Skip to main content

Cross-Posted at Project Vote's Voting Matter's Blog

Weekly Voting Rights News Update

by Erin Ferns

The 2008 presidential election was an inspiration for many citizens to take part in the American democratic process, including first-time voter and convicted felon Eric Stephen Willems of Minnesota. Unfortunately, that vote cost Willems, who was on probation, a trip back to jail, according to the Associated Press last week.

Before voting on Election Day, Willems left a telephone message with his probation officer of his plans to vote, as he was required to do under "intensive supervised release." He was later called back and informed that he had just committed a felony.

When asked if he had been informed of his loss of voting rights upon release from prison, (a commonly neglected procedure that often leaves former felons confused and unnecessarily disenfranchised or, in Willems' case, casting illegal votes) Willems claims he "must have gapped out" that information.

"I was just excited that the presidential election was coming up and I would be able to vote," Willems said. "I had never voted in my life."

Like many states, Minnesota disenfranchises convicted felons until all terms of their sentences are complete, an issue that advocates and lawmakers have long battled over, weighing the cost of stripping citizens who have already paid their debt to society of their civil rights and the subsequent impact it has on social re-integration.

This year looks promising for disenfranchisement reform as "the issue continued to garner editorial support in the media, gain legislative momentum from policymakers, and catch the attention of researchers and advocates alike" in 2008, according to criminal justice public policy group, the Sentencing Project in a recent news report.

Today, more than five million people are not allowed to vote as a result of felony conviction. "As many as four million of these people live, work and raise families in our communities, but because of a conviction in their past they are still denied the right to vote," according to a 2008 report by Erika Wood of the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law, a leading advocate for automatic post-incarceration restoration of voting rights "in each of the 35 states that still disenfranchise people who are no longer in prison."

Under a system of automatic post-incarceration restoration of rights, "citizens released from prison would be immediately eligible to vote while on probation and parole, as are those who are sentenced to probation without serving any time in prison," wrote Wood. "These citizens would be permitted to register in precisely the same way as other eligible citizens, without submission of special paperwork."

"Restoring the right to vote to ex-offenders is an integral aspect of reintegration into society," according to a 2007 Project Vote report, which notes a disproportionate over-representation of low-income and minority citizens in the criminal justice system. "Consistent policies are necessary to prevent large-scale disenfranchisement not only of the ex-offenders themselves, but also of the communities to which they belong. Society as a whole benefits when a representative government truly represents all its citizens."

While advocates like the Brennan Center push for such reforms, expanding voting rights to all citizens – including former felons - has become the focus of lawmakers on the both the state and federal levels. Since 1997, 19 states have amended felon disenfranchisement policies, leading to the restoration of voting rights for at least 760,000 people, according to a 2008 Sentencing Project report.

Last fall, two federal bills were introduced to secure the federal voting rights of individuals who are no longer incarcerated. Although neither bill progressed in the Congress, another bill was introduced for the 2009 session just last week. House Bill 59, sponsored by Rep. Jesse Jackson (D-IL), is currently in the Judiciary committee. On the state level, several legislatures are pre-filing and introducing bills related to felon voting rights, most of which are designed to reduce current restrictions. For example, Wyoming Rep. Dan Zwonitzer (R-Cheyenne) is sponsoring a bill to reduce the waiting period for non-violent criminals to restore their voting rights, according to local publication, the Caspar Star-Tribune. Currently, all former felons in Wyoming must wait five years to have their voting rights restored.

States considering legislation to expand voting rights to certain felons include Georgia, Kentucky (which currently is one of two states to permanently disenfranchise felons), New Jersey, New York, Texas, and Virginia. At this time, Mississippi is the only state to introduce legislation to increase felon voting restrictions (S 2443 and SCR 514). Visit www.electionlegislation.org for more information on these bills.

Quick Links:

Felon Voting Laws By State. Project Vote. 12 Sept. 2008.

Restoring Voting Rights to Former Felons. Project Vote. 2007.


In Other News:

Federal panel upholds Georgia voter ID requirement – Associated Press
ATLANTA - An oft-challenged Georgia law that requires voters to show photo identification before they cast their ballots was again upheld Wednesday, this time by a federal appeals panel.

Early partisan bitterness erupts in Texas Senate over voter identification laws – Associated Press
AUSTIN -- It didn't take long for partisan bitterness and the simmering battle over voter identification laws to mar what was supposed to be a peaceful start of the 2009 Texas Legislature.

Mills wants birth certificate required for voter registration - Gainesville Times [Ga.]
GAINESVILLE - State Rep. James Mills, R-Chestnut Mountain, introduced a bill Monday that would require voters registering for the first time to present their birth certificate.

Bill to ban election-day voter registration swamped by opponents - Billings Gazette [Mont.]
HELENA - Groups representing college students, the elderly, American Indians, women, labor unions and environmentalists turned out in force Tuesday to oppose a Bozeman Republican's bill that would no longer allow people to register to vote on Election Day.

Originally posted to Project Vote on Thu Jan 15, 2009 at 03:16 PM PST.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Project Vote's Tip Jar (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Brooke In Seattle
  •  Be happier if COUNTING was fraud-free (0+ / 0-)

    Doesn't matter who's voting if the machines are rigged to misreport totals.

    NO WAY do I trust electronic voting and totals without any paper trail.

    Even marksense scanners can be rigged - if there's no will to monitor and do ACCURATE recounts, you can't trust them..... New Mexico in 2004 went for Bush in EVERY place where ANY form of electronic tallying was used.

    Funny how DIebold can make a machine for dispensing cash that is ABSOLUTELY error-free and TAMPER-PROOF but when it comes to voting......

    There is NO way the current machines - susceptible to tampering - would have been designed this way UNLESS there was an original INTENT to make these machines so they could be rigged.   Logical design would be to insure they could NOT be tampered - you almost have to work at making them susceptible to tampering - it's against everything you should be doing in such equipment.

  •  Rep. Frosty Calf Boss Ribs, D-Heart Butte (0+ / 0-)

    Wow. Just...wow.

    (-2.38, -3.28) Independent thinker

    by TrueBlueDem on Thu Jan 15, 2009 at 04:22:34 PM PST

  •  Texas Voter ID law (0+ / 0-)

    Glad to see you all are aware of this.

    Despite my user name, I live outside Austin, so I'm actively watching the Lege this session.

    I'm very happy that Tom Craddick is not Speaker any more, but we must work on this disenfranchisement.

    I saw Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst on the local news, and he seemed to think that phasing it in gradually, and not requiring them at first for people over 70 is good enough.

    I have lived in Texas since 1973, except for a few years in Seattle, and we never needed photo ID before, so why do we need it now? More immigrant hysteria and ways to keep Democrats from retaking the state, I guess.

    Please continue to direct your efforts against this issue. I write my state representatives, but they're all Republicans, as are all of my federal representatives. Quite a change from three Democrats in Seattle who actually voted the way I wanted them to.

    "It always seems impossible until it's done." - Nelson Mandela

    by Brooke In Seattle on Thu Jan 15, 2009 at 06:00:40 PM PST

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site