Dont you tell me to deny it,
Ive done wrong and I want to
Suffer for my sins.
Ive come to you cause I need
Guidance to be true
And I just dont know where I can begin.
What I need is a good defense
cause Im feelin like a criminal.
-- Fiona Apple
I have spoken about the issue of "felony" (the quotes are for the fact that I don't think people are necessarily "felons" long after they serve their time, unlike alcoholics are still currently of a sort that cannot have a drop to drink even after years of sobriety) disenfranchisement various times. It seems to me a basic matter of (un)fairness ... you serve your time, you get your rights back. The fact that the system is inherently racially inequitable only adds insult to injury.
[In fact, I doubt that all crimes are so serious that you should necessarily lose all your voting rights even while in prison. Prisoners need not be able to vote in those that represent the districts of their prison to have an ability to vote for President. At least, see Florida 2000, those convicted are generally actual felons, unlike many labeled as such on the rolls.]
A Slate piece, comparing it to the faux voter fraud scandal (again, Talking Points Memo has good ongoing coverage on the point, that should not be lost among the other parts of the prosecutor purge ... the few fired but the tip of the iceberg) the administration is trying to promote, suggests both the breadth of the problem and the real evidence of change -- even since the first time I wrote about the matter. Talking about breadth:
In the last several years, other states have removed lifetime ballot bans or waiting periods for ex-offenders: New Mexico (more than 68,000 regained the vote in 2001); Connecticut (33,000 people on probation regained the vote in 2002); Delaware (switched from lifetime ban to five-year waiting period in 2000); and Texas (eliminated two-year waiting period in 1998, allowing more than 300,000 former felons to join the rolls). In Colorado, a restoration bill is pending.
We are talking real numbers here, especially given the closeness of some races. The bipartisanship of the reform -- see a recent post here about the Republican governor of Florida (cited in the Slate piece) as well as the Republican/Democrat (was it Ford and Carter?) leaders of a federal commission a few years back -- at least in some quarters, also suggests the reason for hope. As to why so few Republicans oppose such efforts, again see the Slate piece, some might say we should look at all those being indicted and convicted these days.
Snark. Anyway, going back to my early remark, there is possibility ... and signs of actual change ... out there. Once you see the dark side, the light is ever more bright.