4 ms·

> we deny felons the right to vote in most states. Only while incarcerated. http://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/felon-voting-rights.aspx http

by KGIII 9y ago

> we deny felons the right to vote in most states. Only while incarcerated. http://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/felon-voting-rights.aspx http://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/felon-v...

Clubber 9y ago
Depends on the state. I'm on one of the states in the "Restoration by Governor's Action or Court Action" category, and I can tell you thought it is possible, voting rates are rarely, if ever reinstated in my state.
- KGIII 9y ago
  Oh, I'm familiar with that. It's just that most don't take away the right to vote permanently. They take it away until you're done serving your sentence and then it is automatically restored. (See the link.) A couple of States even allow inmates to vote while incarcerated. In my now-home State, inmates are encouraged to vote and sometimes politicians will even go campaign inside the prison. That's pretty rare, but has happened. So, it's a temporary loss in most cases. Notably, Maine allows inmates to vote and Maine is overwhelmingly white. Vermont is the same way. In my quest for more information, I found some commentary about that aspect.
  - dragonwriter 9y ago
    > Notably, Maine allows inmates to vote and Maine is overwhelmingly white. Vermont is the same way. Being overwhelmingly white is probably part of the reason; if you don't have a visible black underclass to subjugate, you don't take steps to subjugate them. In discussing the thesis of felon disenfranchisement as part of “the New Jim Crow”, pointing out that states without a notable visible black population don't engage in disenfranchisement is in line with that thesis.
macrael 9y ago
I'm curious what "automatic restoration" means. I recall from The New Jim Crow that the process is onerous in many states, involving paperwork and bureaucracy that many don't end up taking the time to do. But maybe that's just in the nine non-automatic states. Ah, and in the paragraph underneath that table: Even in states where ex-offenders automatically regain the right to vote upon completion of their sentence, the process of re-registering to vote often is difficult. One reason is the complexity of the laws and processes surrounding disenfranchisement. In some cases, it is difficult to determine whose rights can be restored. This can vary in some states according to the date of the crime, the conviction, or the release from prison, or the nature of the crime. The complex restoration process also can be daunting. It often involves lengthy paperwork, burdensome documentation, and the involvement and coordination of several state agencies This, again, is why Jim Crow is an apt comparison. It's a web of rules that all together add up to a system of control.

by KGIII 9y ago

Clubber 9y ago

Depends on the state. I'm on one of the states in the "Restoration by Governor's Action or Court Action" category, and I can tell you thought it is possible, voting rates are rarely, if ever reinstated in my state.

KGIII 9y ago
Oh, I'm familiar with that. It's just that most don't take away the right to vote permanently. They take it away until you're done serving your sentence and then it is automatically restored. (See the link.) A couple of States even allow inmates to vote while incarcerated. In my now-home State, inmates are encouraged to vote and sometimes politicians will even go campaign inside the prison. That's pretty rare, but has happened. So, it's a temporary loss in most cases. Notably, Maine allows inmates to vote and Maine is overwhelmingly white. Vermont is the same way. In my quest for more information, I found some commentary about that aspect.
- dragonwriter 9y ago
  > Notably, Maine allows inmates to vote and Maine is overwhelmingly white. Vermont is the same way. Being overwhelmingly white is probably part of the reason; if you don't have a visible black underclass to subjugate, you don't take steps to subjugate them. In discussing the thesis of felon disenfranchisement as part of “the New Jim Crow”, pointing out that states without a notable visible black population don't engage in disenfranchisement is in line with that thesis.

macrael 9y ago

I'm curious what "automatic restoration" means. I recall from The New Jim Crow that the process is onerous in many states, involving paperwork and bureaucracy that many don't end up taking the time to do. But maybe that's just in the nine non-automatic states. Ah, and in the paragraph underneath that table: Even in states where ex-offenders automatically regain the right to vote upon completion of their sentence, the process of re-registering to vote often is difficult. One reason is the complexity of the laws and processes surrounding disenfranchisement. In some cases, it is difficult to determine whose rights can be restored. This can vary in some states according to the date of the crime, the conviction, or the release from prison, or the nature of the crime. The complex restoration process also can be daunting. It often involves lengthy paperwork, burdensome documentation, and the involvement and coordination of several state agencies This, again, is why Jim Crow is an apt comparison. It's a web of rules that all together add up to a system of control.