Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Voter Laws Need Reform, Groups Say
NEW YORK - One of her sons is serving in the U.S. Army in Iraq while another who has just turned 18 is about to join the Navy. Yet despite being a mother of two U.S. soldiers, Annette McWashington Pruitt cannot cast her ballot in the upcoming presidential polls because the laws in her home state of Alabama do not allow ex-felons to participate in elections.
Pruitt cannot exercise her right to vote because in 2003 she was convicted of receiving stolen property.
Come this November, like Pruitt, millions of U.S. citizens will not be allowed to vote in the presidential elections because they served time in jail for having committed certain crimes in the past. According to the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), currently a patchwork of state felony disenfranchisement laws -- albeit inconsistent from state to state -- prevent a whopping 5.3 million citizens with a past felony conviction from voting.
A little over a week ago, the ACLU filed a lawsuit in Alabama challenging the election authorities' decision to turn down Pruitt's request for to register to vote. Lawyers associated with the nation's largest civil rights group argue that the state election authorities had no right to reject Pruitt's application because her conviction in 2003 for stolen property had never been considered a so-called disenfranchising offence by the state legislature.
Alabama state law allows a person convicted of a crime involving 'moral turpitude' to apply for voting rights restoration from the Board of Pardons and Paroles, but the applicant must have paid all fines, court fees, costs, and restitution associated with his or her sentence before becoming eligible to vote. Voting rights defenders say denying the right to vote based on one's inability to pay these fees amounts to income-based discrimination.
'There is no compelling or legitimate governmental interest in keeping a wealth-based voter registration system that is nothing more than a modern-day poll tax,' said Olivia Turner, executive director of the ACLU in Alabama. 'Everyone knows Alabama's ugly voting rights history. It is disappointing that discrimination based on income, and completely arbitrary disenfranchisement, continues to permeate our voting system. These practices need to end.'
In Alabama, the legislature has adopted a list of about 15 serious felonies that fit the definition of 'moral turpitude' for disenfranchisement. But, as the ACLU has charged, in 2005, the state attorney general developed his own broader list of disenfranchising felonies. His list includes 16 felonies that are disqualifying, including passing a bad check. The election authorities are also reputedly rejecting voters' applications for crimes not mentioned in the list of the attorney general.
Voting rights activists fear that, in addition to ex-felons, hundreds of thousands of citizens may also not be able to cast their ballots in the presidential polls if certain other loopholes in the current electoral system are not fixed before November. Studies show that the 2000 election, which was won by President George W. Bush by a close margin of less than 500 votes in Florida, was fraught with a variety of problems, including intimidation of minority voters by local authorities.
As a 2001-Caltech-MIT study suggests, over four million U.S. citizens from all over the country were disenfranchised in 2000. They were either denied the right to vote or just lost their votes due to poorly designed ballots and/or faulty equipment. The situation was no less different in the 2004 election, even though thousands of citizens, including legal experts, took an active part in non-partisan 'Election Protection' efforts across the country.
Those campaigning for increased voter registration accuse the Republican leadership of trying to keep the current electoral system intact due to fears that a large number of young people, minorities and naturalised citizens would vote against its conservative agenda. 'Republicans have worked against meaningful election reforms at every turn,' said Tanya Clay House of People for the American Way, an independent group.
Recently, the Republicans strongly opposed a legislative move in the House of Representatives that required emergency ballots in cases where machines break down on election day. The bill was blocked by the Republicans about two weeks ago. Disappointed with the Republican response, House added in a statement: 'Emergency ballots are just that -- for emergencies. So what's the problem?'
If passed, the bill would have standardised the electoral procedures already being implemented in some states. The bill, according to House, would have required a 'minimal cost as compared to what we spend to protect the vote for citizens in other countries.'
Voter identification laws in certain states are also an issue of mounting concern to rights groups. Last April, in a majority decision, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld an Indiana state law requiring voters to produce photo identification at polling stations, despite arguments by civil rights lawyer that it would place an additional burden on poor and minority voters.
There are millions of eligible voters who don't have the IDs these laws require. '[They include] senior citizens who don't drive, students, the disabled, low-income people, all of whom have the right to vote,' said Kathryn Kolbert, president of the People for the American Way Foundation, a rights advocacy group. 'These laws are intended to suppress voter turnout.'
Controversies surrounding the fairness of the U.S. electoral system have drawn international attention. Recently, the Geneva-based U.N. Committee against Racial Discrimination (CERD) criticised the fact that in several U.S. states, ex-felons are not allowed to vote, a vast majority of whom are African Americans and other disadvantaged ethnic minorities.
In respond to U.S.-based rights organisations' complaints, the U.N. body has urged the U.S. to address the issue of discriminatory practices against African Americans and other voters belonging to minority communities.
Meanwhile, last week, the well-respected international watchdog group Amnesty International declared it was joining the U.S.-based rights group Rock the Vote and others who have launched a countrywide campaign to make sure all citizens get to exercise their right to vote this year.
'There is no better time to rock the vote for human rights than now,' said Amnesty's Larry Cox. 'Under the Article 21 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, everyone has the right to participate in government and open elections.'
© 2008 Inter Press Service



28 Comments so far
Show AllCan you say, Jim Crow? Honestly, this kind of disenfranchisement of voters strikes me as unconstitutional. Sure, states have rights to pass their own laws, but it seems to me that some of those would be superseded by the United States Constitution, and there's not a word in there that declares ex-felons as ineligible to vote. And that right is delineated in the US Constitution as being open to all US citizens age 18 and above. There are no qualifying statements in the Constitution about who has the right to vote except the age and citizenship, period. States that try to limit voting rights by these sorts of disenfranchisement laws are, in my estimation, violating the Constitutional rights of their people and those laws should be overturned. I hope that the ACLU continues to fight these kinds of disenfranchisement laws so that every eligible voter may cast a ballot in the upcoming Presidential election.
Great, a government elected by a bunch of felons.
I'd rather have voting laws standardized at a national level with regard to disenfranchisement for felonies. I'm all for no votes by felons, but which felonies disqualify shouldn't be arbitrary by state.
African Americans are over represented in the prisons, aids wards, the unemployment lines, and the army and now, low and behold, they are under represented on the voter lists.
Sorry, but W did NOT win the election in Florida. After 9-11 when the votes were actually counted, it tunrs out that Gore won. But no one was going to change presidents by then, were they? In fact, the so called MSM didn't even report on this for more than about 2 minutes.
The SCOTUS decided, in a one time ONLY case, that it would harm W to keep counting the votes in Florida, To hell with the citizens of Florida, who apparently would suffer no harm from being disenfranchised by the pretender to the throne. To stop the count was a complete sham of American ideals and law. Just the opener to the worst, most law breaking administration in American history.
Mike Gravel has a great idea that i can't believe has not caught on..The "Federal Ballot Measure"...let We..the PEOPLE...vote on ALL these "Societal" laws and legislation..Drugs..Voting rights..Abortion..if it effects the CITIZEN direcly..then we should decide..not a handful of OBVIOUSLY COMPROMISED and corrupt "representatives"....who seem...incapable of "representing" us at ALL!
Can you imagine the NATION voting on..Abortion? or marijuana laws? WOW! I can see the changes scaring people because of their RAPIDITY...because we KNOW how many of these votes would come down...we KNOW!..
So..perhapa a "second" form of Vote for...sort of a safety valve..a "redundancy" to assure the people that they get eh laws they WANT...and do not have laws IMPOSED as we do now...if they had to "disenfranchise voters several times a year..it would be both OBVIOUS and Impossible to get away with..AND TOO we could of course..propose a ballot measure for...VOTER DISENFRANCHISEMENT..ahhh yes, yes...MIKE GRAVEL..thank you...
A truly Brilliant idea from an American statesman..an idea who's time has come.."Double the Vote!" make sure we get the laws we want...without a ONE SHOT system that si now compromised by legal hairsplitting and..evil bullshit from the.."Federal Loyalist Army"
VOTE! EN MASS...it is the only wa..they stole 500,000 in Florida in 2000...they sole 1,000,000 in ohio in 2004...in 2008 they will need to steal 5,000,000 to pull it off..they are already laying the ground work..stories on this very site have shown the efforts of electronic voting salespeople moving onto elections boards in texas (who'd uh thunk it?), California (say it aint so..) and Maryland..and Colorado..((colorado is seeing REALLY weird stuff happening..I mean REALLY weird..go to wearechange colorado..it is..ALARMING..))as well as former "security profesionals"..why would that be a job that a Security Professional take? and..in "numbers"??? very odd..don't you think?
Yeah..OF COURSE they are gouing to do everything they can to steal votes..and this is going to be the year when MANY of you will be SHOCKED as you vote in your small tpowns i the local grange or Highschool gymnasium as i do..to find yourself being QUESTIONED by "campaign personnel"..yeah..this year it is gonna be BIG...period...5,000,000 folks...FIVE MILLION VOTES..that is what they have to steal to "win"..and they are DOING IT RIGHT NOW..RESIST! or LOSE! Obama is in the balance..he aint NEAR perfect..but McSame is more than possibly..QUITE COMPLETELY INSANE!..So..please..folks...Put aside your petty bullshit and WATCH..be VIGILANT..and...adon't let em intimidate you at the polling place..call em out..make trouble..this is DEMOCRACY we are fighting for..question THEM!
RESISTANCE is not yet..FUTILE..but it's CLOSE!..this could be our last chance..i really..truly believe..for what it's worth,, as an informed citizen..that McSame is the END of our form of Government..that the ocial unrest with the same people in th white house will become so bad..that a federal emergency and all that it entails in terms of the patriot act et al..will be implemented and that will be that..we are now perpetually at "threat level orange' it never changes...it has been that way for 8 years..basically..and what do you think a "suspension" of the constitution will be?..Do you really think they will "unsuspend" it after awhile?..orange is ..really..oddly..here to stay..an that means more than most people seem to know...you have less rights..you really do..and if they make it..MORE restrictive..you think they'll go "back' they hav not done so yet..and thus..it will eb the end..the country cannot handle "100 years of.." SOLITUDE..we can't not without exploding socially..into a new civil war..we are in the cold war stage of the amercian civil war now..("CWII"..nice..)
The "plan" is so grim the Bushies will NOT SHOW IT TO CONGRESS...it's THAT BAD..they don't want us to know ANYTHING about what it means to be under 'federal emergency status'..the COG thing is even being kept from Kucinich after NUMEROUS requests...the feds do not want us to know to what extent eh constitution is ALREADY compromised by the "Threat level' system we are currently IN!
All of that..hangs in the balance of this election...it is THAT important!
WATCH YOUR BACKS!
glide625 said,
"Great, a government elected by a bunch of felons."
Well, excuse me, but don't we already have a bunch of felons serving in government positions, including the US President himself? This has been the most law breaking administration in history and it was supposedly elected by people who were NOT felons, because they were disenfranchised in the last few election cycles, so what does that say about our ability to choose our own government? Makes the rest of us look mighty dumb, if you ask me.
What's to say that ex-felons would somehow harm the elections if they were permitted to vote? A disproportionate number of them are African-Americans, who tend largely to vote Democratic, so it seems to me that there has been a concerted effort to disenfranchise them in order to keep the Republicans in power.
So I don't buy your argument, glide. I don't buy anyone's argument for disenfranchising ex-felons. If they served their time and are out among us trying to make something of their lives, they should at least have the right to cast a vote for their elected officials. Don't keep punishing them just because they made a mistake. That's double punishment if you ask me, and that's just not fair.
I happen to know an ex-felon who has started his own successful business and is making something of his life and is a darn nice person. He made a mistake some years ago but has atoned for it, done his time and has been out for some time now contributing to society in a useful way. I don't know if Ohio has a law disenfranchising ex-felons, but if it does, then this person should not be punished for a long ago mistake. He pays his taxes like everyone else but if he can't vote, then he is not being fairly represented, and we all remember the words of our Revolutionary forebears: "No taxation without representation!"
Ex-felons who can't vote are not being fairly represented by their elected officials. The cry "No taxation without representation" rings as true today as it did over 200 years ago. Which is why these disenfranchisement laws need to be overturned.
receiving stolen property?
That would eliminate our entire congress!
And Christian Conservitives also.
The Bush/Rove/Gonsolaze/Goodling justice department is working on Ohio as we post... see links below
http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2008/07/analysis_dimora_probe_could_hu.html
http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2008/07/cuyahoga_county_office_raid_ke.html
This is what happens when the voting process is politicized, instead of being run by an independent bureaucracy.
Canada considers voting to be such a fundamental right of citizens in a democracy that it is just about the only right retained by those incarcerated in our prisons. Interesting that the US using imprisonment to disenfranchise its citizens. Given the huge numbers passing through US prisons I figure 50% of it's citizens should be disenfranchised in the near future.
Thanks, jcrumb, for reminding us what all "hangs in the balance of this election." Obama is the right answer this time.
As for national elections on social policies, wonderful idea. As for seeing it happen with "strict constructionists" on the Supreme Court, fuggedaboudit. They, the "conservatives" (also COINCIDENTALLY the Catholics), believe the constitution exists precisely to mitigate and "control" the unrefined will of the mere people (just as they also believe the Pope, Cardinals and Bishops exist to "control" the unrefined will of the mere Catholic parishoners.)
I'm not "knocking" Catholics here, but I am knocking their form of church government THAT IS IN THE DNA OF FIVE OF OUR SUPREME COURT JUSTICES---SPILLING OVER TO SECULAR AFFAIRS AS SURELY AS THE SUN RISES. Surely average voters can see why we might want a president (Obama) appointing future justices that will be of a mindset against siding with the top-down authority worshippers who are already there.
Daniel David, still sore about the excommunication eh?
glide625 said,
"Great, a government elected by a bunch of felons."
SallyUUKent already disposed of this inanity; since government by the People has been phased out in favor of government by a Bunch of Felons, claiming to preserve the quality of the electorate by excluding ex-felons is already a lost cause.
It is unfortunate and pathetic that it strikes people as OK that felons are disenfranchised-- either because it's considered an appropriate part of the "punishment package" or a useful deterrent/disincentive (you know, like capital punishment)-- or because, as glide625 insinuates, convicted felons are inherently malign and corrupt-- not the sort of people decent folk can trust to help choose political leaders.
The wingnut Law and Order worship which has kept the US in its psychotic grip in recent decades remains willfully in denial of the consequences of creating an expanding and broadening underclass of criminal and ex-criminal outcasts.
Losing the franchise, even though it's become woefully devalued in our terminally ill duopoly, is hardly a deterrent or disincentive to committing a crime. But it's SURELY a disincentive to just those ex-felons who HAVE been rehabilitated, or otherwise sincerely hope and desire to put their crime behind them after they've done their time.
Dumbed-down, flatliner Amerika is too dense, apparently, to appreciate the evil of cyclical phenomena, e.g. the cycle of violence or the cycle of criminality. Not only wingnuts, but even average citizens too readily stop at the simplistic idea that only Bad Guys (and Gals) get caught and are convicted, and are fully responsible for their second-class citizen status. It's fatally easy to just say, "To hell with them".
It isn't only that permanent loss of rights is an unconscionable departure from traditional penal philosophy; it's that a permanent and growing criminal underclass is itself a breeding ground for exactly the despair and deprivation and hopelessness that causes people to commit crimes. Turn your back at your peril, because ultimately you will deservedly be bitten in the ass.
jlocke123,
There never was an "excommunication". I am not an ex-Catholic. But I do raise that theme frequently with respect to the five of them we have on the SCOTUS. Most people don't even know that's the case, and even those who do don't "get it" that these guys have been indoctrinated from birth in a form of (church) government that is as thoroughly un-Democratic and un-American as can be imagined.
Note AGAIN, I'm not knocking Catholics and I'm not knocking the worship of Jesus. I AM knocking the worship of top-down hierarchial authority structures in the minds of our "Justices".
I want a president who DOES NOT add to the already large problem at the SCOTUS. It's really about the biggest "issue" around---hiding in plain sight---and it affects the lives of a LOT of people for a LONG time.
McCain has already won. The rest is just for show.
Voting is a right, not a privilege.
Driving is a privilege, not a right.
I once posted this on a U-Tube site and people were surprizingly eager to exclude people from this right to vote. No one understood what rights and privileges mean.
Anyone too young, of course, can be excluded as they are not adults.
They did the same thing in Florida in 2000, except they put innocent people's names on the felons' list, and... surprise most were Democrats.
I hope ACLU can beat Alabama in the courts as well as other red states from again tipping the scales again.
The motto for the gop should be; "If they can't cheat they can't win."
If you can't beat em..cheat em...so say the neocons.
4 million disenfranchised that is Demockracy in Amerika.
SallyUUKent - Thank you! You have put this so much better than I could have done.
I would only add that I heard Greg Palast discussing this the other day and he made a couple interesting points.
First of all, 90% of people who have served time vote DEMOCRATIC. That is one reason your Republicans don't want them voting. And it seems that even if these folks enter prison as Republicans, they are likely to leave it as Democrats. May have something to do with exposure to reality.
Secondly, it is NOT illegal for ex-felons to vote in many states. They just think it is. Palast was talking to an ex-con in New Mexico and informed the guy that he could indeed vote, and made plans to register him. The guy broke down on the air.
Check your own state laws. Felons can probably already vote, they just are told that they can't.
Here is a link to The Sentencing Project: Felony Disenfranchisement Laws in the US (PDF):
http://www.fairvote.org/righttovote/Felony%20Dis%20Laws%20in%20the%20US.pdf
The way they get away with the Jim Crow felony disenfrachisement is through the 14th Amendment passed after the Civil War. "Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice-President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State."
Once the old rebels, after the end of Reconstruction, figured out that all they had to do was start arresting and convicting minority voters of felonies, they had it made. it keeps on going.
"Great, a government elected by a bunch of felons."
glide625, one need only look to australia to see the results of that.
Democrat Barney Frank is introducing a bill to legalize up to three ounces of pot. They're not all bad.
"McCain has already won. The rest is just for show."
The old expression,ÈYa gotta break an egg to make an omeletteÈ,fits John McCain quite well .The sooner McCain in his blind belligerence,breaks the American Empire and itès complicit citizens down to a more sane , compassionate , humble , benignly- socialist omelette , the better for the rest of the world
It is time Americans boycotted these pseudo democratic processes in mass....... The issue is not "are you allowed to vote", but who controls the choices available and the information channels. Democratic process has become an almost complete fraud beyond the local level. Participation in national elections lends them a legitimacy they do not deserve, and expresses a faith in the system as it exists. We must recognize non-participation as a statement..... and a very important one, look to reforming the system to be responsive to the people........ A far more important issue at this time than the voting rights of ex-felons. They and everybody else needs meaningful elections with a wide range of candidates NOT controlled by two huge organizations if we are to call our process democratic!!
Howard
My mother and her family are all devout Catholics. They are all lifetime Democrats (because they are all working people) and all thought GWB was the biggest dimwit to run for president even before 2000. They are devoted to the church and are anti-abortion. But they believe that their religion covers those beliefs, and it is not the job of the state to enforce any religion, even theirs which they believe is the one true religion. So being Catholic and being Republican do not necessarily go hand-in-hand.
Remember how the conservatives said if the Catholic JFK was elected the Pope would be running the US? They remembered, which is why they did such a good job of finding Catholic supreme court nominees who place the Pope's religion above the Constitution. They will always find some lackey who fits their needs. So we have Scalia, a full-fledged Nazi, with Alito and Roberts close behind, unbalancing the court with the aid of Clarence (I never had a idea of my own) Thomas. Ironically, Thomas is the poster-boy for everything the Republicans say is wrong about affirmative action. Once again, if it works in their favor, they'll ignore it.
My opinion is that organized religion is the root of all evil. Religion is the worst possible example for a democracy. It is an autocracy based on blind faith and archaic ritual. It requires its followers to turn over their thought processes, free will, and cash to their holy leader and his earthly representatives without question. Organized religion is fascism.
Yes, but it's never going away. It's part of our nature. We have to have some way of making sense of a world that makes no sense.
We know that freedom is an illusion. We know that determinism is a fact. But something in us absolutely will not accept that as truth.
If religion did not exist, within a month it would be invented.
"Uplifting illusion is dearer to us than a host of truths"---Pushkin
I think maybe parking tickets would be a good threshold for voting. That would reduce the number of voters to very low numbers and the cost of elections would go way down. In addition then the money spent on campaigns could decrease as well and people wouldn't have to listen to all those political ads that interfere with game shows, survival and American Idol. We would then be lulled into contentment and the powers that be could get on with what ever war and other skull duggery they want to do.