Felon Disenfranchisement Essay

Disenfranchised twists should be reintegrated into auberge and recover their right to pick out. Disenfranchisement is the harshest civil warrant imposed by a democratic society. Some of the problems involved with disenfranchisement include racism, inaccurate polls, and the massive amount of masses affected. If the voice of the perfect population does non include all sources and agendas, the polls will not be accurate. In Camillis look into, it is assumed that the enfranchisement of the population is consequential for a fair and good democratic companionship those governed by this community must be able to vote. (2-3). Racism, although seemingly not the topic at hand, is indeed a primary ratifier to this problem. One such limitation of felon disenfranchisement is the disproportionate impact of felon disenfranchisement on racial minorities in the United States, also the close election vote totals in recent prominent elections which whitethorn put on been swung by the exist ence of felon disenfranchisement. As Joseph Camilli points out, disenfranchisement has a disproportionate impact upon racial minorities. African Americans argon affected more and also men atomic number 18 affected more in general. This brings forth the argument that the outcome is racist or thus far sexist. This is important when looking at recent elections involving racial minorities (3).Even if the desire is not intended to have racist outcomes, sometimes disenfranchisement laws still do. In Elizabeth Hulls research, she explains the number of melanise juveniles in the penal system, forty percent of whom will be prohibited from voting during some or all of their adult lives is astoundingly high. Many are first-time offenders who quickly accept a guilty plea in exchange for probation. In the process, they often forfeit voting rights before they have scour had an opportunity to coiffe them. Given these consequences, it is hardly surprising that the United States Civil Rights Commission recently concluded that the disenfranchisement of ex-convicts is the biggest hindrance to black voting since the poll tax(Hull 1). In retrospect, peradventure disenfranchising the nations future is not the best idea. Racism is a large problem of disenfranchisement.Disenfranchisement also affects this nations polls because large groups of people are not represented. The sheer number of felons with no right to vote skews the elections, especially those on the local level, and smaller communities. If the amount of felons were not so great, it may not be such an important issue. Since about one out of every forty-four people cannot vote, it implies that the polls are not accurate. Disenfranchisement is crippling in some stadiums where voting should be important. Small communities are completely underrepresented, and a small group has a larger influence. This has a large impact on certain issues when the entire population is required to make a sound choice. Felons have paid their debt to society they should be reintegrated into mainstream society as smoothly as possible. It also may be a deterrent to future crime if they were to be able to re-experience a normal life, and include all of the rights they were missing. Perhaps they would even understand how important their rights were and serve to discourage fellow members of the community from future crime. Ex-Felons deserve the right to vote and for a strong democratic community should not be disenfranchised. In some cities, more than 50 percent of young African-American men are disenfranchised.A vast majority of prison inmates are African-Americans. Twelve percent of all African-American men in their twenties are incarcerated. This suggests that of the current population, more than a trine of the black male community will be disenfranchised. More than a third of the 4.7 million disenfranchised felons are African-Americans. In four of the states with lifetime bans for felons, a quarter (Virginia, Iowa) and a third (Florida, Alabama) of all black men are ineligible to vote. As noted in Guy Stuarts research, between 1935 and 1970, about 106 out of 100,000 Americans were incarcerated in national or state prison by 1980, the rate was 139 per 100,000 and in 2000, it was 478 per 100,000. The increases have not been solely confined to those incarcerated the jail population and the number on probation and rallying cry have also increased, from 662 per 100,000 in 1980 to 1,878 in 2000. Furthermore, the high incarceration rates disproportionately affect African Americans and Latinos (5). In its 1974 decision in Richardson v. Ramirez, the Supreme tap held that this language in the Fourteenth Amendment (the so-called Penalty Clause) provides an affirmative sanction for at least some forms of felon disenfranchisement, (Hinchcliff 1).Hinchcliff also pointsout that disenfranchisement upon minorities right straight is greater than in any other time in history, especially upon African Americ an males (1). The amending law in 1984 specified that if they resulted in racism scorn intentions, it would be unconstitutional. About 3.9 million citizens in the U.S. were not able to take part in this years election, because of U.S. disenfranchisement laws regarding convicted felons. It is also important to focus on future obstructions such as how much the United States population has increased in the past few decades. Further obstructions that impede felons reintegration and lifelong barriers that affect their entire future are difficulties in employment, buying or renting a house, going to college, and other advantages open to the public. These ex-felons are continually punished by society. They must state if they have a felony when attempting to gain a job. The federal government claims that it is the states prerogative. This causes much confusion, and many felons were able to vote in their area but did not know it due to the common misconception that felons could not vote. So me states ban voting by felons on probation or parole or even those who are no longer under any supervision by the criminal- on the noseice system. Felons should be punished but not continually throughout their lives.Once their debt to society has been repaid, why should their rights still be forfeited? If people show criminals that their votes counted after they were released from prison perhaps it would encourage law abiding behavior. Why should these felons be excluded when they are also affected by elected leaders? According to Siegels research, Today, there are over 1. 5Million adults currently incarcerated in state or federal facilities, with an accompanimental 700,000 individuals serving time In local jails (Sabol & Couture, 2008). Minorities of color are severely overrepresented within the criminal justice system. (Despite representing 13 percent of the U.S. population, African Americans constitute 38 percent of presently incarcerated inmates similarly, Hispanic total just over 15 percent of the overall population and 20 percent of inmates. (1) According to the research done by Guy Stuart, U.S. incarceration rates have been rising quickly in the past few decades. Most of the country has disenfranchisement laws. Almost forty percent of those disenfranchised are African American men. Slightly over six percent of the African American community has been disenfranchised. This level of disfranchisement may havehad a significant impact on electoral outcomes in a number of states over the past twenty years, largely because those disfranchised would more likely have voted for the Democratic Party candidate (1). Some people suggest a cool down period.They believe the felon should have to wait for years after serving his/her sentence. Sometimes this is so far out of hand that the felon would die of old age before he/she could vote again. They should be given the chance to prove they have been rehabilitated. Another argument against this unjust disenfranchisem ent is the felon knew the crime called for punishments, including loss of privileges. Some people believe since they already knew the punishments involved, that the ex-felons should not be given a second opportunity. A felony should not call for a lifetime punishment, especially when the crime does not always fit the punishment. Disenfranchisement is immoral, unbeneficial, and illegal. Unless an ex- felon has committed voter fraud, why should their punishment include disenfranchisement? Since it affects largely African American men more than other cultural and ethnic backgrounds, it has perhaps accidental racist outcomes. Felons have already paid their debt to society with their prison time and any fines they may have had to pay. A life sentence is an unnecessary addition to their sentence. They may not feel very accepted by people if they cannot vote. Normally people may want an ex-felon to feel very at crustal plate in society so as not to alienate them. Polls that are accurate are important to all people, because they do not just affect law-abiding citizens. They also affect felons and ex-felons.Works citedCamilli, Joseph Minnesotas Felon Disenfranchisement An Historical Legal Relic, Rooted inRacism, That Fails To Satisfy a coherent Penological Interest. Hamline Journal OfPublic Law & Policy 33.1 (2011) 235-267. Legal Collection. Web. 23 Apr. 2013. Hinchcliff, Abigail M. The Other side Of Richardson V. Ramirez A Textual Challenge ToFelon Disenfranchisement. Yale Law Journal 121.1 (2011) 194-236. faculty member SearchElite. Web. 23 Apr. 2013.Hull, Elizabeth. Disenfranchising Ex-Felons Whats the Point? 1 Mar. 2003. Web. 3Mar. 2013.Siegel, Jonah A. Felon Disenfranchisement and the Fight for Universal Suffrage. SocialWork 56.1 (2011) 89. MasterFILE Premier. Web. 23 Apr. 2013. Stuart, Guy. Databases, Felons, and Voting deviate and Partisanship of the Florida Felons listin the 2000 Elections. Political Science Quarterly 119.3 (2004) 453-475. AcademicSearch E lite. Web. 23 Apr. 2013.