The refusal to extend the vote, as well as all of the other rights prohibited to ex-felons, really denies them the chance to begin their lives again as fully integrated citizens of their city, state and country. The irony is that while the disenfranchisement laws negate the application of some rights for the ex-felons, the laws don't negate other obligations that are a part of citizenship.
For instance, ex-felons who do take the initiative to become employed are still obligated to pay taxes even though they are denied the benefits usually attached to those duties. A good example would be the right to take part in the election of their congressperson and senators or to have a say on policies that will control their lives.
Wasn't it a couple of hundred years ago that we fought some kind of minor skirmish over taxation without representation?
We push ex-felons to the margins of our society by restricting many of the rights and functions of citizenship that their neighbors have. It is not an excuse to say that, by pushing them out, we leave them few options, except perhaps illicit activities, which will start the cycle all over again.
Alex Friedmann, an ex-felon, said it best: "If society doesn't care enough about former prisoners to treat them as citizens, with voting [and other] rights of citizens, then why should former prisoners care enough about society to act like law-abiding citizens" (Mitchell, 2004, para. 11).
Communities are impacted too. Unfortunately, there are many ex-felons living in communities today -- more than we might guess (Remember, one out of forty-one adults). To deny them the right to vote, for instance, diminishes the community's elective power. Also, a neighborhoods' power...
For many reasons, it is this group that suffers the brunt of our system of laws. And, since the jury pool cannot have true representation of their peers because the law doesn't allow it, are they truly getting "
due process?"
Andrew Shapiro (The American Prospect, 1997) argues that "disenfranchising ex-felons who have served their time and paid their
debt to society is indefensible under even the most punitive theories of
criminal justice." It is, in a sense, cruel and unusual punishment.
Bibliography
Felony disenfranchisement. (n.d.). Retrieved May 21, 2009, from Sentencingproject.org: http://www.sentencingproject.org/IssueAreaHome.aspx?IssueID=4
Mauer, M. (2000). Felon voting disenfranchisement: A growing collateral consequence of mass. Federal Sentencing Reporter, 248-51.
Mitchell, S.D. (2004, December). The new
invisible man: Felon disenfranchisement laws harm communities. Retrieved May 21, 2009, from bad.eserver.org: http://bad.eserver.org/issues/2004/71/mitchell.html
Sentencing project. (2008, September). Felony disenfranchisement laws in the United States. Retrieved May 21, 2009, from Sentencingproject.org: http://www.sentencingproject.org/Admin/Documents/publications/fd_bs_fdlawsinus.pdf
