Skip to comments.Holder's call to let ex-felons vote divides Senate Democrats
Posted on 03/01/2014 2:42:36 PM PST by Clintonfatigued
Attorney General Eric Holders call to restore voting rights to felons after theyve served their time in prison has split Senate Democrats.
Liberal Democrats who are not facing tough re-elections this year say its the right thing to do, but vulnerable incumbents are steering clear of the proposal.
Holder has become increasingly outspoken recently. This week he declared that state attorneys general are not obligated to defend laws that are discriminatory.
Political experts say barring ex-felons from voting impacts African Americans disproportionately.
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
Does anyone remember that 1988 Bush television commercial, the one showing prisoners entering & leaving prison through a revolving door?
>> Political experts say barring ex-felons from voting impacts African Americans disproportionately.
I wonder what the victims think.
Suppose just a stretch in prison doesn’t pay “the debt to society”? Suppose some us of believe that there are other consequences, including forfeiting one’s right to vote?
Fine, as long as all rights are restored, vote, office, firearms ownership etc etc.
Permanent disenfranchisement is a crime, denying even the most non-violent felons little recourse to defend their lives from violent assault with meaningful tools commonly in use.
If they are dangerous criminals, they should not walk among us; incarcerate or terminate, but not re-integrate, the numbers tell us why.
Yeah, it impacts “African Americans” disproportionately because they commit a highly disproportionate amount of the crimes. Duh.
On the other hand, if they are too dangerous to have their second amendment freedoms back, then they are too dangerous to have the vote back and they are too dangerous to be let out of prison.
Wow, felony convictions are a dime a dozen these days, you would be surprised what a felony is today.
Just where in the constitution does it say felonies negate your God Given rights?
Ever hear of paying a debt, now lifelong sentences are appropriate?
Ever hear of the 5th?
ENOUGH of this racist puke.
where does the law mention RACE?
too many blacks in prison? not enough Jews on the NBA or doing Rap “music”
RAP “Music EQUITY for Jews Now!!
Give The DEAD the VOTE!!
Well you give up those rights while you’re in prison. Is that constitutional?
One presumes that Mister Warner is LYING in order to make fence-sitting VA voters think that he is anything but in the Dem tank for felons voting (early, often, and from the big house.)
Felons and illegal aliens...Dems keep some interesting company, eh?
With God given rights come responsibility, which is always the forgotten child when people start talking about rights. The right to vote assumes the individual will abide by the laws, will be responsible enough to make him/herself knowledgeable of the issues and cast an honest vote. But today, responsibility is no longer stressed. When an individual commits a felony he/she knows he/she will lose their right to vote if caught and convicted, so they play the game and take the chance. Apparently, they didn’t thing their right to vote was important enough to not commit a felony, so why should we think their right to vote is any important than they do. So, no, they don’t get to vote again.
That's poor journalism. I think they meant "ex-convict" since they're talking about felons who have completed their sentences.
This would be an interesting experiment: Poll convicted felons and ask if they would rather give up their Bill of Rights protections or be incarcerated and have their rights remain intact. (Assuming they’d have to give up 2A, at least during incarceration.)
C’mon, you’re better than that.
Prison is the price you pay, of course the fundamental deprivation of your freedom is constitutional. Further denial of rights is not.
What other rights should be denied after a felony conviction, speech, freedom of religion, due process, how about life in general?
> Permanent disenfranchisement is a crime, denying even the most non-violent felons little recourse to defend their lives from violent assault with meaningful tools commonly in use.
> If they are dangerous criminals, they should not walk among us; incarcerate or terminate, but not re-integrate, the numbers tell us why.
I'm pretty sure that voting is the last thing someone's thinking about when they go out and commit a felony.
If some guy commits a felony DUI and does a few years in the slammer, what's to be gained (from society's viewpoint) by not letting him vote 50 years later when he's an 80 year old man who has since been an honorable citizen, paying his taxes, running a successful business, a homeowner, a father and grandfather etc?
>> Suppose some us of believe that there are other consequences, including forfeiting ones right to vote?
> Wow, felony convictions are a dime a dozen these days, you would be surprised what a felony is today.
> Just where in the constitution does it say felonies negate your God Given rights?
> Ever hear of paying a debt, now lifelong sentences are appropriate?
> Ever hear of the 5th?
Or the 8th.
Amazing how that works every six years, isn't it?
Two words: term limits.