In addition to opposing reasonable measures to prevent fraudulent voting, there is a substantial push, principally by Democrats, to give the vote to convicted felons. Some, such as presidential candidate Senator Bernie Sanders, seek to even give incarcerated prisoners, including terrorists, the right to cast ballots.
There is a history of some states allowing convicted felons who have completed their sentences to regain voting rights. The National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL) notes that “It has been common practice in the United States to make felons ineligible to vote, in some cases permanently. Over the last few decades, the general trend has been toward reinstating the right to vote at some point, although this is a state-by-state policy choice. Currently, state approaches to felon disenfranchisement vary tremendously…In all cases, “automatic restoration” does not mean that voter registration is automatic. Typically prison officials automatically inform election officials that an individual’s rights have been restored. The person is then responsible for re-registering through normal processes. Some states, California is one example, require that voter registration information be provided to formerly incarcerated people.”
Pro/con notes that “An estimated 6.1 million people with a felony conviction are barred from voting in elections – a condition known as disenfranchisement. Each state has its own laws on disenfranchisement. While Vermont and Maine allow felons to vote while in prison, ten other states permanently restrict certain felons from voting. Proponents of felon re-enfranchisement say that felons who have paid their debt to society by completing their sentences should have all of their rights and privileges restored. They argue that efforts to block ex-felons from voting are unfair, undemocratic, and politically or racially motivated. Opponents say felon voting restrictions are consistent with other voting limitations such as age, residency, sanity, etc., and other felon restrictions such as no guns for violent offenders and no sex offenders near schools. They say that convicted felons have demonstrated poor judgment and should not be trusted with a vote.”
The reason for the Democrats’ interest in this topic is clear. According to an NYU study, “disenfranchisement laws tend to take more votes from Democratic than from Republican candidates. Analysis shows that felon disenfranchisement played a decisive role in U.S. Senate elections in recent years. Moreover, at least one Republican presidential victory would have been reversed if former felons had been allowed to vote… felon voters showed strong Democratic preferences in both presidential and senatorial elections…even comparatively unpopular Democratic candidates… would have garnered almost 70 percent of the felon vote.”
During the 2016 presidential campaign, Terry McAuliffe, then-governor of the key swing state of Virginia and a personal friend of Hillary Clinton, announced that he was restoring voting rights of more than 200,000 Virginians who were convicted of felonies such as murder, rape, armed assault and other crimes. Some analyses indicated that the governor’s restoration would be permitted despite the status of any unpaid fines or restitution requirements. A press release from McAuliffe’s office noted “Each of those Virginians will immediately regain the right to register This new system of buying with affordable costs can be obtained cialis prescription after the third treatment. All you need to online viagra pharmacy do take some amount of acid is secreted in our stomach to aid the digestion process. So plan for a nice candle light dinner with your partner before the intercourse and downtownsault.org commander levitra spend some time with you only. They claim that this was the first clinical study of such kind. levitra prescription to vote, to run for office, to serve on a jury and to serve as a notary public…”
There was a harsh reaction. A National Review assessment questions whether the Governor can provide a blanket pardon, as opposed to a case-by-case action. The article quotes legal sources claiming that McAuliffe is essentially rewriting the state constitution. An Associated Press (AP) description left no doubt that the purpose of the move had less to do with the rights of released criminals and everything to do with the 2016 election. AP noted that at the announcement, left-wings groups were present, handing out voter registration forms. A BBC article quoted Republican Caucus Chairman Ryan T. McDougle: “Terry McAuliffe wants to ensure that convicted pedophiles, rapists, and domestic abusers can vote for Hillary Clinton.”
An Atlantic article favorable to McAuliffe noted the end result: “When Republicans in Virginia’s state legislature revolted at that executive order and won an August 2016 Virginia Supreme Court decision blocking restorations en masse, McAuliffe took another route, with his office reviewing thousands of felons’ records and the governor restoring their rights individually using an autopen. The number of restorations completed that way only stood at 13,000 of the planned 200,000 in August of 2016. But the administration has been persistent, and now Secretary of the Commonwealth Kelly Thomasson tells…[that] 172,298 people have had their rights restored.”
Some Democrats are concerned that traditional support groups such as blue collar workers and ethnic minorities will be swayed by President Trump’s economic advances. That worry extends to Jewish voters as well, who traditionally prefer Democrats but may be offended by many Democrats’ reduced support for Israel and the party’s growing relationship with those making anti-Semitic remarks. Enfranchising felons, with their traditional support for Democrats, is seen as one small but significant way to partially address the expected shortfall.
Illustration: Pixabay