They tell us that there are no coincidences in life, and similarly, there are no coincidences in politics. On Tuesday, Attorney General Eric Holder gave a headline-making speech on criminal justice reform at a civil rights conference at Georgetown University Law Center. The New York Times, on the same day, ran an editorial calling for an end to felon disenfranchisement laws.
We hope that these two not-so-coincidental events are the one-two punch needed to get this issue off the back burner. Holder, with his characteristic combination of lawyerly restraint and personal passion, traced the origins of felon disenfranchisement to the racist animus of the post-Civil War era. It is also no coincidence that the states clinging most stubbornly to the most restrictive policies include many in the south, where prison populations are disproportionately African-American. In Florida, Kentucky, and Virginia, one in five African-American adults is not allowed to vote.
Studies demonstrate that minorities are disproportionately targeted by the criminal justice system—they’re more likely to be arrested, more likely to be charged, more likely to be tried, and more likely to serve prison time than whites involved in the same conduct. Unforgiving felon disenfranchisement laws further exacerbate this injustice, punishing these prisoners all over again, sometimes for life, and further alienating them from the society they are asked to reenter and respect. In addition to this obvious injustice, disenfranchisement laws are also counterproductive. A Florida study recently showed that those released from prison without regaining their voting rights are three times more likely than those who are re-enfranchised to commit further offenses within the first three years after release.
An estimated 5.8 million Americans are disenfranchised because of felony convictions. As Attorney General Holder remarked, “These individuals…are routinely denied the chance to participate in the most fundamental and important act of self-governance. They are prevented from exercising an essential right. And they are locked out from achieving complete rehabilitation and reentry—even after they’ve served the time, and paid the fines, that they owe.”
As the New York Times editorial observed, “Felon disenfranchisement laws lie at the intersection of two issues on which Mr. Holder has become increasingly outspoken: criminal justice reform and voting rights. While he has no direct authority to change state laws, the weight of his words can help pave a path for legislative action in both Congress and statehouses around the country.” True, the Attorney General has no authority to change the law, particularly state law, but his office does have a formal role in the deliberations of Congress, and we urge him to use that role aggressively.
The Democracy Restoration Act, which has been languishing in Congress since 2008, could certainly use a jump-start from the Department of Justice. This legislation sets a uniform, easily understood national baseline, providing that former felons who have served their prison sentences are eligible to vote in federal elections. (Congress is not authorized to legislate such policy for state or municipal elections.) It has not been re-introduced in the 113th Congress, but we hope that its champions, including Senator Ben Cardin (D-MD) and Rep. John Conyers (D-MI), will take advantage of this week’s confluence of events to put it on the front burner.
Photo by United States Department of Justice via Wikimedia Commons
