States should lift life bans on voting for ex-felons: Attorney General

[rockin'robin]

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. states should repeal laws that restrict for life the voting rights of ex-felons because the laws prevent former prison inmates from successfully reentering society, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder said on Tuesday in the latest Obama administration push on civil rights.

In a speech at Georgetown University Law Center, Holder said that former prisoners whose rights are restored are less likely to find themselves in court again. According to a preliminary 2011 study from Florida that he cited, the recidivism rate was 11 percent for ex-felons whose civil rights were restored there, compared to 33 percent for ex-felons overall.

"These restrictions are not only unnecessary and unjust, they are also counterproductive," Holder said at a legal conference. "By perpetuating the stigma and isolation imposed on formerly incarcerated individuals, these laws increase the likelihood - increase the likelihood - they will commit future crimes."

People convicted of serious crimes in state and federal courts usually must give up various rights that otherwise are guaranteed to Americans, such as the rights to hold public office and serve on a jury. They may be reinstated later, though sometimes through a complicated process.

Eleven states restrict voting rights to varying degrees after a felon has completed his or her sentence, Holder said.

About 5.8 million Americans are barred from voting because of current or previous felony convictions, and a disproportionate number are racial minorities, according to a report in October from the Leadership Conference Education Fund, a civil rights group. In Florida, about 10 percent of the voting-age population is affected, the report said.

Holder said his Justice Department would work with state legislators to prod them to change their laws. He gave no indication the department would go so far as to sue over the laws, as the department did last year when it sued North Carolina and Texas over voting laws that require people to show photo identification before casting a ballot.

Yahoo!

 

[Foxrac]

Oh wow, in my state, if you are convicted of felony crime so you will lose access to vote permanently.

 

[mikemike]

to AG Holder, everything to him is racism, racial and racist.
breaking the law is not ~ism....

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. states should repeal laws that restrict for life the voting rights of ex-felons because the laws prevent former prison inmates from successfully reentering society, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder said on Tuesday in the latest Obama administration push on civil rights.

In a speech at Georgetown University Law Center, Holder said that former prisoners whose rights are restored are less likely to find themselves in court again. According to a preliminary 2011 study from Florida that he cited, the recidivism rate was 11 percent for ex-felons whose civil rights were restored there, compared to 33 percent for ex-felons overall.

"These restrictions are not only unnecessary and unjust, they are also counterproductive," Holder said at a legal conference. "By perpetuating the stigma and isolation imposed on formerly incarcerated individuals, these laws increase the likelihood - increase the likelihood - they will commit future crimes."

People convicted of serious crimes in state and federal courts usually must give up various rights that otherwise are guaranteed to Americans, such as the rights to hold public office and serve on a jury. They may be reinstated later, though sometimes through a complicated process.

Eleven states restrict voting rights to varying degrees after a felon has completed his or her sentence, Holder said.

About 5.8 million Americans are barred from voting because of current or previous felony convictions, and a disproportionate number are racial minorities, according to a report in October from the Leadership Conference Education Fund, a civil rights group. In Florida, about 10 percent of the voting-age population is affected, the report said.

Holder said his Justice Department would work with state legislators to prod them to change their laws. He gave no indication the department would go so far as to sue over the laws, as the department did last year when it sued North Carolina and Texas over voting laws that require people to show photo identification before casting a ballot.

Yahoo!

 

[Foxrac]

to AG Holder, everything to him is racism, racial and racist.
breaking the law is not ~ism....

This thread is about ex-convicts so AG Holder believes that ex-convict's vote rights should restored after complete the sentence in the prison.

I'm fine with restore the vote rights for ex-convicts who committed nonviolent crime.

Sometime, the criminal charge can be racially charged or jurors use racially biased.

 

[diehardbiker]

Just put this way, losing voting right permanently after toppling the rock in Utah... Justified?

This thread is about ex-convicts so AG Holder believes that ex-convict's vote rights should restored after complete the sentence in the prison.

I'm fine with restore the vote rights for ex-convicts who committed nonviolent crime.

Sometime, the criminal charge can be racially charged or jurors use racially biased.

 

[Foxrac]

Just put this way, losing voting right permanently after toppling the rock in Utah... Justified?

Not in Utah, you have to complete the prison sentence so you will have vote rights restored after get out of prison.
State Felon Voting Laws - Felon Voting - ProCon.org

Utah is much better than Alabama.

 

[diehardbiker]

I don't mean by reality but the concept behind that.

I still stand "Felony" charges as excessive charge of crime, and this case should be thrown out.

Anyway back to topic, there are some crimes I see occurs with felony charged penalty seems to be excessive and not justified. So, barring ex con from voting after served their sentence may be unreasonable. Why should a free man, even after served their sentence be barred from the freedom of vote?

Not in Utah, you have to complete the prison sentence so you will have vote rights restored after get out of prison.
State Felon Voting Laws - Felon Voting - ProCon.org

Utah is much better than Alabama.

 

[Konijnen]

I think voting should be consistent nationwide. It does not seem fair an ex-felon can vote in one state and not another - they should both get the same right to vote. Totally with them on this situation. The voter id lawsuit - not so much... seems commonsense to me that you should need to present some sort of identification before voting to prevent fraud. I would rather see them spend resources on making ID easier to get then suing states for wanting to require it.

 

[Foxrac]

I don't mean by reality but the concept behind that.

I still stand "Felony" charges as excessive charge of crime, and this case should be thrown out.

Anyway back to topic, there are some crimes I see occurs with felony charged penalty seems to be excessive and not justified. So, barring ex con from voting after served their sentence may be unreasonable. Why should a free man, even after served their sentence be barred from the freedom of vote?

Excessive charge? Couple of idiots got charged with low level felony for destruction of state park. If you don't like it - don't make anything is stupid that cause destruct the state park. The misdemeanor and felony are depending on how much value is destroyed - smaller value - misdemeanor and larger value - felony. It is big deal to Utahans and lovers of state parks.

Losing vote rights for convicted felons are nature of punishment. It isn't much of my problem about excessive crime, that's state issue.

There is worst thing in my state - overcrowded prison (over 190%), the probation will not removed until you pay fine/restitution in FULL (bad news for convicted felons who have no job), some crime charges, especially drugs are excessive and sometime, police officers can be asshole to make excessive charge against you.

I'm prepared myself if our state prison (it is about 7 miles from our house) got broken down and all inmates escape due to staffing shortage.

I'm no love about my state government.

 

[diehardbiker]

You said one way, and gone other way,

Excessive charge? Couple of idiots got charged with low level felony for destruction of state park. If you don't like it - don't make anything is stupid that cause destruct the state park. The misdemeanor and felony are depending on how much value is destroyed - smaller value - misdemeanor and larger value - felony. It is big deal to Utahans and lovers of state parks.

Losing vote rights for convicted felons are nature of punishment. It isn't much of my problem about excessive crime, that's state issue.

There is worst thing in my state - overcrowded prison (over 190%), the probation will not removed until you pay fine/restitution in FULL (bad news for convicted felons who have no job), some crime charges, especially drugs are excessive and sometime, police officers can be asshole to make excessive charge against you.

I'm prepared myself if our state prison (it is about 7 miles from our house) got broken down and all inmates escape due to staffing shortage.

I'm no love about my state government.

 

[rockin'robin]

Voter Rights for Florida Convicted Felon

Under Florida law, a felon who has been convicted by any court of record is prohibited from voting. An individual who has been barred from voting because of a felony conviction may apply for the restoration of civil rights.

Voting
On a voter registration application, an individual is required to disclose whether he has ever been convicted of a felony and whether he has had his civil rights restored. The application does not require disclosure of the nature of the felony offense. A voter who registers and is then convicted of a felony will have his name automatically removed from the list of registered voters.

Restoration of Civil Rights
Florida permits a felon to request his civil rights to be restored so that he may vote. There is an application form that needs to be filled out by the felon. There are several levels of review: automatic approval of restoration of rights; restoration of rights without a hearing; 15-year arrest and crime-free review without a hearing; and full investigation and hearing process for murderers, sex offenders and sexual predators.

Automatic Approval
A felon who has not been convicted of a lewd or lascivious crime, kidnapping, child pornography, murder or other violent crime may have his civil rights automatically approved. This requires the felon to complete his sentence and supervision or probation, pay victim restitution and have no pending charges.

Review and Approval Without Hearing
A felon who was not convicted of a violent or sexual crime may have his rights restored without a hearing. This requires the felon to complete his sentence and supervision or probation, pay any victim restitution, have no pending charges, have a midlevel investigation completed by the Parole Commission and have approval of the application by the Governor and two members of the Clemency Board. If approval of the governor and Clemency Board is not completed within 30 days, a full investigation will be conducted.

15-Year Rule
If a felon was convicted 15 years prior to the date of the application and has not committed any crimes since, he may have his civil rights restored without a hearing. This requires the felon to complete his sentence and any supervision or probation requirements and pay victim restitution. The Parole Commission will verify eligibility and conduct a midlevel investigation. The application must be approved by the governor and two members of the Clemency Board within 30 days. If it is not approved with 30 days, a full investigation will be conducted.

Full Investigation
Felons who were convicted of murder or sexual offenses, or who are sexual predators, have to undergo a full investigation to have their civil rights restored. This requires completion of the sentence and any supervision or probation requirements, payment of victim restitution, and a full investigation and hearing, including a victim statement to the Clemency Board.

History
Florida's lifetime ban on felons' civil and voting rights dates to the Reconstruction era after the Civil War, when newly freed slaves were granted the right to vote. Florida officials responded to this by amending the state constitution to limit felons' rights. At that time, people could also be banned for "moral turpitude," or conduct that is not in accordance with social norms. African-Americans faced disparate application of this charge in general and were often tried and convicted for crimes they did not commit or were coerced into confessing. As a result, the law was used to exclude African-Americans from voting and exercising other civil rights.

Voter Rights for Florida Convicted Felons | eHow

 

[Foxrac]

You said one way, and gone other way,

How?

 

[whatdidyousay!]

I don't mean by reality but the concept behind that.

I still stand "Felony" charges as excessive charge of crime, and this case should be thrown out.

Anyway back to topic, there are some crimes I see occurs with felony charged penalty seems to be excessive and not justified. So, barring ex con from voting after served their sentence may be unreasonable. Why should a free man, even after served their sentence be barred from the freedom of vote?

There is no good reason to keep them from voting once they finish their sentence. Not allowing them to vote only keep them feeling like they can apart of society again. I met the inmate that trained my hearing dog and the guy told me that he felt like he was giving back to society by training Finlay , it made him better about himself .

 

[diehardbiker]

You said that you wanted throw them in jail so badly because they tripped ageless rock (General speaking), and those simple violations used up so much prison space, in the end you fumed about government spending $ on prisons.

See where I am saying?

How?

 

[Foxrac]

You said that you wanted throw them in jail so badly because they tripped ageless rock (General speaking), and those simple violations used up so much prison space, in the end you fumed about government spending $ on prisons.

See where I am saying?

That's not what I means - I'm talking about state law that regulate on illegal drugs are ridiculous - if you possess crack, heroin, hashish, LSD, meth and other illegal drugs can land you with felony charge. Most inmates in state prisons are drug-related offense.

Low level felony for destruction of state park if value is greater is reasonable to me. I can't let idiots whoever mess with state park that result in bigger damage, more larger value. Maximum for mischief could be up to medium level felony. Couple of idiots will only stay in state prison for up to 5 years so they will have vote rights restored. 5 years aren't very long, however I know some people got 20 years, 30 years in prison for drug-related offense.

I want couple of idiots to learn a lesson for not make stupid action that cause destruct the state park so I want them to treat with respect, that all I care.

Alabama has 15 prisons (exclude work camp/work center) since Utah only have 2 prisons. The overcrowding in Utah prisons are closer to capacity since Alabama is too way overcapacity - over 190%. Utah has law that regulate on overcrowding - if over the capacity so Utah is required to early release of low level inmates, especially for example, couple of idiots who destruct the state park will get early release if state prison goes over the capacity.
Utah State Prisons Reach Capacity | Greg Smith and Associates, Criminal Law Attorneys | Salt Lake City

I think Utah government is smarter than Alabama government.

 

[diehardbiker]

I don't really want to derail this thread. My point is, since them boy scout had a jolly time and wasn't think anything serious and poses zero, I mean absolutely zero risk to anyone. They cared about everybody safety, how can a felon care about everybody's safety? It also was their first offense, they may not realize, regardless of boy scout oath they took. The best, cheapest and smart thing is punish them with community service, nothing more. Its like killing two birds with one stone,. they learned their lesson, and educate others about respect at same time… Can Felony punishment do this way? I don't think so! On other hand, if it were their second offense, and had a downright evil laughter thinking destruction is funny thing, just pure vandalism behavior, then I would agree as felony.

That concept applies on this thread because when we the people take away privilege as punishment, if the crime isn't severe enough but yet a felony charge and they HAVE served their sentence, then voting privilege should be restored. If one decided go down at a huge stadium somewhere with full of fans, sprayed machine gun at everybody, that felony, I would agree a LIFETIME loss of privilege on voting. Its like, if a felon learned a valuable lesson, showed it all the way, served the sentence, why continue bar the privilege? Those who sprayed lead at everybody, is definitely out of mind and permanent felony.

I believe in second chance, we all are humans by nature.

That's not what I means - I'm talking about state law that regulate on illegal drugs are ridiculous - if you possess crack, heroin, hashish, LSD, meth and other illegal drugs can land you with felony charge. Most inmates in state prisons are drug-related offense.

Low level felony for destruction of state park if value is greater is reasonable to me. I can't let idiots whoever mess with state park that result in bigger damage, more larger value. Maximum for mischief could be up to medium level felony. Couple of idiots will only stay in state prison for up to 5 years so they will have vote rights restored. 5 years aren't very long, however I know some people got 20 years, 30 years in prison for drug-related offense.

I want couple of idiots to learn a lesson for not make stupid action that cause destruct the state park so I want them to treat with respect, that all I care.

Alabama has 15 prisons (exclude work camp/work center) since Utah only have 2 prisons. The overcrowding in Utah prisons are closer to capacity since Alabama is too way overcapacity - over 190%. Utah has law that regulate on overcrowding - if over the capacity so Utah is required to early release of low level inmates, especially for example, couple of idiots who destruct the state park will get early release if state prison goes over the capacity.
Utah State Prisons Reach Capacity | Greg Smith and Associates, Criminal Law Attorneys | Salt Lake City

I think Utah government is smarter than Alabama government.

 

[Foxrac]

I don't really want to derail this thread. My point is, since them boy scout had a jolly time and wasn't think anything serious and poses zero, I mean absolutely zero risk to anyone. They cared about everybody safety, how can a felon care about everybody's safety? It also was their first offense, they may not realize, regardless of boy scout oath they took. The best, cheapest and smart thing is punish them with community service, nothing more. Its like killing two birds with one stone,. they learned their lesson, and educate others about respect at same time… Can Felony punishment do this way? I don't think so! On other hand, if it were their second offense, and had a downright evil laughter thinking destruction is funny thing, just pure vandalism behavior, then I would agree as felony.

That concept applies on this thread because when we the people take away privilege as punishment, if the crime isn't severe enough but yet a felony charge and they HAVE served their sentence, then voting privilege should be restored. If one decided go down at a huge stadium somewhere with full of fans, sprayed machine gun at everybody, that felony, I would agree a LIFETIME loss of privilege on voting. Its like, if a felon learned a valuable lesson, showed it all the way, served the sentence, why continue bar the privilege? Those who sprayed lead at everybody, is definitely out of mind and permanent felony.

I believe in second chance, we all are humans by nature.

First paragraph, Utah government and Utahans disagree with you. The online video indicated that they destructed the rock for fun - see their facial expression. The rock was stand and it didn't danger to anyone, until scout decided to push the rock that caused to slide down, along with their facial expression. There were outcry and the scout organization kicked them out for not respect the nature of state park. The low level felony is make sense for two idiots because value of damage is much larger, but maximum is medium level felony. Having a felony charge will put two idiots more awareness about how serious is crime if they destruct the state park. It is big deal to Utahans and state park lovers.

I think you should be more concern about my state because possess of illegal drugs could land with felony charge and we have a severely overcrowded state prison - it is #1 most overcrowded prison in the US.
The 3 most crowded state prison systems in America

In my state, if you vandalize the properties or state parks that result in felony charge, so you will very likely to get a long probation, house arrest or work camp, prior to parole or early release, depending on plea bargain. For anyone with drug offense - not much, they automatically send to state prisons and stay for years.

Convicted felons can opt for expungement, especially for nonviolent crime.

 

[Foxrac]

It looks like two ex-scouts will eligible for expungement after they serve the prison sentence and pay all fine off.
Expungement Eligibility | Utah Department of Public Safety

They will not have felony on their record for rest of their life, though.

 

[whatdidyousay!]

You said that you wanted throw them in jail so badly because they tripped ageless rock (General speaking), and those simple violations used up so much prison space, in the end you fumed about government spending $ on prisons.

See where I am saying?

I did not say I wanted to put them in jail , I said I want to see the guy pay a fine and do community work. Yeah I am against the taxpayers having to pay for an inmate to have a sex change . Now my state will have to do the same for other inmate that want this too . I rather see the money spend on kids that can't afford to pay for their school lunches.

 

[Jiro]

Just put this way, losing voting right permanently after toppling the rock in Utah... Justified?

did they lose it?