Ex-felons should keep their voting rights

By The Pine Tree Editorial Staff

The right to vote is one of the most valuable rights we have as American citizens. Our founding
fathers made sure that we the people had the power to choose those who lead us. Well, we here
at The Pine Tree find it wrong that some have this right stripped away from them.
Ex-felons have a tough time as it is when coming out of the U.S. criminal justice system. While
some find it hard to get out of the cycle of crime, many will try to improve themselves upon
being released. This self improvement will usually lead to trying to get a job once out of prison
and trying to become a better citizen. Unfortunately, not all states are comfortable with giving
ex-felons their full citizenship back. Currently, 11 states require ex-felons to wait beyond their
sentence to get their voting rights back, but some states like Kentucky and Iowa have lifetime
bans.
Now it is understandable that some ex-felons deserve this punishment for their crimes, but what
about those who don't? What about those ex-felons who want to change themselves for the
better? We believe they should have that opportunity to improve themselves and shouldn’t be
held back by the consequences of others. States like Texas and California already provide voting
rights to those who complete their sentence, and in the case of Maine and Vermont, current
felons are allowed to vote from jail.
However, we feel that for those 12 states that currently do not extend the right to vote after jail
need to step up and get with the times. It makes no sense to not give back the right to vote to
those who have paid their debts to society. Once the punishment is over, all rights should be
restored.
We have often heard that we as American citizens have the privilege of voting. But voting is
actually a right. In fact, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services asks on the citizenship
test what right pertains only to U.S. citizens, and the answer is voting. As used by the U.S.
government, the word "right" is defined as a freedom "one may assert affirmatively and which
the government is precluded from invading." Since the government agrees all citizens have the
right to vote, a right which cannot be revoked, it only makes sense that ex-felons have the right
to vote just like any other citizen.
When the U.S. does not make sure that all citizens have the right to vote, the government
becomes an accomplice to the social injustice being committed against this marginalized group.
Looking back on history and stories from our ancestors, we know that discrimination is no new
thing when it comes to voting in the U.S. However, amendments like the 15th, 19th, 24th and
26th were established so marginalized groups, such as African Americans and women, could
vote more easily. Not allowing ex-felons to vote is a form of discrimination that should be
addressed in the same manner.
When a convicted felon finishes their sentence, they will live the remainder of their life with all
of their fundamental rights with the exception of one; the right to vote. But, just because they
sacrifice some of their daily freedoms doesn’t mean that they should sacrifice their human-rights.
We believe that if ex-felons have the opportunity to continue practicing freedom of religion and
speech, then they should not be withheld from their ability to support a political representative.
The assumption among a portion of modern society is that criminals are not trustworthy and/or
educated enough to choose wisely in electing America’s leaders. However, the entire purpose of
the U.S.’s justice system is for the reformation of criminals into citizens who will benefit society.
If we did not trust ex-convicts, we would not allow them to drink alcohol, obtain a driver's
license, or even own property. Following this, some argue that allowing current prisoners the
right to vote is only, “expensive and impractical” and that it should not be attempted because of
these reasons. While this argument may be logical towards smaller, local elections, we believe
that this may actually become counter-effective towards the goal of producing law-abiding
citizens. Stripping former prisoners of their right to vote may only encourage their loss of respect
for law and authority. On the other hand, allowing convicts to remain engaged may build a
deeper devotion to promoting civil responsibilities and working towards the common good of the
people.
We understand that some people still don’t feel comfortable with the idea of letting criminals,
even former criminals, vote. They might ask, “how could we put our country’s future in the
hands of violent offenders?” But, in reality, not every felony offense is violent, and not every
crime affects political standings.
Crimes like tax evasion, copyright infringement and gambling are all felonies. But does
committing a crime like that mean someone isn’t fit to vote? It might mean a period of clouded
judgement or bad decisions, but the point of prison is to be reformed. Once you’re out, your
privileges should be restored. The only way to completely rejoin society is to be allowed to
participate in it, and voting is our most prevalent form of participation. And in the cases of taxes
and gambling, third parties like the Libertarian party believe those should not even be crimes to
begin with, so why take the right to vote away from someone who is not even seen as a criminal
to everyone?
If you’re still not convinced, think of all the people who were wrongly accused of a crime. It
might not be an overwhelming majority of people in prison, but it still happens. According to the
Equal Justice Initiative, more than 2,500 people have been exonerated since 1989. Now think of
all the innocent people who haven’t been exonerated, and will one day be released from prison to
never have their rights fully restored for something they didn’t do. If voting rights are not
restored to people out of prison in every state, then the voices of too many people are being
stifled.
Overall, it is just important to remember that the system was built for the people. It is not being
used correctly if the people are not allowed to use it.