| Author | Thread |
|
|
10/05/2008 10:36:37 AM · #1 |
I saw a story in the paper this morning with the headline:
Push to Return Felons to Voter Rolls Could Benefit Obama
|
|
|
|
10/05/2008 11:02:59 AM · #2 |
Originally posted by kenskid:
I saw a story in the paper this morning with the headline:
Push to Return Felons to Voter Rolls Could Benefit Obama |
Did you see it here? |
|
|
|
10/05/2008 11:08:23 AM · #3 |
You know what, it doesn't really matter if it benefits one candidate or another but if the idea is a good one or not.
IMO, felons lose rights when they get sent to prison. Voting is a right that is lost when sent to prison.
|
|
|
|
10/05/2008 11:10:15 AM · #4 |
Are you saying it ain't true?
Originally posted by milo655321:
Originally posted by kenskid:
I saw a story in the paper this morning with the headline:
Push to Return Felons to Voter Rolls Could Benefit Obama |
Did you see it here? |
|
|
|
|
10/05/2008 11:15:06 AM · #5 |
Originally posted by milo655321:
Originally posted by kenskid:
I saw a story in the paper this morning with the headline:
Push to Return Felons to Voter Rolls Could Benefit Obama |
Did you see it here? |
It's also an article on MSN today as well. |
|
|
|
10/05/2008 11:35:10 AM · #6 |
| Next they will want to give them the right to bear arms again while taking it away from the law abiding citizens. |
|
|
|
10/05/2008 11:41:36 AM · #7 |
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
You know what, it doesn't really matter if it benefits one candidate or another but if the idea is a good one or not.
IMO, felons lose rights when they get sent to prison. Voting is a right that is lost when sent to prison. |
Yes, they lose rights when they get sent to prison, like the right to freedom. Once they have served their time and their probation, they should have all the rights every other citizen has and in most states, they do. This article is written about Virginia, where you do not necessarily gain those rights back. The right to vote is a fundamental right in this country. To state that some people are more deserving of the right to vote that others opens up a can of worms this country has already been through and gotten past. For example, it used to be that only male property owners could vote. Realizing this was undemocratic, they opened it up to all males that weren't slaves. Then slaves got freed so they could vote (but a poll tax was enacted so poor people couldn't vote). So they repealed (found illegal) the poll tax and eventually let women vote. Anyway, once a person has served their time, they should be allowed the fundamental right to vote.
The exact phrase of the constitution that allows this to happen is:
"But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State."
It does not specify what crime, though it does only include males over 21. This is a problem really, as a state could decide certain specific crimes could be barred(and some have), and it could devolve into any crimes the state sees fit, depending on how the legislature of the state is feeling about their re-election chances. Tomorrow, the representatives of your state, in the state legislature, could make it illegal for anyone who was convicted of anything to vote. That can include such mundane things as speeding if they so wish.
When the right to vote is removed from a particular class of people, no matter who that class of people may be, it is a lessening of the fundamental rights we enjoy in this country.
|
|
|
|
10/05/2008 11:54:48 AM · #8 |
Originally posted by dahkota:
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
You know what, it doesn't really matter if it benefits one candidate or another but if the idea is a good one or not.
IMO, felons lose rights when they get sent to prison. Voting is a right that is lost when sent to prison. |
Yes, they lose rights when they get sent to prison, like the right to freedom. Once they have served their time and their probation, they should have all the rights every other citizen has and in most states, they do. This article is written about Virginia, where you do not necessarily gain those rights back. The right to vote is a fundamental right in this country. To state that some people are more deserving of the right to vote that others opens up a can of worms this country has already been through and gotten past. For example, it used to be that only male property owners could vote. Realizing this was undemocratic, they opened it up to all males that weren't slaves. Then slaves got freed so they could vote (but a poll tax was enacted so poor people couldn't vote). So they repealed (found illegal) the poll tax and eventually let women vote. Anyway, once a person has served their time, they should be allowed the fundamental right to vote.
The exact phrase of the constitution that allows this to happen is:
"But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State."
It does not specify what crime, though it does only include males over 21. This is a problem really, as a state could decide certain specific crimes could be barred(and some have), and it could devolve into any crimes the state sees fit, depending on how the legislature of the state is feeling about their re-election chances. Tomorrow, the representatives of your state, in the state legislature, could make it illegal for anyone who was convicted of anything to vote. That can include such mundane things as speeding if they so wish.
When the right to vote is removed from a particular class of people, no matter who that class of people may be, it is a lessening of the fundamental rights we enjoy in this country. |
I suppose but women getting the right to vote and those in prison getting the right to vote are two very different things.
Once released from prison, a person should regain all the rights lost while incarcerated.
It's still irrelevant whether giving the right to vote to prisoners benefits one candidate over another.
Message edited by author 2008-10-05 11:55:56.
|
|
|
|
10/05/2008 11:59:46 AM · #9 |
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
You know what, it doesn't really matter if it benefits one candidate or another but if the idea is a good one or not.
IMO, felons lose rights when they get sent to prison. Voting is a right that is lost when sent to prison. |
Do you think that right should be withheld for the rest of their lives?
The article appears to be saying that there are some activists groups who are trying to register people who have served time for felony convictions but are now under state law currently eligible to vote. From the article:
"Nationally, there are roughly 4 million released felons whose convictions have cost them the right to vote at least temporarily, if not permanently. To return to the ballot box, felons must negotiate suffrage laws that vary from state to state, in many cases working with election officials who can be both unfamiliar with the law and hostile to former convicts seeking to register."
Since, in the United States, prison populations are disproportionately black, it is assumed, not without evidence, that black ex-cons who are legally eligible to vote would likely vote for Obama. From the article:
"Blacks represent 'about 40 percent of the people who've gotten their rights lost and restored,' Mitchell said. 'With an African-American running, and such a critical mass, this could have a tremendous impact.'"
Also the article touches on the confusion between different laws in different states may lead to intentional and/or unintentional voter fraud. From the article:
âThe confusion isn't limited to felons. Researchers at the Brennan Center and the American Civil Liberties Union interviewed election officials in 23 states from 2003 to this year. In a report released Wednesday, the groups said many officials in those states didn't understand voter eligibility rules for felons or how they can register to vote. (â¦) The confusion works both ways. In some cases, the researchers found election officials willing to register felons who were not yet eligible to cast a ballot under that state's law â a potential case of criminal voter fraud.â
Originally posted by David Ey:
Are you saying it ain't true?
Originally posted by milo655321:
Originally posted by kenskid:
I saw a story in the paper this morning with the headline:
Push to Return Felons to Voter Rolls Could Benefit Obama |
Did you see it here? |
|
No. But I do prefer seeing the source of the information for myself. In this case, the Associated Press. The first link on a Google search for âPush to Return Felons to Voter Rolls Could Benefit Obamaâ leads to Fox news.
kenskid, since you brought up the article without comment, may I ask your opinion about it?
ETA:
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
Once released from prison, a person should regain all the rights lost while incarcerated.
It's still irrelevant whether giving the right to vote to prisoners benefits one candidate over another. |
Nevermind my question to you above, I got your answer.
Message edited by author 2008-10-05 12:01:58. |
|
|
|
10/05/2008 12:00:27 PM · #10 |
Originally posted by kenskid:
I saw a story in the paper this morning with the headline:
Push to Return Felons to Voter Rolls Could Benefit Obama |
This is Chicago style politics. Pay the homeless a dinner, drive them to the polls and have them vote for your candidate. Flaunt election laws and register the dead to have more votes for your candidate. Make up names and identies to get more votes. And when all else fails, just count the vote cast that support the leadership (union) position on any issue - like when it has to do with contract retification. Chicago politics has beeb dirty for decades. Chicago politicians have been the worst abusers of fraud since the sixties and beyond. Obama is a product of this and his associations with the most lying/theiving political team of Clinton and Clinton leaves me with nothing as surprising. Add in the illogical lefts obsession with stolen elections in Florida and Ohio by Bush and we have a mindset that "anything" is permissable as long as the Democrats win in November.
As we have seen in Chicago politics for years and years, Obama might actually pull this off - especially with all the support he is receiving from people who should know better. For Dodd and Franks to blame the Republicans on the failure of Fannie and Freddie - and actually get away with it - demonstrates to me that the left will lie through it teeth to win. They will cavort with terrorists, do business with criminals and ignore the associations with extremist religious zealots (like Farakan and Wright). Obama may win, but if he does, I hope those that voted for him finally accept personal resonsibility and accountability. Though they can't even face their own support for the failed policies of liberalism. |
|
|
|
10/05/2008 01:42:17 PM · #11 |
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
I suppose but women getting the right to vote and those in prison getting the right to vote are two very different things.
Once released from prison, a person should regain all the rights lost while incarcerated.
It's still irrelevant whether giving the right to vote to prisoners benefits one candidate over another. |
We had a slight misunderstanding here. I thought you were agreeing with the state of Virginia (where the article originated from) which does not allow anyone, free or incarcerated, who has been convicted of a felony to vote (same for Kentucky). Additionally, a few other states hold that certain felony convictions remove your right to vote (in perpetuity). We are in agreement with regard to currently incarcerated felons - voting should be one of the rights they lose. My points above are in reference to the laws of those states that do not allow convicted but free felons (those whom have served their time) to vote. |
|
|
|
10/05/2008 02:40:13 PM · #12 |
Originally posted by Flash:
This is Chicago style politics. Pay the homeless a dinner, drive them to the polls and have them vote for your candidate. Flaunt election laws and register the dead to have more votes for your candidate. Make up names and identies to get more votes... |
The idea that you would equate those with the right to vote for people who have served their time and been given a second chance is shameful.
Message edited by author 2008-10-05 14:40:42. |
|
|
|
10/05/2008 04:31:31 PM · #13 |
Ok this is a little off subject, but if we allow this then next felons who are convicted of a sexual offense will not want to be registered as a sex offender. That would be the same logic as allowing them to vote. A felon is a felon and should lose certain rights for not abiding by the law. To me I look at it as part of the punishment.
Message edited by author 2008-10-05 16:31:46. |
|
|
|
10/07/2008 10:01:22 AM · #14 |
|
|
|
10/07/2008 10:18:57 AM · #15 |
And what do Republicans do? They disenfranchise poor urban people because they know they don't get many votes from that bloc, using lies and intimidation. They push for computerized voting machines, made by Republican-owned companies, that are easily tampered with. The Democrats cannot compare or compete with the no-holds-barred, morality-free tactics that the Republicans have been perfecting for decades. |
|
|
|
10/07/2008 10:21:31 AM · #16 |
oh, btw, I read that article. Why can't homeless people vote? Do you not understand that they might need a ride to do so, that they might not even realize they can participate in this way? That's not fraud. Believe it or not, they are people, too. |
|
|
|
10/07/2008 10:27:37 AM · #17 |
Originally posted by coronamv:
Ok this is a little off subject, but if we allow this then next felons who are convicted of a sexual offense will not want to be registered as a sex offender. That would be the same logic as allowing them to vote. A felon is a felon and should lose certain rights for not abiding by the law. To me I look at it as part of the punishment. |
So their punishment should go on without end? |
|
|
|
10/07/2008 10:28:05 AM · #18 |
| Only tax paying citizens should be allowed to vote. Otherwise you have what we have now, a bunch of people on the recieving end only wanting more free stuff and politions promising it to them so they can stay in office. |
|
|
|
10/07/2008 10:31:59 AM · #19 |
Originally posted by posthumous:
oh, btw, I read that article. Why can't homeless people vote? Do you not understand that they might need a ride to do so, that they might not even realize they can participate in this way? That's not fraud. Believe it or not, they are people, too. |
I have no problem with homeless people voting. I have a problem with the practice of buying a vote with a meal. The practice of taking advantage of ignorance to advance your cause. The practice of "Chicago" style politics or "Union" style politics or politics that are in their nature dishonest. |
|
|
|
10/07/2008 10:32:11 AM · #20 |
Originally posted by David Ey:
Only tax paying citizens should be allowed to vote. Otherwise you have what we have now, a bunch of people on the recieving end only wanting more free stuff and politions promising it to them so they can stay in office. |
That would be an oligarchy, not democracy.
|
|
|
|
10/07/2008 10:34:06 AM · #21 |
Originally posted by Flash:
Originally posted by posthumous:
oh, btw, I read that article. Why can't homeless people vote? Do you not understand that they might need a ride to do so, that they might not even realize they can participate in this way? That's not fraud. Believe it or not, they are people, too. |
I have no problem with homeless people voting. I have a problem with the practice of buying a vote with a meal. The practice of taking advantage of ignorance to advance your cause. The practice of "Chicago" style politics or "Union" style politics or politics that are in their nature dishonest. |
As opposed to Republicans calling Uni. Students and telling them they can't vote where they go to school or otherwise engaging in similar tactics with the poor... |
|
|
|
10/07/2008 10:57:57 AM · #22 |
Free soup! Yum!
Maybe if you talked to some homeless people or people that lost their jobs it might help gain some perspective.
This is really a goofy premise that 'poor' people are all about getting "free stuff". As if cars, lap-tops and cell phones are something they even think about. Obviously you think that our economy is being dragged down by people taking advantage of the social programs.
Do you honestly think that there are a bunch of people who go to the polls so they can continue being homeless and leaching the system?
Originally posted by David Ey:
Only tax paying citizens should be allowed to vote. Otherwise you have what we have now, a bunch of people on the recieving end only wanting more free stuff and politions promising it to them so they can stay in office. |
Message edited by author 2008-10-07 10:58:23. |
|
|
|
10/07/2008 11:31:03 AM · #23 |
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Originally posted by coronamv:
Ok this is a little off subject, but if we allow this then next felons who are convicted of a sexual offense will not want to be registered as a sex offender. That would be the same logic as allowing them to vote. A felon is a felon and should lose certain rights for not abiding by the law. To me I look at it as part of the punishment. |
So their punishment should go on without end? |
Depends on what you mean by punishment. I would think that if an individual has committed a violent crime then they lose the right to own/possess a firearm. If an individual has committed a sexual offense against children they lose the right to be around children unsupervised. I don't think that serving time in jail along with completed probation should restore these rights. Individuals choose to commit a crime then they should realize that there are certain ramifications and consequences that will result for committing that crime, including the permanent lose of some "rights"/ privileges. |
|
|
|
10/07/2008 11:34:21 AM · #24 |
Originally posted by metatate:
Free soup! Yum!
Maybe if you talked to some homeless people or people that lost their jobs it might help gain some perspective.
This is really a goofy premise that 'poor' people are all about getting "free stuff". As if cars, lap-tops and cell phones are something they even think about. Obviously you think that our economy is being dragged down by people taking advantage of the social programs. |
You are not getting my point. The PROCESS of buying votes is wrong. The PROCESS of strongarming votes is wrong. It is not about homeless or felons or... - it is about ignorant persons being taken advantage of and "selling" their vote. |
|
|
|
10/07/2008 12:03:13 PM · #25 |
Originally posted by Flash:
Originally posted by metatate:
Free soup! Yum!
Maybe if you talked to some homeless people or people that lost their jobs it might help gain some perspective.
This is really a goofy premise that 'poor' people are all about getting "free stuff". As if cars, lap-tops and cell phones are something they even think about. Obviously you think that our economy is being dragged down by people taking advantage of the social programs. |
You are not getting my point. The PROCESS of buying votes is wrong. The PROCESS of strongarming votes is wrong. It is not about homeless or felons or... - it is about ignorant persons being taken advantage of and "selling" their vote. |
So, homeless people are ignorant?
I don't know how it is where you are, but a good portion of the homeless around here are some of the most politically informed and savvy folks I've ever encountered. |
|
