Felons, Life expectancy, and Presidential elections (op-ed)
Years ago I asked a man if he voted. He said he was a felon. I didn’t know. But the self incriminating label implied his voting rights were revoked.
I told him Pennsylvania restored voting rights automatically after prison release. The state changed that law years ago.
Without hesitation, he replied it didn’t matter.
Why doesn’t it matter? I demanded to know.
He shrugged and said it wouldn’t change anything.
At first I thought he meant one vote out of millions has no impact on the outcome of an election. But that wasn’t it. What he conveyed was that voting didn’t matter, he was still a felon. Voting restoration didn’t help him on a job application. And that stigma was a life sentence that led to his self imposed disenfranchisement.
Recently Virginia Governor Terry McAuliffe signed an executive order to restore voting rights to more than 200,000 convicted felons. Before McAuliffe’s signature the state of Virginia restricted felons from voting for life. The action overturned a civil war era provision in Virginia’s constitution geared toward disenfranchising blacks.
During McAuliffe’s gubernatorial campaign, he promised to restore voting rights, but Virginia Republicans have overlooked the morality of the matter and questioned the Governor’s motive. They accuse the governor of circumventing the legislative process because McAuliffe is a longtime friend and fundraiser for the expected Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton. The executive order will increase the voting population by 4%. Most of the new voters are black, a loyal constituency for the Democratic Party, and Virginia’s republican lawmakers plan to challenge the matter in court.
The Virginia Republican Party chairman, said, “Those who have paid their debts… Should be allowed full participation in society but there are limits. [The governor] was wrong to issue a blanket restoration of rights.” (The executive order extended to nonviolent and violent felons, including murders and rapists.)
Virginia’s Republican Party has declared the matter a constitutional crisis.
The Washington Post stated only a fraction of those eligible are likely to cast ballots on election day, but with the state’s recent history of close elections the smallest amount of new voters can change the outcome.
I agree. It’s just two camps maneuvering to win a battleground state for their party. Only there’s a belief among “fair minded” observers that the governor’s decision was right but the timing was wrong, but if politics is put to the side the best time to restore voting rights is during a presidential election year.
According to the latest data life expectancy for black males in the United States is 71 years of age and presidential elections take place every 4 years. Now if you divide life expectancy by the election cycle, you get 17.75, I’ll round the number.
That’s 18 presidential elections.
But that number is from birth to 71. You’re not eligible to vote until your 18 years old and that subtracts 4 elections.
So during the average life span of a black male there are 14 presidential elections.
But no one knows if they are going to reach the age of average life expectancy. For example, my father died at 58. After he became voting age his presidential election life span was from 1969 - 2009. That’s 40 years, divide that by the election cycle and you get 10. So my father voted for the president 10 times.
Life is short, presidential elections during a life span are few.
And if a state has the opportunity to restore voting rights for ex-offenders during a presidential election year they should. It’s not only right, it’s timely, because no one knows the limits of their individual life span and that election could be a person’s first and last chance to vote for the leader of the free world.
First published in the New Pittsburgh Courier 5/11/16
I told him Pennsylvania restored voting rights automatically after prison release. The state changed that law years ago.
Without hesitation, he replied it didn’t matter.
Why doesn’t it matter? I demanded to know.
He shrugged and said it wouldn’t change anything.
At first I thought he meant one vote out of millions has no impact on the outcome of an election. But that wasn’t it. What he conveyed was that voting didn’t matter, he was still a felon. Voting restoration didn’t help him on a job application. And that stigma was a life sentence that led to his self imposed disenfranchisement.
Recently Virginia Governor Terry McAuliffe signed an executive order to restore voting rights to more than 200,000 convicted felons. Before McAuliffe’s signature the state of Virginia restricted felons from voting for life. The action overturned a civil war era provision in Virginia’s constitution geared toward disenfranchising blacks.
During McAuliffe’s gubernatorial campaign, he promised to restore voting rights, but Virginia Republicans have overlooked the morality of the matter and questioned the Governor’s motive. They accuse the governor of circumventing the legislative process because McAuliffe is a longtime friend and fundraiser for the expected Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton. The executive order will increase the voting population by 4%. Most of the new voters are black, a loyal constituency for the Democratic Party, and Virginia’s republican lawmakers plan to challenge the matter in court.
The Virginia Republican Party chairman, said, “Those who have paid their debts… Should be allowed full participation in society but there are limits. [The governor] was wrong to issue a blanket restoration of rights.” (The executive order extended to nonviolent and violent felons, including murders and rapists.)
Virginia’s Republican Party has declared the matter a constitutional crisis.
The Washington Post stated only a fraction of those eligible are likely to cast ballots on election day, but with the state’s recent history of close elections the smallest amount of new voters can change the outcome.
I agree. It’s just two camps maneuvering to win a battleground state for their party. Only there’s a belief among “fair minded” observers that the governor’s decision was right but the timing was wrong, but if politics is put to the side the best time to restore voting rights is during a presidential election year.
According to the latest data life expectancy for black males in the United States is 71 years of age and presidential elections take place every 4 years. Now if you divide life expectancy by the election cycle, you get 17.75, I’ll round the number.
That’s 18 presidential elections.
But that number is from birth to 71. You’re not eligible to vote until your 18 years old and that subtracts 4 elections.
So during the average life span of a black male there are 14 presidential elections.
But no one knows if they are going to reach the age of average life expectancy. For example, my father died at 58. After he became voting age his presidential election life span was from 1969 - 2009. That’s 40 years, divide that by the election cycle and you get 10. So my father voted for the president 10 times.
Life is short, presidential elections during a life span are few.
And if a state has the opportunity to restore voting rights for ex-offenders during a presidential election year they should. It’s not only right, it’s timely, because no one knows the limits of their individual life span and that election could be a person’s first and last chance to vote for the leader of the free world.
First published in the New Pittsburgh Courier 5/11/16
Comments
Post a Comment