Reply #162: The reason we disenfranchise felons . .

[msmcghee]

. . is that it's such an easy topic to demagogue. Another way to say that is the average American has less than a game-show mentality when it comes to governance. Democracy is set up to ensure that more than half the people will be happy with what's happening - not that we make wise decisions.

So far, no-one has talked about the message that society sends to ex-felons with that rule. Setting aside the racial differences for a minute, put yourself in the ex-con's shoes.

You've just gotten out of jail, you don't want to go back. You're thinking, "Maybe I can turn my life around here".

OTOH - Only one in 10 employers would even consider hiring you as an ex-felon, and only one in three of those because you're skin is dark. Let's see - that's less than a one in thirty chance of making a minimum wage in a crap job.

But your old buddies are still dealing drugs and making good money - and are looking for some help.

When society says - we don't care what you do, how much you change your life, what education you get, nothing - you'll never even be able to vote in this country as long as you live - we are basically assuring that that person will remain a criminal - just smarter now about being caught.

Or, society could say - you've paid for your crime. We'd love to have you back as one of the good guys if you're ready for that. We've got some programs to help you improve your hiring chances and we'd even welcome you to the voting process if you're interested.

Now, which approach is likely to be the most successful, and cost less to society in the long run. Which one is the most humane, the most mature, the most in-tune with life affirming values.

And, which is the most immature, the most demagogic, the most idiotic way to reduce crime?

Do you think any criminal has ever said, "I'm not going to knock over that C-store with you guys tonight. I could lose my right to vote."

But, someone on the edge, possibly willing to turn their life around, at the right moment, might possibly be swayed by a compassionate message welcoming him back to society.

What's the cost to society? That democrats will organize a "Get out the ex-con" vote? I say anyone who's paid for their crime should have the right to vote - just as a matter of principle.

It's the same reason why society should not kill people as punishment for capital crimes. The deterrence value is minimum. But the message that society considers all killing as beyond the pale - is the right message to send.

Intelligent and qualified compassion - it's just the right thing to do.