Florida Gov Rick Scott Playing God: Arbitrary Voting Rights Restoration For Ex-Felons

[PoliTalker]

The State of Florida is currently very close to a toss up between Republican and Democratic voting. Because the State has experienced Gerrymandering, arbitrary voter rights, and voter suppression efforts, Republicans currently hold control. But Democrats routinely vote in such great numbers, the State often swings blue. Florida voted for President Obama twice. A Democrat currently leads in the 2018 governor's race.

One of the reasons Florida does not have more Democratic votes is because many Democrats are prevented from voting if they made mistakes in their lives and did something illegal. Even if they serve their time, get released, and turn their lives around, there is no defined process for them to regain their right to vote. It has become totally arbitrary, up to the whims of the Governor. And he even said so. Some feel that is a violation of the US Constitution.

I've included an excerpt from an article by NPR, explaining what is going on.

Rule 5 of this site guides why the following is in quotes, with the link to the source given:

Across the U.S., most states restore voting rights to felons after they've completed their sentences. Some wait for probation and parole to be complete. In recent years, many states have updated and streamlined the process.

Florida, however, has gone in the other direction. When Gov. Rick Scott took office seven years ago, he rolled back reforms put in place by his predecessor, Charlie Crist. More than 150,000 Floridians had their voting rights restored during Crist's four years in office. In the seven years since then, Rick Scott has approved restoring voting rights to just over 3,000 people.

In Florida, more than 10 percent of the adult population is prohibited from voting because they've had felony convictions. Under a law that dates back to the Reconstruction era, Florida bars felons from voting, unless officials approve a request to have those rights restored. That means nearly 1.5 million people in Florida can't vote, even though their sentences are complete.

At a hearing in 2016, Scott tried to explain to one man why he was denying his request to have his rights restored.

"Clemency is — there's no standard," Scott said. "We can do whatever we want. But it's ... tied to remorse. And ... understanding that we all want to live in a law-abiding society."

Jon Sherman, with the Fair Elections Legal Network, says that's the problem with Florida's system.

"There's no rule, no standard, no criteria governing their decision-making," he said. "Sometimes, the governor simply says, 'I don't feel comfortable at this point.'"

Sherman believes the inconsistent way in which Florida restores voting rights violates the U.S. Constitution. He represents a group of former felons that's suing the state.

"A lot of people have seen how unfair and arbitrary the process is, how delayed," Sherman said. "I mean, we've met people who are waiting for up to 10 years for a hearing on their application. And they see that and they decide, 'You know, it's not worth it to even apply.'"

One of those suing Florida is Yraida Guanipa. She served 11 years on a drug trafficking conviction before being released in 2007. Since then, she's gone back to college, earned a bachelor's and a master's degree, and started a business in Miami. Her probation ended in 2012, but Florida's law requires her to wait an additional seven years before applying to have her rights restored.

"The seven years is not up until next year," Guanipa said. "And after that, I have to get into the line of the backlog, of maybe 10 years. I probably would be dead."

Part of the reason Florida withholds the right to vote from felons, Guanipa says, is political. She believes it's aimed at suppressing the vote in minority communities.

"It's not only punishing me," she says, "but it punishes my family and my community because it's blocking us [from having] a voice."

In Florida, more than 20 percent of otherwise eligible African-American adults are unable to vote because of the law.

Earlier this year, a federal judge said Florida's process for clemency and restoring voting rights was unconstitutional. The state appealed and arguments in the case are scheduled in a few weeks. But before there's a final decision on that, Florida voters will weigh in.

Another group that has been working to restore voting rights for felons, the Florida Rights Restoration Coalition, gathered more than a million signatures for a constitutional amendment that will be on the November ballot. It would restore voting eligibility to most felons once they'd completed their sentences.

NPR

Do you think the State of Florida is treating people fairly? Should there be a defined process in place to restore the voting rights of convicted felons who have served their sentences and been released? Or should it be up to whether or not the Governor 'feels comfortable' doing so, after asking arbitrary questions such as how often someone goes to church?

[jimmymccready]

If the Governor has the executive power to do so granted to him, then it is his business. Until the legislature or the voter or the judges intervene, it is what it is.

[PoliTalker]

Hello jimmymccready,

If the Governor has the executive power to do so granted to him, then it is his business. Until the legislature or the voter or the judges intervene, it is what it is.

The issue is on the ballot for the fall 2018 midterm vote.

If there is a blue wave, this power could be taken away from the governor, and a process established for restoring ex-felon voting rights.

If that occurs it would bring Florida in line with most of the USA.

Only a handful of States do not automatically grant ex-felons the right to vote after they have paid their debt to society.

It is always Republicans who do not want to give people the right to vote.

Always the Republicans trying to limit voter turn out.

Do Republicans hate one person one vote?

Is voter suppression and gerrymandering the only way Republicans are able to have as much power as they have?

[jimmymccready]

Thank you.

In Maine and Vermont, felons never lose their right to vote, even while they are incarcerated.

In 14 states and the District of Columbia, felons lose their voting rights only while incarcerated, and receive automatic restoration upon release.

In 21 states, felons lose their voting rights during incarceration, and for a period of time after, typically while on parole and/or probation. Voting rights are automatically restored after this time period. Former felons may also have to pay any outstanding fines, fees or restitution before their rights are restored as well.

In 13 states felons lose their voting rights indefinitely for some crimes, or require a governor’s pardon in order for voting rights to be restored, or face an additional waiting period after completion of sentence (including parole and probation) before voting rights can be restored.

http://www.ncsl.org/research/electio...ng-rights.aspx

[PoliTalker]

Hello Jimmy,

Thank you.

In Maine and Vermont, felons never lose their right to vote, even while they are incarcerated.

In 14 states and the District of Columbia, felons lose their voting rights only while incarcerated, and receive automatic restoration upon release.

In 21 states, felons lose their voting rights during incarceration, and for a period of time after, typically while on parole and/or probation. Voting rights are automatically restored after this time period. Former felons may also have to pay any outstanding fines, fees or restitution before their rights are restored as well.

In 13 states felons lose their voting rights indefinitely for some crimes, or require a governor’s pardon in order for voting rights to be restored, or face an additional waiting period after completion of sentence (including parole and probation) before voting rights can be restored.

http://www.ncsl.org/research/electio...ng-rights.aspx

Thanks for that excellent link.

It doesn't seem right that the States control the voting when what is being voted on is a national office.

It makes more sense that the federal government should regulate voting for federal elections.

I especially object to the States controlling who gets to vote in a primary, and how their electoral votes are allocated. The electoral college is all fine and well, but 'winner take all' is wrong. If a State nearly splits, say 55/45 on a presidential election, then the electoral votes should be split accordingly. I can see no justification for the State awarding all the electoral votes to a candidate who really only won a portion of the State's electors.

[Adolf_Twitler]

It won't be long, and Crooked Donnie won't be allowed to vote anymore!

Lock him Up! Lock him up! Lock him up!

[PoliTalker]

Hello Adolf_Twitler,

It won't be long, and Crooked Donnie won't be allowed to vote anymore!

Lock him Up! Lock him up! Lock him up!

Would be more fitting if he were prevented from tweeting.

[evince]

the Florida state under republicans uses the no felon vote to disenfranchise people who ARE NOT FELONS

It is proven fact

[evince]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florid...ral_Voter_File



The Florida Central Voter File was an internal list of legally eligible voters used by the US Florida Department of State Division of Elections to monitor the official voter lists maintained by the 67 county governments in the State of Florida between 1998 and January 1, 2006. The exclusion of eligible voters from the file was a central part of the controversy surrounding the US presidential elections in 2000, which hinged on results in Florida. The 'Florida Central Voter File' was replaced by the Florida Voter Registration System on January 1, 2006 when a new federal law, the Help America Vote Act, came into effect.

[evince]

James Lee's testimony[edit]
On 17 April 2001, James Lee testified, before the McKinney panel, that the state had given DBT the directive to add to the purge list people who matched at least 90% of a last name. DBT objected, knowing that this would produce a huge number of false positives (non-felons).[4]
Lee went on saying that the state then ordered DBT to shift to an even lower threshold of 80% match, allowing also names to be reversed (thus a person named Thomas Clarence could be taken to be the same as Clarence Thomas). Besides this, middle initials were skipped, Jr. and Sr. suffixes dropped, and some nicknames and aliases were added to puff up the list.
"DBT told state officials", testified Lee, "that the rules for creating the [purge] list would mean a significant number of people who were not deceased, not registered in more than one county, or not a felon, would be included on the list. DBT made suggestions to reduce the numbers of eligible voters included on the list". According to Lee, to this suggestion the state told the company, "Forget about it".
"The people who worked on this (for DBT) are very adamant... they told them what would happen", said Lee. "The state expected the county supervisors to be the failsafe." Lee said his company will never again get involved in cleansing voting rolls. "We are not confident any of the methods used today can guarantee legal voters will not be wrongfully denied the right to vote", Lee told a group of Atlanta-area black lawmakers in March 2001.[7]

[evince]

The republican party hates democracy


they don't want the people having power

[Adolf_Twitler]

Hello Adolf_Twitler,



Would be more fitting if he were prevented from tweeting.

He's not a tweeter, he is a Troll!

[Text Drivers are Killers]

Will scott restore their gun rights?? Of course not even though that is a constitutional right while voting is not.

[Text Drivers are Killers]

The republican party hates democracy


they don't want the people having power

Democrats are the ones who hate democracy. They want every issue settled by the unelected supreme court.

[Adolf_Twitler]

Hello Adolf_Twitler,



Would be more fitting if he were prevented from tweeting.

I'm starting to think, it would be more fitting if we didn't allow him be out from behind bars!