Taxation Without Representation

For many ex-felons completing their sentencing and/or parole or probation still does not allow them the opportunity to rejoin their fellow citizens in the voting booth. In what many consider the last vestiges of Jim Crow, there are still some states that do not allow these people to vote. It is an effort to continue to disenfranchise the rights of some Americans to vote.

These men and women have served the terms of their sentences and completed the requirements of release, yet they are still denied the right to vote. How can this be? The proponents of these laws base them on the 14^th Amendment to the Constitution.

“The legal authority of a state to revoke an inmate's voting rights is based upon the Fourteenth Amendment. While this amendment stipulates that, "no state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States", it allows for the denying of the voting rights of individuals guilty of "participation in rebellion, or other crime". Under current law, the federal government may not infringe upon a state's authority to grant or rescind voting rights to prison inmates and former felons.”[1]

So, it is up to the states to determine what voting rights a citizen may get to exercise. Having the states determine the voting rights of our citizens is a dubious proposition at best. If we had left it up to the states to repel the various voting laws on the books to disenfranchise the poor and minorities of this country they would still not be voting in some states. There are those who would use these questionable laws to suppress the votes of those they deem unworthy and to maintain the status quo.

It seems clear to me that the goal of the “founding fathers” was to prevent those that had participated in the armed overthrow of the government from voting, not the guy or gal who may have been convicted or plead guilty to a simple drug possession charge. These people are not a direct threat to this government any more than the guy who shoplifts. Because of how our courts have systematically been bias against minorities, in that minorities are more likely to have their charges upgraded to a felony, it would be logical to assume that these laws would affect minorities more negatively than others.

“The San Jose Mercury News conducted a massive study of 700,000 California legal cases over a 10-year period. The paper reported in December 1991 that a third of the white adults who were arrested, but had no prior record, were able to get felony charges against them reduced. Only a quarter of the African-Americans and Latinos with no priors were as successful in plea bargaining.”[2]

With evidence suggesting that race is indeed a factor in whether felony charges are pursued or not, it would also seem logical to conclude that preventing ex-felons from voting could be used by some states or legislatures to suppress the votes of minorities. Voting has not always been a right for minorities in this country and it took the shedding of blood to acquire it. And I say, it would be a travesty to the memory of those who laid down their lives for this right to have it eliminated through some back door loophole. Because of these laws, 13% of African-American males are being disenfranchised; to continue this is unconscionable. Despite what the Supreme Court said in Bush v. Gore: "The individual citizen has no federal constitutional right to vote for electors for the President of the United States." The truth of the matter is that voting defines democracy and citizenship. This was one of the main linchpins for the American Revolution; taxation without representation. To now over 200 years later to justify this treatment because someone has broken the law is according to the founders of this land; tyranny.

If we are not going to allow them to vote, then it only stands to reason that they should not be taxed without a voice. Many in the Congress are afraid to touch this issue because of the far right attacks of “soft on crime”, but this is not a criminal issue. This is a fairness issue; it is a moral issue. Do we believe in rehabilitation and paying ones debt to society or not. Do we believe in inclusion of those who have made mistakes and second chances? You should not lose your citizenship for making a mistake, if that were the case would any of us be allowed to vote?

It is time for us to make voting a constitutional right for all of our citizens. Many people already believe that it is. Let’s not allow politics and rhetoric to take the voice of our people, any of them and silence it. At the current rate of incarceration figures continue to rise, many in the minority community will be marginalized and remember, “No justice, no peace.” Our democracy is too valuable and has come too far to let the racist attitudes of the past once again derail the rights of those who are different. Let he who is without sin, cast the first stone…

---

[1] http://www.speakout.com/activism/issue_briefs/1289b-1.html

[2] http://www.crf-usa.org/brown50th/color_of_justice.htm

Read more!

If Not Affirmative Action, Then What?

I am not nor have I ever been a proponent of free rides for anyone. It was taught me and I truly believe that if given a fair opportunity I can compete with anyone. The issue becomes "a fair opportunity". What constitutes a fair opportunity? This is the issue that has divided this country and will continue to do so until we reach a consensus of what a fair opportunity entails.

For example, it used to be fair for over 3oo years in this country for white males to be the only ones to fully experience the freedom that this country provided. They were the only ones who could own property, they were the only ones to vote, and they were the only ones to attend school. This arrangement was considered fair at the time. Any other race or gender was not considered worthy to partake of these privileges. So for 300 years, you have one group that has exclusive rights to all the economic, educational, and political resources available. This group prospers and generates opportunities for others in this group to do likewise. Now granted everyone in this group may not be personally involved in the subjugation of the other groups, but they are reaping the benefits of this subjugation. They have less competition for the available resources thereby increasing their chances of success. I do not want to delve into the emotionalism of this issue, but merely the factualism of it.

So now after these 300 years of complete monopoly, we want to say, "You know what, we were wrong, let's start all over with a clean slate." We will make the playing field level from now on. None of these other factors will have any influence on our decision making. You have been given inferior education, job training, and representation in the past, but today we are even. It is wrong to discriminate against anyone and we will no longer stand for it. We will now let you compete with us on an even plane. We won't hold your inferior schools, economic circumstances, or past discrimination against you, we just want to be fair today. Even though, for many years members of your group were indiscriminately subjected to this institutionalized racism that was supported by the majority of our citizens and those who did not support it still benefitted from this system, we want to be fair today. But today it is unfair to use race as a criteria even for making up for past injustices. We will just pretend those "little indiscretions of the past 300 years" didn't happen. Live and let live. Forgive and forget. If you work hard you can make up the difference in no time. The problem with trying to right past wrongs is that there is never anyone to take responsibility for them. Each generation points to some past generation as the culprit, but this isn't about blame. It is about how we as a society can move forward into the future with a system that will help to overcome this 300 year head start in a fair and equitable way. It's funny how we used the court system to make up for women's rights and there was no large scale outcry of reverse discrimination. Is this fair?

I don't have the answer. I am open to any suggestions. But until we begin to tackle this issue head on there can be no justice. I do not propose "free rides" or "lowering standards" as alternatives. Instead of lowering the standards for any group we should figure out a way to raise the standards for that group to fairly compete. This will require an investment in time and money on the one side and an investment in hard work and effort on the other side. There will be no system that everyone agrees with. Any system will hurt some group. But we should be able to come up with a system that hurts the fewest people while at the same time ensures the most success.

If not affirmative action, then what?

Read more!