An issue that doesn’t seem to be discussed much in this part of the world, is whether convicted criminals should be allowed to vote.
In New Zealand convicted criminals serving a sentence of three years or more are unable to vote, but in the US, all prisoners, and ex-prisoners on parole, are barred from voting in most states.
It’s been estimated that preventing criminals serving sentences from voting may well have had a significant impact on the outcome of some state and national elections. For example, the Democrats may well have lost the 2004 presidential elections, because 400,000 Black males in the crucial state of Florida were unable to vote due to criminal convictions (in Florida both currently serving, and previously convicted, felons are barred from voting).
Although criminals are likely to have a high rate of apathy in regard to voting, their low socio-economic status means they are much more likely to vote for centre-left parties than those on the centre-right.
With centre-right parties in many western countries struggling to come up with ways of taking the initiative away from the centre-left, perhaps those with liberal voting laws (such as Canada, and a number of European states) should take a leaf from America, and consider restricting voting rights to law-abiding citizens only.
2 comments:
There are definitely leftists in the U.S. who are trying to give felons the right to vote. What possible gain there could be from letting criminals, who don't respect the law, vote, is beyond me, although I could see restoring the right to vote on a case-by-case basis for those who have proven that they have reformed. Actually, I would rather see the franchise restricted than expanded; again, why some people would want every drug addict, drunk, mental incompetent, and felon vote is easy enough to understand: they are easily manipulated if you promise them enough goodies. Sir Alex Fraser Tytler (1747-1813) has been quoted as follows: "A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government. A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship." It seems that we have reached the point of fiscal collapse in the U.S.; it remains to be seen whether dictatorship will follow.
Thanks Mark, I'm undecided about whether ex-cons should be allowed to vote or not, but I'm definitely against people who are serving sentences being able to vote.
Not only is there the responsibility/rights issue, but there's also the significant administrative cost of sending out enrolment forms and so on.
Post a Comment