Rep. Ayanna Pressley of Massachusetts and Sen. Peter Welch of Vermont submitted the legislation, named the Inclusive Democracy Act, on Tuesday which would guarantee the right to vote in federal elections for all citizens regardless of their criminal record.

In a statement, Pressley said the legislation was necessary due to policies and court rulings that “continue to disenfranchise voters from all walks of life — including by gutting the Voting Rights Act, gerrymandering, cuts to early voting, and more.” Welch called the bill necessary due to “antiquated state felony disenfranchisement laws.”

In late 2022, approximately 4.6 million people were unable to vote due to a felony conviction, according to a study by the Sentencing Project, a nonpartisan research group. The same study found that Black and Hispanic citizens are disproportionately likely to be disenfranchised due to felony

  • morphballganon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    82
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    Convicted of drug crime? Should never lose right to vote.

    Convicted of violent crime? Should regain right to vote upon release.

    Convicted of trying to overturn an election? Never get to vote again.

    • query@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      58
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      They should all be able to vote. From prison, too. The punishment never needs to be to take their voting rights away. If they commit fraud, stop them from committing fraud again.

      • surewhynotlem@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        17
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        I think if you’re overthrowing the government, you’re basically tapping out of the democracy. That’s literally the only crime I could see not being allowed to vote. I also think they should be removed from the country they tried to destroy. But then I have no idea how would they remain detained in that situation.

          • Jax@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            So we just make them legitimate sovereign citizens?

            What happens when they start to organize and try to create a new country within the United States?

            Edit: weird downvotes, I’m asking questions

            • _dev_null@lemmy.zxcvn.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              8
              ·
              1 year ago

              Make a new permanent US penal colony, call it New Australia, located in Texas. TX as been wanting to secede anyway, let’s give them a helping hand. Deport all seditionists there with all visa/passport privileges being revoked.

              And the final chef’s-kiss: Enact all of the cruel immigration laws against New Australia that they’ve been wanting so bad, see how they like it.

              • Jax@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                Hmmm, the more I think about it the more I like this plan. I vote for New Australia. It fits U.S. naming conventions too!

            • Mobiuthuselah@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              What’s your understanding of “sovereign citizen”? Asking in good faith.

              I mean, we have Amish in the US. That’s a kind of sovereign citizen, right?

              • Jax@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Well I’m basing it off of the google definition…

                Sovereign citizens believe they are not under the jurisdiction of the federal government and consider themselves exempt from U.S. law. They use a variety of conspiracy theories and falsehoods to justify their beliefs and their activities, some of which are illegal and violent.

                I mean we’d basically be making them the same thing, no? Only legitimate?

              • ryathal@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                The Amish are just members of a fairly extreme religion. They don’t reject the existence of government itself. Sovereign citizens are people that believe they aren’t subject to the laws of the country the reside in.

      • logicbomb@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’d prefer compulsory voting from all able people of voting age. Prisons should have full in-person voting locations with private voting booths. Mail-in ballots should be a freely available option for all.

        It doesn’t guarantee good results, but I feel it is the most straightforward way to rid ourselves of voter suppression campaigns, which I think are fundamentally evil.

          • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            It’s not much of a tax when it can be “paid” by sending a piece of paper through the mail, postage-paid.

            Australia does this. It works out very well.

    • bob_lemon@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I disagree with this approach without even touching the morality aspect.

      There should be no way to lose your voting rights once you are of age and a citizen of the US for the very simple reason of limiting the bureaucratic overhead of elections. If every citizen above the age of 18 can vote, you can just completely remove the ridiculous notion of “voter registration”.

      Just register everyone based on their legal address (which the government should have anyway because taxes). Just like a real democracy.

    • Reddit_Is_Trash@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      22
      ·
      1 year ago

      I disagree with violent crime, they should entirely lose the right to vote. There’s no room in our society for behavior like that

      • happilybitchycowboy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        27
        ·
        1 year ago

        I got a felony 14 years ago for running from a cop. He got a scratch on his hand and charged me with aggravated assault on a law enforcement officer. Bogus public defender didn’t even help try to fight for me and their charges stuck like glue.

      • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        20
        ·
        1 year ago

        If the number of violent criminals in your society is enough to affect the outcome of an election, you’ve got much bigger problems. And if you take away the right to vote for violent crimes, politicians will attempt to redefine what “violent” means to disenfranchise more people.

      • morphballganon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Keeping a person out of our society is not done by revoking the right to vote, it’s done by giving them a life sentence.