T he election this November features an inspiring speaker and the first person of color to represent a major party on a presidential ticket, and a self-described “maverick” and former prisoner of war. Both Barack Obama and John McCain promise a different brand of politics, and all predictions are for record voter turnout. Yet more than 5 million Americans will be staying home from the polls, not because they are uninterested in the process, but because of state laws that restrict the voting rights of people with felony convictions.

Felony disenfranchisement laws date back to the time of the nation’s founding when women, African-Americans, illiterates and poor people were also excluded from the ballot box. In 200 years we’ve done away with most of these limitations on the right to vote — and now look back on them with a great deal of embarrassment — except for the felony provisions. These laws raise fundamental questions about democracy, but their practical impact is greater than ever as the criminal justice system expands and entangles more Americans. Our prison population has grown 600 percent since 1970, creating millions of newly disenfranchised citizens.

And the racial disparities of the criminal justice system — often a result of biased enforcement of drug laws — translate into disenfranchisement as well, with one of every eight black males currently ineligible to vote.

Within the metropolitan Washington area, there is a patchwork of disenfranchisement policies. In the District, incarcerated citizens cannot vote, but they regain their rights upon release from prison. In Maryland, people with felony convictions are disenfranchised while in prison, as well as while on probation and parole. And in Virginia, people with felony convictions incur a lifetime ban on voting and can only have their rights restored through special action by the governor.

This story continues below
Advertisement

There are two key reasons why felons should be allowed to vote. First, in a democracy everyone’s voice should count; we should be wary of any attempt to restrict the right to vote based on perceived political views, loyalty or behavior. In fact, there is no evidence that people with felony convictions have significantly different views on defense policy, taxation, abortion or any other issue of concern to most Americans. Voting is also important for reasons of fairness and public safety. People living in the community on probation or parole supervision, or who have completed their felony sentence, are subject to all the obligations and responsibilities of other citizens. They work, pay taxes and support their children. Denying them the right to vote only communicates a message of second-class citizenship.

Research demonstrates that people with previous convictions who engage in voting are less likely to be arrested than those who don’t. This makes intuitive sense, because people who are positively connected and have a stake in the life of their community are less likely to harm their neighbors.

The U.S. is the world leader in its use of incarceration, so our disenfranchisement policies are extreme by world standards. We are the only industrialized nation that disenfranchises felons after they have completed their sentence. Many democratic nations, including Canada, permit everyone to vote — including people still in prison. None of this suggests that there should not be legitimate punishments for people who break the law. But we should be careful to distinguish between punishment for a crime and the fundamental rights of citizenship of 5 million previously incarcerated Americans.

Marc Mauer is the executive director of The Sentencing Project and the author of “Race to Incarcerate.”