RSN Fundraising Banner
Florida Republicans Erect New Voting Barriers for People Convicted of Felonies
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=49709"><span class="small">Sam Fulwood III, ThinkProgress</span></a>   
Friday, 29 March 2019 13:01

Fulwood writes: "GOP lawmakers in Florida aren't about to give up the fight to cripple democratic norms with a refreshed push for new legislation to strip ex-felons of their recently acquired voting rights."

Permon Thomas (l) prays with Neil Volz (c) and Lance Wissinger (r) before Volz and Wissinger register to vote on January 8, 2019, in Fort Myers, Florida. (photo: Getty)
Permon Thomas (l) prays with Neil Volz (c) and Lance Wissinger (r) before Volz and Wissinger register to vote on January 8, 2019, in Fort Myers, Florida. (photo: Getty)

Florida Republicans Erect New Voting Barriers for People Convicted of Felonies

By Sam Fulwood III, ThinkProgress

29 March 19

Critics say lawmakers' maneuvers are tantamount to restoring the racist "poll tax" of the Reconstruction era.

OP lawmakers in Florida aren’t about to give up the fight to cripple democratic norms with a refreshed push for new legislation to strip ex-felons of their recently acquired voting rights.

There was overwhelming voter approval last November for a measure — known as Amendment 4 — to overhaul the state constitution. The referendum granted voting rights to more than a million former felons. But Republicans in both houses of the state legislature are pushing bills that would subvert the will of voters and force many newly-enfranchised Floridians off the rolls.

Prior to last year’s passage of Amendment 4, Florida’s constitution automatically stripped voting rights from people with felony convictions, based on law dating back to 1838, before the territory was a state. White lawmakers, fearful of the political potential of freed blacks in the state, updated the law during post-Civil War Reconstruction. In this way, the state was able to suppress generations of black and poor people from voting.

As recently as last year, Florida still operated under one of the largest-scale voter suppression laws in the nation. That essentially changed with passage of Amendment 4, restoring voting rights to an estimated 1.4 million people, most of whom were black and poor. Though they’re loath to say so, GOP lawmakers fear those new voters are likely to support Democratic candidates who have challenged GOP take-backs and championed the rights of ex-felons to vote.

While much of the outrage has been focused on the advancement of the House bill, a similar set of voter-rollbacks are under consideration in the GOP-led state Senate. Specifically, the House and Senate legislative packages mount a two-pronged attack on voting rights:

Under provisions in the Senate bill, the proposed law would change the legal definition of murder and sex crimes, two criminal categories excluded under Amendment 4. Arguing that the language of the voter-approved change wasn’t clearly stated, Republicans want to create new meanings for “murder” and “felony sexual offense” in ways that exceed commonly understood and accepted definitions.

For example, the Senate version of the bill redefines murder to include offenses such as unsuccessful attempts to kill, unintended killings committed in the course of another crime, and the death of an unborn child caused by injury to a pregnant woman.

Sen. Jeff Brandes, a Republican who helped draft the legislation, defended the change in murder definitions, arguing that “attempted murder” is essentially the same crime as if the victim actually was killed. “Obviously murder—first degree, second degree—to me, that means attempted murder, because there’s intent,” Brandes said in an interview with the Tampa Bay Times.

But as bad as the Senate bill is, the House version is far worse. It redefines crimes more punitively and demands that ex-felons pay off all court fines and fees before they can register to vote — a move that anyone with an understanding of U.S. history should immediately recognize as a latter-day poll tax.

As University of South Florida professor Darryl Paulson, an expert on Florida and southern politics, recently noted in an op-ed on voting rights, Florida has a long and sordid history of using discriminatory tactics to restrict black and poor voters from participating in state decision making:

Florida was the first state in the nation to adopt a poll tax. In 1889 the Legislature adopted a $2 annual poll tax as a requirement for voting. On the surface, there was nothing discriminatory about the tax. Both whites and blacks had to pay it.

In reality, the legislators knew that the $2 tax would affect blacks more because they were so poor. Although some poor whites also were disfranchised, they could often find ways to circumvent the tax. Candidates often paid the cost to entice voters. Election officials frequently “overlooked” the tax for whites.

Kirk Bailey, political director of the Florida American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), made the same connection in a news release condemning the legislature’s attempt to reverse the wishes of the voters.

“This bill sets out to undermine the will of Florida voters by passing legislation that would severely restrict the right to vote for 1.4 million Floridians who just had their rights restored after passage of Amendment 4,” Bailey wrote. “It is legislative attempts like these that ultimately affect voter disillusionment and raising suspicion in the voting process in general.”

Email This Page your social media marketing partner


A note of caution regarding our comment sections:

For months a stream of media reports have warned of coordinated propaganda efforts targeting political websites based in the U.S., particularly in the run-up to the 2016 presidential election.

We too were alarmed at the patterns we were, and still are, seeing. It is clear that the provocateurs are far more savvy, disciplined, and purposeful than anything we have ever experienced before.

It is also clear that we still have elements of the same activity in our article discussion forums at this time.

We have hosted and encouraged reader expression since the turn of the century. The comments of our readers are the most vibrant, best-used interactive feature at Reader Supported News. Accordingly, we are strongly resistant to interrupting those services.

It is, however, important to note that in all likelihood hardened operatives are attempting to shape the dialog our community seeks to engage in.

Adapt and overcome.

Marc Ash
Founder, Reader Supported News

0 # 2019-03-29 23:30
This is disgraceful, and another example of the undermining both parties continue to do in one form or another. We deserve a much more productive and inclusive system. Perhaps a numbering system all candidates were judged by? Points would vary depending upon their views, with people looking for candidates with numbers/totals most in-line with what they think. Elected officials should only be beholden to their constituency and stated values, as opposed to a party -- we all overlap in our opinions anyway so that is a false dichotomy. A person might have to show so many names on petitions to be able to be on the ballot. There would be a cap on spending with subsidies up to that amount -- so that more people could participate. Money as an influence should be banned, period. We can and should do a lot better for ourselves and future generations. We all need to come together, but the current system, as evidenced here, fosters stagnation, divisiveness, and worse. Americans, our soldiers, and our future deserve much better principles and a greater humanity, to fight and die for, and under-which we live.