this post was submitted on 06 Dec 2023
478 points (97.6% liked)

News

23310 readers
3666 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

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

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 80 points 11 months ago (5 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 62 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (2 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 11 months ago (1 children)

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.

[–] Eezyville 19 points 11 months ago (2 children)

If they are not allowed to vote then by all rights they shouldn't be taxed as well.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 11 months ago

Yup. I'm good for that. Prisoners shouldn't be making enough to be taxed.

[–] Jax -4 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (2 children)

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

[–] [email protected] 9 points 11 months ago (1 children)

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 2 points 11 months 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!

[–] [email protected] 5 points 11 months ago (2 children)

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?

[–] ryathal 1 points 11 months 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.

[–] Jax 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

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?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 11 months ago

I see what you're saying

[–] [email protected] 6 points 11 months ago (1 children)

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.

[–] PsychedSy 3 points 11 months ago (1 children)

What's the punishment for failing to vote? It would just end up being a poor tax.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 11 months ago (2 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Hey, you're talking to the country that has you actively apply to get a right to vote. The US is seemingly incapable of keeping track of their own citizens.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Give the IRS more funding and we will have little trouble keeping track of everyone.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 11 months ago

Yeah, I just wrote another comment and noticed that the government probably has addresses because the IRS needs those to function.

[–] PsychedSy 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Homeless people will rejoice for sure.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Homeless people get counted on the census.

[–] PsychedSy 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

They don't consistently receive mail and are often on drugs. Fines for not voting are absurd.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Do you think that's how it works in Australia, where voting is compulsory? Or do you think they've found ways to accommodate for that?

[–] PsychedSy 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I'd hope they accommodate for it. I don't trust the US government to not fuck it up.

Personally I hate the concept of compulsory almost anything. If you have a right to vote you have a right to protest elections as well.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 11 months ago

Compulsory voting doesn't mean you literally have to vote for something. You can cast a blank ballot in protest. Sales tax is compulsory. Gas tax is compulsory. There are lots of things that are already compulsory.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 11 months ago (1 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 11 months ago

I agree with this.

Even people who make mistakes should be entitled to vote. Even while paying for their mistakes frankly. They may have lost their freedom, but they are still citizens of the Republic.

The only compelling argument I know of is that voting in local elections is a mess because there would be counties that'd suffer from the over representation due to the location of the prisons. I would just consider those to be absentee voters myself, and they just keep the last address they had before going in or next if kin instead.

Just my thoughts

[–] [email protected] 4 points 11 months ago

But muh rights?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

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

While we are improving society, why concede the existence of "drug crime" in our hypotheticals?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 11 months ago

There shouldn't be user level drug crimes but manufacturing and distribution should be regulated fairly strictly and dealer level drug crimes can be legitimate. Dealer level drug crimes should also apply to pharmaceutical companies.