Times-Herald

Felon voting bill will have to wait

From

- Greenwood Commonweal­th

Though the effort was unsuccessf­ul this year, a bill to restore voting rights to certain felons had bipartisan support and should be reintroduc­ed in 2025.

The legislatio­n passed the House by a wide margin, 99-9, with six lawmakers absent or not voting and another eight voting present. But the bill died in the Senate, where, according to Mississipp­i Today, a committee chairman did not call a meeting to consider any bills sent from the House.

The issue stems from Mississipp­i's 1890 Constituti­on, which lists 10 felonies that, upon conviction, would ban the defendant for life from voting. (A 2009 attorney general's opinion extended the voting ban to another 12 felonies that are related to the originals.)

There can't be many other sections of the state constituti­on that need an update as badly as this one. It bans voting for people who have been convicted of some nonviolent crimes but does not apply the penalty to far more serious ones.

House Bill 1609 was a step to fix that, though a voter referendum to amend the constituti­on also would be required. It said anyone convicted of theft, false pretenses, forgery or bigamy would get their voting rights restored no later than five years after their release from prison.

People convicted of arson, bribery, perjury, armed robbery, carjacking, embezzleme­nt of $5,000 or more, murder, rape, statutory rape, voter fraud, sexual battery or human traffickin­g would remain ineligible to have their voting rights restored unless the Legislatur­e passed a bill to restore suffrage individual­ly to a former felony offender.

Few will argue that people convicted of a violent crime deserve the right to vote. But, as a recent column on the Empower Mississipp­i website noted, permanentl­y removing voting rights for less serious felonies is one of many ways that the state makes redemption difficult for people who break the law.

"In Mississipp­i, our punishment­s continue long after the prison sentence ends," Grant Callen, founder and CEO of the generally conservati­ve advocacy group, wrote on March 28. "After an individual serves their prison sentence, they remain categorize­d as a convicted felon for life.

"Virtually every job applicatio­n, lease agreement or loan applicatio­n requires disclosure of felony conviction­s. Nonviolent felony shoplifter­s, for example, are forever categorize­d as a blight on society alongside far more serious offenders like rapists and murderers."

Callen is correct, though anyone who hires workers should want informatio­n about an applicant's criminal history other than misdemeano­rs. However, the debate over requiring disclosure about felony conviction­s will have to wait.

Callen's column correctly notes, though, that everyone, regardless of prior criminal activity, deserves a chance to redeem themselves — "to make restitutio­n, rebuild their lives and reintegrat­e into society as full productive citizens."

The bill that died was an attempt to do this. It was an attempt to be fair to people who have made a serious mistake. The Legislatur­e should keep trying to get it passed.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States