The right to vote is a fundamental part of being an American citizen. Prisoners are not only denied the right to vote, they are even denied visitation rights with family members who have committed minor drug-related offenses. Prisoners are often excluded from society entirely both by law and public opinion. The most common argument against allowing prisoners to vote is that prisoners have abandoned their right to vote by committing a crime.
Prisoners are not citizens of the state in which they are imprisoned, so for this reason prisoners should not be allowed to vote because voting is a citizen’s privilege. Prisoners have been denied the right to vote since the U. S. became a country and that has never been questioned until recently. In court cases such as Richardson v. Ramirez, determining who is an American citizen has always been determined by how much one was involved with the system rather than where one lived or if one had citizenship somewhere else.
A counterargument to this argument against allowing prisoners to vote is that 1) It costs more money to keep someone incarcerated than it does to give them an education 2) Prisoners have committed a crime, but they have paid their debt to society by being locked up and 3) Prisoners can serve on juries, so denying them the right to vote denies them a say in their own trial. Prisoners’ voting rights should be restored by giving them back the right to vote while still incarcerated and allowing prisoners to vote from behind bars until their sentence is complete.
Prisoners should also have visitation rights with family members who have been convicted of minor drug-related offenses because it helps lower recidivism rates if prisoners get regular visits from loved ones. In recent years, many states have begun having voter ID laws (such as requiring one to present an Illinois state identification card when at the polls). Prisoners often do not drive and many prisoners live in impoverished areas where getting a valid state identification card is nearly impossible.
Prisoners who do not have a valid form of identification cannot vote under these voter ID laws. Prisoners’ voting rights should be restored by allowing them to present an inmate identification card when voting because it is unfair to require people who may not even live in the district in which they are voting from or have an up-to-date form of identification, especially when this group consists mostly of minorities and the poor.
In order for prisoners to successfully reenter society, they need to maintain ties with loved ones from outside prison walls. Prison visitation programs allow families who have been convicted of minor drug offenses the opportunity to spend quality time with their incarcerated family members while helping lower recidivism rates.
Prisoners with children should also be allowed to spend quality time with their families because it shows prisoners that people still care about them and they are not forgotten while behind bars. Prisoners who do not have any family members on the outside or friends in the neighborhood should be given more visitation programs so they can socialize with others while incarcerated, which will help lower recidivism rates when they get out of prison.
Prisoner voting rights should also include visitation rights for eligible family member’s convicted of minor drug offenses because this is an important part of reintegrating into society after serving one’s sentence. Prisoners want to vote just like everyone else in America, but there has been a stigma against prisoners voting for years. Prisoners should have their voting rights restored because they are still citizens of the United States and deserve to vote in elections just like everyone else.
The punishment of criminals is one of the most contentious issues in contemporary society. Prisoners are kept away from society and their families, not allowed to vote, and excluded from many jobs. In recent years politicians have been getting tougher on crime with longer sentences being given out for even minor offenses. Many people argue that prisoners should be punished further by not allowing them to vote. However, there are many reasons why prisoners should be allowed to vote and this article will explain them One of the most important rights that people have is the right to vote.
Prisoners do not lose their citizenship when they become incarcerated so basing policies on the idea that convicts cannot vote would deny them some of their basic human rights as enshrined in law by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Prisoners, like other citizens, also have a responsibility as members of society to contribute to political decisions through voting. Prisoners who no longer pose a threat to society following rehabilitation should be reintroduced into society with full citizenship rights which includes voting.
This can help prevent reoffending by giving inmates an incentive to behave properly in prison in order to be allowed the vote when they are released. Prisoners should also have voting rights because it can improve relations between prisoners and members of society. – Voting gives convicts the same responsibilities as other citizens which makes them feel like part of society leading to less reoffending. – Prisoners pay taxes therefore they should be allowed to vote.
Prisoners themselves will not benefit directly from voting but this is not a reason for denying them suffrage rights that all other citizens enjoy. Prisoners in most countries already have the right to vote even though there are only very few countries which allow incarcerated people this basic human right (European Court of Human Rights, 2011). The current UK government policy does not allow convicted prisoners the right to vote, but a recent case brought before the European Court of Human Rights has ruled that this is a breach of human rights laws.
A UK Government spokesman said they would not appeal against the ruling and would instead put forward new proposals on whether prisoners should be given voting rights (BBC News, 2010). Prisoner voting has been an important issue for many years with the argument mainly being presented from one of two different perspectives. The first perspective argues that it is a basic human right which everyone should have and that denying convicts suffrage rights breaches international law on human rights. Prisoners can also suffer as a result of not being allowed to vote because they do not have equal representation.
Prisoners are more likely to be from minority groups who have racial or ethnic backgrounds different to the majority of people who make up the electorate (Fitzpatrick, 2010). Prisoners are also less likely to be able to vote as they may not be registered, they may not have the right identification or they may be unable to travel to their voting station (Prison Reform Trust, 2002) Therefore denying prisoners suffrage rights means that these individuals cannot influence political decisions which will directly affect them.
