Hacker News Reader

Comment by Daishiman | Hacker News Reader

The original fact that you can't be in debt to vote is quite abhorrent.

In other times this would be quite the scandal. Given that right the Florida government is actively engaging in voter suppression though...

View on HN

As a convicted felon in FL you need to have completely full filled the terms of your sentence from the courts in order to have your voting rights restored. This sentence may include the payment of fines or restitution. It is the failure to pay these court ordered payments and therefore completing the terms of their sentence which prevents a convicted felon from being able to vote.

General debts do not prevent someone that is or isn't a convicted felon from voting.

This doesn’t make it much (at all?) better to me. It might even make it worse that the explanation should make this any better.

As there are rights and privileges, there are also responsibilities. One is to maintain yourself within the bounds of the law. Seems like if you're not willing to take responsibility for your actions then you don't get to tell others what to do through voting.

Isn't the theoretical point of prison to rehabilitate? We want to take people who have wronged others and get them to take responsibility for their actions and make them productive members of society. Removing voting rights permanently certainly can't increase the engagement of criminals, enough that the voters of florida voted to enfranchise felons.

In practice, the general sentiment of prison at least in the US seems to be more for punishment ( see tough on crime laws, etc.) and not rehabilitation.

Until recently voting rights were actually removed permanently in FL for felons. Now voting rights can be restored if people who have wronged others take responsibility for their actions. Part of taking responsibility for your actions is completing the court determined punishment for your crime. This can include fines and making financial restitution to those who have harmed through your actions.

I'm sorry but by the standards of most civilized western nations it's still an abomination that your voting rights are tied to financial obligations.

What if some laws are selectively enforced and don’t have a logical reason for even existing? Is it morally okay to ignore those laws until logic and sense prevails? I think it is ironic how some Americans cry ‘freedom’ over wearing masks or taxes but don’t skip a beat in dictating how somebody else treats their own body.

What I’m saying is not all laws are just and being a Felon doesn’t diminish the person’s reasoning capabilities. Felons can easily act as rational as some of these politicians...

In theory, yes. But the people he's paying for have real crimes on their records, like assault and robbery. The only thing he takes into account is race. If black or latino, he pays. If you're not, you still don't get to vote.

this is patently false, frcc assistance is race blind and you only have to be covered by the ballot initiative to qualify. i would be very interested to learn where you have (falsely) heard there is some race based test for assistance that has led you to repeat this (false) claim.

i would add the ballot initiative did not require fines and fees to be paid and this was tacked on by the legislature for the express purpose of continuing to prevent as many of these people as possible from voting.

What if the law are unjust but no one else in society cares you're locked up?

A distinction without a difference.

There's a big difference between a fine and a debt. The purpose of each is different, and fines can be set proportional to the persons wealth.

But they don't, the system is incredibly unjust and this likely rights more wrongs than the status quo.

That’s not true. Many “rich” people are in debt yet they can vote. If I’m underwater on my mortgage and have negative net worth, I can still vote.

What’s abhorrent is certain debts prohibit voting.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com