Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Contributors
- Foreword: Waves of Democracy and Criminal Disenfranchisement
- Acknowledgments
- Introduction
- Part I CONTEMPORARY DISENFRANCHISEMENT LAW
- Part II DISENFRANCHISEMENT IN COMPARATIVE PERSPECTIVE: LEGAL AND POLITICAL APPROACHES
- 3 U.S. Felon Disenfranchisement: Parting Ways with Western Europe
- 4 The Right to Universal, Equal, and Nondiscriminatory Suffrage as a Norm of Customary International Law: Protecting the Prisoner's Right to Vote
- 5 Our ‘Crooked Timber’: Why Is American Punishment So Harsh?
- Part III VOTING RIGHTS AND PEOPLE WITH CRIMINAL CONVICTIONS: CASE STUDIES
- Index
- References
5 - Our ‘Crooked Timber’: Why Is American Punishment So Harsh?
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 03 July 2009
Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Contributors
- Foreword: Waves of Democracy and Criminal Disenfranchisement
- Acknowledgments
- Introduction
- Part I CONTEMPORARY DISENFRANCHISEMENT LAW
- Part II DISENFRANCHISEMENT IN COMPARATIVE PERSPECTIVE: LEGAL AND POLITICAL APPROACHES
- 3 U.S. Felon Disenfranchisement: Parting Ways with Western Europe
- 4 The Right to Universal, Equal, and Nondiscriminatory Suffrage as a Norm of Customary International Law: Protecting the Prisoner's Right to Vote
- 5 Our ‘Crooked Timber’: Why Is American Punishment So Harsh?
- Part III VOTING RIGHTS AND PEOPLE WITH CRIMINAL CONVICTIONS: CASE STUDIES
- Index
- References
Summary
“Out of the crooked timber of humanity, no straight thing was ever made.”
Emmanuel KantINTRODUCTION
During the last few years, while writing on the disenfranchisement of ex-felons, I often wondered why, almost alone among Western democracies, we in the United States treated people “who had paid their dues” with such contempt. Almost every other democratic nation restores full voting rights to all ex-felons, and a considerable number, including Canada and 17 European countries, now extend the franchise even to offenders behind bars. Several countries consider the franchise so important that they actively encourage inmates to participate in the electoral process. Yet all but 2 of the 50 U.S. states deny prisoners the vote, and most bar probationers, parolees, and other nonincarcerated people from voting, either indefinitely or during a waiting period. Even for those eligible, restoration can include not only complicated bureaucratic procedures but also, until recently, DNA testing. Several states effectively bar some convicts from voting for life, treating them as debtors forever – a policy that “verges on the macabre.” Despite reforms to some American ex-felon disenfranchisement policies in recent years, laws barring all inmates from voting remain relatively popular in the United States – not only among the public, but also among leading Democratic politicians.
In my opinion, the simplest way to explain why almost all U.S.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Criminal Disenfranchisement in an International Perspective , pp. 136 - 164Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2009
References
, “Disenfranchisement as Punishment: Reflections on the Racial Issues of Infamia,” 46 UCLA Law Review (August 1999), p. 1907Google Scholar
, “Barred from the Vote: Public Attitudes toward the Disenfranchisement of Felons,” 30 Fordham Urban Law Journal (2003)Google Scholar
, “States Are Growing More Lenient in Allowing Felons to Vote,” New York Times, Oct. 12, 2006Google Scholar
, Thinking about Crime: Sense and Sensibility in American Penal Culture (Oxford University Press, 2004), p. 22Google Scholar
, “Tough Time: Inside the Supermax Pelican Bay Prison, Brutal Conditions Make Convicts More Brutal,” The Ottawa Citizen Sunday, April 28, 2002Google Scholar
, “Populism, Democratic Government, and the Decline of Expert Authority: Some Reflections on ‘Three Strikes’ in California,” 28 Pac. L.J. 243 (1996)Google Scholar
, “‘The New Abolitionism’ and the Possibility of Legislative Action: The New Hampshire Experience,” 63 Ohio State Law Journal (2001 Symposium Abstracts), 2002Google Scholar
“How the Death Penalty Weakens U.S. International Interests,” 13 William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal309 (2004)
“Stop Calling Bush ‘Hitler,’” National Review, March 21, 2005
, “Race and Incarceration in the United States,” Human Rights Watch Press Backgrounder, February 27, 2002Google Scholar
, “13 Percent of Adult Black Men Barred from Voting,” Associated Press, Sept. 22, 2000Google Scholar
, “Sallie Mae to Create Center to Study Higher-Education Issues,” The Chronicle of Higher Education
, “Why Aren't German Penal Policies Harsher and Imprisonment Rates Higher?” 5 German Law Journal (2004)Google Scholar
“That Manners Are Softened as Social Conditions Become More Equal,” in Democracy in America, Vols. I & II. (Vintage, 1990)
, New Perspectives on Prisons and Imprisonment (Cornell University Press, 1983), 29, 240Google Scholar
, “What Works? Questions and Answers about Prison Reform,” in Rehabilitation, Recidivism, and Research (Hackensack, NJ: National Council on Crime and Delinquency, 1976)Google Scholar
, The Culture of Control: Crime and Social Order in Contemporary Society (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2001)Google Scholar
& , “From Nothing Works to the Appropriate Works: The Latest Stop on the Search for the Secular Grail,” Criminology, August 28, 1990, p. 405CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, Turning Right in the Sixties: The Conservative Capture of the GOP (Univserity of North Carolina Press, 1995)Google Scholar
“The Conservative 1960s,” 276 The Atlantic Monthly, December 1995; No. 6; pp. 130–5
, “Why Aren't German Penal Policies Harsher and Imprisonment Rates Higher?” 10 German Law Journal (October 1, 2004), p. 8Google Scholar
& , “Understanding Prison Policy and Population Trends,” in & , eds., Prisons (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1999)Google Scholar
& , “Cross-National Comparisons on Imprisonment,” in , ed., Crime and Justice: A Review of Research, Vol. 17 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1994), pp. 1–49Google Scholar
, “Addressing Capital Punishment through Statutory Reform,” Ohio State Law Journal, March 2001Google Scholar
, “Crime in International Perspective,” in & , eds., Crime (San Francisco: Institute for Contemporary Studies, 1995), pp. 22–3Google ScholarPubMed
, America Right or Wrong: An Anatomy of American Nationalism (New York: Oxford University Press, 2004)Google Scholar
, “Why Is U.S. Human Rights Policy So Unilateralist?” in & , eds., The Cost of Acting Alone: Multilateralism and US Foreign Policy (Boulder: Lynne Riener Publishers, 2001)Google Scholar
, “The Religious and Other Beliefs of Americans 2003,” The Harris Poll, February 26, 2003Google Scholar
, , & , “Religion, Punitive Justice, and Support for the Death Penalty,” 10 Justice Quarterly2 (June 1993), p. 291
, , , & , “Cracks in the Monolith? Evangelical Protestants and the 2000 Election,” Christianity Today (2001)Google Scholar
, “The Presidential Election,” in , ed., The Elections of 2004 (Washington, D.C.: CQ Press, 2005), p. 48Google Scholar
, , , & , “Protestant Fundamentalism and the Retributive Doctrine of Punishment,” 30 Criminology (February 1992)Google Scholar
, , & , “Protestant Fundamentalism and Attitudes toward Corporal Punishment of Children,” 6 Violence and Victims4 (1991), pp. 283–98Google ScholarPubMed
, , & , “Support for Corporal Punishment in the Schools,” 73 Social Science Quarterly 1 (1992), pp. 177–87Google Scholar
, “Abolishing the Rod,” 21 Journal of Psychology and Theology2 (1993), pp. 127–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, “Religious Influence on Parental Attitudes toward the Use of Corporal Punishment,” 5 Journal of Family Violence 2 (1990), pp. 173–186CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, Moral Politics: How Liberals and Conservatives Think (Chicago: University of Chicago, 2002), p. 203CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations (Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1958)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
& , “Religion, Attribution Style, and Punishment toward Juvenile Offenders,” 32 Criminology 1 (1994), pp. 23–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
& , “An Exploration of Adults’ Religious Orientations and Their Philosophies of Human Nature,” 24 Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 3 (1985), pp. 293–304CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, “Executing the Innocent and Support for Capital Punishment: Implications for Public Policy,” 4 Criminology & Public Policy 1 (2005), pp. 3–38Google Scholar
, , , & , “Forgiveness and Fundamentalism: Reconsidering the Relationship between Correctional Attitudes and Religion,” 38 Criminology (2000), pp. 719–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, “Privileging Public Attitudes to Sentencing,” in & , eds., Changing Attitudes to Punishment: Public Opinion, Crime and Justice (Cullompton: Willan, 2002)Google Scholar
, Making Crime Pay: Law and Order in Contemporary American Politics (New York: Oxford University Press, 1997)Google Scholar
, “Racial Discrimination and the Death Penalty in the Post-Furman Era: An Empirical and Legal Overview, with Recent Findings from Philadelphia,” 83 Cornell Law Review (1998), p. 1638Google Scholar
& , eds., The New Punitiveness: Trends, Theories, Perspectives (Portland: Willan Publishing, 2005)
, Restoration: Congress, Term Limits, and the Recovery of Deliberative Democracy (New York: Free Press, 1992), pp. 12, 142Google Scholar
, Harsh Justice: Criminal Punishment and the Widening Divide between America and Europe (New York: Oxford University Press, 2003), pp. 12, 142Google Scholar
, What's the Matter with Kansas: How Conservatives Won the Heart of America (New York: Henry Holt, 2004)Google Scholar
, State Formation and Civilization: The Civilizing Process, vol. 2 (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1982.)Google Scholar
, “Capital Punishment: The Case for Justice,” 145 First Things: A Monthly Journal of Religion and Public Life (August-September 2004), p. 39Google Scholar
, , & , “Public Support for Correctional Treatment: The Continuing Appeal of the Retributive Ideal,” 77 The Prison Journal (1997), pp. 237–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar