TRENTON - New Jersey is one of the more restrictive states when it comes to barring criminal offenders from voting, and it's time to revisit that policy, according to a report released today by New Jersey Policy Perspective.

"We have an opportunity to join the least restrictive states or at least step away from the more restrictive ones," said NJPP President Jon Shure. "Doing so would send a strong signal that democracy is alive and well here, and that when it comes to voting we know our future should be tied more closely to participation than punishment." The report, Restoring the Right to Vote: Isn't it About Time?, was co-written by Shure and Rashida MacMurray, a student at Rutgers-Newark Law School.

The report shows that New Jersey is among 14 states that take the right to vote away from convicted felons if they are in prison, on probation or on parole. Three states place no voting restrictions on convicted felons. Another 15 plus the District of Columbia take away the right to vote only when someone is in prison, and three states deny voting to anyone in prison or on parole. Around the world, 12 countries on four continents allow prisoners to vote.

According to the report, denial of voting rights to offenders is based on what must be seen as archaic principles dating to medieval times when a person was stripped of all property and rights. But today such a policy goes against the more important concept of bringing people back into society as opposed to cutting them off further from it.

Disenfranchisement remains a selectively denied right, and one that carries strong racial repercussions because of the over-representation of African Americans, especially males, in the prison population. New Jersey's rules have the effect of barring about 17 percent of African American males in the state from voting. This is slightly higher than the national average of 13 percent, according to data compiled by The Sentencing Project and Human Rights Watch.

In today's "lock 'em up" political climate, supporters of disenfranchisement rarely are called on to defend their position. When they must, they often fall back on nearly ancient phrases like "the purity of the ballot box." But the reality is that people who have a stake in the decision-making process are less likely to be alienated from society. Like having a job and a place to live, being able to vote can help to root people in their community.

According to the NJPP analysis, revisiting this basic denial of citizenship is especially important at a time when we should be looking for all possible ways to broaden participation.

Debate over denying voting rights in New Jersey should involve considering the following:

• Not taking away the right to vote at all.
• Limiting denial of voting rights only to those serving prison time, and not those on probation or parole.
• Establishing a connection between the severity of the crime and denial of voting rights.
• Giving judges some discretion in taking away voting rights.
• Either granting automatic restoration of voting rights upon completion of an offender's obligation or creating a system under which those about to complete their obligation are notified of the need to re-register, encouraged to do so and sent a registration form.

New Jersey Policy Perspective is a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization that conducts research on state issues.

TAX REFORM

WORK & WAGES

BUDGET & FISCAL POLICY

TRANSIT ISSUES

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

VOTING & GOVT REFORM

© 2008 New Jersey Policy Perspective