DPVA: "Dems Call on McDonnell to Rescind New Barrier to Voting and Gun Rights"

This is getting tiresome and scary.. (0.00 / 1)

What is next? Women can't work? Stay tuned.

---

by: linda b @ Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 18:07:11 PM UTC

Shocked really isn't the word I'd use.... (0.00 / 1)

A comment by Frank Anderson (who has been a terrific voice in raising awareness for this, even to people like me) made me think of something.

Frank mentioned that he had written an essay of sorts when he submitted an application.  That made me wonder -- what percentage of people who are asking to have their voting rights restored also write essays?  On the surface, this made the request for such an essay look reasonable.  But I think it  actually belies a sneaky way of denying MORE people their rights.  (And again, this isn't exactly shocking.)

For instance, if you wrote an essay, were you more likely to have your voting rights restored?  I would think so.  Crafting a well put together essay seems a clear indication of one's ability to contribute to society.  Thus, writing an essay was, until McDonnell, a way of improving one's chances.  That advantage has now been taken away.

Also, it's worth noting that many serving time in prison struggle with basic literacy skills (the number in prison with learning disabilities, for instance, is disproportionately higher than in the general population.)  McDonnell essentially says to these Virginians that they aren't as worthy.

Another issue is mental health.  Mental health issues in our prisoners spike against those in the general population.  These are people who again, may not have the skills to put together a well crafted piece of writing.  So again, another group of Virginians who are no longer worthy.

Then, of course, there are the prisoners who do now speak fluent English.  I'm assuming that McDonnell isn't going to read essays written in any other language.  

I'm sure some reasonable Republican will come and point out that there are people who will help these Virginians write their essays.  But then we enter a sort of mobius strip -- someone like me or people who post on these blogs helping a person with learning disabilities or mental health issues or broken English is going is likely to produce an essay that doesn't sound very "authentic."  It's likely to be seen as a reason to NOT restore voting rights, not a help to the person writing for the request.

Maybe I'll be proven wrong -- maybe McDonnell will continue to grant restoration in the thousands like Kaine and Warner, rather than the hundreds, as did his Republican predecessors.  I'd like to be proven wrong.  But somehow, I don't think I will be.

---

by: GretchenLaskas @ Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 18:24:15 PM UTC

Ken Plum says... (0.00 / 1)

"By requiring nonviolent offenders to submit an essay, Governor McDonnell is returning to a 'blank sheet' voter registration system that in the past disenfranchised many African American voters. By creating an additional, unnecessary and egregious hurdle, McDonnell has violated the spirit, if not the letter, of the Federal Voting Rights Act."

Follow me on Twitter.

---

by: lowkell @ Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 19:09:17 PM UTC

That would be true (4.00 / 1)

...if the decision to reinstate voting rights wasn't discretionary.

I disagree with McDonnell's stance here as well, but Plum is going too far.  

---

by: Brian W. Schoeneman @ Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 19:12:55 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Why is it that 48 other states and (0.00 / 1)

a good chunk of his own state disagree with Bob McDonnell on this? They're all wrong and he's right?  Ahhhhhh.

Follow me on Twitter.

---

by: lowkell @ Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 19:16:22 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Last time I checked (4.00 / 1)

The governor didn't make the law that gave him discretion. That's been the law, including under two Democratic Governors.

I don't like that he's added the essay requirement, but the fact that the law gives him the discretion isn't his fault. Blame the GA.  

---

by: Brian W. Schoeneman @ Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 19:29:16 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

So, why doesn't he push to change that law? (0.00 / 1)

n/t

Follow me on Twitter.

---

by: lowkell @ Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 19:32:46 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Probably because there are bigger issues affecting larger numbers of Virginians (4.00 / 1)

While I sympathize with the plight of folks like Frank Anderson, according to NLS, there were only about 675 former felons who had petitioned to have their rights removed. I would much rather have the governor working to get the nearly 300,000 unemployed Virginians back to work. I would also rather see him focus on expanding the economy so we can restore the budget cuts, as well as working on a transportation.

The Governor only has so many resources at his disposal. If this wasn't a priority for Mark Warner or Tim Kaine, I don't see why you all now think it should be a major priority for McDonnell.  

---

by: Brian W. Schoeneman @ Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 19:56:36 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Remember (0.00 / 1)

Most of us were pretty angry at Tim Kaine.  And if McDonnell wanted to focus on the concerns of larger numbers of Virginians, well, then I find it interesting that he took the time out of his busy schedule to make it harder, and will require more from the people processing the requests.

---

by: GretchenLaskas @ Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 20:09:18 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

This is laughable. (0.00 / 1)

and insulting to anyone with the slightest bit of intelligence.  

Follow me on Twitter.

---

by: lowkell @ Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 20:12:18 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I do remember that you guys were angry with Kaine (4.00 / 1)

But I only recall it being an issue after McDonnell was elected. Then again, I wasn't really pay attention to the issue until I started seeing Lowell and Ben hitting Kaine on it last year.

But, as I said before, this isn't an issue for the Governor. This is an issue for the General Assembly.

I agree that McDonnell shouldn't have added the essay portion, but again, that's his way of defining how he exercises his discretion.

There's nothing insulting in recognizing that the Governor has limited resources. And it's very easy for him to add an essay requirement - he doesn't have to clear that with anybody. As opposed to having a bill introduced in the GA, lobbying both sides to get it passed, etc. That's much harder, and not something he can do immediately.  

---

by: Brian W. Schoeneman @ Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 20:28:12 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

You must not have been reading (0.00 / 1)

RK or Blue Virginia the past few years. Do you remember when we changed the name of the blog from "Raising Kaine" to "RK" because we were so angry at Kaine on a wide variety of issues?  I know, what a concept - progressives who don't just blindly, knee-jerk follow their "leaders," but think for themselves and are not afraid to criticize members of their "own" party. Maybe you could try that with Bob McDonnell once in a while?

Follow me on Twitter.

---

by: lowkell @ Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 20:32:04 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I wasn't. I only started reading when you started up over here last year (4.00 / 1)

And I have already criticized McDonnell and other party leaders multiples times - you know I've done so directly with Cuccinelli.

What I am trying to do is get you and the other readers to recognize that there are two sides to every story. Even when I disagree with McDonnell, I don't assume that his motivation is based on him being evil or inclined to do horrible things, which is what seems to be the implication of a lot of the comments people make when they criticize him, ala "Manchurian Candidate."

If you can't recognize that the Governor has his own priorities and that he's got to prioritize things because he can't do everything, that's pretty unfortunate. Anybody who has been in a senior policy position in government recognizes that fact. You don't have to have an IQ over 50 to recognize that no one can do everything.  

---

by: Brian W. Schoeneman @ Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 20:37:51 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Straw men. (0.00 / 1)

The issue here isn't whether McDonnell is "evil or inclined to do horrible things," the issue is specifically that we disagree with him (strongly) on his move to make it even HARDER for EX-felons to get their right to vote restored. End of story.  As to your other point, I'm not going to respond to it anymore, it's too ridiculous.

Follow me on Twitter.

---

by: lowkell @ Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 20:40:57 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

You can disagree without the personal attacks (4.00 / 1)

I've seen McDonnell attacked personally quite a bit over here, by a variety of people. Even if you disagree with him, there's no reason to assume his motivations must be nefarious. And we have no evidence that this will make it harder for felons to get their rights to vote restored. We're just assuming it will. I think that's a fair assumption, but until it's actually reviewed, it's just an assumption.

And the limited resources argument isn't invalid at all, nor is it ridiculous. I've seen plenty of Democratic attacks on McDonnell's focus on the wineries, claiming that he's wasting his resources on an issue that has such little impact across the entire Commonwealth. Why is that a valid argument if this isn't?

I think it's perfectly fair to criticize his priorities, but to act like he doesn't have to prioritize doesn't make a lot of sense to me.  

---

by: Brian W. Schoeneman @ Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 20:50:34 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

The argument about the wineries (0.00 / 1)

is silly, but it's illustrative of McDonnell's broader, pro-corporate-welfare position. It's also illustrative of his hypocrisy and priorities, cutting government spending on schools, public safety, etc. but not on corporate welfare, however small?

By the way, as far as I can tell, one of the main critics (if not THE main critic) of McDonnell on the corporate welfare issue was conservative blogger Norm Leahy at Tertium Quids.

As far as the "attacks" on McDonnell's "nefarious" motivations, I think we've been very clear that we believe McDonnell's entire philosophy - trickle down Bush-o-nomics combined with Pat Robertson on social issues - is "nefarious." You're right in the sense that we don't really need any more than that to make our case against him.

Follow me on Twitter.

---

by: lowkell @ Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 20:58:33 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Brian: Are you implying that Taliban Bob cannot walk (0.00 / 0)

and chew gum at the same time?

---

by: TomPaine @ Tue Apr 13, 2010 at 00:16:50 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

No, I'm saying that he's got priorities (0.00 / 0)

And that's his prerogative. As many have stated here, Warner and Kaine had eight years to fix this problem.

It's kind of like the snark I get from Democrats when talking about the health care reform law - Republicans had eight years to do something about it and we didn't, so now we have to live with what Obama and the Democrats have done. You know, that whole "elections have consequences" line.  

---

by: Brian W. Schoeneman @ Tue Apr 13, 2010 at 01:45:47 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Again, the "limited resources" (0.00 / 1)

"argument" is laughable and insulting to anyone with an IQ over about 50.

Follow me on Twitter.

---

by: lowkell @ Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 20:32:39 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Timing (0.00 / 1)

I'll be honest -- I didn't really understand the issue in any detail until Ben broke the story on his blog.  So yes, you're correct as regards the timing on my behalf.  I'm only sorry that I didn't understand earlier.  That's my failing.

---

by: GretchenLaskas @ Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 21:08:58 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I'm missing something (0.00 / 0)

So, the Governor is not to blame for a decision he made that you agree is bad.  The fault lies with the GA who allowed him the discretion to make that decision in the first place?  I don't understand the logic there.  Individuals are free from blame for bad decisions they make as long as the authority to make those decisions was delegated from someone else.  Is that what you are saying?

If the Governor has limited resources, why does it make sense to add requirements to a process?  That takes time to do and then time to implement.  And who will be reviewing these essays?  This doesn't seem like something one does when they want to utilize limited resources most efficiently.  And if he should be busy focusing on jobs, why should he have taken any time away from that to do this?  And if it was effortless to add this, then it should be equally effortless to take it away.  

---

by: tx2vadem @ Tue Apr 13, 2010 at 01:30:15 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Ward Armstrong says (0.00 / 1)

"Virginia is one of only two states in the nation that does not automatically restore non-violent offenders' rights after they have completed their sentence. Governor McDonnell's move creates another roadblock to the most basic democratic right we have: the ability to choose our own representatives. Someone who bounces a $200 check should not be permanently deprived of their right to vote or hunt."

Follow me on Twitter.

---

by: lowkell @ Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 19:09:57 PM UTC

Well, Ward Armstrong is wrong (3.00 / 1)

A brief review at the following link makes it clear that Virginia is one of several states (or even many states, depending on your interpretation of the statement) that does not automatically restore all non-violent offenders' rights after they have completed their sentence.  

http://felonvoting.procon.org/...

There are a lot of flaws and half-truths in Armstrong's statement, but owing to "limited resources" I'll let the chart and supporting documentation speak for itself.    

Just wondering, other than the fact that felons tend to vote for Democrats, why do we care about this so much?  As a Catholic, I believe in forgiveness and all, but does not the loss of some Citizenship rights--even if only temporarily--deter the commission of felonies in a manner that does not raise our taxes?  Maybe one would not commit non-violent voter fraud if they realized that they could permanently lose their rights to vote (see Tennessee).  

I'm not saying I support McDonnell's move, as it seems politically motivated, and does not serve a purpose of deterring anything.  I also find it ironic, that in Confederate History Month, he is again paying tribute to traditions of yesteryear.

--Rick

---

by: WestEndVoter @ Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 21:56:35 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Blame McDonnell (2.00 / 2)

Brian writes, "The governor didn't make the law that gave him discretion. That's been the law, including under two Democratic Governors. I don't like that he's added the essay requirement, but the fact that the law gives him the discretion isn't his fault. Blame the GA." To the contrary, we should blame McDonnell. He was the one who took time out of his supposedly laser-like concentration on bringing jobs to Virginia to add a new hurdle to the discretionary voter restoratation process. And, if the GA does deserve blame, then why didn't McDonnell ask the GA to eliminate the discretion and make restoration automatic?  

---

by: Peter 2010 @ Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 20:20:05 PM UTC

Question (2.67 / 3)

A requirement to write an essay sounds very much like a literacy test. Have not such shenanigans been outlawed as part of the old Jim Crow laws? Can this requirement be the subject of a lawsuit?  

---

by: Teddy Goodson @ Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 21:46:57 PM UTC

Great point (3.50 / 2)

As I just mentioned, the requirement does not really deter anything.  I'm sure the bank robber/car jacker/check bouncer etc. is going to read that provision re: the essay prior to committing their crime, right...

That being said, one who likes to hunt might be deterred by knowledge that committing a felony with their gun may result in the inability to practice their hobby.  

But the "essay" does seem like a literacy test.

---

by: WestEndVoter @ Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 22:03:58 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

It will be interesting to see if there's an exception for those who are illiterate or low IQ (3.50 / 2)

If there's no exception, then that goes a long way to considering this a literacy test. That being said, since the Governor's decision to reinstate voting rights is discretionary, not as of right, I don't know if the literacy test argument is directly on point.

Regardless, it's just not a good policy and I hope the Governor reverses it.  

---

by: Brian W. Schoeneman @ Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 22:19:59 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

The ACLU (2.00 / 2)

The ACLU of Virginia is arguing just that.

The ACLU of Virginia accused Gov. Bob McDonnell of reinstating a "literacy test" in Virginia when he decided to add another step for nonviolent felons to have their voting rights restored.

"For persons with a limited education, the governor's requirement that they write an essay explaining their past and present actions and the rationale for why their rights should be restored is a nearly insurmountable obstacle,'' said ACLU of Virginia Executive Director Kent Willis on Monday.

Follow me on Twitter.

---

by: lowkell @ Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 22:10:37 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

1-800-LET-ME-VOTE (3.00 / 1)

Ditch the essay.  If you want to streamline the process, just set up an automated hotline.  

1. Name
2. Contact information
3. Why I deserve to vote

Have someone make a follow-up call/visit to prevent fraud.  And its not a literacy test.  

---

by: WestEndVoter @ Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 22:36:47 PM UTC

[ Parent ]