Political Punishment: Consequences of Felon Disenfranchisement for Rhode Island Communities

• NCJ Number: 207028
• Author(s): Marshall Clement; Nina Keough
• Date Published: 2004
• Length: 12 pages
• Publication Format: Document (Online)
• Publication Type: Issue Overview
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America
• Note: Downloaded September 28, 2004.

Annotation

This report estimates the extent of felon disenfranchisement in Rhode Island and compares the impact of felon disenfranchisement across the State’s cities, towns, and neighborhoods.

Abstract

Felon disenfranchisement is the only legal means of denying United States citizens the right to vote. While laws concerning felon disenfranchisement vary from State to State, felon disenfranchisement generally entails the restriction of voting rights due to a prior or current felony conviction. Rhode Island has some of the most restrictive felon disenfranchisement laws in the country; this fact, coupled with Rhode Island’s burgeoning felony population has led to disenfranchisement for a substantial portion of the State’s population. The main questioned addressed by this research is: “What is the impact of Rhode Island’s felony disenfranchisement law on the size and nature of Rhode Island’s eligible voting population?” Approximately 15,500 Rhode Islanders, or 2 percent of the State’s population, are currently unable to vote because of a felony conviction; 86 percent of those disenfranchised are not currently serving a prison sentence. Male disenfranchisement in Rhode Island is more than six times that of female disenfranchisement; 20 percent of adult Black males are disenfranchised, as are 9 percent of adult Hispanic males in the State. These figures are contrasted with the 2 percent of adult White males who are disenfranchised due to a felony conviction in Rhode Island. The impact of felon disenfranchisement varies greatly across the State, with most disenfranchisement occurring in five urban areas. The report argues that felon disenfranchisement does not improve the public safety in Rhode Island as restricting voting rights has no impact on whether or not an individual commits criminal acts. Moreover, re-enfranchisement could be an important component of prison reentry in terms of stimulating civic and community involvement. Rhode Island, and other States, should carefully consider revising their felon disenfranchisement laws. Tables, figures, endnotes, technical notes