






































Untitled document


Voting While in Mass Incarceration
Rebecka Sokoloff75

ABSTRACT: This article explores a recent report of scholars and voting-rights activists urging
Congress to make voting mandatory. In this article, I examine the rights of felons, specifically
their rights to vote while in mass incarceration. Since prisoners are not allowed to vote in most
states, I argue why they should gain suffrage. From this article, I hope to provide and enlighten
the reader on possible alternative solutions to prisoner voting.

Introduction
In a recent report, many scholars and voting-rights activists urge Congress to make voting

mandatory for all U.S. citizens.76 Participating in voting is incredibly important because it
ensures your voice is heard, which is one of the primary foundational elements of democracy. By
forcing Americans to vote, scholars and voting-rights activists are encouraging and influencing
individuals to educate themselves and others about the important issues and policies of each
presidential candidate. This is crucial in our democracy because it allows us to be involved in the
national decision-making process and having knowledge in what our nation is achieving. If every
individual were to cast a vote, the outcome would be huge; there would be reduced partisanship,
more knowledge about current issues, and more youth advocates and activist groups.77 Scholars
and voting-rights activists argue that if people do not vote or have an acceptable excuse for not
voting, they should be penalized. This stemmed from the 2012 and 2016 Presidential Election
reports that revealed an average of 61.6% of eligible citizens participating in the registration and
voting process.78 Since many individuals have not voted in recent years, scholars and
voting-rights activists argue that if people do not vote or have an acceptable excuse for not
voting, they should be penalized. By making voting a civic responsibility, America would be a
more democratic and advanced society.79 Voting is an important right in America, and it should
be upheld for all citizens, no matter if one has been convicted of a felony or incarcerated.

Currently, in the United States, felons are ineligible to vote. In some circumstances,
felons lose their right to vote while they are in incarceration but receive restoration upon their
release. Unfortunately, states continue to indefinitely remove voting rights from felons.80 Several
important questions have been raised regarding voting rights in relation to prisoners, such as,
how do prisoner voting rights factor into this new plan? Why are prisoners not allowed to vote?
Should they be allowed? Are there alternative ways to ensure that prisoners can vote? It is
unjustifiable and unconstitutional to deny prisoners the right to vote, and it is incredibly

80 “Felon Voting Rights.” National Conference of State Legislatures (2019).
79 Moyo, (2019).
78 “Voting in America: A Look at the 2016 Presidential Election.” The United States Census Bureau (2017).
77 Moyo, 2019.
76 Dambisa Moyo. “Make Voting Mandatory in The U.S..” The New York Times (2019).
75 Undergraduate at Brandeis University, Class of 2022.

34



important that America changes its established laws to accommodate prisoner voting because we
cannot take away an American’s inherent right to participate in democracy.

Background
The history of felony disenfranchisement dates back to the English colonists. When

British colonists came to North America, they brought with them the common law practice of
“civil death.”81 These were a set of criminal penalties that punished those who rejected common
law. If one violated the moral code, the penalty was the revocation of their right to vote. It was
not until after the American Revolution that the states began expanding the annulment of voting
rights to all felony offenses.82

During the post-Reconstruction period, also known as the Jim Crow Laws era, many of
the southern states tailored disenfranchisement laws to target and ban black males from voting.
For example, Kentucky and Virginia created laws that prevented convicted felons from voting at
any point in their life after conviction. The laws for disenfranchisement broadened throughout
the states, causing more individuals to lose their right to vote.83

This disenfranchisement continued in the United States until 1965 when the Voting
Rights Act was introduced nationwide, in order to protect voting rights. This landmark
legislation prohibited every state and government from discrimination of racial or cultural
minorities through voting rights.84

The Voting Rights Act was the start to providing equality in voting rights for all
Americans. However, the 1974 court case Richardson v. Ramirez challenged this progress.
Ramirez and several felons brought a class action suit against California’s Secretary of State
because they were denied their right to vote. They challenged the laws that permanently
disenfranchised any individual that was convicted of a crime and argued that the state did not
have justification or evidence to deny them the right to vote. On appeal, the Supreme Court ruled
in favor of California. It was stated that it was constitutionally acceptable to deny the felons the
right to vote because a state could lawfully consider the qualifications of a voter based on their
criminal record. Yet, the Constitution confirms that states cannot deny the individual the right to
vote based on their racial presentation. Since it was viewed as historically acceptable to
disenfranchise prisoners, Ramirez and the other felons did not regain their right to vote.85

85 Richardson v. Ramirez, 418 U.S. 24 (1974).
84 “History of Federal Voting Rights Laws.” The United States Department of Justice (2020).
83 Chung, 2019.
82 Chung, 2019.
81 Jean Chung. “Policy Brief: Felony Disenfranchisement.” The Sentencing Project (2019).

35



As seen above, the barring of felons from voting stems from the hostility and the
perception society has about individuals who commit crimes. When an individual is incarcerated,
they are forever tainted with a negative image based on their crimes, regardless of serving their
time and amending their sins. Some might argue that the government and authorities need to
control and govern felons’ voting rights because they have and (possibly) will continue to violate
the rules and regulations put in place by the state and federal government. Additionally, many
individuals may ask why prisoners should be allowed to vote when they neglected to adhere to
the law? While some crimes may not be as bad as others (i.e., the possession of marijuana
compared to first degree murder), anyone who goes against set rules is deemed inexcusable in
the eyes of the law. Prisoners who disrupt the peace and commit crimes need to have the
intrusion in order to get the help they need to live a crime-free life, and to ensure the safety of the
public. If they were left to do this on their own, they may fall into bad habits or cause more
destruction.

Importance of Prisoner Voting
While these are true remarks, how can we justify taking away someone’s right to talk for

themselves? Even if an individual committed a crime, they are a self-governing individual
protected under the fundamental rights of the Constitution. They have the ability to speak and act
for themselves, without the forced governance of authority. People voice their opinion in politics
through voting. If the government or authorities were to implement harsher restrictions onto the
individual, it may depreciate them more. The individual may be more isolated from society and
not given the resources they need in order to improve. The isolation from society would enable
the incarcerated to continue to feel useless and unwanted. This would not only affect their mental
and physical health, but also not allow them to be educated, express themselves, or reintegrate
back into society properly. Implementing these restrictions could be detrimental and cause more
separation and judgement within society.

Our national political conversation and change depends on the voting. In the past 20
years, neglect and the misuse of authoritative power has plagued prisoners throughout the nation.
In addition to being locked away, the prisons are failing health inspections and lack proper
immersion programs for the prisoners. If prisoners had the ability to vote, they would vote for
representatives that cared about the prison system and would fight to ensure that health
inspections are taken care of. Furthermore, the representatives could enact programs that allow
prisoners to access proper education and therapeutic resources.86 By giving them the right to
vote, prisoners can represent themselves and the larger portion of the population. Moreover, they

86 “Prison Abuse: A Curated Collection of Links.” The Marshall Project (2020).

36



can voice their concerns about maltreatment and the ways to help improve life in and after
prison.

As a result of prisoners being prohibited from voting, a caste system has formed. America
has had a dark past where it was believed that people were not and should not be equals. This can
be seen in the “three-fifths clause” of the U.S. Constitution. This clause stated that African
Americans were only three-fifths of a full citizen of the United States. Enslaved African
Americans were not allowed to vote, allowing white individuals and the government to talk, act,
and decide for them.87 Like slavery, mass incarceration is a designed system to racialize,
discriminate, and create stigma between individuals in prison and individuals in the ‘free world.’
Prisoners are legally the property of the government. The government has the right to speak on
their behalf and to go above their heads to use the law, even if that makes them inferior and
dehumanized.88 A caste system in the United States is the artificial grouping and labeling of
individuals.89 Prisoners could be considered in a caste system because they are systematically
grouped to be labeled as bad individuals. Caste systems go against everything this country is
supposed to stand for, and limit individuals’ ability to partake in their fundamental rights.

Furthermore, prisoners perform mandatory labor for private companies. Mass
incarceration may refer to this as a rehabilitation approach to get prisoners back into normal life,
but there are ulterior motives other than rehabilitation. Often there is a profit extraction for this
labor where prisoners are paid little to nothing for their labor.90

Most importantly, the inhumane conditions of the prisons cause medical and mental
health problems. By not facilitating the prisoners with proper sanitation and cleanliness, it is in
contradiction to the idea that prisons are a rehabilitation center. Many of the prisoners are left in
the same dirty, moldy prison cells with little cleaning. In addition, they wear the same clothing
every day. The lack of sanitary conditions can contribute to the spread of infections, diseases,
and viruses. Mentally, prisoners are not given proper support or resources to find comfort in their
surroundings or with themselves. This can make prisoners act out violently towards each other or
the guards. Going a step further, this could lead to suicide or self-harm. Surely, prisoners who
committed horrible acts deserve to feel guilty, but why should the government and prison system
allow for cruel and unusual conditions? Voting would enable the prisoners to elect
representatives that cared enough to implement policies and conditions that would improve their

90 Florio, 2016.
89 Isabel Wilkerson. “America’s Enduring Caste System.” The New York Times Magazine (2021).
88 Gina M. Florio. “5 Ways America’s Prison System Mimics Slavery.” Bustle (2016).
87 Malik Simba. “The Three-Fifths Clause of the United States Constitution (1787).” Black Past (2014).

37



living conditions. Prisoners should be given the tools, such as voting, to improve themselves and
right their wrongs right. This cannot be done when they are treated like animals.91

Alternative Solutions
Since 2019, a few states have found alternative solutions to prisoner voting. However, not

all of the alternative solutions have an easy and positive outcome. For instance, the Harris
County Jail in Houston, Texas has partnered with outside organizations – such as the Texas
Organizing Project and the Houston Justice – to help jumpstart voting initiatives within the
prisons. One of the alternative solutions to prisoner voting was to place a polling location within
the jail. This way, both the prisoners and the surrounding community have the opportunity to
vote. Though, this solution was not plausible. First, the incarcerated felons lacked the proper and
necessary identification to cast a ballot. The jail lacked internet access or resources to obtain the
proper identification of the prisoners. Second, any polling place must be open to the general
public because any individual is entitled to use one. This meant that community members would
have to enter the jail in order to vote. There was controversy with this solution because jails limit
the number of individuals who enter the building, meaning that the community members would
not have access to the polling station.92

Besides the Harris County Jail, there have been many attempts in finding resolutions to
prisoner voting and the voting process throughout the country. In several states, such as the
District of Columbia, Maine, and Vermont, felons never lose their right to vote, even while they
are incarcerated. In the past years, legislatures within the states of Virginia, Maine, and Vermont
have rejected laws that excluded convicted individuals from voting because they felt as though it
was wrong to retrieve an individual’s American rights. In these states, prisoners can vote by
absentee ballot. Since there are many people of color within the prisons, these states allow the
minority to participate in their right to vote. However, while these states allow prisoners to vote,
there is a lack of resources and discussions on the voting process and political options.93 I suggest
several alternative solutions that would allow prisoners to vote and to be educated about the
voting process and political options.

First, all prisoners should have a mandatory seminar every four years about the different
presidential candidates and their policies in order to inform the prisoners about the voting choice.
Thus, criminals can be well educated and learn about new policies. This is especially important
for criminals who are serving short prison sentences or individuals who have children of their
own. The seminars could be taught by outside officials or educators in a protected and safe

93 Nicole Lewis. “In Just Two States, All Prisoners Can Vote. Here’s Why Few Do.” The Marshall Project (2019).
92 Nicole D. Porter. “Voting in Jails.” The Sentencing Project (2020).

91 Amy Miller. “Overcrowding in Nebraska’s Prisons Is Causing a Medical and Mental Health Care Crisis.” ACLU
of Nebraska (2017).

38



classroom (to ensure that all officials or educators feel comfortable). This solution would work
because it allows convicted felons not only the opportunity to be informed, but also to
understand the candidates and their policies. Before voting, the felons are exposed to the outside
world and would be given a second wave of hope. During the voting process, there should be
several polls placed within the prison that enable incarcerated individuals to vote. The security
guards could monitor the number of prisoners entering and exiting the polling area. The polls
would ensure security and protection of the vote, while also allowing prisoners to participate in
the inherit American right to democracy. If the polling stations were to malfunction, the prisons
should have absentee ballots ready for the detainees. When they are released, the inmates would
be able to experience a society, no matter if it had changed the outcome based on their vote. Even
if the votes show that the other party wins, incarcerated individuals will still have the opportunity
to be seen as individuals and re-integrate back into society.

A second option could be that prisoners who will be released during the next presidency
period should vote. Since the prisoner would no longer be incarcerated, their presidency choice
would matter. They have the right to vote for someone that they believe will represent and
govern them. While this could create a separation between the prisoners (who can vote and who
cannot vote), it may also provide a sense of encouragement, hope, and ‘revolutionary’ spirit. A
plausible concern with this alternative is that the inmates that would not be released by the next
presidency would feel as though there was special treatment. This may ensue distrust amongst
the guards and prisoners, and more violence between inmates. Nevertheless, it would allow the
prisoner to vote and make change within the nation.

These two options are of many possibilities to help restore the knowledge and
humanization of the mass incarceration system and society.

Conclusion
It is deeply problematic to deny the right to vote for an entire class of American citizens.

The democratic society and system depend on all of the individuals within the nation.
Fortunately, many states are reconsidering their disenfranchisement policies, but this does not
excuse the effects that it has caused in the past. Prisoners are individuals who have a voice and a
right to be heard. If people of the nation do not vote, they are letting the nation’s leaders speak
for them, and important issues will be disregarded. Prisoners are used as correctional facilities.
To deny a product of that facility the right to vote and the right to be a proper citizen is to say
that the prison system in the United States is untrustworthy and deeply flawed. The United States
has two options: continue down the path of a flawed system or do what the nation is designed to
do; change.

39



Works Cited
Moyo, Dambisa. “Make Voting Mandatory in The U.S..” The New York Times (2019). Web:

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/15/opinion/united-states-voting-mandatory.html.
Chung, Jean. “Policy Brief: Felony Disenfranchisement.” The Sentencing Project (2019): 1-6.

Web:
https://www.sentencingproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/Felony-Disenfranch
isement-Primer.pdf.

“Felon Voting Rights.” National Conference of State Legislatures (2021). Web:
https://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/felon-voting-rights.aspx.

File, Thom. “Voting in America: A Look at the 2016 Presidential Election.” The United States
Census Bureau (2017). Web:
https://www.census.gov/newsroom/blogs/random-samplings/2017/05/voting_in_america.
html.

Florio, Gina M. “5 Ways America’s Prison System Mimics Slavery.” Bustle (2016). Web:
https://www.bustle.com/articles/142340-5-ways-the-us-prison-industrial-complex-mimics
-slavery.

“History of Federal Voting Rights Laws.” The United States Department of Justice (2020). Web:
https://www.justice.gov/crt/history-federal-voting-rights-laws.

Joyce, Michael S. “On Self-Government.” Policy Review of the Hoover Institution. Stanford
University, no. 90 (1998): 41-48. Web: https://www.hoover.org/research/self-government.

Lewis, Nicole. “In Just Two States, All Prisoners Can Vote. Here’s Why Few Do.” The Marshall
Project (2019). Web:
https://www.themarshallproject.org/2019/06/11/in-just-two-states-all-prisoners-can-vote-
here-s-why-few-do.

Miller, Amy. “Overcrowding in Nebraska’s Prisons Is Causing a Medical and Mental Health
Care Crisis.” ACLU of Nebraska (2017). Web:
https://www.aclu.org/blog/prisoners-rights/cruel-inhuman-and-degrading-conditions/over
crowding-nebraskas-prisons-causing.

Porter, Nicole D. “Voting in Jails.” The Sentencing Project (2020). Web:
https://www.sentencingproject.org/publications/voting-in-jails/.

“Prison Abuse: A Curated Collection of Links.” The Marshall Project (2020). Web:
https://www.themarshallproject.org/records/50-prison-abuse.

Simba, Malik. “The Three-Fifths Clause of the United States Constitution (1787).” Black Past
(2014). Web:
https://www.blackpast.org/african-american-history/events-african-american-history/three
-fifths-clause-united-states-constitution-1787/.

Wilkerson, Isabel. “America’s Enduring Caste System.” The New York Times Magazine (2021).
Web: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/01/magazine/isabel-wilkerson-caste.html.

40

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/15/opinion/united-states-voting-mandatory.html
https://www.sentencingproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/Felony-Disenfranchisement-Primer.pdf
https://www.sentencingproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/Felony-Disenfranchisement-Primer.pdf
https://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/felon-voting-rights.aspx
https://www.census.gov/newsroom/blogs/random-samplings/2017/05/voting_in_america.html
https://www.census.gov/newsroom/blogs/random-samplings/2017/05/voting_in_america.html
https://www.bustle.com/articles/142340-5-ways-the-us-prison-industrial-complex-mimics-slavery
https://www.bustle.com/articles/142340-5-ways-the-us-prison-industrial-complex-mimics-slavery
https://www.justice.gov/crt/history-federal-voting-rights-laws
https://www.hoover.org/research/self-government
https://www.themarshallproject.org/2019/06/11/in-just-two-states-all-prisoners-can-vote-here-s-why-few-do
https://www.themarshallproject.org/2019/06/11/in-just-two-states-all-prisoners-can-vote-here-s-why-few-do
https://www.aclu.org/blog/prisoners-rights/cruel-inhuman-and-degrading-conditions/overcrowding-nebraskas-prisons-causing
https://www.aclu.org/blog/prisoners-rights/cruel-inhuman-and-degrading-conditions/overcrowding-nebraskas-prisons-causing
https://www.sentencingproject.org/publications/voting-in-jails/./
https://www.themarshallproject.org/records/50-prison-abuse
https://www.blackpast.org/african-american-history/events-african-american-history/three-fifths-clause-united-states-constitution-1787/
https://www.blackpast.org/african-american-history/events-african-american-history/three-fifths-clause-united-states-constitution-1787/
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/01/magazine/isabel-wilkerson-caste.html


Cases Cited
Richardson v. Ramirez, 418 U.S. 24 (1974).

41




