In
a period of painfully close presidential elections, with
the most dangerous White House in history hoping to extend its
criminal reign, every American vote in 2004 is potentially
a matter of life and death for masses of people at home and
abroad. It is exceedingly significant, therefore, that 4.4
million Americans are disenfranchised due to a past or current
felony conviction. No other nation imprisons a larger share
of its population or marks so large a share of its population
with the lifelong mark of a serious (felony) criminal record.
According to the best estimates last year, 13 million Americans – fully
7 percent of the adult population and an astonishing 12 percent
of the adult male population – possess felony records.
At
the same time, no other democratic nation denies the vote to
a remotely comparable share of its offender and ex-offender
population. According to Jeff Manza and Christopher Uggen,
the leading academic authorities on felon and ex-felon voting rights, "48
states disenfranchise incarcerated felons, 37 states disenfranchise
felony probationers or parolees (or both), and 14 states additionally
disenfranchise some or all ex-felons who have completed their
sentences." America’s army of disenfranchised felons and
ex-felons "are expected," note Manza and Uggen, "to
respect the law (and indeed, are often subject to significantly
harsher penalties and face a higher level of scrutiny, than
non-felons). They are expected to pay taxes to the government,
and to be governed by elected officials. Yet they have
no formal right to participate in the selection of those officials
or the public policies that allocate government expenditures." Among
those expenditures we might include the hundreds of billions
of dollars that American governments spend on mass surveillance,
arrest, detention, prosecution, incarceration, and post-release
criminal supervision.
Click
to view entire cartoon
Florida, History
and the Color of Felony Disenfranchisement
Anyone
who doubts the historical significance of this mass denial
of basic voting rights
need only review the considerable literature, academic and otherwise,
that is now readily available on the dark and fateful presidential
selection of 2000. As scholars (Uggen and Manza) and journalists
(see the first chapter, titled “Jim
Crown in Cyperspace” in Greg Palast’s bestselling The
Best Democracy Money Can Buy) have shown beyond the shadow
of reasonable doubt, Florida’s disenfranchisement of felons and
ex-felons was sufficient in and of itself to saddle America and
the world with the terrible Bush regime. But for that policy,
Uggen and Manza demonstrate, Al Gore would have picked up 60,000
additional votes in Florida, home to 1,088,667 ex-felons and
293,396 current felons in the fall of 2000. This was more than
enough to have pre-empted the subsequent melodramas over “hanging
chads,” Jewish votes for Buchanan, butterfly ballots, and the
role of Ralph Nader’s third-party candidacy. Also worth noting,
as Greg Palast has shown, the state of Jeb Bush and Kathleen
Harris also disenfranchised many thousands of other Floridians
falsely suspected of possessing criminal records by a Republican-connected,
vote-scrubbing firm (Database Technologies, a division of ChoicePoint)
that failed to perform minimally adequate fact-checking procedures.
Manza
and Uggen’s dark
finding rests largely on the very disproportionately black composition
of America’s official criminal class within and beyond Florida,
a reflection of criminal justice disparities so great that an
astonishing one in three black adult males in the United States
carries a felony record. Manza and Uggen factor in and cross-match
all the relevant social-science inputs on race, socioeconomic
status, party identification, and voter turnout to show that
felony disenfranchisement was a wining tool for the Republican
Party, consistent with broader and related Republican efforts
to minimize and dilute the heavily Democratic weight and significance
of the black vote. Anyone concerned about the prospect of long-term
Republican hegemony in the American Party system should support
the movement to extend the ballot to ex-felons – a reform that
is supported by 80 percent of Americans according to a recent
poll.
The Policy-Driven
Color of Felony Marking
Of
course, partisan consequences should hardly be the only concern. Elementary
considerations of fairness and forgiveness should leave no
room for the vicious practice of imposing medieval “civil death” upon
people who have broken society’s laws. At the same time, those
who think that losing one’s vote is an appropriate punishment
for violation of the “social contract” through criminal behavior
should consider the fact that the astonishing boom of America’s
prison, felon, and ex-felon numbers during the last 30 years
is – like felony disenfranchisement – a state policy. Contrary
to the "law and order" rhetoric cultivated by many
politicians and policymakers, there has been no clear
or consistent pattern of rising criminality, including violent
criminality that can remotely explain the simply remarkable
off-the-charts expansion of America's racially disparate prison,
criminal supervision felon and ex-felon population during the
last three decades. The central factor is that imprisonment
and related felony-marking in the US have "changed," in
Northwestern University sociologist Devah Pager's words, "from a
punishment reserved for only the most heinous offenders to
one extended to a much greater range of crimes and much larger
segment of the population." People who committed nonviolent,
especially drug crimes accounted for more than three fourths
of the nation's increase in prisoners between 1978 and 1996.
These
trends have impacted black communities with special harshness. While
blacks make up just 15 percent of illicit drug users, they
account for 37 percent of those arrested for drug offenses. They
comprise 42 percent of those held in federal prison for drug
charges and 62 percent of those in state prisons. Blacks
constituted more than 75 percent of the total drug prisoners
in America in one third of all states according to a report
issued in 2000 by the prestigious human rights organization
Human Rights Watch. Black
crime rates have been consistently higher than the white crime
rate, consistent with blacks' lower socioeconomic status and
related higher stress levels and weaker social and familial
structures, but there has been no massive upsurge of black
criminality that could even remotely explain the skyrocketing
black incarceration and felony rates.
The Three-Fifths
Compromise Lives
There’s more to the
story of how the criminal justice system is working to reduce
African-American’s political power in the United States. One
key related issue relates to legislative
redistricting in our geography-based representative system of
single-member districts and winner-take-all elections. In a
disturbing re-enactment of the notorious three-fifths clause
of the US Constitution, whereby 60 percent of the ante-bellum
South's non-voting and un-free (slave) black population counted
towards the congressional representation of Slave states, 21st
century America’s very disproportionately black and urban prisoners
count towards the political apportionment (representation) accorded
to predominantly white and rural communities that tend to host
prisons in, say, “downstate” Illinois or “upstate” New York.
Thus, if a Chicagoan like me takes a one-year position at Southern
Illinois University in Carbondale but maintains a residence on
the predominantly black and Democratic South Side of Chicago,
I still contribute to the likelihood that Chicago and the South
Side will have a large number of state representatives and Congresspersons. But
if I get arrested and then sentenced to 2 years in the Big Muddy
correctional facility in very predominantly white far-southern,
Illinois, I'll count towards the political representation of
whiter and more Republican Southern Illinois.
To
get a sense of how this plays out in terms of racial political
power, consider some numbers from my own home state. The Chicago
metropolitan area is home to 83 percent of the state's African-Americans
and point of origin for 70 percent of the state's prisoners. Nearly
two thirds (64 percent) of the state's 45, 629 prisoners in
2001 were African-American, a percentage more than four timers
greater than blacks' share of Illinois' population. Forty-four
percent of the state's prisoners are African Americans from
Chicago’s Cook County. Eighteen of the twenty adult correctional
facilities constructed over the last two decades in Illinois
are located in counties that are disproportionately white for
the state. Just four of the state's twenty post-1980
prison towns have above-average black populations for the state
but in three of those this is only because they get to report
prisoners as part of their population. Five of the six
adult Illinois correctional centers constructed in the 1990s
are located in the southern third of the state. Visitors to
such very visibly white downstate towns as Ina, Illinois (home
of the Big Muddy Correctional Center), would be surprised to
learn from the Census Bureau that that community is 42 percent
African-American and 90 percent male. The explanation, of course,
is mass incarceration.
It’s not enough, apparently
that each black prisoner is worth tens of thousands of economic
development dollars. According to distinguished criminologist
Todd Clear, writing in 1996, the prison boom fed by the rising “market” of
Black offenders is in fact a remarkable economic multiplier for
communities that are often far removed from urban minority concentrations. “Each
prisoner,” he found “represents as much as $25,000 in income
[annually] for the community in which the prison is located,
not to mention the value of constructing the prison facility
in the first place. This,” Clear says, amounts to “a massive
transfer of value [emphasis added].”
Part
of this “massive
transfer,” it should be added, includes state and federal funding
allotments granted on the basis of census counts, weighted to
increase with the size of a jurisdiction’s poverty population
(and most prisoners are poor). An investigation by The Chicago
Reporter, an excellent local public affairs magazine, finds
that racially disparate mass incarceration’s interaction with
the geography of prison construction, political districting rules
and federal budgetary practices to cost Chicago’s Cook County
nearly $88 million in federal benefits between 2000 and 2010
(see Molly Dugan, “Census
Dollars Bring bounty to Prison Towns”). None of that money
redounds to the benefit of those who are responsible for it,
of course – the prisoners who do not get to drive on the improved
roads or enjoy the improved services built and provided with
federal and state grants that rise with mass imprisonment’s inflationary
impact on local and regional census counts.
All of which provides
some interesting context for a Chicago Tribune story that
bears the perverse title “Towns Put Dreams in Prisons.” (Chicago
Tribune, March 20, 2001, 2C:1). In “downstate” Hoopeston,
Illinois, the Tribune reported, there was “talk of the
mothballed canneries that once made this a boom town and whether
any of that bustling spirit might return if the Illinois Department
of Corrections comes to town.”
“You don’t like to think
about incarceration,” Hoopeston’s Mayor told the Tribune, “but
this is an opportunity for Hoopeston. We’ve been plagued by
plant closings.” The Hoopeston Mayor’s willingness to enter the
prison sweepstakes was validated by another small town mayor,
Andy Hutchens of Ina, Illinois. According to the Tribune,
in a passage that reminds us to include diversion of tax revenue
among the ways that mass incarceration steals wealth from the
inner city:
Money, Politics
and the Prison Industrial Complex
Of
course, many Americans don’t vote even though they possess the right to do so. Probably
the single biggest factor that keeps Americans out of the ballot
box is their all-too accurate perception that the American
policy and related candidate-selection processes are all about
Big Money lobbying and campaign contributions, so that wealth
trumps one-person one-vote in America, "the best money
democracy can buy."
In this regard it
is politically as well as socio-economically relevant that
racially disparate mass incarceration and felony marking devastates
the earning capacity and wealth potential of black communities. That
negative economic impact – great enough for mass incarceration
to be discussed as a form of Reverse Racial Reparations – reduces
the black community's already poor ability to compete with
whites in the money-politics game of special interest influence,
campaign finance, lobbying, and public relations, etc. At the
same time, of course, the other side of the coin, taxpayer-funded
mass incarceration is political super-enfranchisement for others. It
generates an enormous amount of wealth for predominantly white
prison communities and predominantly white-owned corporations
that build and serve prisons. Those special interests,
including the prison-guard unions, invest heavily in politics
as a down payment to encourage the expansion and preservation
of policies that generate a steady army of black and brown “offenders,” the
basic core human raw material for the lucrative and powerful
prison industrial complex.
Every Vote
Matters
None
of this is meant to downplay the significance of the “narrow” issue
of reforming
election laws and procedures to enfranchise ex-offenders. This
is a huge, significant issue in and of itself. It is especially
crucial today, of course, in a time of close presidential elections,
with humanity endangered by a dark White House cabal that has
attained a position of previously unimaginable power on the
backs of disenfranchised felons and the victims of September
11, 2001. George W. Bush, Karl Rove, Donald Rumsfeld, John
Ashcroft, Paul Wolfowitz and their ilk have seen to it that
every single vote counts, as it should in every election in
the "land of liberty."
Paul
Street ([email protected]) is an urban social policy
researcher in Chicago, Illinois. He
writes on class, race, imperialism and thought control. He
is the author of The Vicious Circle: Race, Prisons, and Community
in Chicago, Illinois, and the Nation (available online at www.cul-chicago.org)