Activism

Lawmakers Push Bill to Grant Prisoners Right to Vote

Last week, Assemblymember Isaac Bryan (D-Los Angeles) the chair of the Assembly’s Committee on Elections introduced Assembly Constitutional Amendment 4 (ACA-4). The legislation proposes amending the California Constitution to allow felons serving time in state and federal prisons to vote.

Published

2 years ago

February 16, 2023

Oakland Post

Assemblymember Isaac Bryan announces ACA 4 the Bill will restore the voting rights of people who are incarcerated across the state alongside advocates and supporters. Feb. 8, 2023. Screenshot photo.

By Maxim Elramsisy

California Black Media

Proposition 17, approved in 2020 by California voters, enabled persons convicted of felonies on parole to vote.

If the bill passes the Assembly and Senate, and the governor approves it, voters in California could vote to join Vermont, Maine, and Washington, D.C. in allowing incarcerated individuals to vote.

“After the 13th Amendment liberated the slaves, we started to see different types of voter disenfranchisement occurring,” Bryan explained in an interview with California Black Media (CBM).

“We saw Black codes, we saw Jim Crow, poll taxes, literacy tests, felony disenfranchisement, becoming more commonplace in statewide constitutions and so it’s through that legacy that we’ve been trying to roll back all of these years and make sure that our democracy is inclusive of everybody,” Bryan commented on the systemic discrimination and disenfranchisement African Americans have endured over centuries.

Lawmakers opposing the legislation say allowing incarcerated felons to vote is a slap in the face to victims of the crimes they committed.

“I believe that it discounts the impact that this will have on people who have suffered being a victim of a very violent offense,” Assemblymember Tom Lackey (R-Palmdale) told CBM.

“Part of rehabilitation is going through a process of recognizing the seriousness of what has been done, and I think when we allow someone to exercise the most sacred privilege that we have in this country, that people have died so that we can exercise that privilege, that is an affront against those who have suffered ill, and a lot of times eternal pain,” Lackey said.

Responding to Lackey’s objection, Bryan said, “That’s like saying allowing incarcerated persons to breathe is an affront to their victims, allowing incarcerated persons to drink water, allowing incarcerated persons to hold conversations with one another.”

“There is no reason that that should be coupled with disenfranchisement and the expelling of individuals as citizens of this country.”

“There’s a difference between suspending a privilege and dehumanizing someone,” Lackey said. “Certainly no one expects someone to go through inappropriate suffering. That is not part of justice. That’s not part of our judicial process.”

David Liamsi Cruz, an advocate from Initiate Justice, was released in September after serving 13 years in prison.

“One problem that I constantly came across was that people serving their sentences alongside me felt that they didn’t have the means to improve their environment that controlled their lives or to contribute to their families’ wellness outside. Despite what many people assume, people in prison care about the same political issues that we outside do,” Cruz said.

“Those who were willing to become civically engaged with me were diligent in their work, they even brought me bill ideas that could have solved issues that were longstanding in their communities. I was honored to witness their passion for change, for an opportunity to grow, and to contribute to something way bigger than themselves. Even though I am home [from] prison now, I have not forgotten the ten thousand voices of people who are still inside and have so much to contribute. I want their voices to be heard.”

Supporters of the plan say that reducing recidivism — or the reincarceration of persons less than three years after they are released from prison — is one of the primary benefits of this plan.

“We already know a lot of the facts, and the facts are that the more someone is engaged in their democracy, they are 50% less likely to reoffend,” said Assemblymember Ash Kalra (D-San Jose) who is a co-sponsor of the bill.

“So, if we already know this, then the policy not allowing those who are incarcerated to vote has nothing to do with public safety.”

Kalra said when he was a public defender it was “plain as day” to see who was given second chances.

“Those who were given probation versus prison, and it was so connected to race and class and the same communities who have been fighting to be free since the inception, and before the inception of this nation,” he said.

Another concern is the ability for those who are incarcerated to hold public officials accountable. “Those who are incarcerated and their families are some of the most educated people in our state, far more educated than the average voter,” said Kalra. “And they will hold us accountable, and maybe that’s what people are afraid of. They don’t want that accountability from those who are suffering the most from decisions that are made traditionally in [the Capital].”

The legislation is backed by a coalition of lawmakers, including California Legislative Black Caucus members — Assemblymembers Lori Wilson (D–Suisun City), Reggie Jones-Sawyer (D-Los Angeles), Tina McKinnor (D–Inglewood), Mia Bonta (D-Oakland), Dr. Akilah Weber (D–San Diego) and Senators Steven Bradford (D-Inglewood) and Lola Smallwood Cuevas (D–Ladera Heights).

“There was a time where women couldn’t vote,” Jones-Sawyer said at the press conference held last week to announce the bill. “There was a time when African Americans couldn’t vote, and just recently we tried to get slavery out of the California state constitution and it failed, because of Democrats.”

“An American citizen’s right to vote is the most powerful right in our nation,” McKinnor said. “Let’s be clear, an incarcerated American citizen is an American citizen, and no law should ever restrict an American citizen’s right to vote. Too many Americans have died, too many Americans have sacrificed, too many Americans have been denied the right to vote for too long.”

Lackey and others who oppose the legislation, however, insist that denying a felon to vote is appropriate punishment.

“There has to be a period of reflection and a period of suspension of certain what I would call privileges or rights in order for the judicial process to be effective,” Lackey said to CBM.

Bryan said the protection of citizens’ rights is paramount.

“There are some basic human rights, and then there are some basic American rights that have to be preserved, even in the systems of accountability,” he emphasized.

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Up Next

Memphis Police Murder Case Puts Spotlight on California Legislation

Don't Miss

California Black Legislators Host Black History Month Activities

Oakland Post

Click to comment

Activism

‘Respect Our Vote’ Mass Meeting Rejects Oakland, Alameda County Recalls

The mass meeting, attended mostly by members of local Asian American communities, was held in a large banquet room in a Chinese restaurant in Alameda. The Respect Our Vote (ROV) coalition, consisting of concerned community members and groups, is organizing meetings in Oakland and around Alameda County leading up to the November election.

Published

2 weeks ago

September 28, 2024

Oakland Post

Some of the leaders who spoke at the Respect Our Vote – No Recalls!” mass meeting were (left to right): Elaine Peng, Mariano Contreras, Pastor Servant B.K. Woodson, and Stewart Chen. Photo by Ken Epstein.

By Ken Epstein

A recently organized coalition, “Respect Our Vote – No Recalls!,” held a standing-room only mass meeting on Sept. 14, urging residents to vote ‘No’ on the two East Bay recalls funded by conservative billionaires and millionaires with the help of corporate media and instead to support the campaign to protect residents’ democratic right to choose their representatives.

The mass meeting, attended mostly by members of local Asian American communities, was held in a large banquet room in a Chinese restaurant in Alameda.

The Respect Our Vote (ROV) coalition, consisting of concerned community members and groups, is organizing meetings in Oakland and around Alameda County leading up to the November election.

Speaking at the meeting, prominent East Bay leader Stewart Chen said that local leaders, like Alameda County D.A. Pamela Price and Oakland Mayor Sheng Thao, worked hard to get elected, and our system says they get four years to carry out their policies and campaign promises. But rich people have “broken” that system.

Within two months after they took office, they were facing recalls paid for by billionaires, he said. “(Billionaires’) candidate did not get elected, so they want to change the system.”

“(Our elected leaders) were elected through the process, and the people spoke,” said Chen. “It’s the entire system that the billionaires are trying to (overturn).”

“If a candidate does something wrong or enacts a policy that we do not like, we let it play out, and in four years, we do not have to vote for them.

“The democratic system that we have had in place for a couple of hundred years, it needs our help,” said Chen.

Pastor Servant B.K. Woodson, a leader of the coalition, emphasized the diversity and solidarity needed to defend democracy. “We need each other’s wisdom to make our nation great, to make it safe. We are deliberately African American, English-speaking, Latino American, Spanish-speaking, and all the wonderful dialects in the Asian communities. We want to be together, grow together, and have a good world together.”

Mariano Contreras of the Latino Task Force said that people need to understand what is at stake now.

The recall leaders are connected to conservative forces that will undermine public education, and bilingual education, he said. “The people behind (the recalls) are being used by outside dark money,” he said. The spokespeople of these recalls are themselves conservatives “who are wearing a mask that says they are progressives.”

In 2017, Oakland passed an ordinance that gave teeth to its “Sanctuary City” policy, which was brought to the City Council and passed because it was supported by progressive members on the council.

“That would not be possible anymore if the progressive alliance – Sheng Thao, Nikki Fortunato Bas, and Carroll Fife – if they are pushed out,” he said.

Elaine Peng, president of Asian Americans for Progressive America, said, “I strongly oppose the recalls of Oakland Mayor Sheng Thao and Alameda County District Attorney Pamela Price.”

Citing statistics, she said Alameda County’s murder rate was higher when Alameda County D.A. Nancy O’Malley was in office, before Pamela Price was elected to that position.

“The recall campaign has been misleading the public,” said Peng.

She said Oakland is making progress under Thao. “Crime rates are falling in Oakland,” and the City is building more affordable housing than ever before and is creating more jobs.

Attorney Victor Ochoa said, this recall is “not by accident in Oakland – it is a political strategy.”

“There is a strategy that has been launched nationwide. What we’re seeing is oligarchs, (such as Phillip Dreyfuss from Piedmont), right wingers, conservatives, who can write a check for $400,000 like some of us can write a check for $10.”

“They aligned themselves with so-called moderate forces, but they’re not moderates. They align themselves with the money, and that’s what we have seen in Oakland.”

Ochoa continued, “You got to put up signs, you’ve got to talk to your neighbors, volunteer whatever hours you can, have a house meeting. That’s the way progressives win.”

Pecolia Manigo of Oakland Rising Action spoke about what it will take to defeat the recalls. “This is the time when you are not only deputized to go out and do outreach, we need to make sure that people actually vote.

“We need everyone to vote not just for the president, but all the way down the ballot to where these questions will be. Remind people to fill out their ballot, and mail it back.”

Former Oakland Mayor Jean Quan, who had herself faced a recall attempt, said, “In this recall, they used a lot of money, had paid signature gatherers, and they moved very fast. I talked to many of the people gathering signatures. They didn’t know what was going on. Many of them didn’t live in Oakland. It was just money for them.”

“Sam Singer, the guy who is their spokesperson, is a paid PR guy. He has media ties, so they’ve swamped the media against Sheng,” Quan said.

‘Oakland is… a city that implemented some of the first rent control protections in the country. So, developers and big apartment owners would love to get rid of rent control,” said Quan.

“We also established ranked-choice voting, which allows people with less money to coalesce and win elections,” she said. “That’s too democratic for people with big money. They would rather have elections the way they were.”