July 27, 2007
A modest proposal

Today's P-I mourns yesterday's state Supreme Court decision requiring convicted felons to complete their sentences before having their voting rights restored. The P-I wants the Legislature to "find a solution that welcomes people who have done their time back into society", i.e. automatically restoring the voting rights of those who haven't paid their financial obligations to their victims.

Instead of automatic reenfranchisement, I propose that those who wish to give unincarcerated felons an equal voice in society's decisions should simply help the felons pay off their legal obligations.

e.g. Dwight Pelz and the state Democrats could launch a "Help this Felon Vote" website to include sympathetic appeals such as:

Fruto Boy Crispila punched an old lady in the face and stole her purse. He completed a 20 month prison sentence. He still owes $300 in court costs and $500 to his victim for her dental bills. Your donations will help him to pay his debts so he can vote for Christine Gregoire!

Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at July 27, 2007 11:07 AM | Email This
Comments
1. Too funny. But won't Pelz get a PAC group put this out as a 'position' ad?

Posted by: swatter on July 27, 2007 11:13 AM
2. I was rear-ended by one of our local "usual suspects" on my drive home at 2:00 AM following Midnight Mass at St Martin's Abbey. The troopers estimated the idiot's speed at "likely above 100 mph," the impact broke the seat from the floor which allowed it to tip back which is probably why my neck wasn't broken. I had a x-cab 4x4 Ranger and sli from under the seat belt and through the rear window up to my niples. How I scrambled back through the window and managed to get the truck settled down and over to the side of the highway without flipping it is anybody's guess, all I can remember is that I was busier than a one legged man in an ass kicking contest. I got out and my canopy was knocked lose and my dogs were running all over a half mile of freeway. This "accident" cost me a fortune, thankfully none of my dogs were killed or seriously injured as a result of being tossed at 60 mph onto the asphalt or struck by a car afterward. This happened in 2000, and the a-hole who is responsible has not ponied up so much as a wooden nickel. He was charged and spent nine months in the can as a result of the "accident." To be quite honest the fact that he cannot vote untill he forks over..... really doesn't move me.

Posted by: JDH on July 27, 2007 11:16 AM
3. I think Democrats should word it a bit differently:

We'll Pay Off Your Felon Debts, as long as you sign this guarantee to vote Democrat!

Posted by: Jeff B. on July 27, 2007 11:16 AM
4. Why should Democrats waste the money? They can write up some fake votes fro Fraudoire much cheaper.

Posted by: pbj on July 27, 2007 11:23 AM
5. JDH, glad to hear that you and your dogs survived the accident.

We bought harnesses for our dogs to wear while travelling in the car. It keeps them from flying about and if aid cars or police get you out of the car, the dogs don't get loose and run away. Highly recommended.

Posted by: Obi-Wan on July 27, 2007 11:47 AM
6. Typical of the left wing loonies in Olympia. They care more for the "rights" of criminals than they do for law abiding citizens. But then again, aren't all the left wing loonies criminals?......

Posted by: Allan Rothlisberg on July 27, 2007 11:54 AM
7. I still see that probation time is excluded in the discussion here.

Personally, I don't want felons to vote, but if they pay the time and cash, then I will go along with consensus.

Posted by: swatter on July 27, 2007 12:00 PM
8. Be carefull what you wish for. If the Democrats were to come up with a plan to pay off felon's debts so they could be re-enfranchised, the plan would include new taxes to pay the costs.

Posted by: Chuck Berlemann on July 27, 2007 12:11 PM
9. Because Reed supports this, I'll be voting for and giving money to, anyone running against him.

Posted by: Hinton on July 27, 2007 12:23 PM
10. "Find a solution"? What a stupid way to put it.

This isn't a problem that needs a solution, this is a policy which the P-I's editorialists dislike.

God, the level of cant and dishonesty in modern politics is truly depressing.

Posted by: ScottM on July 27, 2007 12:38 PM
11. We have to get over our obsession with bashing Sam Reed. He has a difficult job and I'm glad he's there instead of Laura Ruderman. I'll be voting for and endorsing Sam.

If we feel the need to bash someone, how about pointing out the obvious about Rod Tom, wearer of too much man jewelry!

Posted by: Eunice Burns on July 27, 2007 12:40 PM
12. Shark: I hate to blind-side you with confidential i8nformation, but...Fruto Boy Crispila IS Christine Gregoire!

Posted by: John425 on July 27, 2007 12:49 PM
13. Shark: I hate to blind-side you with confidential information, but...Fruto Boy Crispila IS Christine Gregoire!

Posted by: John425 on July 27, 2007 12:49 PM
14. Come on man...we all know Fruto Boy can still vote for Fraudoire as long as he votes in King County. If he lives in the right districts, he can vote for her THREE times!

Posted by: drw on July 27, 2007 01:16 PM
15. "We have to get over our obsession with bashing Sam Reed." The Sam Reeds on the Republican Party is reasin enough to not support patrty until and unless there is a change in the status qou in this State's Party.

Posted by: JDH on July 27, 2007 01:18 PM
16. I loved this typical response in the P-I comments section

"...How many people do you know who have NEVER smoked something illegal or NEVER taken something that didn't belong to them or NEVER had a drink before driving or NEVER hit someone?...

I mean really, aren't we all criminals who simply haven't gotten caught yet?

Ummm.. no. Idiot.

Posted by: Mike H on July 27, 2007 01:52 PM
17. Theodore Dalrymple: "Political correctness is communist propaganda writ small. In my study of communist societies, I came to the conclusion that the purpose of communist propaganda was not to persuade or convince, nor to inform, but to humiliate; and therefore, the less it corresponded to reality the better. When people are forced to remain silent when they are being told the most obvious lies, or even worse when they are forced to repeat the lies themselves, they lose once and for all their sense of probity. To assent to obvious lies is to co-operate with evil, and in some small way to become evil oneself. One's standing to resist anything is thus eroded, and even destroyed. A society of emasculated liars is easy to control. I think if you examine political correctness, it has the same effect and is intended to."

I'm sure coddling and bribing criminals in the hope that they'll become good is related.

Posted by: Tomas de Torquemada on July 27, 2007 03:00 PM
18. Groan. As sure as you mention it in the 2nd paragraph Stefan, sure enough there will be some democrat proposing an actual budget item funded by taxpayers to help felons pay their debts off to the victim, etc. No no no

Posted by: Michele on July 27, 2007 03:25 PM
19. Does this mean the P-I will also advocate restoring felons' gun rights?

Just asking...

Posted by: SeaRep on July 27, 2007 09:20 PM
20. SeaRep, silly poster. After doin' time in the graybar hotel, aren't most of them folks rehabbed and not going to handle a firearm ever again?
Besides, with a gun, they can only rob one store at a time. With a vote, they can effectively rob the entire state at one time.

Posted by: PC on July 28, 2007 09:13 AM
21. This website is slanted in virtually everything it says/reports about. As you say, the PI mourns.... to say the PI mourns is biased beyond the pale, and I'm an independent saying this not a Democrat.

Anyway I'm somewhat ambivalent about whether felons who have served their time should be granted voter rights after paying all related fines. I mean, maybe people charged with felons should be allowed the right to vote again after serving thier time and paying the fines. Why do we have to treat these people as outcasts for the rest of their lives. But again I am ambivalent about the issue. And I know this is a far-right blog, so I expect a bit of backlash from this post.

And don't forget righties, I'm an independent not a Democrat, so keep that in mind if you decide to respond to this post. Don't just try to put me in your little Democrat box just because I don't fully believe in all you're positions on issues and the oozing bias that pervades basically your entire blog from top to bottom.

Regards,
David

Posted by: David on July 28, 2007 09:52 AM
22. David: I thought indies were able to read. What this thread is discussing is whether felons should be granted their voting rights BEFORE their fines are paid, which is part of their sentence. There are more than a few legislators who feel this would be a good thing. Most posters here disagree. Does that help clarify? Ambivalence is okay, I guess, although not very many folks would post three paragraphs on something about which they are ambivalent. However, smarm and snarkiness are just pitiful.

Posted by: katomar on July 28, 2007 10:03 AM
23. 21 - David - Why post troll food - your statement:

"I mean, maybe people charged with felons should be allowed the right to vote again after serving thier time and paying the fines."

Is exactly what the law says, what the Supreme Court decision was and what Stefan said in his posting. It also disagrees with the PI article. So thanks for agreeing with everyone on a 'far-right blog' as an Independent. It would a good idea to be a bit more affirmative in your thoughts.

Posted by: me on July 28, 2007 10:11 AM
24. ahh, in the first two responses to my message, I am labeled an indie unable to read, implied that I post so-called smarm, snarkiness and called pitful. I am also labeled as posting troll food. I can see how open-minded and accepting of "outsiders" you people are.

Obviously I came to the wrong place. This place is for far rights only, no independence allowed.

You people are too bitter and unbecoming, not just the people who post the blogs, but the people who comment on the blogs as well.

I apologize for entering your hostile right-wing zone.

Regards.

Posted by: David Wolbeck on July 28, 2007 12:05 PM
25. David,

I too, am an indie and I disagree with granting rights BEFORE the sentence is served and fines and restitution are paid. I agree that people should be brought back into society and set on the right path. Often, that will not happen until the issues that brought the person into the court system are addressed. I have dealt with many persons who got their rights restored by going through a faith-base program, gasp, I know secular progressives have stopped reading, and they took the long hard road of getting a GED, going through alcohol or drug programs, getting anger management classes and reconnecting with family and friends. Often, leftoids and secular progressives want the vote of the person, they don't want the person whole.

Posted by: WVH on July 28, 2007 01:53 PM
26. I apologize for entering your hostile right-wing zone.

Here's an idea... maybe it would be a good idea not to start off your first post by taking potshots at this website with a smarmy, holier than thou attitude if you don't want folks here to be hostile. I mean, really, you could have just said, "I am an independent, and I don't think people should be able to vote before they've paid their fines and served their time". Guess, what? No one would have "attacked" you. Instead, you start with a paragraph attacking the folks here for being biased and a bunch of far righties.

I mean, come on, that's like going to the WSU campus in a UW t-shirt and calling everyone at WSU a bunch of inbred morons, than wondering why you got your a$$ kicked afterward. Are you really that dense?

Posted by: Mike H on July 28, 2007 03:01 PM
27. I am labeled an indie unable to read,

Do you think maybe that's because you didn't read the article? Or maybe you did read it and didn't comprehend what you read?

Debate is welcomed here. People who spend three paragraphs discussing something they claim they don't care about - and then daring anybody and everybody to pick a fight with them - and then whining when they get their wish, is not.

Posted by: jimg on July 29, 2007 11:23 AM
28. I am labeled an indie unable to read, implied that I post so-called smarm, snarkiness and called pitful.

Sounds about right. You come here, post insults surrounded by a point (somewhere) and then when you receive a little of your medicine back, you declare victory. You score a zero for internet troll originality.

Posted by: Palouse on July 30, 2007 09:54 AM
29. Hello! Good Site! Thanks you! ewgpuispiq

Posted by: jdlqjcwvet on July 31, 2007 06:13 AM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?