How many civil rights heroes lost their right to vote?
Last weekend, a cousin of mine was married here in Silver Spring, Maryland. A patriarch of the family, Bill Terry, was a Tuskegee Airman. He told me an incredible story about how when he was in the military, he was arrested and thrown in jail for causing disorder.
It turns out that he was trying to integrate the military base. This was back when Franklin Roosevelt was president. He and a group of other young soldiers organized a sit-in of sorts where they went, row after row, to the front door of a social club and demanded to be let in.
Terry and some others got thrown in jail. Their plan to have housekeepers at the White House talk to Eleanor Roosevelt, so that she could lean on FDR to do something about the situation, was foiled by Roosevelt's absence from the White House and then his death. So Bill Terry sat in jail for nearly a month.
And as a result he lost his right to vote. In his own words,
You can read more about Bill Terry's efforts to fight discrimination in the Armed Forces here.
Nationwide today, nearly 5 million Americans don't have the right to vote because they were convicted of a felony, even though they have served their time.
Read more about the issue and take action with the Sentencing Project.
Change is possible.
P.S., as a sidenote, this is a particularly great story for anyone who thinks that the Civil Rights Movement started when some brave lady named Rosa Parks decided to stand up on a bus in the 1950s. It was a mass movement underway for decades, and there are many, many heroes.
It turns out that he was trying to integrate the military base. This was back when Franklin Roosevelt was president. He and a group of other young soldiers organized a sit-in of sorts where they went, row after row, to the front door of a social club and demanded to be let in.
Terry and some others got thrown in jail. Their plan to have housekeepers at the White House talk to Eleanor Roosevelt, so that she could lean on FDR to do something about the situation, was foiled by Roosevelt's absence from the White House and then his death. So Bill Terry sat in jail for nearly a month.
And as a result he lost his right to vote. In his own words,
I was convicted, and I stayed convicted for 50 years and one month. And, after 50 years...I was given a full pardon, and I restored my rank, etc. For the first time in 50 years, I could vote, I could hold office, I was restored to my rank of Second Lieutenant, and it only goes to show that we're a nation of laws. If you wait long enough, you will be vindicated.
You can read more about Bill Terry's efforts to fight discrimination in the Armed Forces here.
Nationwide today, nearly 5 million Americans don't have the right to vote because they were convicted of a felony, even though they have served their time.
Read more about the issue and take action with the Sentencing Project.
Change is possible.
P.S., as a sidenote, this is a particularly great story for anyone who thinks that the Civil Rights Movement started when some brave lady named Rosa Parks decided to stand up on a bus in the 1950s. It was a mass movement underway for decades, and there are many, many heroes.
posted by Hans Riemer at 7:20 PM
22 Comments:
Not all convicts loose their right to vote – only the worst – the felons. By their actions they’ve shown that they are not capable of making the good decisions. So why would you want them voting? I want law-abiding citizens with diverse viewpoints voting – not former murders, crooks and liars.
When people lie (as this Lil’ Kim was found guilty of) there are consequences. Her lie was so grave (perjury to a grand jury) that she was convicted of a felony.
When felons are done serving their time they are welcome to 99% of their previous freedoms – but note 100% of them. For some things there are permanent repercussions.
True, even with the extensive appeals systems our legal system is not perfect. Pardons are a good safety valve and it is great that the Mr. Terry’s right to vote was finally restored. But… it is not fair or safe to use an extremely rare exception to defend a general point. Let’s debate with more logic and critical thinking and less diversion and emotion.
"Some Lady name Rosa Parks". Good job Hans. Show a little respect for a woman who did a bold and difficult thing. Just because your little story isn't in the history books doesn't mean you should take away from history that is in the books.
I wondered if someone would take the Rosa Parks comment the wrong way. The point is not to downplay her role in history but rather to get across that she was not an individual actor, but was recruited by a large and highly organized campaign; and that the campaign had been underway for decades.
Many people seem to think that Rosa Parks just stood up spontaneously. In fact, she was part of an organized movement. That's how social change happens---individual action in conjunction with movements. Not just individuals by themselves.
So I added the word "brave" to the Rosa Parks comment because I don't want anyone to misintepret it and thus miss the point entirely.
As a convicted felon you usually lose the right to vote. Lil'Kim is the one that broke the law and losing the right to vote is part of the punishment.
It seems to me your story about Bill Terry hits it right on the head. He said "it only goes to show that we're a nation of laws. If you wait long enough, you will be vindicated." It sounds to me like he is happy the way it turned out and that the process works.
If you are a convicted felon then you obviously have done something wrong against society. If this is the case then why should you have any say in the direction of society when you don't have it's best intrest at heart?
My brother is a convicted felon and we have had discussions about this subject. He understands why he can't vote and he doesn't like it but he accepts it. he realizes he broke the law and brought this on himself and he is accountable for his actions.
Hans your going to have to look somewhere else for your 5 million liberal votes. It's very sad that you feel you have to get convicted felons to vote to help you push your liberal agenda.
"That's how social change happens---individual action in conjunction with movements. Not just individuals by themselves."
What a true liberal thing to say Hans. The concept of the individual is nothing to you without the support of the group? Its sad to think that you hold individuals to such low standards and believe that one person can not make a difference, especially since thats the whole mantra of Rock the Vote, or at least it was. Rosa Parks was not recruited by a large organization to stand up for herself on that bus, she made a stand and it became a statement. Other individuals have done the same over the course of history and their actions sparked or rejuvenated movements. Individuals are what makes America unique, its what our country was based on, but if in your mind the individual is nothing without the group then I suppose that explains some of your stances on topics like Social Security.
Voting is not a right. At best (rarely) it is an act of self-defense; the vast majority of the time, it is a criminal act by proxy.
No people in history have ever voted their problems away.
Liberals have been at war against individual rights for years. Individuals are way to stupid to run their own lives. The latest example is the eminent domain case that the liberal justices made legal. Individual private property rights, FORGET IT. Why haven't you put a blog up about that Supreme Court Decision, Hans? Sandra Day O'Connor voted against it, and you seem to praise her up and down.
I know why, because it was the liberal justices that voted for it. There was a poll taken where 94% of Americans polled are against the decision. Don't you think it is important for young people to know they don't have property rights anymore?
Read this history of Rosa Parks. It should be clear that she had been active with the NAACP for more than 10 years and that the NAACP was leading a challenge against Jim Crow laws.
http://www.africanaonline.com/rosa_parks.htm
So, I had to change this entry because basically I just messed it up and it wasn't clear. As a result, some of your comments look out of context and like they are directed at the Terry story when in fact they were directed at Lil' Kim etc. Go ahead an delete them or I can if you want. Hans
Sounds to me from your article, Hans, that Rosa acted on her own when she decided to sit on the bus. It wasn't until after that she was contacted by the NAACP to handle her case in court.
George Bush:
THE PRESIDENT: We are fighting these terrorists with our military in Afghanistan and Iraq and beyond so we do not have to face them in the streets of our own cities.
Well, that didn't work out quite as planned, did it?
Could you try to stay on topic Erik?
Well, while I'm ambivalent about exactly what I think about felons voting rights, clearly trying to link this to rosa parks and the 60's civil rights movement is ridiculous.
Well, that didn't work out quite as planned, did it?
And I'm sure members of the left wing echo chamber such as yourself are cheering.
Erik, I believe that attack was in the streets of London, not the US. Do you need me to post a map for you?
Anyway, keep cheering for the bad guys. That's what libs are left with. Can't win on ideas, so you have to hope the terrorist make Bush look bad. What a hopeless state you guys are in.
QUOTE:
Erik, I believe that attack was in the streets of London, not the US. Do you need me to post a map for you?
Anyway, keep cheering for the bad guys. That's what libs are left with. Can't win on ideas, so you have to hope the terrorist make Bush look bad. What a hopeless state you guys are in.
/QUOTE:
I think his point is still relevant if this was an al-Qaida attack (which we don't know yet.) If everyone weren't too busy taking partisan swipes at each other here, you'd all see that
1) The question of whether taking "the battle" to "them" has actually reduced terror attacks on americans and the world is a very pertinent one, since ultimately our foreign policy's success should be judged in part on how safe it makes Americans
2) Arguing that the London attack shows the policy to have failed in making Americans safer is fairly ridiculous in that you don't have basis for comparison with how events would have played out had we done nothing (particularly since we don't even know who really did this anyway.)
So in short, everyone just grow up.
Noid, you make a valid argument, and I'm not against discussing erik's point, but I would rather he stick to the subject at hand instead of trying to drive the discussion in another direction. Of course since we're already off the beaten path in regards to voting rights for felons, allow me to add one further observation to your points.
Considering the current evidence that this was an Al Quaida attack due to the Brits involvement in Afghanistan and Iraq I don't see how anyone can blame this attack on policy or the war. This wasn't a retaliation because we went into Iraq, it was claimed to be a counterattack due to our invasion of both countries, and no matter how obverse you are to the Iraq war I have yet to meet one person who thinks removing the Taliban after 9-11 was wrong. In that one case alone the London attack proves that no matter what the Western Allies do these hijackers of Islam will continue to consider us as enemies and will kill innocent civilians no matter where they stand.
Hans, nice omission of which President issued the pardon. I bet it was a Republican. How inconvenient.
...back to the topic ~
I'm fully in support of the felony vote ban; at the same time ~ I'm not completely against some means by which to prove one's self worthy of the vote again. Perhaps a clean record for x years; perhaps an honorable discharge; perhaps some great charitable and noteworthy deed... I can't say that I wouldn't support such a path to voting privlidges being restored. What say the assemblage?
Paul in Cocoa Beach
Just line em up and shoot em.
http://midwestrightwingers.blogspot.com/
A felony conviction should not result in denial of full rights of a citizen. They have done their time! ANY tax payer should have the right to vote for the leaders in their community and country. Denial of voting rights should then equal TAX EXEMPT!
One more thing...some felonies should have never been felonies. Those who can vote should stand up to tyranny!
Post a Comment
<< Home