In a recent CNN town hall, Pete Buttigieg said that he didn’t support Bernie Sanders’ proposal to extend voting rights to incarcerated Americans. Here’s why that’s a big deal.
Of the 2.3 million Americans currently locked up in prisons and jails, an estimated 1.9 percent are LGBTQ — that’s 43,700 queer people (roughly the population of Niagra Falls, New York). These people already lack the right to vote — they lose that right as soon as they go behind bars — and it’s an issue worth discussing.
When Buttigieg says he doesn’t want to let 2.3 million American inmates vote, he’s effectively saying he doesn’t want a population the size of the entire population of Houston, Texas — America’s third-largest city — to vote.
It may be unfair to pick on Buttigieg for this policy position as the same question wasn’t asked to each Democratic presidential candidate at CNN’s televised town halls.
How about we take this to the next level?
Our newsletter is like a refreshing cocktail (or mocktail) of LGBTQ+ entertainment and pop culture, served up with a side of eye-candy.
But during the CNN town hall, Buttigieg said, “[Let people vote] while incarcerated? No, I don’t think so. I do believe that when you are out, when you have served your sentence, part of being restored to society is that you are part of political life of this nation, one of the things that needs to be restored is your right to vote.”
Related: Pete Buttigieg won’t be baited, offers seriously sassy clap back to Trump appointed troll
You might think, “Hey, these people broke the law, so they don’t deserve to vote,” but that ignores the fact that 540,000 currently incarcerated people are just being held while awaiting charges and trials. That is, 23.5 percent of all inmates haven’t even been convicted of a crime yet, meaning that they’ve lost their vote without having even definitively broken the law.
Furthermore, a 2016 report from the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law found that 25 percent of all U.S. prisoners (364,000 people), “almost all non-violent, lower-level offenders, would be better served by alternatives to incarceration such as treatment, community service, or probation.” Studies have also shown that restoring people’s voting access makes it less likely that they’ll return to prison.
According to Business Insider, Sanders proposed the idea, he said:
“I think the right to vote is inherent to our democracy. Yes, even for terrible people, because once you start chipping away…you’re running down a slippery slope. I believe even if they are in jail, they’re paying the price to society, that should not take away their inherent American right to participate in our democracy.”
“This is a democracy, we have to expand that democracy,” Sanders added as he accused Republicans of working to disenfranchise certain groups.
Fellow Democratic presidential candidates Kamala Harris and Elizabeth Warren have said they’d like to further consider Sanders’ idea, adding that it’s important to restore all convicted people’s voting rights once they’ve served their prison sentences.
It should also be said that LGBTQ people, people of color and the poor are more likely to be incarcerated. Thus, revoking their right to vote disenfranchises already marginalized communities. And people affected by state and federal prison systems should have a say in electing leaders who’ll instate policies governing those systems. Prisons are abysmal and rife with horrid food, physical and sexual violence and other human rights abuses, most of which fall hardest on LGBTQ prisoners.
The question remains an important one and will surely return as the primary plays out.
AgainNagain
When these criminals commit crimes and get locked up in jail, part of the punishments is loss of freedom and certain civil rights. I support Mayor Pete’s position to deny these criminals’ right to vote. In fact, I think most of the criminals in the country get way too lenient sentences in proportion to the severity of their crimes. Why do the extreme liberals always want to be on the side of criminals and druggies?
MJH
I agree…
TheThirtyNine
When you’re in jail you’re still a citizen of this country yes or no? Being a citizen gives you the right to vote no matter what you’ve done in life. It’s an inalienable right we all have and did you even read the article? A great deal of these “criminals” have lost the right to vote without even committing a crime and most of the people in jail are those of marginalized groups because as we all should know by know, those who have minority identities are often punished more severely.
GreenHilDun
I feel like I’m spamming this chat but I see that people aren’t really considering this issue beyond a superficial way. Ethical considerations must always be made when making a decision. Ethically a reason you don’t have the right to vote while in prison is that you are person who is not of free will. This means you could easily be exploited and coerced. I look at it much like medical research ethics in special populations and how prisoners are a special population and generally not allowed to be willing participants of medical research.
Brian
‘Being a citizen gives you the right to vote no matter what you’ve done in life.”
Where on Earth did you get that idea? Obviously that’s not true since this article is about giving the right to vote to people who have lost it. In 34 states felons don’t even get the right to vote back immediately upon release.
dmanhart
Amen sir. Amen..
screwtop
Because way too many of them are in there for almost nothing. If you’re a whitie, and snort cocaine, nobody cares. If you’re black, and smoke a joint, WHAM – it’s jail, and no voting rights.
I’d far rather ban crack heads with swanky apartments in Manhattan from voting.
Or f***ed in the head religious weirdos, whose beliefs include some delusional notion that they can weld their religion to the constitution.
Jackrabbit
No votes for convicts gay or straight
PeteP
If Democrats really want to take back the White House in 2020, they need to stop focusing on issues like this. It’s one thing to support granting felons the right to vote after they serve their sentences, it’s another to advocate for inmates’ voting rights. I’m sorry, but this is the kind of nonsense that drives undecided voters right into the arms of the Republican party. There is so much at stake here, we have to be focused on the big picture (the White House) and stop expecting our candidates to pass unrealistic purity tests.
rbernard
you are correct – please move to the head of the line.
davegun2
Oh my god this is what I am thinking also. I will be using your argument as this comes up. There is too much at stake here to be going all left wing for prisoners. This article references issues about gay prisoners that has nothing to do with voting. It’s just dramatic bull crap to get people confused and divided. Stay focused people.
Brian
It seems like a lot of people think that going even more extreme left is the ticket to get a Democrat into the White House and that blows my mind. Trump being elected should have shown that that is not what a huge portion of the country wants, and the universal pointing and laughing at everything that comes out of AOC’s mouth should really drive the point home.
Like it or not, our country has been doing really, really well economically since Trump took over. The job market is better than it’s been in decades. People of any political party who are feeling more financially secure than they have felt in a long time are not necessarily going to be thrilled by the concept of things like paying for everyone else’s healthcare or college, or radical, expensive environmental causes.
You don’t win elections by appealing only to the people who are going to vote for you no matter what (AKA Pelosi’s glass of water theory), you win by convincing the people who could go either way to go your way. And I doubt too many of those people are very concerned about prisoner’s voting rights.
And finally, let’s not pretend that any of these politicians care about prisoner’s voting rights. This is a Democrat cause because they know most of these prisoners would vote Democrat. If it were mostly prisoners who had bombed abortion clinics, they wouldn’t give it a second thought.
Will L
Well stated!
HmphGay
Thank you!
Adam
I get that you guys aren’t an actual news outlet, but this may be your most irresponsible headline ever. If you’re working for the Sanders campaign, just come out and say that. Otherwise, give this story — and Mayor Buttigieg — the balance and perspective they deserve.
Adam
Thank you for changing it. The new one is far more balanced.
Brian
Wow, they actually listened to you? Where were you when they were running headlines about Jussie’s “attempted lynching”?
MJH
Brain :
economy was getting back on track the last 2yrs of Obama ..after he bailed out the crooks on wall street , banks,and auto industry ….so really Trump has been riding the wave
tdmart007
First, he’s not denying anyones voting right b/c inmates already can’t vote while incarcerated excepts for I think 3 states and (for felons) once you’ve served your time, met all the conditions of your sentence and paid all court fines/fees you are eligible to re-register to vote. Here’s the thing tho when your incarcerated your stripped of your rights. Heck I’d prefer to have my 4th amendment right….I’d be like “No Mr. CO you cannot search my cell for no reason!!!”
DarkZephyr
Great job Queerty. Lets eat our own. After all, we can afford it, right? We aren’t currently in need of a unified front against the Trump administration or anything.
Juanjo
I agree that once a felon has served his time and is under no court supervision, he should have all his civil rights restored, the same is NOT true for anyone serving a sentence. Buttigieg says people serving sentences should not be allowed to vote and I agree. This is NOT an issue for anyone but idiots and Bernie Bots but those are really the same thing.
Ronbo
That name-calling makes you seem sooooooo smart.
Aromaeus
Rights are rights. There are already criminals voting the only difference is the law hasn’t caught up with them. The US is also behind many other first world countries on this issue. Let’s also not forget that the vast majority of felons we are talking about are people with nonviolent drug offenses. You can use buzzwords like “boston marathon bomber” but the reality is when you start putting caveats on peoples’ rights you create a slippery slope where they are left open to be picked away at. Mayor Pete is not a progressive, just another neoliberal establishment shill that will cost us the white house if he is given the nomination. Here me now, quote me later.
AgainNagain
Your comment just demonstrate why the extreme right AND the extreme left always pick the most unsuitable candidate for the elections. They delusionally believe that the rest of the country, which always stays in the center left or right, will vote their way. Any opinions that differ from their crazy belief system is unacceptable to them. They, both the ultra left and ultra right, are the most dangerous people in a democratic society.
truthseeker
@Aromaeus
So do you support giving felons their 2nd amendment rights and letting them have guns?
iamru2
Thankfully we are not like the other countries you mention!
MJH
actually it is to bad for the light offender….but u cannot start the slippery slope ..hence, i agree with the Pete on this one
GreenHilDun
I think it’s more you give prisoners the right to vote, suddenly they are voting how the prison management companies want them to vote. They are a special population and should be protected from this abuse until they are under their own free will like when their sentence is completed.
Kieran
Mayor Pete is right. I don’t want Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev allowed to vote in our elections. That’s just crazy. I like the idea that Pete Buttigieg is a liberal with sanity.
Mikey E
I support Mayor Pete 100% on this. Peopel who are doing time for breaking the law shouldn’t be able to participate in making the law. Also, people in pre-trial detention don’t lose their voting rights, so that part of the post above is pure BS.
Also, there’s this:
“1.9 percent are LGBTQ — that’s 43,700 queer people”
Um, how can you call the same group of people “LGBTQ” – where the Q means “queer” and then also call them queer? If they are all queer, then they would all be covered by the Q in LGBTQ and we wouldn’t need LGBT. Jeez, it’s like the author puts no thought into how he writes.
passingthru
Prisoners should not be allowed to vote. That’s what I think. Plain and simple.
iamru2
That fascist Bernie Sanders is the only candidate so far who wants violent incarcerated criminals to have the right to vote! Hopefully he is the only one and the others don’t cave to the SJW fascists!
Hussain-TheCanadian
The majority of people in jail in the United States are there due to non-violent crimes; these people, these Americans, should have not lost their rights to vote at all, and reinstating these rights is the least the federal government can do.
Loss of freedom is punishment enough, the person is either a citizen or isnt, and voting is either a right or a privilege, you cant pick and choose.
Brian
Nobody is picking and choosing. You lose a lot of rights when you go to jail, not just the right to vote.
Hussain-TheCanadian
Well, personally speaking, I think non-violent offenders should retain their right to vote, especially if democracy is supposed to be integral to American society. It’s quite enough that they are paying their debt to society by forfeiting their freedom, there is no logical reason as to why they shouldn’t vote.
AgainNagain
Hussain, do you understand how absolutely essential not to have Trump re-elected in 2020? We can’t afford to lose this one again so I don’t care if a few criminals can’t vote from the jail but I do mind when people like you try to impose your liberal purity test on the rest of the country.
Brian
One logical reason is what gets classified as “non violent offenders”. California’s Pro 57 exploited the hell out of that, as the list of violent felonies they go by is missing a whole lot of violent crimes, so they get classified as non violent by default.
Hussain-TheCanadian
@ AgainNagain
2.3 Million human beings are not a few Nathan, they are citizens of your country, and 90% of them are not in a cage because they killed, raped, or beat someone to an inch of their life, the majority are there due to drugs, theft, and other non-violent offences – you know this, and don’t throw the orange chimp at me, Canada is also a victim of his tariffs, we haven’t forgotten that. You want to beat him, good, it aint “mayor Pete” who’s going to do it.
@ Brain
Point taken, so a reform is in order?
Brian
But why would they want to reform it if it gives them bigger numbers of whatever they’re trying to accomplish? Prop 57 was about paroling non violent offenders, by keeping the list as is they had a lot more eligible people and could use the statistics to crow about how many non violent offenders were unnecessarily imprisoned. It can easily be used as a tool to advance an agenda.
Hussain-TheCanadian
Who is they, and what is their agenda?
Brian
“They” is whoever is trying to give voting rights to prisoners. Their agenda is to get more Democrat votes because they think that most prisoners will vote democrat. The fewer people excluded, the more votes they would get.
Prop 57’s agenda was to release as many prisoners as possible to relieve CA prison overcrowding because that’s cheaper and easier than building more prisons.
MJH
sorry Canadian ..as i stated before
MJH
actually it is to bad for the light offender….but u cannot start tht slippery slope ..hence, i agree with the Pete on this one
Hussain-TheCanadian
@ Brain
So once the definition of “nonviolent ” is better defined, you have no problem with prisoners voting?
@ MJH
Why not? What are you afraid of?
Brian
Why are you putting words in my mouth? I didn’t say anything remotely like that. I’m perfectly fine with the status quo of letting states decide.
PinkoOfTheGange
Pretty sure those not yet convicted could request an absentee ballot.
The thing is this is a state issue; they are the ones that decides who votes.
Apolodorus
Just putting this out there: in the US you don’t exactly have parity of sentencing. A young, white, upper middle class young man gets caught by the policeman California with pot. A young, underprivileged black boy is found in possession of the in Louisiana.
One receives a caution, and gets to vote in the next day. The other is sent to jail due to a combination of institutional racism and disparate enforcement of the law in different states. He doesn’t get to vote.
You have a factual, verified problem of incarceration of certain groups in the US. But because he is not touched by this, he doesn’t even consider it. It’s not a cute look.
But who cares? He’s gay. He doesn’t have any policies. But he’s gay. And white. Gay and white. And a man 😀
AgainNagain
What do the non-violent criminals do to deserve a break? They steal, cheat, sell drugs, commit frauds and cause a lot of damage to the society. If anything, they should be served a longer sentence in jail as a punishment for their unlawful and reckless behaviors. But the bigger picture is that this is a wedge issue that the politicians have used to divide their opponents. You know, divide and conquer. But if you are smart enough, when you see a stupid bait like this (in this case, it’s from the ultra Left), you should not take it.
Brian
There shouldn’t be parity of sentencing between states. Institutional racism is certainly an issue that every state faces, but different laws in different states is one of the foundations of this country. If you don’t like the laws in Louisiana then get the f*** out of Louisiana. If you can’t or won’t do that then you better follow the laws, or figure out how not to get caught if you’re breaking them.
thomes
What are your feelings on Kamala Harris? She also came out and said she doesn’t support convicted felons in prison voting. Plus her time as prosecutor in California is being attacked by the left-wing. Would she be an acceptable candidate in your eyes?
footwork61
Meanwhile in Kentucky, Iowas and, until the Nov. election, Florida, you couldn’t vote even after getting out of prison unless you begged the governor and proved that you deserved to have that Constitutional right restored.
My motto is that voting should be at least as easy to do as buying a gun.
truthseeker
@footwork61
So you think that to vote, everyone should pass a criminal background check, purchase a license, present ID, undergo an extensive wait period?
You do realize that people who are felons cannot legally buy a gun, right?
DHT
I think disenfranchisement should be included with sentencing but should not be automatic. That is actually what most countries do. Some felons should be able to vote, some should not. The problem in this country is that so many are apathetic that a lot wouldn’t care.
MJH
i do think tht is a discussion for sure ….just not sure where to draw line…as it stands now ..for me, no to voting if serving time …once out ..all rights returned
thomes
Kamala Harris didn’t give an answer that night on the stage, but the next day she put out a clarification that she does not think that convicted felons serving time in prison should be allowed to vote. If you’re trying to make this a litmus test the only person who has spoken up in favor of that is Bernie Sanders. At least be fair about who you’re targeting.
GreenHilDun
I don’t think anyone is really considering the main issue about prisoners having the will of others forcefully subjugated on them. It needs to be looked at ethically. Prisoners are a special population, especially for voting, in much the same way as they are a special population for medical research as defined in medical ethics legislation in the United States. The tendency of others to influence their will on persons while in prison makes it dangerous for these prisoners. After, if you were deemed to have served your sentence, you should have your right restored, as a person who is again of their own free will and expected to make living decisions for themselves.
funpitt412
This is typical Democrat Plantation BS. Democrats know that the majority of people in prison are black men. (Yes, AMERICA you have tons of raciest people in power who put black men in jail.) Democrats have rules to keep blacks on their plantation with their empty promises and use fear to keep them in place. If you are in jail you should not have any voting rights.
Ronbo
This comments section is actually a tRumpapalooza. So many angry young men lookkking for their MAGA hats; yet not wanting to look like they are racist.
Brian
Bless you for calling me young.
Ronbo
@Brian.
Frankly, I didn’t think you were a man. So much bitterness, bigotry and hate seems more a RNC campaign than human.
Brian
Whatever, as long as you think I’m young.
truthseeker
@Ronbo
Fun fact. Cher tweeted that criminals should not be allowed to vote.
So in the mind of Ronbo, Cher is a MAGA hat wearing bigot
James
SOMEHOW I CANNOT IMAGINE WHY ANYONE WOULD BE INTERESTED IN THE VOTE OF THE BOSTON BOMBER.
griffnyc
I agree.
On release, voting privileges should be restored
fauxsherrrr
I think what some progressive candidates know that Pete fails to recognize is that the majority of people in prison are there because of systemic racism. Slavery didn’t end but it changed it’s form. It doesn’t take much digging to come to that conclusion.
Racism has always been rampant in this country and right now it has been lethally emboldened.
The burning of black churches, police officers murdering innocent black men without impunity, shooting up synagogues, and the relentless torture of immigrants seeking asylum.
I will not support a candidate who does not boldly defend those groups of people because he wants to appease the criminally ignorant.
“All lives matter” Pete Buttigieg does not have my vote simply because he’s handsome, intellectual, and gay.
fauxsherrrr
*with impunity