Felon voting bill goes to Florida governor amid outcry | TribLIVE.com
U.S./World

Felon voting bill goes to Florida governor amid outcry

Associated Press
1113825_web1_1113825-8d876a10e7444166b58d4eefa39486ea
Sen. Jeff Brandes, R-St. Petersburg, right, confers with Rep. James Grant, R-Tampa as the senate debates on a felons voting rights bill which they sponsor during session Thursday May 2, 2019, in Tallahassee, Fla. (AP Photo/Steve Cannon)

TALLAHASSEE, Fla. — Florida felons will have to pay court-ordered financial obligations if they want their voting rights restored under a bill sent to Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis on Friday that would implement a voter-approved constitutional amendment.

The bill, though, caused outrage among Democrats who say Republicans are adding hurdles that don’t reflect the spirit in which voters approved allowing most felons to vote once they’ve completed their sentences. The amendment was approved with 64.5 percent of the vote and excludes murderers and sex offenders from the voting restoration rights.

“I believe Floridians are smart. I believe Floridians knew exactly what they were doing,” said Democratic Rep. Al Jacquet. “White, black, Hispanic, women, male, every Floridian understanding the value of their voice, the value of their vote. But we sit here and we begin to say, ‘Well, if you want to regain it, you should do this.’”

The ballot language on the amendment said rights would be restored after all terms of a sentence are completed. Republicans said that means court costs, restitution, fees and fines imposed by a judge. Democrats have said financial burdens shouldn’t be a barrier to voting rights restoration, especially if a judge converts them to a civil judgment.

Jacquet and other Democrats argued that the original intent of the felon voting ban was to repress the minority vote, because minorities historically have been disproportionately convicted of felonies.

“Why did we take it away in the first place? Why did we take it?” Jacquet asked. “If we determine which individuals or groups to target, we can easily sideline an entire group of voters.”

Democrats were also upset that the amendment implementation was attached at the last minute to a bill with bipartisan support that dealt with other voting issues. The Senate made those changes Thursday before approving the bill.

“I was up on the elections bill. I can’t support it now,” said Democratic Rep. Mike Gottlieb. “The spirit of the amendment was to enfranchise as many returning citizens as possible … I don’t think this product does that.”

The elections bill the amendment implementation was attached to is aimed at streamlining ballot-counting in the state’s sometimes-chaotic elections, months after tightly contested governor and U.S. Senate races prompted recounts marred by fraud accusations and malfunctioning vote machines.

It would extend the period that absentee ballots can be requested from 35 days ahead of the election to 40 days. It would also move up the deadline for requesting such ballots from 6 days ahead of the election to 10 days. Election officials would have until eight days before the election to mail out the ballots. The measure also calls for mandatory training in signature verification for election staff and requires election supervisors to contact voters “as soon as practicable” if a problem with a signature is discovered.

But the debate was dominated by the felon voting rights language when it passed on the last day to consider legislation other than the state budget.

The bill does allow other pathways for felons to have financial obligations forgiven beyond simply paying them. Among the options would be to have a victim forgive the repayment of restitution or to have a judge convert financial obligations to community service.

Republican Rep. James Grant defended the language on restoring voting rights, and angrily disputed that the motive was to suppress voting rights. Grant also said he agrees with Democrats that the amendment implementation shouldn’t have been attached to the elections bill.

“I think it’s a shame,” Grant said. “We can agree that I’m sad too.”

Categories: News | World
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.