A few months ago, I got into an argument on Twitter with a right-winger over voting and taxes.
I was watching MSNBC’s Melissa Harris-Perry’s show and one segment was about felon disfranchisement.
I posed this question to my Twitter followers: Should people who have paid their debt to society still be taxed if they aren’t allowed to vote?
This question immediately attracted said right-winger, who answered yes.
We got into a short back-and-forth, which I won’t elaborate here. The crux of his belief was that if a person didn’t want their rights taken away, they shouldn’t commit a crime. Never mind that many people, black Americans especially, have been railroaded by our criminal justice system. Whatever happened to “No taxation without representation”?
This month marks the 50th anniversary of the Voting Rights Act, but the celebrations are tempered by the United States Supreme Court’s recent gutting of the landmark legislation. Despite what the majority of the justices in that case would have us believe, racism in the electoral process is still alive and well in America. Felon disfranchisement, which disproportionately impacts Americans of color, is one problem that is at the forefront of the current movement for voting rights.
States have different laws regarding incarcerated people and voting. The most draconian disfranchise for life people convicted of felonies. The most lenient allow people in prison to vote in all elections.
California is in the middle, restoring voting rights to the formerly incarcerated after they have completed their sentence and parole.
Voting rights advocates tend to frame disfranchisement in moral terms: That it is undemocratic to exclude people from participating in our democracy.
Getting back to my Twitter argument with the right-winger, I wanted to frame the issue in terms I thought conservatives would understand: Would they sympathize with an apparent anti-tax argument when it came to the formerly incarcerated? At least that right-winger didn’t. I can’t say I’m surprised because I posed the question to expose what I think was a big reason behind felon disfranchisement laws: to ensure that black Americans have little to no say in how our country’s resources, through taxes, are distributed.
The right-winger didn’t say anything about race. But he didn’t have to.
Ultimately, voting is about deciding if, when and how much to tax ourselves, where and on whom those dollars are spent.
Racism is about animosity toward other groups, but it is also about economics — keeping disfavored groups at an economic disadvantage relative to one’s own group.
What better way to take resources away from blacks and the poor, and redistribute them to whites and the affluent, by making certain behaviors criminal felonies, disproportionately targeting and arresting members of marginalized groups for those behaviors, and passing laws taking away those groups’ voting rights after conviction?
Now this may sound to some like tin-foil hat conspiracy theory. But it is no coincidence that the era of the Drug War, mass incarceration, and the right-wing anti-tax revolt began not long after President Lyndon Johnson signed the set of civil rights laws guaranteeing black Americans’ equal participation in U.S. democracy.
Ms. Moore, president of the Culver City Democratic Club, may be contacted at President@CulverCityDemocraticClub.com
