Is Florida going to become a lean-D state between now and 2020?

[eric82oslo]

In my opinion, Florida will be a perfect bellwether in 2016 without Hillary on the ballot. With Hillary however, it will be lean Dem. In 2020 however, it will surely be a lean Dem already. Up until the 2000 election, Florida was trending hard towards Democrats. Then it took a hold and stayed where it was for the next 12 years. It's about high time that the intense demographic changes the state has gone through lately will cause the state to continue its past trend. Hispanics in the state have gone from voting overwhelmingly Republican (because of Cubans) to voting heavily Democratic (because of influx of non-Cuban Hispanics and younger Cubans without biases). By 2020 Florida will be 50/50, 50% white, 50% minorities. Republicans have done an extraordinary job by keeping the political status quo in the state for such a long period. Partly how they've managed this is by keeping their Jim Crow law regarding the disenfranchisement of past prisoners. As Florida is one of only 4 US states (the others being Virginia, Iowa & Kentucky) to completely withdraw the right to vote of prisoners for life, election results have been heavily rigged in favor of Republicans. This because reports show that more than 1 in 4 black men in Florida have been imprisoned sometime during their life. Blacks make up a very high percentage of Floridians, namely 15%, and increasing by a speed of 26% during the last decade. This disenfrancisement of past prisoners also heavily reduce the Hispanic vote. Charlie Christ made it a lot easier to restore voting rights for prisoners, but obviously Rick Scott, the new governor, had to reverse this new law. The same happened in Iowa, where the new Republican governor Branstad, overturned the enfranchisement law signed by Democratic governor Tom Vilsack. From Mother Jones: "According to PPI's data, a full 9 percent of Florida's voting-age population is disenfranchised because they have at one time been incarcerated. In Virginia, the figure is 6 percent." Two-thirds of the 2.6 million disenfranchised prisoners who have already completed their sentences but are barred from regaining their voting rights, live in either Florida or Virginia, according to the Prison Policy Initiative. Thus, once the next Democratic governor of Florida restores the voting rights for former prisoners, expect the Democratic share of votes to increase by a point or two in elections.

From The New York Times: "The law has been on the books since 1868, when Florida gave blacks the right to vote as a condition of the state's being readmitted to the Union after the Civil War. A new State Constitution drafted that year expanded the number of crimes that required disenfranchisement, a change that critics say was meant to affect blacks disproportionately. They also charge that this discriminatory intent of the ban persists even though the provision was re-enacted in 1968 as part of a new Constitution."

From The Guardian: "Florida holds the dubious distinction of being the nation's capital for disenfranchisement. According to the Sentencing Project, the state has stripped more than 1.5 million people of the vote because of their criminal records – about one in 10 of all adult Floridians."

From Wikipedia: "Felon disenfranchisement laws disproportionately affect communities of color as "they are disproportionately arrested, convicted, and subsequently denied the right to vote". The presence of disenfranchised community members may affect social norms related to voting. Felony disenfranchisement has the potential to affect the outcomes of election. An analysis of recent election data revealed that at least seven senatorial elections and one presidential election [2000] would have been decided differently if convicted felons had retained suffrage."

Many countries around the world allow prisoners to vote btw, even as they're still imprisoned. From Wikipedia: "Many countries allow inmates to vote. Examples include Australia, Canada, the Czech Republic, Denmark, France, Israel, Japan, Kenya, Netherlands, Norway, Peru, Poland, Romania, Serbia, Sweden, and Zimbabwe. In Germany, the law even calls on prisons to encourage prisoners to vote. Only those convicted of electoral fraud and crimes undermining the "democratic order", such as treason are barred from voting, while in prison. In Australia, where compulsory voting is practiced, the High Court of Australia in 2007 found that the Constitution enshrined a limited right to vote, which meant that citizens serving relatively short prison sentences cannot be barred from voting." The European Court on Human Rights ruled in 2005 that every prisioner has the right to vote. "By a 12-5 majority, the Court upheld voting is "a right and not a privilege" and should be available in almost all circumstances." Source: http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/europe-court-rules-prisoners-should-be-let-vote-in-elections-25960539.html

Vermont and Maine are the only US states currently allowing prisioners still serving their sentences to vote from inside their prisons.



2 Swing States That Swing on Felon Disenfranchisement: http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2012/11/swing-states-florida-virginia-felon-disenfranchisement

Felon voting laws to disenfranchise historic number of Americans in 2012: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/jul/13/felon-voting-laws-disenfranchisement

Disenfranchised Florida Felons Struggle to Regain Their Rights:
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/28/us/disenfranchised-florida-felons-struggle-to-regain-their-rights.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm

Advancement Project: http://www.advancementproject.org/issues/voting-rights-restoration

[eric82oslo]

I would say you have a much greater chance of getting Debbie Wassermann Schultz elected governor then overturning felon disenfranchisement. Even more than most other states, law and order politics has been a vote winner here.

I think we can imagine that after the Trayvon Martin debacle.

Just like the Trayvon Martin trial (or non-trial to begin with) was all about institutionalized racism and non about keeping law and order in place, the felony disenfranchisement is non about law and order either, yet all about century-old racist laws. It's remarkable though that 90% of US states have gotten ridden of such laws already (or didn't have them to begin with, or haven't yet deared to reintroduce them), so many of them - like Alabama - despite their heavily Republican majorities.

[eric82oslo]

I would say you have a much greater chance of getting Debbie Wassermann Schultz elected governor then overturning felon disenfranchisement. Even more than most other states, law and order politics has been a vote winner here.

I think we can imagine that after the Trayvon Martin debacle.

Just like the Trayvon Martin trial (or non-trial to begin with) was all about institutionalized racism and non about keeping law and order in place, the felony disenfranchisement is non about law and order either, yet all about century-old racist laws. It's remarkable though that 90% of US states have gotten ridden of such laws already (or didn't have them to begin with, or haven't yet deared to reintroduce them), so many of them - like Alabama - despite their heavily Republican majorities.

Laws were followed to the T and that's why Zimmerman got off. Otherwise, he would've got the death penalty for murder because he did murder Martin.

No reason for death penalty. It should be abolished in any case, at least all cases that don't involve mass murders. However, no matter what the reason for killing someone is, even if it's 95% accidential, unintentional or based on bad judgement, I think the vast majority agree that it's morally wrong not to get at least a short prison sentence when you happen to murder someone. It's just right for the victims, his family, closest friend, the society as a whole. In the Trayvon Martin case, all the neighbourhood eyewitnesses - at least the two I've heard speak on CNN, two white women - are absoltely sure that he killed the guy, who was both unarmed and half his body-size. In the 911 call, Zimmerman clearly tells the call center that he's following the boy. And Trayvon's mother is 100% sure that it is her son who is screaming for "Help" in the 911 call - which also is what the eye witnesses have told the police.

[eric82oslo]

I would say you have a much greater chance of getting Debbie Wassermann Schultz elected governor then overturning felon disenfranchisement. Even more than most other states, law and order politics has been a vote winner here.

I think we can imagine that after the Trayvon Martin debacle.

Just like the Trayvon Martin trial (or non-trial to begin with) was all about institutionalized racism and non about keeping law and order in place, the felony disenfranchisement is non about law and order either, yet all about century-old racist laws. It's remarkable though that 90% of US states have gotten ridden of such laws already (or didn't have them to begin with, or haven't yet deared to reintroduce them), so many of them - like Alabama - despite their heavily Republican majorities.

Laws were followed to the T and that's why Zimmerman got off. Otherwise, he would've got the death penalty for murder because he did murder Martin.

No reason for death penalty. It should be abolished in any case, at least all cases that don't involve mass murders. However, no matter what the reason for killing someone is, even if it's 95% accidential, unintentional or based on bad judgement, I think the vast majority agree that it's morally wrong not to get at least a short prison sentence when you happen to murder someone. It's just right for the victims, his family, closest friend, the society as a whole. In the Trayvon Martin case, all the neighbourhood eyewitnesses - at least the two I've heard speak on CNN, two white women - are absoltely sure that he killed the guy, who was both unarmed and half his body-size. In the 911 call, Zimmerman clearly tells the call center that he's following the boy. And Trayvon's mother is 100% sure that it is her son who is screaming for "Help" in the 911 call - which also is what the eye witnesses have told the police.

So if it was self-defense, you think someone should go to prison only to make the attacker's family feel better? I'm not saying Zimmerman was in the right, but laws were followed to a T as far as the court procedure. I agree the death penalty should be reserved for terrorists and non-American war criminals.

You don't need a gun for self defense when you're twice the size of an innocent teenager with no past criminal record and no threatening behavior on the night.