Florida: Despite Landmark Move, Coalition Challenges Limitations of Re-enfranchisement Policy The Florida Rights Restoration Coalition (FRRC), a coalition of over 40 local, state and national organizations dedicated to eradicating Florida's antiquated and discriminatory voting rights ban, has submitted a memo to the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights to propose changes to the state's disenfranchisement policy enacted in April by the Clemency Board. The coalition proposes that the state adopt a "truly automatic, paperwork-free, rights restoration process for all Floridians who have completed their sentences, with any restitution owed to be paid, but not as a precondition to rights restoration." The current policy lifts the voting ban for non-violent offenders who have completed parole and probation and have paid restitution, but individuals must wait for the Clemency Board to restore their rights - a major obstacle according to the coalition. It also stated that the new rules pose several re-entry problems, including: -Burden on individuals who have been released and completed supervision -Needlessly complex and unclear restoration rules which lead to the poor administration of voting rolls -Bureaucratic delays in processing cases National: Jena Six Case, Disenfranchisement, Examples of Nation's Racial Disparity "The state laws are so varied that from jurisdiction to jurisdiction there is no consistency on what convictions will trigger a loss of voting rights," writes Dr. Henrie M. Treadwell, director of Community Voices in a column featured on BlackNews.com. Dr. Treadwell writes of the discrepancy and racial impacts of disenfranchisement and calls for action on the part of individuals nationally. "The burden falls upon communities to push their local legislators to advocate for reinstating voting rights to prisoners and those formerly incarcerated, especially the non-violent offenders." Theodore Shaw, Director-Counsel and President of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, links racial disparities within the criminal justice system to the disenfranchisement of formerly incarcerated individuals and the Jena, LA., case in an interview published in the Oberlin Review. "[The Jena Six] is an example of the fact that racial disparities and discrimination are alive and well. While [it] is an important case, it is emblematic of a larger pattern of treatment of disparate ways of black and brown people that exist around this country ... Issues like felon disenfranchisement continue to bedevil us and will continue to bedevil us," he stated. International: High Court's Reasons Reveal 'Inconsistencies' in Constitution In August, the Australian High Court struck down a blanket ban denying all incarcerated individuals the right to vote, finding that the legislation was unlawful and unconstitutional. The Court's reasons in Roach vs. Electoral Commission and Commonwealth of Australia held that the 2006 amendments to the law were inconsistent with the system of representative democracy established by the Constitution. From 1902 to 1983, legislation banned certain prisoners from voting. Afterward, individuals sentenced for an offence punishable by imprisonment for one year were banned. Further changes to the legislation were enacted and in 2006 the Commonwealth Electoral Act was adopted disqualifying individuals serving any prison sentence from voting in federal elections. - - - - - - Help The Sentencing Project continue to bring you news and updates on disenfranchisement! Make a contribution today. Contact Information: email: [email protected], web: http://www.sentencingproject.org