This document provides an overview of a research paper that examines whether felony disenfranchisement laws constitute a form of racial discrimination against African Americans. It begins with an abstract that outlines the paper's objectives to establish the relationship between these laws and racial discrimination, and determine if the laws should be repealed or amended. The next sections provide background on the problem formulation, research question, and operational definitions. The literature review then summarizes previous studies that have approached this issue qualitatively and quantitatively, finding that these laws disproportionately impact minority populations and may violate constitutional rights. Demographic data on incarceration rates is also presented to argue the laws have a discriminatory effect.

1. Running Head: Felony Disenfranchisement Laws: A form of
Racial Discrimination against African Americans 39
Running Head: Felony Disenfranchisement Laws: A form of
Racial Discrimination against African Americans
Table of Contents
Abstract………………………………………………………………
……………………..pg.4
Problem
Formulation…………………………………………………………
……………..pg.5

2. Introduction…………………………………………………………
……………………….pg.5
Problem
Statement……………………………………………………………
……………..pg.6
Research
Question………………………………………………………………
…………...pg.6
Independent/Dependent
Variable…………………………………………………………...pg.
7
Literature
Review………………………………………………………………
…………....pg.7
Research
Design…………………………………………………………………
…………..pg.16
Methodology…………………………………………………………
……………………...pg.16
Sample
Population……………………………………………………………
……………..pg.17
Instrument……………………………………………………………
……………………...pg.17
Reliability and
Validity………………………………………………………………
……..pg.18
Data Analysis and
Findings………………………………………………………………
…………………….pg.18
Introduction…………………………………………………………
………………………..pg.19
Demographics………………………………………………………
………………………..pg.19
Tables…………………………………………………………………
……………………...pg.21

3. Conclusion……………………………………………………………
………………………pg.22
References……………………………………………………………
………………………pg.23
Appendix………………………………………………………………
……………………pg.26
Code
Book…………………………………………………………………
………………..pg.27
Abstract
This paper addresses the controversial topic of convicted
criminal’s fundamental rights to vote due to felony
disenfranchisement laws. America being the land of the free one
would assume everyone could exercise his or her right to vote
no matter the circumstances of criminal status or history. The
study will clearly dissect and uncover reasonable truth
regarding felony disenfranchisement laws and their possible
racial discriminative attribute; the following are the objectives

4. that this study sets out to achieve. To establish the relationship
between felony disenfranchisement laws and racial
discrimination. To determine whether the felony
disenfranchisement laws should be repealed or amended they
are subdivided into general objective and specific objectives.
The disenfranchisement laws infringe upon convicted minorities
more so than convicted whites to racially discriminate against a
group of people. The mass incarceration of minorities is directly
affected by the disenfranchisement laws preventing them to
vote. Exploratory study uses quantitative data to emphasize the
political marginalization of African Americans of Felony
disenfranchisement laws and how they may be racially
discriminatory against African Americans.
Problem Formulation
Introduction
The suspension of individual’s voting rights upon
conviction is quite controversial as it appears to violate the
fundamental right to vote. However, the most contentious issue
arises when the felony disenfranchisement laws appear to
discriminate against racial minorities. Numerous cases have
been filed and heard regarding racial discrimination by the
felony disenfranchisement laws and in almost all the cases, the
plaintiff lost the case (Manza & Uggen, 2008). Felon
disenfranchisement laws disproportionately affect ethnic
minority communities on a national level. A higher rate of
incarceration among the black and Latino populations leads
directly to higher disenfranchisement rates (Isler, 2000).

5. Nationwide, over 13 percent of black adult males are denied the
right to vote, and black men make up 36 percent of the total
disenfranchised population. In other words, although black
people make up only 13.5 percent of the total U.S. population,
more than one third of disenfranchised Americans are black
(Cutting, 2016).
Nationwide police profiling and over-sentencing of members of
minority populations negatively influences communities that
already live in poor conditions as a result of discriminatory
legislation, such as districting and strict public. Cheryl Wertz of
the New Immigrant Community Empowerment organization and
the Unlock the Block coalition observed, “A collection of
decisions are made by a collection of people without a very
good idea of education and poverty.” Prisoner
disenfranchisement that occurs as a result of over-sentencing
relieves politicians of constituent pressure to address the needs
of this largely poor, uneducated, minority population (Ini,
2006). Profiling and over-sentencing, allows inequity to make
its way into the criminal justice system, whose policies act as
powerful tools to keep minority communities in a perpetual
state of poverty and disempowerment. Ron Hayduk, a Political
Science professor at Borough of Manhattan Community College
and former social worker, characterized the racial inequalities
of disenfranchisement law in the following manner: "mass
incarceration of minorities is definitely mean-spirited in content
and effect."
Research Question
Are felony disenfranchisement laws a form of racial
discrimination against African Americans? Is there any
correlation between felony disenfranchisement laws and racial
discrimination? Have felony disenfranchisement laws been used
to discriminate citizens on racial grounds? Should the felony
disenfranchisement laws be repealed, amended or upheld? The
purpose of this paper is to show how felony disenfranchisement
laws are racially discriminative, how they single out people of
color more and how they have little to no effect on whites.

6. These felony laws infringe upon the fundamental constitutional
rights and should be repealed. This paper focuses on the most
fundamental democratic right: the right to vote. What does
disenfranchisement mean for some groups? And what does our
willingness to disenfranchise people mean about American
democracy? Despite public opinion in favor of re-enfranchising
ex-felons, legislation is slow to act. Both disenfranchisement
and the social structures that perpetuate discrimination must be
challenged in order to make the United States a truly democratic
country. This research will be conducted with scholastic
journals, interviews, surveys, and data from Rust College and
University of Memphis students. The surveys will consist of 20
questions that are neutral to all races.
Operational Definition
Felony disenfranchisement laws: these are laws that nullify the
right to vote of an individual convicted of a criminal offence
with some states applying the laws to all crimes while other
states apply them to capital offences. Racial discrimination: the
unfair treatment or distribution of benefits to individuals based
on their skin color and origin. Minority Races: These are any
non-white races residing in the USA and include African-
Americans, American-Indians, Native-Hawaiians, Asians,
Hispanic among others.
Independent/Dependent Variable
The independent variable is Felony disenfranchisement laws;
and the dependent variable is racial discriminate against
Americans. Other variables that are involved deal with
percentage of prison population, race, rights restored by state
and percentage of the country’s total population.
Literature Review
Previous studies conducted on felony disenfranchisement and
racial discrimination approached the issue both qualitatively
and quantitatively. Qualitative approach has made the
constitution the center of the study whereby, loopholes and

7. conflicts that arise from disenfranchisement laws have been the
basis of the study. An example of a case that resulted to public
outcry is Richardson vs. Ramirez (1974) case heard by the US
Supreme Court. This was a case filed in protest to the
restoration of the individual voting rights upon completion of
sentence. It was argued that the state of California violated
section one of the 14th amendment that guarantees equal
protection by the law for all people. The state of California, like
many other states base restoration of voting rights upon
payment restitution and legal fines. According to these studies,
this is a form of discrimination on grounds of wealth status. It
is argued that this in actual sense is a racial discrimination
owing to the fact that the white population is wealthier than the
minority races. The study further states that restoration of
voting rights based on payment of fines violates the 24th
Amendment to the US constitution that states that no individual
should denied voting rights for failure to pay any form of taxes,
(Marc, 2006).
Another public outcry regarding felony disenfranchisement is
with regard to what is known as “drug-war weapon”. Studies
indicate that felony disenfranchisement laws relating to drug
crimes bar individuals forever from voting. The study that cited
this as a proof for racial discrimination by disenfranchisement
laws indicated that about one million non-violent ex-convicts
who are neither on parole nor probation, majority being African
Americans, are permanently barred from voting, (Jeff,
Christopher, McKnight, 2006).
The above claims were supported by statistics obtained from
the justice system regarding prisoner demographic figures.
There has been public outcry regarding racial disparities when it
comes to number of arrests, prosecution and the eventual
conviction. The studies indicate that out of the arrests made, the
percentage prosecution is higher for the minority races as
compared to the whites. This is supported by the fact that the
prisoners’ statistics show that 67% of the prisoners are from
minority races. These figures will however be analyzed further

8. in the empirical review section (Brewer, M. R., & Nancy, H. A.
2008).
All the above scenarios have been argued to favor the white
race and also violate fundamental voting rights of the
individuals affected. Among the key issues cited by previous
studies that culminate to racial discrimination and infringement
to the fundamental constitutional rights of individuals are;
Selective application of the disenfranchisement laws. This
refers to the partisan enforcement of the disenfranchisement
laws thereby favoring a particular group of individuals. The
studies further reiterate that in Kentucky, Virginia and Florida,
1 in every 5 African Americans are affected. This implies bias
in the application of these laws, (Rand, 2013)
"There is enough discrimination against us, and feeling
alienated leads to recidivism. I served my sentence. I paid my
debt to society. Why am I still doing time?" - Perry Hopkins,
convicted felon and current community organizer for
Communities United, talking about voting rights in Maryland.
Racial discrimination has been meted on African Americans
under the pretext of flawed felony laws. The discrimination has
taken various forms in all spheres of life for this affected group
including economic, social and political spectra (Behrens,
Uggen, & Manza, 2003).
Many studies have shown that voting rights are still a highly
contested issue in America across all the states at a varying
extent (Brewer & Nancy, 2008). Many states are passing strict
laws with regard to voting rights that make it nearly impossible
for the minority population especially African Americans to
politically exercise their fundamental democratic rights. For
instance, it is extremely difficult for a former convict with no
parole to serve and who has committed to lead a reformed life
to exercise this fundamental right under these flawed felony
laws. It is four times less likely for a former Black convict to
exercise his or her democratic rights than the Whites in the
United States. The states with most stringent restrictions for the
ex-convicts include Alabama, Arizona, Florida, Nebraska,

9. Nevada, Tennessee, Virginia and Wyoming being the leading
contributing immensely to the staggering 5.89 million African
Americans with no voting rights owing to their earlier criminal
records (Manza & Uggen, 2008).
Moreover, most of these aforementioned states have shown
increasing tendencies to impose a lifetime ban blocking the
Black ex-convict from participating in political course including
enlisting as potential voters. Few states, for instance, Minnesota
have not entirely banned these former convict from voting.
However, the ex-convict must complete serving their parole
after which they may be allowed to vote. Vermont and Maine
are the only states that allow convicts to cast absentee ballots
while they are in prison serving their jail terms. This pattern of
voter suppression under flawed felony laws have locked out
more than 4.5 million Americans most of whom are African
American voters.
Concerted efforts have been put in place especially by the
Republican States which lead with the African American
populations and Latinos, all of which have history of
suppression of voters on criminal grounds. These have the long
term effect of changing voting landscape in America. The states
agitating to amend some clauses of voting rights acts by
supreme court in these states with voting suppression normally
faces legal bureaucratic ball rolling in overturning the
controversial felony laws. Most of these laws violate individual
constitutional rights and discriminate mostly against the black
community. These laws have mostly disenfranchised the
African-Americans ex-convict community from actively
participating in politics either as voters or contenders casting
doubts whether there is a veiled racism in these felony laws
(Chin, 2002).
Furthermore, restricting felons’ voting rights have the potential
of perpetuating racial disparities in the course of discharging
criminal justice. It is not uncommon to find young African
Americans being over subjected to excessive police profiling
and unnecessary police stop search tactics as compared to their

10. White counterparts. Similarly, drug convict African Americans
are severely punished more than the White defendants both the
same magnitude of the drug offence committed (Ewald, 2002).
The ex-convict who completed their jail terms find themselves
yet in another problem if they cannot find jobs besides having
no prospects to vote in the future. Such fundamental rights are
necessary for these former convicts to turn around their lives
(Simpson, John , & Hawthorne, 1976). These economic and
political disenfranchisement against Blacks under felony laws
have been seen by most critics as current and future potential
cause of racial tension among the Black and White communities
(Khalilah, 2003).
Currently, most of the felony disenfranchisement laws exist in
books in some states. For instance, District of Columbia has
felony disenfranchisement law on its books. Some states have
made a forward step in restoring franchise to felons who have
finished serving their jail sentences, however, most of the states
have continued to hold fast onto and adopt laws that prevent
felons from voting during their terms in prison (Behrens,
Uggen, & Manza, 2003). In Massachusetts, convicts were
allowed to vote until 2000 when the Bay state’s voter were
subjected to a ballot question on the proposed state’s
constitutional appeal which took away the incarcerated felons
franchise. Such amended received approval of majority with
60% voting yes and 34% voting no. Similarly, in Utah;
incarcerated felons had the voting right up to 1998 when major
changes took place which saw amendment of the constitution to
infringe on the felons’ franchise. Such proposition was passed
by acclamation with 82% in support and a very small percentage
opposing such amendments (Behrens, Uggen, & Manza, 2003).
Different states have different ways of restoring voting rights
for ex-convicts. Maine and Vermont remained the only states
that with unrestricted voting rights for felons. These states
allow convicts to vote during incarceration, through absentee
ballot and also after the end of conviction terms. However,
some states restore voting rights to convicts after they released

11. or completion of incarceration. Such states include some
fourteen states and Colombia. Some states have their
disenfranchisement on convict ending after completion of
probation by these convicted criminals. Nineteen states require
either incarceration or parole to be complete together with
probation in order to restore these fundamental voting rights to
felons. Conventionally, some states have disenfranchisement
laws that relate to the magnitude of the crime committed by the
convict. Under these laws, some offenders may regain back
their voting rights on completion of incarceration, parole and
probation. In this case offenders are required to file petition
that in most cases may be denied. For instance, in Alabama,
convicts with moral turpitude felony are denied voting rights,
(Simpson, John , & Hawthorne, 1976)
There is little doubt as to whether states have an equally
substantial vested interest in preventing felons, especially those
still incarcerated and under probation from voting in order to
potentially to tide elections results in their favor (Tomkovicz,
1994). Hence, the legitimate concern over the voting rights as
compelled by lobby group in disenfranchising felons cannot
outweigh any supposed racial impact. Indeed, the Framers of the
Reconstruction Amendments found most states authority to
disenfranchise felons to be of such paramount significance that
they willingly permit such motives through the Fourteenth
Amendment. The Supreme Court allows states to function
independently by separating the independent existence of the
States and their governments the power to determine within the
limits of the Constitution the qualifications of their own voters
for state, including these African Americans (Clegg, 2001).
There has been some progress in the recent past in fighting
against the felony disenfranchisement laws by some lobby
groups (Shapiro, 1993). In 2009, some non-native Americans
serving probation sentences were denied the privilege of voting
in the 2008 presidential elections and they filed suit against
government officials with the consequence of South Dakota
legislature amending the law which expanded space for

12. enjoyment of civil rights which came to effect in 2012. Under
these new laws, the convict loses the voting rights until one has
completed his or her full sentence including parole and
probation. Alabama, on the other hand, has received heavy
criticism regarding uneven application of the State’s felony
disenfranchisement law; however, such criticism has been
dismissed on the guise of lacking enough jurisdictional grounds
(Manza, Brook, & Uggen, 2004).
Similar incidents have been seen in Washington state
were several African Americans have waged felony conviction
challenge to the State disenfranchisement laws under the
framework of the Fourth and Fifteenth Amendments of the
American constitution and section 2 of the Voting Right Act of
1965 which provide against racial discrimination in fundamental
voting rights. Such cases are normally turned down by the
courts ageing out the appellants’ constitutional claims without
hard evidence which include clear proofs intentional
discrimination in the State’s criminal justice system (Uggen,
Manza, & Thompson, 2006). Such bureaucratic standard
intentional discrimination is normally hard to prove in court,
hence further making the felony disenfranchisement laws tools
of racial discrimination against African Americans.
There is significant national momentum towards restoring
voting rights to people with criminal convictions (Pinaire,
Heumann, & Bilotta, 2002). Over the past two decades, more
than 20 states have taken action both legislative or/ and
executive to allow more people with past criminal convictions
to vote, with intention aimed at getting the fundamental voting
right sooner in a convenient manner, or for the felons to access
that right more easily than it used to be in the past. Several
initiatives are being put in place toward realization of those
voting rights for the minorities especially African Americans.
For example, the Brennan Center has been put in place to acts
as legal counsel in the broader movement to restore voting
rights to minorities with convictions cases (Preuhs, 2001). The
Center scrutinizes state constitutions, statutes, and

13. administrative rules to understand and interpret felon convicts
who are permitted to vote under what circumstances and how
these rights might be expanded progressively to achieve
universal suffrage. This provides useful analyses at crucial
stages in the legislative processes to push for reforms in felony
disenfranchisement laws. These analyses are also key in
informing the general proposals for reform intended. In New
York and Alabama, the Brennan Center conducted many surveys
of local boards of elections, which documented that election
officials were disenfranchising citizens who were legally
eligible to vote. The Brennan Center then worked with election
officials for the betterment of their practices and created
education materials to ensure that citizens with past convictions
are aware of their voting rights (Rodger, George , & Kenneth,
2006).
Reform efforts in reforming felony disenfranchisement laws. In
last few decades, there have been and improving trend in lifting
the felony disenfranchisement restrictions, including procedures
for applying for the restoration of civil rights for African
Americans who had fulfilled their punishments for felonies by
either finishing their parole or incarceration (Harvey, 1994). In
2007, Florida's Republican Governor successfully agitated for
change geared towards elimination of felony disenfranchisement
laws making it easier for most convicted felons to regain their
voting rights much faster after serving their sentences and
probation terms (Eisenstein & Jacob, 1977). Consequence, by
2008 about one million of the felons who had previously been
denied right to vote, and who would have otherwise been
disenfranchised under the older rules had their voting rights
restored to them. From 2008, less severe disenfranchisement
rules have been passed in majority of the states (Ewald C. A.,
2009). However, felons may not apply to the court for
restoration of voting rights until seven years after completion of
sentence, probation and parole as seen in most Republican
states (Fellner & Marc, 1998). In 2005, Democratic governor in
Iowa issued an executive order restoring the right to vote for all

14. persons who had completed their supervision. Iowa's Supreme
Court upheld mass re-enfranchisement of convicted felons in
order to restore their voting rights. More, states disenfranchise
felons for various period of time following their conviction.
With except of Maine and Vermont, every state prohibits felons
from voting while still in prison (Khalilah , 2003). The study
therefore, attempt address the gaps by attempting to find
corrective measures against felony disenfranchisement laws
against minority especially the African American (Ansley,
1991).
TABLE 1(The sentencing Project, 2008)
States
# disenfranchised African Americans
% of Felons Who are African American
% of African American men who are disenfranchised
# disenfranchised men
% of men who are white
% of White men who are di
Alabama
42,072
66.4
73,429
33.3
6.3
Florida
109,063
31.2
169,931
55.4
42.6
3.5
Mississippi
81,700
75.3

15. 28.6
9,088
24.2
1.1
Virginia
40,852
66.5
25.0
25,792
32.6
1.4
Texas
156,610
44.5
425,382
28.3
20.8
7.9
Iowa
10,746
24.2
26.5
15,157
68.9
1.5
States
Disenfranchised
Hispanic men
% of felons who are Hispanic
% of Hispanic men disenfranchised
Alabama
5
0.02

16. 0.0007
Florida
5,884
9.2
.219
Mississippi
57
.4
.144
Virginia
127
.4
.039
Texas
37,427
27.9
.561
Iowa
310
4.5
.376

17. TABLE 1: Shows disenfranchisement rates for men by race
and ethnicity this graph shows the number of disenfranchised
African Americans also the percent of felons who are African
American. These 13 states have been chosen to do this study
based upon the disenfranchised rate of race and ethnicity.
Research Design & Methodology
Design
This Research is an exploratory study that uses quantitative data
to emphasize the relationship of Felony disenfranchisement
laws and how they may be racially discriminatory against
African Americans. For this study the independent variable is
Felony disenfranchisement laws. The dependent variable is
racial discrimination against African Americans.
Methodology
The Purpose of this research is to examine Felony
disenfranchisement laws and racial discrimination against
African Americans. The independent variable is Felony
disenfranchisement laws. The dependent variable is racial
discrimination against African Americans. This is an
exploratory study that will examine disenfranchisement laws
and the correlation between that and racial discrimination
against African Americans. Racial discrimination has been
meted on African Americans under the pretext of flawed felony
laws. The discrimination has taken various forms in all spheres
of life for this affected group including economic, social and
political spectra (Behrens, Uggen, & Manza, 2003).
Many studies have shown that voting rights are still highly
contested issue in America across all the states at a varying
extent (Brewer & Nancy, 2008). Many states are passing strict

18. laws with regard to voting rights that make it nearly impossible
for the minority especially the African Americans to politically
exercise their fundamental democratic rights. For instance, it is
extremely difficult for a former convict with no parole to serve
and who has committed to lead a reformed life to exercise this
fundamental right under these flawed felony laws. It is four
times less likely for a former Black convict to exercise their
democratic rights than the Whites in the United States.
Moreover, most of these aforementioned states have shown
increasing tendencies to impose a lifetime ban blocking the
Black ex-convict from participating in political course including
enlisting as potential voters
Sample Population
There were 23 Rust college students who participated in filling
out the survey questionnaire; some of the students came from
the Memphis metropolitan statistical area. And some were from
the Marshall County. The participants were African American
and Hispanics the study used. A non-probability sampling based
on availability the study was conducted at the Library, in the
Bcs lab and also in front of the cafeteria between the hours of
12pm.-2pm.
Instrument
There are two parts to the research instrument. The first section
includes demographics of the participants. The first
demographic question asks if they are between of 18- 35+. The
second demographic question indicates race African American,
Hispanic and other. And the third demographic question about
gender.
The second section to the research shows respondents answer 20
questions relating to Felony laws in correlation to how they
racially discriminate against minorities. The participants will
have to fill in the information according to the demographics
for each question. Questionnaires consisted of questions that
examined incarceration rates of minorities knowledge about
disenfranchised felons and also general laws on voting.
Examples of the Questionnaires include: Do you know how

19. many states deny the right to vote to all individuals with felony
convictions even after they have completed their sentence? Do
you know the number of ex-offenders disenfranchised as a
result of felony laws?
Reliability and Validity
The instrument that was used in examining the findings of this
research was a survey. To analyze data, descriptive statistic
was employed. The instruments used were for the regression
analysis through which provided the correlation coefficients of
the racial prison composition and the coefficient of
determination. The descriptive statistic and tables were obtained
from SPSS statistics. The information presented purposed to
show the relationship between racial discrimination and felony
disenfranchisement laws.
Data Analysis and Findings
Introduction
The purpose of this study is to examine Felony
disenfranchisement laws and whether or not they are a form of
racial discrimination against African Americans. The
independent variable is Felony disenfranchisement laws. The
dependent variable is racial discrimination against African
Americans. The research was conducted through the method of
surveying 23 students that attend Rust College and in the
surrounding community.
Demographic
The Demographic statistical analysis resulted in age,
gender, and ethnic group. The age of the participants for this
study was 30.4% for ages (18-21) that participated and 47.8%
for ages (21-24) for ages (25-28) that participated 17.4% and
for ages (29-32+) that participated 4.3%. The Gender of the
participants there were 56.5% for the males who participated in
the study and 43.5% for the females who were participants in
the study. The Ethnic Group of the participants is as follows
African Americans were 52.2% Asians were 4.3% Hispanics

20. were 21.7% Native American made up 17.4% and there was a
4.3% again for participants who were other.
Table 1: Gender Table
Frequency
Percent
Valid Percent
Cumulative Percent
Valid
Male
13
56.5
56.5
56.5
Female
10
43.5
43.5
100.0
Total
23
100.0
100.0
Table 2: Age Table
Frequency

21. Percent
Valid Percent
Cumulative Percent
Valid
18-21
7
30.4
30.4
30.4
21-24
11
47.8
47.8
78.3
25-28
4
17.4
17.4
95.7
29-32+
1
4.3
4.3
100.0
Total
23
100.0
100.0

22. Table 3: Ethnic Group Table
Frequency
Percent
Valid Percent
Cumulative Percent
Valid
African Americans
12
52.2
52.2
52.2
Hispanic
5
21.7
21.7
73.9
Native American
4
17.4
17.4
91.3
Asian
1
4.3
4.3
95.7
Other
1
4.3
4.3
100.0

23. Total
23
100.0
100.0
Tables: 1, 2 and 3: The demographic tables provide the student
ages, gender and also ethnic groups of 23 students. It can be
seen that 13 of the respondents, or 56.5% are males and 10 of
the respondents or 43.5% are females. The age range of the
students varies from a range of eighteen to thirty two and up,
with the highest number of ages being ages 21-24 which gave
me 11(47.8%) respondents. The ethnic groups of the
respondents were 12 (52.2%) African Americans, 5 (21.7%)
Hispanic, 4 (17.4%) Native Americans, 1 (4.3%) respondent for
Asians and 1 (4.3%) as others which gave me a total of 23
(100%) for ethnic groups.
Table 4: Cross-Tabulation of Ethnicity and Question 6
Ethnic Group * ShouldConvictsLoseRightToVote Cross
tabulation
ShouldConvictsLoseRightToVote
Total
Yes
No
Neutral
Ethnic Group
African Americans

24. Count
7
4
1
12
% of Total
30.4%
17.4%
4.3%
52.2%
Hispanic
Count
2
3
0
5
% of Total
8.7%
13.0%
0.0%
21.7%
Native American
Count
2
2
0
4
% of Total

25. 8.7%
8.7%
0.0%
17.4%
Asian
Count
1
0
0
1
% of Total
4.3%
0.0%
0.0%
4.3%
Other
Count
0
0
1
1
% of Total
0.0%
0.0%
4.3%
4.3%
Total
Count
12
9

26. 2
23
% of Total
52.2%
39.1%
8.7%
100.0%
Table 4: This table shows the response to survey Question
3(Should ex- offenders lose their right to vote permanently even
after their debt is paid to society?). There were 12(52.2%)
African-Americans respondents, of which 7(30.4%) said yes,
4(17.4%) said no, and the other 1(4.3%) said neutral, 5(21.7%)
Hispanics 0 said neutral 3(13.0%) said No and 2(8.7%) said yes.
4(17.4%) Native Americans 0 said neutral, 2(8.7%) said No and
2(8.7%) of them said yes, 1(4.3%) Asian and he answered yes,
Only 1 out of the Other category said Neutral, which gave me a
total of 23(100%) respondents for my Bivariate Analysis chart.
Table 5 Multivariate Analysis
Ethnic Group * Age * ShouldConvictsLoseRightToVote Cross
tabulation
ShouldConvictsLoseRightToVote
Age
Total
18-21
21-24
25-28
29-32+
Yes
Ethnic Group
African Americans
Count
2

27. 5
0
7
% of Total
16.7%
41.7%
0.0%
58.3%
Hispanic
Count
0
1
1
2
% of Total
0.0%
8.3%
8.3%
16.7%
Native American
Count
1

28. 1
0
2
% of Total
8.3%
8.3%
0.0%
16.7%
Asian
Count
0
1
0
1
% of Total
0.0%
8.3%
0.0%
8.3%
Total
Count
3
8

29. 1
12
% of Total
25.0%
66.7%
8.3%
100.0%
No
Ethnic Group
African Americans
Count
1
1
1
1
4
% of Total
11.1%
11.1%
11.1%
11.1%
44.4%
Hispanic
Count
2
0
1

30. 0
3
% of Total
22.2%
0.0%
11.1%
0.0%
33.3%
Native American
Count
1
1
0
0
2
% of Total
11.1%
11.1%
0.0%
0.0%
22.2%
Total
Count
4
2
2
1

31. 9
% of Total
44.4%
22.2%
22.2%
11.1%
100.0%
Neutral
Ethnic Group
African Americans
Count
0
1
1
% of Total
0.0%
50.0%
50.0%
Other
Count
1
0
1

32. % of Total
50.0%
0.0%
50.0%
Total
Count
1
1
2
% of Total
50.0%
50.0%
100.0%
Total
Ethnic Group
African Americans
Count
3
6
2
1
12

33. % of Total
13.0%
26.1%
8.7%
4.3%
52.2%
Hispanic
Count
2
1
2
0
5
% of Total
8.7%
4.3%
8.7%
0.0%
21.7%
Native American
Count
2
2
0
0
4

34. % of Total
8.7%
8.7%
0.0%
0.0%
17.4%
Asian
Count
0
1
0
0
1
% of Total
0.0%
4.3%
0.0%
0.0%
4.3%
Other
Count
0
1
0
0
1

35. % of Total
0.0%
4.3%
0.0%
0.0%
4.3%
Total
Count
7
11
4
1
23
% of Total
30.4%
47.8%
17.4%
4.3%
100.0%
Table 5: This table shows multivariate analysis between age,
ethnicity and question which asked: Should ex- offenders lose
their right to vote permantely even after their debt is paid to
society? There were 12(52.2%) African-Americans respondents,
of which 7(30.4%) said yes, 4(17.4%) said no, and the other
1(4.3%) said neutral, 5(21.7%) Hispanics, 0 said neutral
3(13.0%) said No and 2(8.7%) said yes. 4(17.4%) Native
Americans 0 said neutral, 2(8.7%) said No and 2(8.7%) of them
said yes, 1(4.3%) Asian and he answered yes, Only 1(4.3%) out
of the respondents were neutral

36. Those between the ages 18-21 there were 7(30.4%)
respondents, between the ages of 21-24 there were 11(47.8%)
respondents, between the ages of 25-28 there were 4(17.4%)
respondents, between 29-32+ there were 1(4.3%) respondent.
There were a total of 12(52.2%) of African Americans who
agreed that convicts should lose their right to vote. Between
those ages of 18-21 there were 2(8.7%) African Americans
agreed and 1(4.3%) for Native American. Between the ages of
21-24 there were 5(21.7%) African Americans 1(4.3%) Native
American 1(4.3%) Hispanic and 1(4.3%) Asian who agreed that
convicts should lose their right to vote. Between the ages 25-28
there was 1(4.3%) Hispanic who agreed that convicts should
lose their right to vote. There were a total of 9(39.1%)
respondents who disagreed that convicts should lose their right
to vote. Between the ages of 18-21 there were a total of
4(17.4%) respondents. 1(4.3%) African American, 2(8.7%)
Hispanics and 1(4.3%) Native American. Between the ages of
21-24 there was total of 2(8.7%) respondents 1(4.3%) African
American and 1(4.3%) Native American. Between the ages of
25-28 there were 2(8.7%) respondents 1(4.3%) African
American and 1(4.3%) Hispanic. Between the ages of 29-32+
there were a total of 1(4.3%) respondent which was African
American. There was 1(4.3%) respondent who remained neutral
regarding if convicts should lose their right to vote and they are
considered as other.
Conclusion
By attempting to bring certainty to the controversies facing the
legislature regarding the legitimacy of felony
disenfranchisement laws and establishing whether or not these
laws are racially discriminative, this study will have provided
reasonable cause for legislative action on the laws at hand.
Also, by explaining the outcome in details, and in a manner that
is acceptable by all, the study will have settled judicial disputes
spooked by the ambiguity and controversy of these laws.
Therefore outcome of this study will not only be useful to

37. judiciary and legislature, but to the entire public that is
disturbed by the controversy surrounding these laws.
Denying the vote to ex-offenders is antidemocratic, and
undermines the nation’s commitment to rehabilitating people
who have paid their debt to society. And after doing countless
and relentless research and interviews, and using different
instrument such as surveys the results have been phenomenal.
According to my research Felony laws have a sizable racial
impact: 13 percent of African Americans alone have had their
votes taken away, seven times the national average. Having
conducted a survey where 23 respondents were asked questions
about felony voting laws and also rights that people naturally
have as Americans. . But even though it is policy, denying
felons the vote has been a disaster because of the chaotic and
partisan way it has been carried out. The evidence bears out that
felony disenfranchisement laws should be repealed, or amended.
This study through literature review has been able to establish
the constitutional conflicts that exist between felony
disenfranchisement laws and the Human rights clauses of the
constitutional amendments. Among the amendments violated
include the 14th amendment chapter one and the 24th
amendment to the constitution. Also, the study has established
an existing racial imbalance in the prison composition that
implies racial discrimination. To add to that, every state has its
own criterion for enforcement of felony disenfranchisement
laws which means that these laws can be abused by authorities
in power on racial or other malignant grounds.
The findings demonstrated a clear awareness of the subject
population to issues of discrimination in sentencing to felony
voting laws. 52% percent of the respondents indicated that
felony voting laws and regulations hurt the black communities
as well as the overall voter’s outcome. With the overwhelming
evidence of the remarkable amount of nationwide felony voting
laws it is no surprise that the findings of the study are aligned
with the efforts of elected officials. The desire of the people to
see reform is slowly affecting these laws but however there is

38. much work to be done if true equality is to be achieved not only
with felony voting laws but with the criminal justice system as a
whole.
References
Ansley, L. F. (1991). Race and Core curriculum in legal
education. California Law
Review, 22(3), 1511-1597.
Behrens, A., Uggen, C., & Manza, J. (2003). Ballot
manipulation and the "Menace of Negro
Domination" Racial Threat and Felon Disenfranchisement
in the United States
1850-2002. American Journal of Sociology, 109(3), 559-
605.
Brewer, M. R., & Nancy, H. A. (2008). The racialization of
crime and punishment criminal
Justice, color blind racism, and the political economy of
prison industrial complex.
American Behavioral Scientist, 51(5), 625-644.
Booker T. Washington, Up From Slavery (Boston: Bedford/St.
Martin's, 2002), 134.
Chin, G. J. (2002). Race, the war on drugs, and collateral
consequences of criminal conviction.
Journal of Gender, Race and Justice, 6(253), 567-
634.
Clegg, R. (2001). Who should vote? Texas Law Review. & Pol.,
1, 159-177.
Eisenstein, J & Jacob, H. (1977). Felony Justice. Boston: Little
Brown.

39. Ewald, A. (2002). Civil Death: the Ideological paradox of
criminal disenfranchisement Law in
The United States. Wisconsin Law Review, 11045-
1132.
Ewald, A. (2002). Civil Death: the Ideological paradox of
criminal disenfranchisement Law in
The United States. Wisconsin Law Review, 10047-
10135.
Ewald, C. A. (2009). "Criminal disenfranchisement and the
challenge of American Federalism" publius.
Journal of federalism, 39(3), 527-556.
Fellner, J., & Marc, M. (1998). Losing the votes: The impact of
felony disenfranchisement laws the United States.
New York: Sentencing project.
Harvey, E. A. (1994). Ex-felon disenfranchisement and its
influence on Black
Vote: The need for a second look. University of
Pennsylvania Law Review,
Jeff Manza, PhD, Christopher Uggen, McKnight, (2006).
Locked Out, Felon
Disenfranchisement and American Democracy.
142(3), 1145-1189.
Khalilah, B. L. (2003). One lens multiple view: felony
disenfranchisement laws and American
Political inequality. New York: The Ohio State University.
Manza, J., & Uggen, C. (2008). Locked Out: felony
disenfranchisement and American
Democracy. New York: Oxford University Press.
Manza, J., Brook, c., & Uggen, C. (2004). Public attitude
toward felony disenfranchisement in
The United States. Public Opinion Quarterly, 68(2), 275-286.
Marc Mauer, (2006). Felon Disenfranchisement: A policy whose
time has passed: Published
In the Human Rights Magazine.
Pauli Murray, States' Laws on Race and Color, (Athens, GA:
University of Georgia Press, 1997), 414.

40. Pinaire, B., Heumann, M., & Bilotta, L. (2002). Barred from the
vote: Public attitude towards the disenfranchisement of
felons. Fordham Urb, 30(1), 1519-1533.
Preuhs, R. R. (2001). State felony disenfranchisement policy.
Social Sciences Quarterly, 84(4),
733-748.
Rand Paul, JD, US Senator, (2013). The Collateral Damage of
an Insidious Drug-War
Weapon: available at paul.senate.gov.
Rodger, C., George, T. C., & Kenneth, L. K. (2006). Bullet and
the Ballot? The case for Felony
Disenfranchisement statutes. Journal of Gender, Social policy
and the Law, 14(1), 1-26.
Shapiro, L. A. (1993). Challenging criminal disenfranchisement
under Voting Rights Acts: ya
New strategy. The Yale Law Journal, 103(2), 537-566.
Simpson, P. L., John, A., & Hawthorne, K. (1976). The Real
Fiction of American Revolution.
Studies in the literary Imagination, 9(2), 56-77.
The Washington Post Editorial, (2012). A Life Time sentence
for Felons: available at
washingtonpost.com.
Tonkovich, J. J. (1994). Endurance of felony murder rule: a
study of forces that shape our
Criminal law. The Wash & Lee L. Rev, 51, 429-1433.
Uggen, C., Manza, J., & Thompson, M. (2006). Citizenship
democracy and civic reintegration
Of criminal offenders. The annals of the American academy of
Political and Social Science, 605(1), 281-310.

41. Appendix
Code Book
Question
Variable
Response
1
Gender
(1)Male=13
(2) Female=10
2
Ethnic Group
(1)African American=15
(2)Hispanic=3
(3)Native American=2
(4)Asian=1
(5) Other=2
3
Age
(1) 18-21=7
(2) 22-24=11
(3) 25-28=4
(4) 29-32+=1
4
Do you believe that every us citizen should be able to exercise
their right vote regardless of past or present criminal history?

42. Yes
Neutral
No
5
Do you feel that African Americans are more affected by
disenfranchisement laws than Caucasians?
Yes
Neutral
No
6
Should ex- offenders lose their right to vote permanetly even
after their debt is paid to society?
Yes
Neutral
No
7
Do you believe disenfranchisement laws were created to racially
profile against African Americans?
Yes
Neutral
No
8
Is this an important topic that needs to be addressed more in the
African American community?
Yes
Neutral
No
9
Do you feel that felony disenfranchisement laws and regulations
hurt the black community?
Yes
Neutral
No

43. 10
Have you or someone you know personally been affected by the
disenfranchisement laws that are enacted?
Yes
Neutral
No
11
Were you informed about the disenfranchisement laws and the
restrictions on convicted felons before you read this survey?
Yes
Neutral
No
12
After reading these survey Questions does this change your
views on convicted felons right to vote?
Yes
Neutral
No
13
Do you believe that this issue should be voted on a state by
state basis?
Yes
Neutral
No
14
Should each state have the same laws regarding voting rights
for convicted felons?
Yes
Neutral
No
15
Should states deny the right to vote to all individuals with
felony convictions even after they have completed their

44. sentences?
Yes
Neutral
No
16
Do you believe that racial discrimination has something to do
with felony disenfranchisement laws?
Yes
Neutral
No
17
Do you think states should prohibit voting while incarcerated
with felony offenses?
Yes
Neutral
No
18
Approximately 6 million people were unable to vote due to
felony conviction could this have changed the outcome for
presidency?
Yes
Neutral
No
19
In states that disenfranchise ex-offenders, should African
American men permanently lose their right to vote?
Yes
Neutral
No
20
Are African Americans mostly affected by felony
disenfranchisement laws?
Yes
Neutral

45. No
21
Is this disenfranchisement something that has been repeated in
history when it comes to voting
Yes
Neutral
No
22
Individuals convicted of felonies should receive full voting
rights back after they complete their prison sentence?
Yes
Neutral
No
23
Does felony disenfranchisement hurt the voting outcome
judging by the number of people who don't vote?
Yes
Neutral
No

46. “The Felony Disenfranchisement Laws Survey Questions”
Gender: Male or Female
Age: (1) 18-21=7
(2) 22-24=11
(3) 25-28=4
(4) 29-32+=1
Ethnic Group: African American, Hispanic, Native American,
Asian, and Other
1. Do you believe that every U.S citizen should be able to
exercise their right vote regardless of past or present criminal
history? Yes or no
2. Do you feel that African Americans are more affected by
disenfranchisement laws than Caucasians? Yes or No
3. Should ex- offenders lose their right to vote permantely even
after their debt is paid to society?
Yes or no or Neutral
4. Do you believe disenfranchisement laws were created to
racially profile against African Americans? Yes or no or neutral
5. Is this an important topic that needs to be addressed more in
the African American community? Yes or no or neutral
6. Do you feel that felony disenfranchisement laws and
regulations hurt the black community? Yes or no or neutral
7. Are you or someone you know personally affected by the
disenfranchisement laws that are enacted? Yes or No or neutral
8. Were you informed about the disenfranchisement laws and
the restrictions on convicted felons before you read this survey?
Yes or No or neutral
9. After reading this research paper does this change your
views on convicted felons right to vote? Yes or No or neutral
10. Do you believe that this issue should be voted on a state by
state basis? Yes or No or neutral
11. Should each state have the same laws regarding voting
rights for convicted felons? Yes or No or neutral
12. Should states deny the right to vote to all individuals with

47. felony convictions even after they have completed their
sentences? Yes or No or neutral
13. Do you believe that racial discrimination has something to
do with felony disenfranchisement laws? Yes or No or neutral
14. Do you think states should prohibit voting while
incarcerated with felony offenses? Yes or No or Neutral
15. Approximately 6 million people were unable to vote due to
felony conviction could this have changed the outcome for
presidency? Yes or No or Neutral
16. Should ex-offenders of the law that are minorities
permanently lose their right to vote if they have paid their debt
to society? Yes or No or Neutral
17. Are African Americans mostly affected by felony
disenfranchisement laws? Yes or No or Neutral
18. Is this disenfranchisement something that has been repeated
in history when it comes to voting? Yes or No or Neutral
19. Individuals convicted of felonies should receive full voting
rights back after they complete their prison sentence? Yes or No
or Neutral
20. Does felony disenfranchisement hurt the voting outcome
judging by the number of people who don't vote? Yes or No or
Neutral