American Forum Op-Ed

KENTUCKY FORUM

By Homer S. White

State Senator Damon Thayer is preventing a proposed amendment to the Kentucky constitution that would restore voting rights to former felons from moving forward. Furthermore, nine of the 12 members of Thayer’s State and Local Government Committee say that they intend to support the measure, but Thayer still refuses to let it be heard. Surely this is an important proposal that merits full consideration (the proposal passed the House last month with strong bipartisan support).

Nearly 129,000 former felons in Kentucky, who have served their prison time, probation and parole, have not been able to navigate the existing pardoning process which requires an individual pardon from the governor. Tens of thousands more Kentuckians will be in the same situation in coming years. Conversations with former felons indicate that most have not heard about the pardon process and don't know how to initiate it. Even officials in the Kentucky justice system and the state's county clerk offices often don't know how to help people through the process.

We have to bear in mind that persons recently released from prison are at a particularly vulnerable point in their lives. If we want them to re-engage in society in a positive way, we should provide them with every possible encouragement to do so, and work to remove hurdles that stand in their way.

The current pardon process is entirely dependent upon the sitting governor. It's less complicated under Gov. Beshear, but was quite difficult under Gov. Fletcher. A civil right as fundamental as the right to vote should not be subject to the whim or favor of any one individual.

Thayer alludes to the fact that the current proposal, as currently written, does not automatically restore rights to those who have committed murder or sexual abuse. He speculates that this may create “two classes” of felons – those who regain their rights when they have completed their sentences and those who must still rely “on the favor of the governor.”

This is a point worthy of consideration.

I would prefer to restore rights without exception. After all, the most dangerous voters are those who use their rights to advance their own interests at the expense of the common good.

For example, lobbyists for business interests routinely support laws that give their business a special and unfair advantage, often at taxpayer expense. Yet, we would never think of denying such persons the vote. The right to vote is just that sacred.

A former murderer, on the other hand, never has an opportunity to vote for politicians who pledge to "make murder easier," so his vote is far less likely to damage the common good. Accordingly, there is even less reason to deny this person the right to participate in our democracy.

Nevertheless, the current proposal, as it stands, has widespread support, and it would at least restore rights to nearly all former felons. It’s a fair compromise.

The proposal is more than just a technical device to make the restoration process cheaper and more reliable than tens of thousands of individual pardons, though it will certainly accomplish this aim.

Restoring the vote will also restore the dignity of the human person. Picture a young woman who gets mixed up in drugs and goes to prison. Many of us know such a person -- she may be a childhood friend, someone we went to school with, a relative, even our child. By allowing her the right to vote after she serves her time sends a message to this young woman that she has dignity, that we need and value her positive involvement in society, that we want her to rebuild her life, and that when she does so we are delighted to welcome her back.

Former felons have served their debt to society. Kentucky must allow democracy, dignity, and reason to have a chance.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
White is a professor of mathematics at Georgetown College.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright (C) 2010 by the Kentucky Forum. 3/10

Tennessee Editorial Forum

By Jaime Gonzalez

My parents are Americans. They are citizens of this great country, which they are proud to call home. They are also immigrants.

My father immigrated to this country from Mexico in 1972 when he was 18 years old. At the time he wanted little more than to provide for his growing family. My mother, then pregnant with my oldest brother, had come over a few months earlier. Before crossing the border my dad was told to squeeze into the spare tire compartment of a station wagon as they drove through customs in Tijuana. For over an hour he prayed and thought of his young wife while trying not to inhale too much of the exhaust that was seeping in from the tail pipe.

That night he slept in a country where dreams come true; a country where people from all over the world are literally risking death just to live here.

The next day my father went to work at a plant nursery earning $1.35 an hour. He worked there for five years. In 1977 he started working for General Motors where he drove cars off the assembly line. It was a turning point in his life: my dad didn’t have to hide in the spare tire compartment anymore.

We all seek definition. As a first generation American born to Mexican immigrants I remember reciting the pledge of allegiance everyday before class. It gave me the clarity of something I could depend on. The words came out of me like a song, and its rhythm seemed to synchronize itself with my heartbeat. I was taught to base the rest of the day on the simplicity of the pledge. Often I would focus on the passage “liberty and justice for all.” At the time it just did not occur to me that even though anyone could cry out their allegiance to this country some people would simply never be heard.

Countless communities across the U.S. are filled with people who have no say. In Shelbyville, the community I belong to, we are repeatedly reminded of the plight of immigrant families who have no confidence in a system they feel has little use for them.

We are constantly receiving reports of honor students being told they cannot continue their higher education because they do not have a social security number. Victims of crime have come to me and said they are afraid to file a report after
they have been robbed simply because they fear legal status scrutiny by police. We have spoken to children who say they become worried when their parents are late coming home because they believe their mother or father have been detained by immigration authorities.

This madness must be brought to an end.

In order to bring a logical and rational solution to our immigration crisis the people must first be heard. The need for reform is clear and more urgent than ever before. It makes little sense to teach children “liberty and justice for all” when this sacred passage is treated like a mere platitude.

Both my mother and father pledged their allegiance to this country, and in 2008 they stated their presence by voting in their first presidential election. They earned this right through their loyalty and devotion to the country they call home. My parents were overwhelmed by emotion as they came to understand the noble power of having a voice when so many immigrants live in constant fear. Millions of people now living in this country, no matter how loyal or devoted, are shut out before ever being heard.

In 2010, on the 21st of March, we will rise to speak for those who are still searching for a voice. We will travel from all over this great nation to gather in Washington D.C., and we will march in the pursuit of a stronger nation for us all. More importantly, however, we will stand together in devotion to the dignity of humanity itself. When the leaders of this nation wake up on that Sunday morning and see us there, tens of thousands of Americans, we will remind them that change takes courage. For we are sons, we are daughters, we are brothers and sisters, mothers and fathers, we are students, we are teachers, we are engineers, we are builders, we are civilians, we are soldiers, we are dreamers, we are human, we are here; and, we are marching for America.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gonzalez is a community leader from Shelbyville and graduate student at Middle Tennessee State University (MTSU).
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright (C) 2010 by the Tennessee Editorial Forum. 3/10

Tennessee Editorial Forum

By Rev. Jeremy Tobin

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) Article 13 states that, “Everyone has the right to leave any country including his own, and to return to his country.” Article 14 states that, “everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution.”

From these and other articles and principles enshrined in the UDHR, came “The International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families,” which was ratified by the United Nations on December 18, 1990.

People of faith believe that human rights are given by the Creator. They come with birth. Good law is to safeguard and protect these rights.

Both Article 13 and the International Convention on the Rights of Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families, declare that people have a right to migrate in order to better their living conditions and escape persecution, poverty and destitution. Migration has been going on as long as payment in return for labor was introduced.

The Catholic Bishops of the United States and Mexico have affirmed the long tradition of Catholic social justice in defending the right to migrate.

The international conventions and the bishops stress the right to migrate. So we begin by defending the right for people to migrate in order to seek work, to support their families and escape poverty and destitution.

International trade policies, notably NAFTA, have contributed to the exploitation of foreign economies and the steady flow of desperate people in search of work.

Historically, U.S. immigration policy is geared toward getting the cheapest labor force possible. It is based on discrimination. It ensures the steady flow of the cheapest labor from slavery to sweatshops, to back breaking field labor, to poultry and meat packing plants, and all manner of labor intensive work. The workers are set up to be treated inhumanely and paid well below what is fair and just. Guest worker policies make workers serfs to the companies that sponsor them. We must demand change in trade policies as well as just immigration reform. Both must happen together.

International conventions and statements from the religious community reinforce the principle that morality and justice are on the side of those struggling for fair and just immigration reform.

Looking at the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of all Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families, article 33 declares, states take appropriate measures to ensure that migrant workers and their families, are informed, upon request, free of charge, in a language they are able to understand, of the rights under this convention and on all matters that will enable them to comply with administrative or other formalities in the state of employment. Migrants are to be informed, even before they leave, of all conditions they must satisfy to gain employment.

Migrants are being abused, on every level as they seek employment in the U.S. Their desperation has created an illegal trafficking industry that robs them of resources and puts them in harms way. Further, they are not being honestly informed, in their own language, of the real conditions of labor on the other side. This must change.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Rev. Tobin is a member of the Mississippi Immigrant Rights Alliance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright (C) 2010 by American Forum 3/10