![Sample our Law journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5942/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Law.jpg"})
Abstract
In Florida, when someone is adjudicated guilty of a felony crime, they lose the right to vote. The only way to regain these rights is to go through the process of rights restoration. The civil rights restoration hearings in Florida have the potential to serve as a formal ceremony in which individuals are acknowledged for their recovery from crime and readmitted into the political community. Data from the Governor’s office, observations of the Executive Clemency Board, and interviews with ex-offenders who have experience with the restoration process, were evaluated to determine the impact these hearings have for ex-offenders’ reintegration. Results suggest that the low success rate, cumbersome process, and lengthy amount of time required may all serve to further alienate the many applicants who are rejected, impeding their reintegration into the community. Recommendations to either simplify the process of rights restoration or to remove ex-felon disenfranchisement policies are given.
Notes
1. The governor has the option of taking a case ‘under advisement’ allowing him to make a decision later on if he wishes. A ‘continued’ case will appear on the next meeting’s agenda. Those cases that were continued were only counted on the agenda that a disposition was reached and since cases taken under advisement do not have public dispositions they were omitted from analysis.
2. It is important to note that the authors acknowledge that time is a complicated factor in this analysis. As discussed later in this paper, the amount of time an application takes to move through the process is lengthy. The authors also acknowledge that there may be seasonal as well as yearly differences in the likelihood of rights restoration, but we were unable to assess these factors in a quantitative analysis, but address them later in the paper.
3. The model was initially run with a control variable representing the Crist years compared to the Bush years. Although this measure was significant it did not substantially alter any of the other findings. Due to the complexity of using a time variable in this manner, it was excluded from the final model.
4. It is helpful to put into context the political climate in which these hearings were held. Governor Crist (Republican) was then planning a run for the US Senate in 2010, and eventually campaigned for the office as an independent. Bill McCollum (Republican) and Alex Sink (Democrat) were both seeking their parties’ nomination to run for the governorship in 2010. Sink eventually became the Democratic nominee. McCollum lost the Republican gubernatorial nomination to Rick Scott, who eventually won the election. Gov. Scott, as noted above, moved quickly to repeal the 2007 changes to Florida’s rights restoration laws.
5. The email sent on 31 August 2009 stated: ‘I was wondering if you know where I can find information about out of state felons who have moved to Florida. I have found conflicting information and I was hoping I could find out whether if another state grants civil rights restoration if it is honored by the State of Florida (i.e. if someone committed a crime in Georgia and received restoration of their civil rights in Georgia and then later moved to Florida becoming a legal resident would that person still have to apply for rights restoration in Florida or would the restoration by Georgia be honored?)’
6. Janet Keels, email message to senior author. 1 September 2009.
7. Janet Keels, email message to senior author. 17 September 2009.