Summary Of Incarceration By Michelle Alexander

One of the more controversial debates in today’s political arena, especially around election times, is that of felon disenfranchisement. The disenfranchisement of felons, or the practice of denying felons and ex-felons the right to vote, has been in practice before the colonization of America and traces back to early England; however, it has not become so controversial and publicized until recent times. “In today’s political system, felons and ex-felons are the only competent adults that are denied the right to vote; the total of those banned to vote is approximately 4.7 million men and women, over two percent of the nation’s population” (Reiman 3).

What would the world look like if there were hardly any incarcerations or arrests? The author of the book “Addicted to Incarcerations” Travis Pratt explains using evidence, the consequences of being in a society where crime and nature go hand in hand. The reason why Americans are getting punished, from petty offenders to those guys you see on TV that get caught trying to rape little children or even women. In the book, Pratt uses real world experiences and put issues out in the open throughout each chapter, while also mentioning race and gender issues that serve as a key component of incarceration. The book forces us to look back on what members of a society have done in the past or what currently is being done and if we have taken life for

While reading the How to End Mass Incarceration article and just thinking about the general conversations surrounding prison abolition, I thought a lot about why we tend to compare the United States to Scandinavian countries. Lancaster states at the end of the article that, “We should strive not for pie-in-the-sky imaginings but for working models already achieved in Scandinavian and other social democracies.” The author continues to argue that prison abolitionists are “out on a limb” and that their arguments are “implausible.” The author even goes as far to say that “abolitionism promises a heaven-on-earth that will never come to pass.” As a solution, the author suggests that we as the United States, need to look at examples of more effective and more progressive alternatives that have been successful elsewhere, like Scandinavia.

Through the use of literature to inspire social change, Michelle Alexander is able to bring attention to an extremely important social issue that is very prevalent throughout our country. The issue that Alexander is writing about is the mass incarceration of black males in the United States. She describes this increase of mass incarceration in depth, and relates this modern form of social control back to an old practice of the Jim Crow laws and separate but equal segregation.

It is a status that will follow and affect every ex-offender even after they have served their time in jail. In this case, our criminal-justice system is constantly discriminating against African Americans in order to identify them as felons and take away their rights. Currently, more than two million African Americans are under the control of the criminal-justice system--in prison or jail, on probation or parole. Felon-disenfranchisement laws bar thirteen percent of African American men from casting a vote, thus making mass incarceration an effective tool of voter suppression--one reminiscent of the poll taxes and literacy of the Jim Crow era. Employers routinely discriminate against an applicant based on criminal history, as do landlords. In some major urban areas, more than half of working-age African American men have criminal record and are subject to legalized discrimination for the rest of their lives. These men are permanently locked into an inferior, second-class status, or caste, bylaw and custom. As Alexander argues, we have not ended racial caste in America; we have merely redesigned it.

About 6.1 million Americans convicted of a felony have been barred from voting by the law in most states (Chung 1). The condition regarded to as felon disenfranchisement is controlled by laws provided for by the individual states within the US. Unlike the states of Maine and Vermont which allow felons the right to vote while in incarceration, most other states have withdrawn the right from convicts. Ten states in the country have permanently restricted specific felons from participating in elections. With the argument that the country’s legacy in safeguarding democracy through felon disenfranchisement, opponents of the idea assert that by completing their sentences, felons have paid the debt owed to the society and should have their privileges and rights fully restored. They further assert that part of the efforts to uphold democracy is to get rid of unfair provisions such as laws advocating for felon disenfranchisement. On the other hand, proponents note that felons and ex-felons should be allowed to vote due to the expression of their poor judgment. While the debate continues to elucidate divergent views, numerous factors illustrate that felon disenfranchisement is inconsequential and does not contribute to the betterment of the country.

“There is an estimated number of 5.85 million Americans who are prohibited from voting due to laws that disenfranchise citizens convicted of felony offenses.” (Uggen). Varying by state, each disenfranchisement law is different. Only 2 out of 50 U.S. states; Vermont & Maine, authorize voting from convicted felons incarcerated and liberated as shown in (Fig. 1). But of the 48 remaining states these rights are either prohibited or authorized in at least 5 years succeeding to liberation. This disenfranchisement needs to be retracted due to fact that convicted felons; incarcerated or liberated, are U.S. citizens who are guaranteed constitutional rights that should allow them as citizens to have equal opportunity in political and social

Millions of Americans lose the right to vote due to past felony convictions. While majority of Americans have completed their sentence, they are still not afforded the opportunity to vote. In some states voting rights of felons are terminated all together while other states allow felons who have completed their sentence to regain their voting rights. Felon disenfranchisement is not being allowed to vote after committing a felony. Felon Disenfranchisement takes a toll on our society by placing limits on the amount of possible state votes, and discontinues voting rights in some states. A vast number of citizens believe that felons should not have the right to vote.

Every race deserves the same respect as the other. In the reading “The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness,” Alexander argues that “Today it is perfectly legal to discriminate against criminals all the ways that it was once legal to discriminate against African Americans” (Alexander 2). The author then continues on to illustrate that when a criminal receives that title of “a felon” that they no longer have the right to vote. According to and academic article “State Felon Disenfranchisement Policy” written by Robert

Prison populations have been on the raise since the early 1970s. Today we incarcerate over 2 million men, women and juveniles in the various correctional facilities around the country. These facilities can range from local jails or detention facilities to the new so called "Supermax" prisons. Conditions can also vary across the spectrum for these different correctional institutions. Each type of inmate has his or her own challenges when faced with incarceration. Many factors play into determining "the experience" they have. Age and sex are one of the things that determine what type of institution you are committed to. Adult male prisoners are committed to adult male prisons.

Although some states believe that voting is a privilege that can be taken away after intolerable behavior, ex-criminals should be given voting rights because they are heavily impacted by government decisions, the vote is consequently taken away from low income, minority factions, and the US has a historical record of disenfranchising people regarding their race, color, previous servitude, and sex, so we have reason to question the disenfranchisement of other minorities.

Mass Incarceration is a huge problem in United States culture. No other country in the world incarcerates its population the way that America does. “The U.S. incarcerates more people than any country in the world – both per capita and in terms of total people behind bars. The U.S. has less than 5 percent of the world’s population, yet it has almost 25 percent of the world’s incarcerated population.” Worse yet the majority of the incarcerated individuals belong to a minority group despite not participating in illegal activity any more frequently than their white counterparts. Is the United States criminal justice system racist and if so what is the cause behind this racism. After the end of slavery, many southern black Americans traveled to the north to escape endless violence and discrimination. In the south they could only find low paying field jobs whereas in the northern cities there were steady factory jobs promised as well as the hope that discrimination could be escaped. The northerners while against slavery were not egalitarian and were not in favor of hoards of black Americans surging into their cities and taking jobs away from the white working poor. The need for social control by white Americans only grew with the population of black Americans living in the cities and working in the factories. The rhetoric of “law and order” first came about in the late 1950s as white opposition to the Civil Rights Movement was encouraged by southern governors and law enforcement.

This felony disenfranchisement came about to keep blacks from voting; it didn’t have anything to do with keeping criminals from voting. However, the stigma has always been that most crimes are committed by blacks. Black Americans who are of the voting age are four times more likely to lose their voting rights than the rest of the adult population, with 1 of every 13 black adults disenfranchised nationally. Nationally 2.2 million people are black citizens that are banned from voting. In three states more than one in five black adults are disenfranchised; Florida has 23 percent, Kentucky has 22 percent, and Virginia has 20 percent (Chung, 2014).

Women have been fighting for equal rights for decades. And, as of a result of this, have gained many equal rights. But are those rights just supposed to disappear when a woman gets incarcerated, and at what price does it cost that woman, to get her rights back, or does she ever get them back? The United States has the highest incarceration rate in the world, and with each year the percentage of women that make up that rate, are growing. According to Statistics on Women Offenders- 2015. (1997), “Since 2010, the female jail population has been the fastest growing correctional population, increasing by an average annual rate of 3.4 percent”. It also states that, in 2013, women made up 17% of the jail population, and 25% of probation population in the U.S. Not only have these numbers been steadily rising, but of those incarcerated, approximately 77% are likely to reoffend (p.1). This has risen quite a concern in society today. Why is there such a high chance that incarcerated women will likely reoffend? At a micro level, is it the fault of the woman? Or, a larger issue at the macro level, with society, laws, policies, and loss of the most basic rights that every citizen should be entitled to? According to Pinto, Rahman, & Williams. (2014), incarcerated women need help meeting individual needs when they are released, such as, reducing drug or alcohol use, finding a job, health issues, as well as help in dealing with the impact of

The voice of millions of Americans can’t be heard due to the disenfranchisement laws, which is vital living in a country that depends on votes for elected officials. There are many supporters and non-supporters of the disenfranchisement laws, and “since 1975 there have been 13 states that liberalized their laws, 11 states have passed further limitations on felons, and 3 states have passed both laws” (Manza, 2004). There is an on going debate among citizens and states whether or not to amend the disenfranchisement laws and allow more convicted ex-felons to use their voting rights. Some believe their voting rights should not be restored, because they are criminals, and it’s a part of being a criminal. Others are fighting that their voting rights should be restored, that people make mistakes, and if they have completed their sentence then they have served their punishment. Research shows a consensus