StudioGlyphic

We no longer have separate bathrooms, water fountains, seating, and all the obvious signs of racism, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist. It's become more subtle and yet it's just as bad as ever.

Jerald M. Lentini had a great post at the Dean blog, blogforamerica.com. He's given me permission to repost it here:

Racial profiling in arrests hits several important policy venues, including drug policy, prison policy and voting rights. I was initially reluctant to discuss this on this post, but I see that I will never have a better opportunity than this.

In Tulia, TX, America witnessed first-hand how law enforcement can be corrupted by racially-biased practices. What we continue to ignore is that it happens in every state, on a regular basis, and there is a very good reason to be worried about it (in at least 10 states, anyway, as I shall discuss further).

Arrest statistics show a highly disproportionate number of African-Americans are booked on drug-related charges. While surveys suggest that the black community uses drugs at a level proportionate to their population size (i.e. at about the same rate as white Americans), blacks are much more likely to be arrested for drug crimes. After their arrest, blacks are more likely to be charged with a felony than to receive a lesser charge, thus increasing the disparity between the races. At trial, blacks are less likely to be offered plea agreements for lesser charges, due in no small part to the fact that, because of socioeconomic realities, blacks are more likely than whites to have to rely on indigent defense. Lastly, blacks receive harsher sentences than whites for identical crimes (for trafficking, the average black convict receives a full year longer than the average white convict). These statements can be confirmed by groups ranging from the ACLU to the Drug Policy Alliance to NORML to the Bureau of Prisons.

Here's where those 10 states come in.

Remember the discovery that Florida had purged thousands of eligible voters, mostly black, from its voter rolls in 2000? This was done as part of the practice of felon disenfranchisement, a politically sensitive yet widespread practice. Florida, along with 9 other states, permantently (sic) prohibits anyone with a felony conviction from voting, whether or not they've served their sentences or had their civil rights restored in other states.

The stated intent of such laws: to preserve the "purity" of the ballot box.

The actual effects of felon disenfranchisement: nearly 4 million otherwise qualified Americans cannot vote for state, local and federal offices, referrendums, (sic) or changes to state constitutions.

The beauty of this practice is that the people being affected by it have essentially no recourse to stop it: how can you vote against allowing something to remain illegal when you are not allowed to vote? Remember prohibition? What if every American found in violation of Prohibition were to have been disenfranchised? Would we still have an Eighteenth Amendment?

The ballot is the coin of the realm in a democracy, as Thurgood Marshall pointed out. In the case of felon disenfranchisement related to racial profiling, that coin is being stolen from one particular part of the country--the worst form of wealth redistribution imaginable is still considered a legitimate policy.

What can President Dean do to correct this? Plenty. In 1982, the Voting Rights Act was amended by the Democratic Congress to provide for instances where discrimination might be present but unintended (in short: motive does not matter when voting discriminiation (sic) occurs). The Voting Rights Act has its roots in the 14th Amendment, which authorizes Congress to pass appropriate legislation to enforce the Amendment. Were the Justice Dept. to follow a policy of challenging on Constitutional grounds states that continue the practice of permanent disenfranchisement, we could see a real change happen. Not only would this serve to strengthen the idea that someone who has completed a prison term has "paid their debt to society,"--a notion long embraced by law-and-order types of all parties--it would have a direct positive impact on civil rights in America by demonstrating that the federal government would not let second-order consequences of their actions go unnoticed. And, as if it needed pointing out, most of those subject to disenfranchisement of this sort belong to demographics that traditionally vote Democratic, making it just as important for the Republicans to fight any change to the practice. In all honesty, felon disenfranchisement is just as responsible as hanging chads for putting George W. Bush into office.

I apologize for the length of this post, but this nation should apologize for the duration of this injustice. In the quest for true racial unity in the U.S., we must not forget that the task will be both nuanced and arduous. We must also remember, however, that it is a task of monumental importance, for ourselves and our posterity.

"I will follow that system of regimen which, according to my ability and judgment, I consider for the benefit of my patients, and abstain from whatever is deleterious and mischievous." -c.400 B.C., still true today.

Yours in Peace,
Jerald M. ("J.R.") Lentini