By Desmond Meade, President, Florida Rights Restoration Coalition

On Thursday, March 8th, Florida International University College of Law’s chapters of the American Constitution Society and the Federalist Society held a debate concerning Felon Disfranchisement. Marc Mauer, president of The Sentencing Project and Roger Clegg, president of the Center for Equal Opportunity offered their views on whether ex-felons should have the right to vote. A spirited debate which got testy at times, gave the audience an excellent view of the polarized viewpoints on an issue in the spotlight in Florida because of the upcoming Presidential election, the role that Florida will play in that election, and the current clemency policies of Governor Scott and his Cabinet.

Thursday's event promoted a moral and legal discussion not just on felon voting rights, but on how disenfranchisement policies are tied to broader questions about the role of democracy in shaping political and social equality. Students pointed out the effects of systemic racism and the war on drugs to criticize Florida's disenfranchisement policies, and expressed concern over the unprecedented expansion of the US prison system.

It instantly became apparent that in order to justify felon disfranchisement, a negative image of impacted individuals had to be developed. From the viewpoint of Mr. Clegg, it would seem that all felons were terrorist assassins who burned, and pillaged our cities. This fictional felon created by Mr. Clegg became the basis of his position that the fundamental right to vote should be denied to all felons, even after they have repaid their debt to society.

Mr. Clegg eventually had to admit that the fictional character he created was a grossly inaccurate depiction of the typical individual impacted by these policies. Mr. Clegg, however, chose to ignore the detrimental impact felon disfranchisement have on the families of formerly incarcerated individuals, and the communities in which they live. Mr. Clegg was unable to reason away the reality that every time a person is disenfranchised, their community loses a voice, and for every voice that a community loses, the more insignificant that community becomes in the eyes of elected officials who are driven by votes.

Florida currently has over 1 million disenfranchised residents, and that number will continue to grow due to clemency policies that make civil rights restoration virtually impossible. That’s over 1 million individuals who, while paying taxes, are prevented from voting, and are severely restricted from obtaining safe and affordable housing.

In the debate, Mr. Mauer correctly surmised that the basic principles of civility and citizenship dictate that all individuals are entitled to have the right to vote; the right to have their voices heard, and participate in the decisions that govern the society in which they live. Mr. Mauer also exposed the absurdity of the unfounded notion that civil rights restoration is a threat to the voting process. The fact is that the real threats to voting are preventing or restricting eligible voters from casting their vote freely, and adopting policies that disenfranchise citizens, in many cases for life.

In a recent CNN online poll, only 20% of responders believed that an ex-felon should not regain their rights to vote.

Obviously the majority of Americans do not believe in Mr. Clegg’s “boogie man” convict.

(Bobby Joe Bracy contributed material for this post).

By Martha Jackovics, Beach Peanuts

Despite all the legislation from last year's session of the Florida Legislature aimed at blocking abortions in the state, no abortion bills were passed in the 2012 session, but not for lack of trying. Ten anti-abortion bills were introduced this year, compared to 18 bills introduced last year.

Considering the push against women's health issues and abortion throughout the country in states controlled by Republicans, this was a win for women's health in Florida.

Consider last year's session:

Abortion bills from 2011:

ABORTION — CHOOSE LIFE (Passed): Proceeds from Choose Life license plates will go to Choose Life Inc. for assisting pregnant women, instead of counties. (SB 196/HB 501)

ABORTION — HEALTH CARE EXCHANGES (Passed): Health care plans created through the federal health care law cannot offer coverage for abortions. (SB 1414/HB 97)

ABORTION — PARENTAL NOTIFICATION (Passed): Requires minors seeking a judicial waiver for parental notification of an abortion to get the waiver in district court rather than a wider-reaching appeals court. (SB 1770/HB 1247)

ABORTION — THIRD-TRIMESTER BAN (Failed): Expands ban on third-trimester abortions to include viability of the fetus. Doctors who perform abortions would be required to receive ethics training. (SB 1748/HB 1397)

ABORTION — ULTRASOUND (Passed): Women preparing to undergo an abortion must be offered the opportunity to have the results and images of an ultrasound explained to them. Woman can decline to see the image. (SB 1744/HB 1127)

During the 2012 session, at least ten anti-abortion bills were introduced. Among them, one introduced by Republican Rep. Charles Van Zant which would have made it a felony to perform an abortion unless strict criteria were met, and with no exceptions for rape or incest.  Another would have outlawed race and sex based abortions. The “fetal pain” bill was introduced, which would have outlawed abortions after 20 weeks. There was also a bill that women’s health advocates called an “omnibus anti-choice bill” because it contained several measures that would make it harder for women to obtain a legal abortions and harder for providers to provide the legal service.

The race and sex based abortion bill was introduced despite the lack of  evidence that such a thing occurs, and it was much the same with the fetal pain bill. The fetal pain bill would have made no exceptions in the case of rape or incest, even though research on whether a fetus can feel pain have been deemed neither scientifically nor constitutionally sound.

The Omnibus abortion bill, a final attempt to "clean up" several parts of abortion bills that didn't pass last year also failed. The bill also contained the failed fetal pain measure from this year.

As the session adjourned, Planned Parenthood released the following statement:

Tonight the Florida Legislature formally adjourned the 2012 Legislative Session without passing any legislation that would limit women’s access to essential health care services.

“We are encouraged that legislators put women’s health before politics by rejecting efforts to target health centers that provide the reproductive health care and family planning services that women need,” said Judith Selzer, Vice President for Public Policy at the Florida Alliance of Planned Parenthood Affiliates.  “Given that Floridians continue to be plagued by the lagging economy and a growing lack of access to health care, legislators must continue to reject attempts to make it even harder for women to access health care services.”

This is not to say they won't be back at it next session. Outside of the legislature, there's also another attempt at the push for a "Personhood" amendment looming for 2014.

But at least for now, on the close of this year's legislative session, this is a win for women's health in Florida.

Here at the ACLU of Florida, we produce a lot of resources to help people in Florida know their rights. In this cartoon, it looks like Governor Rick Scott has decided to do our job for us with the state's new election laws.

Last year, the legislature passed and the governor signed a law that overhauled the state's election code, making it harder for many Floridians - especially students, seniors, and racial minorities - to register to vote, to cast a vote and to have their vote counted. This voter suppression trifecta has earned the name "The Voter Suppression Act" among voting rights advocates.

The ACLU of Florida has been fighting the Voter Suppression Act since an emergency meeting with many of our staff was called last year the day an "amendment" to a half-page bill turned it into the 15-page assault on the bedrock of our democracy that is now part of how Florida handles elections. Since that day, we've been fighting the bill, first in the legislature, then before the US Department of Justice, and now in the courts. Our case is currently before a federal court in Washington DC, where a judge will determine whether the law violates the Voting Rights Act.

Last week, the US Department of Justice said that the state has failed to prove that the law doesn't violate the Voting Rights Act (the state's attorneys, for their part, have argued that courts should toss out the Voting Rights Act).

The debacle this law has caused and the work the ACLU of Florida is doing to fight it were recently featured on The Colbert Report. Until it's resolved, however, voting in Florida has just gotten a lot more disorienting - even if you do have a Rick Scott-approved map.