I have been passionate about pushing for legal restoration that addresses the disproportionate availability of expungements for those that have been convicted of felony crimes, have been off of probation/parole for more than ten years, and have not committed any additional crimes. In most instances and states, this is what's considered a good candidate for expungement, but in some states there is no chance to have any felony convictions expunged. Sure, some should never be expungeable; but not all.
Having to check "yes" on a job application when asked about being convicted of a felony is almost like begging the potential employer to not give you a job. Of course we want to believe that all people are given an equal chance to get a job they apply for and therefore prove themselves, but the reality is that companies do take that question (check-mark) into consideration when making hiring decisions. Why do some state allow expungements and some do not? To have to ask the questions proves there is no logical or credible answer. In Kansas you can seek out expungements for certain crimes and for some crimes expungements aren't available. In Missouri, it doesn't matter what the crime was; there isn't any possibility to get it expunged. So, a person convicted of a low-level felony 15 years ago in Missouri and moves to Kansas when they are in their early thirties to seek employment will be in for a rude awakening. I can't begin to tell all the stories told to me by those who feel their lives are totally lost because not only is their prior record keeping them from moving ahead with their life; there's nothing they can do about it!
If Recovery Act funds are to truly help those with barriers to employment move ahead, then this is a policy that must be addressed. I believe that states without expungement opportunities should be offered decent financial (grant) incentives if they change course and adopt an expungement policy that's uniform across the states that allow them. Grant that can then be targeted towards those that are ex-convicts; with an emphasis on those with expungeable offenses and a high-probability of getting their felony past expunged. This doesn't take rocket science.
Comments (6)
I agree.I got in trouble(more like railroaded)thirty years ago.These pieces of sh.. do not care about truth or right.They care about filling a friggin bed in the biggest industry in America.Always hiring and never firing.
I too agree, because a convicted felon has no right to vote again, when in fact he probably has learned a lot more than most in a country where easily 95% of the male population could be convicted of some felony or another if the government wanted to go after all of us.
well this is a great idea because being a convicted felon i can tell you that feelings of hopeleddness is a very real thing even if i choose to vote which i do, in other areas i feel that my chances to suceed are limited in scope
I would ordinarily disagree with the majority on this issue, it was decided on the basis of the wide disparity of inclinations of people, being the principle purpose of keeping the "Several Sovereign States", and to keep the central government limited in scope and power by giving it no control over the "Several States" except for the specific Constitutional areas it has authority. The idea was that people would tend to migrate to such states that had attributes they preferred over others, and all would be able to find their own closest to home, feeling State.
The over-arching central government has made a complete mockery of the design limits of the Constitution, most of what are felonies were never laws an hundred years ago, and such "felonies" as were on the books at the time were, in my opinion, not subject to this discussion, such as murder, arson, rape, all violent crimes.
The Nanny State, having made selling herbs and emolients federal felonies, and with States taking up where the Federal Government leaves off, we now have more felonious crimes on the books than all the crimes listed completely, not so many years ago.
Expungments ought to be used vigorously by States to compensate for the out of control government, however the real issue is the status of laws which have no business being on the books, and the government, which has caused so much depradation in our society by meddling in everything, making a mess of everything it touches, and fostering crime by its intrusiveness.
The crimes which truly rate as "felonies", should not have any means of expungment, that status was intended for capital crimes and such crimes as there is no return from, pedophiles do not stop being what they are, rapists always rape again, if given the chance, however such crimes should be punished fully, and I believe in capital punishment. The thousands of crimes which qualify as "felonies", are mostly issues of prohibition, and as such, are not so much crimes, as social standards, and should be treated as such. We very effectively treated such issues by "voluntary association" and "ostracizing" such things, making them known as unwelcome without making crimes of them. We taught our children the difference between crime and bad behavior, and were more effective in suppressing crime, and spent more time punishing our children for bad behavior than having to deal with them committing minor crimes.
Being a Sovereign Citizen of the Nation gives one privileges of citizenship, authority over government, both State and Central, and it is by our consent, that government reigns as it does, however for every privilege, piece of authority and power of consent we have, we have an equal measure of responsibility over that exact aspect of civil life, and how we authorize our government to enact laws, and what we allow them to act on.
We have an over-arching Nanny State because too many people saw it as a means of eliminating their personal responsibility, and not enough people considered it such an imposition they felt like vehemently vying against those wanting it.
To effectively act as Sovereign Citizens, we must remove every elected official the moment their term is up, because incumbents become accustomed to "knowing more of what you need than you do". We only govern by our consent, when we withdraw it each election from the citizen, sent to represent our interests, and return citizens to the community when they are done.
Far too many Americans believe the Nation has changed too much to cleave exactly to the Constitution, and far too much of the government, both central and State's, is completely beyond authority because we, the people, have failed to maitain our end of respsonsibility.
It can be taken back at any election, but only if the majority of the people are willing to be in charge of themselves. This principle once was the foundation in all or education, but has been removed from school curriculums because it is antithetical to controlling "The People", and our school system is set up to turn out socialists who will be good serfs, allowing those who assumed the "professional government manager" position, to retain it indefinitely.
The change you want is available at the next election, you only have to teach people about sovereignty, and what it has for value, and what its benefits are. That was what we were taught in "civics", many years ago, and I have never lost my taste for Sovereignty, because it is my source of liberty and personal freedom. What is little known these days is it is the only means of reining in government that has ever worked for more than one generation. It worked for us for almost an hundred and fifty years before we were driven off course with our central education system.
John McClain
GySgt, USMC, ret.
Felons Should Have Voting Rights. Link: http://opengov.ideascale.com/akira/dtd/4172-4049
PRISON REFORM. Link: http://opengov.ideascale.com/akira/dtd/5993-4049
Why can't I vote on this one??