As Matt just mentioned, a King County judge ruled that felons should be allowed to vote even if they haven't paid their financial obligations. [The Secretary of State website has the ruling here] The Seattle Times notes:
In a written statement, [Mrs. Gregoire1] said that convicted felons still have a responsibility to their debt, but that "once they have served their time, withholding certain rights due to fines becomes a virtual debtors' prison."Why would this woman advocate for the reenfranchisement of vicious predators who fail to pay restitution to their victims, unless she was convinced that most of them would be voting for her?
1 Judge Bridges ruled that 1,401 felons voted in the election which Mrs. Gregoire supposedly won by 133 votes.
Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at March 28, 2006 08:54 AM | Email ThisAnd what of our continual lessening of punishment and coddling of any victim class, even criminals? What message does it send if when you get out of prison, you can declare bankruptcy, skip your debts, start voting again, and ignore the judicial process in general.
The concept of relative degrees of punishment, restitution, responsibility, wealth, hapiness, etc. is foreign to progressives. They think they can simply legislate or tax the outcomes that they desire.
Posted by: Jeff B. on March 28, 2006 09:33 AMfirst of all, hats off to you for a VERY appropriate alias.
second, I totally agree with the notion that once someone has done their time, they should be able to vote. HOWEVER, if paying restitution is part of their punishment, then if they haven't finished that, they really HAVEN'T done their time, have they?
thanks for playing.
Posted by: libertarianobserver on March 28, 2006 09:44 AMIt should be noted that Judge Bridges ruled that if he was to reduce votes based upon a statistical analysis of felons voting, that Dino Rossi would have lost more votes that Governor Gregoire.
I've long said that one of the best reforms we could make to election laws is to prohibit people on welfare from voting. No one should be able to vote to continue picking my pocket, just because they use government to do it.
Posted by: libertarianobserver on March 28, 2006 10:05 AMThe Judge is as much a fool as you! He didn't support the proportional deduction theory to resolve this, so your statement is irrelevant.
The real problem is that illegal votes were counted and a fraudulent election "validated" by the validators was concluded.
I suppose for you to be convinced that the parties should have paraded as many of those illegal voters across the stand to testify who they voted for would have satisfied you when we found 133 illegal votes for the illegitimate Queen.
You obviously are happy with being hand feed the bull your Government feed you.
Posted by: SP Fan on March 28, 2006 10:08 AMThis is about basic rights and the constitution...something you *claim* to support.
But when it comes down to it, you don't. Just like simple majority (you prefer No voters's votes counting more than Yes voters's votes -- that's pretty unconstitutional).
No worries...this is just another example of the extreme right wing idiocy that has permeated the republican party. At leat one republican had the *guts* to call it what it is -- that would be Rep. Tom.
He's got the ethics and the morals the rest of the Republicans are leaving behind.
Posted by: LovinUSA on March 28, 2006 10:23 AMWhat, no?
I wonder what the difference between a destitute person who can't pay for basics and a crooked gazillionare who you won't even ask to pay....
Ah...never mind...flashback to Bush's state of the union speech and the special invited guest...I get it....never mind...
This is getting to be absolutely absurd.
It will be interesting to see where this goes on Appeal.
Hooked!
You forgot...the reason the fines won't be real (real in terms of truly providing restitution) is they all buy the BEST POSSIBLE lawyers (remember, you hate them).
Remember how you felt when Michael Jackson got off? Or OJ? All those "buy the lawyers" comments?
SAME EXACT THING HERE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Posted by: Lovinusa on March 28, 2006 10:49 AMhoney, try decaf.
Posted by: libertarianobserver on March 28, 2006 11:04 AMPersonally, the hypocrisy of this website keeps me pumped....if Stefan became fair minded, balanced and equal handed...my excitement level would go way down.
His partisan, uneven, unfair and, frankly, irresponsible blogging has to be continually challenged. Otherwise, people would start believing the drivel. Course, it does keep my blood pumping....
Posted by: Lovinusa on March 28, 2006 11:11 AMGoodness, the people of this state cannot WAIT to vote this woman out!
Posted by: Misty on March 28, 2006 11:11 AMWho says? You?
You haven't made a sound, reasonable argument since you've shown up here. But I guess that's to be expected from a sanctimonious lefty who doesn't know half as much as he/she thinks he/she does.
But yeah, keep that blood pumping with your self-righteousness, and I'll keep laughing at your ignorance.
Posted by: jimg on March 28, 2006 02:43 PMOf course, restitution IS a PART OF THE SENTENCE. Therefore, ONLY once the ENTIRE sentence, INCLUDING restitution, is completed should the “sentence” be considered completed.
Maybe if the Queen had ever been a criminal victim needing restitution, she might have a different perspective on the issue.
Criminals have no rights!
Posted by: dcat on March 28, 2006 05:13 PMHopefully Gregoire will put this ENDORSEMENT on every single one of her Campaign Brochures.
I tell you what, if she doesn't...........
WE WILL!!!!!!!!!!!!
This one is a COMPLETE LOSER for the Dems.
When people see what some of these criminals have done to others, the light sentences they received and PRECISELY WHAT THE RESTITUTION IS FOR.......
You will see these LEFTIST PINHEADED KLOWNS running back into the darkness of there holes like a group of CONTORTIONISTS!!!.
This resembles Barry Bonds - if he breaks two HR records of distinction - first Babe Ruth, then Henry Aaron, when any intelligent baseball fan knows that these records are fraudulent - enhanced by steroids, whereas Gregoire's election was enhanced by illegal votes that were effectively stonewalled by the Demoncrat machine.
Posted by: KS on March 28, 2006 08:11 PM