Study Finds Most Americans Support Voting Rights for Ex-Felons

Fall 2002, Volume 24, Number 1

Jeff Manza

Tough-on-crime attitudes don’t translate into support for a “civil death” penalty, according to a new study that finds the public is receptive to voting rights for ex-felons and convicts living in the community.

The study, by IPR faculty fellow Jeff Manza, Clem Brooks at Indiana University, and Christopher Uggen at the University of Minnesota, shows that only 31% of the public would allow current prisoners to vote — but up to 80% would restore the franchise to ex-felons. Similarly, 61%-68% do not believe in disenfranchising felony probationers and parolees who are not currently in prison.

Data for the study were drawn from a national telephone survey of 1,000 adults ages 18 and older conducted by Harris Interactive in July 2002. It is the first national level data collected to systematically assess American public opinion on issues of voting rights for criminal offenders.

Convicted felons who are not currently incarcerated make up approximately 75% of the disenfranchised population — more than 3 million Americans. In earlier work, the authors found that about 4.7 million, or 2.3% of the voting age population, were disenfranchised in the last presidential election by virtue of a felony conviction.

The study found support for enfranchisement drops considerably when the specific nature of a crime is incorporated into the survey question. But majorities still back voting rights in cases of violent crime (66%) and white collar crime (63%). The weakest candidates for enfranchisement seem to be sex offenders, but even in this case a majority (52%) favored extending voting rights to sex offenders who have completed their sentences.

The drop-off in support for voting rights in the case of specific categories of crimes (as compared to the “generic ex-felon” question) suggests that politicians and activists could shape public attitudes by framing the debate in terms of specific offenses.

However, the similar levels of support — over 60% — for enfranchising white-collar and violent offenders, as well as for probationers and parolees, points to a strong fundamental preference for civil rights over the harsh punishment of criminals, the authors suggest. This conclusion squares with another survey finding that the public is no more opposed to generic civil rights for criminals than for other historically unpopular groups.

In fact, the survey found no statistically significant difference between public acceptance of an atheist’s freedom of speech (82%) and an ex-felon’s (85%). The authors consider this “prima facie evidence of Americans’ willingness to extend civil liberties to criminal offenders.”

Even in the specific case of a drug offender advocating legalization of controlled substances, some 72% were supportive of the hypothetical ex-felon’s civil liberties. This is a striking level of support for a particularly unpopular form of speech by a particularly mistrusted group of individuals, and illustrates the broader sentiment toward welcoming ex-felons back into civil society.

The working paper is available at www.northwestern.edu/ipr.