Florida goes red and votes to turn itself blue
In close races, the Republican candidates for governor and senator in Florida were victorious.
At the same time the voters of Florida gave them their wins, about a million and a half felons in the state were automatically given the vote next time (with the exception of felony sexual offenders and murderers). There were about 8 million total voters in the election in that state this year, so you do the math—another one and a half million voters stands to change the voting tendencies of the state to blue, blue, blue.
And the vote to restore these rights was not even remotely close: about 64% pro and 36% con. The measure needed at least 60% to pass, and it got it.
So, why did the voters of Florida do this? To begin with, Florida was an outlier in terms of votes and felons: it was one of only four states that doesn’t automatically restore voting rights on the completion of a sentence, although felons who’d served their time could apply for clemency to the governor and a Clemency Board. To the voters of Florida, automatically restoring their rights instead must have seemed only fair, and a way to bring the state in line with most other states (see this for a map that will tell you the policies in all the states).
However, the political reality is that this change in Florida is likely to make the state reliably Democratic, and those voters who don’t like that fact will have voted for it.
Or is that the case? No one knows for sure how these people will vote or how many of them will actually vote. But I do think it’s much more likely than not that the vast majority of those who do end up voting will vote the Democratic ticket.
Florida is one of the most important states in the US during presidential elections. Anyone who’s been around for the last two decades or so is highly aware of that. So this has potentially enormous national repercussions.
[ADDENDUM: I want to add that noting in this post means that I think that ex-felons shouldn’t be allowed to vote in Florida. I think that’s up to Floridians. In most states, they can vote, and my basic position is that they should be allowed to vote after serving time and parole.
However, I continue to think—depending, of course, on how many choose to vote, and what party they tend to vote for—that because Florida appears to be balanced on a knife-edge in regard to the two main political parties, this change in law is more likely than not to lead to more voters for the Democrats, and therefore has a very real potential of turning the state reliably blue. If that turns out to be incorrect, I will be happy to have been wrong.]
Gillum, a truly terrible candidate, at least had the grace to concede; not so Georgia’s Abrams, who seems to feel as though, by virtue of the endorsements she received from celebrities, she was entitled to win.
Trump has become involved in “sentencing reform” which may appeal to some felons. Not that I think it is a good idea.
I don’t see this as a problem to get worked up over. I’ve known a lot of felons, and they come in all political shapes and sizes. Most of them are not about to take time from their busy day to go vote. Of the rest, a sizable portion are conservative. Ironically, the one who comes to mind as most likely to vote in the future got his conviction for having voted twice for George W. Bush. I’m sure he’d never vote for a Democrat.
Besides, it’s a done deal. We just have to work harder in the future to get out the conservative vote.
I’m not buying the notion that exclusion of felons reduces the dimensions of the eligible electorate by 11% in Florida.
Here’s Charles C. W. Cooke on the implications of this Florida election:
https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/florida-man/
It sets up Florida to be a low-tax, conservative state for a long time. And who says all of those felons who have completed their sentences including probation are going to be Democrats?
Art Deco:
It doesn’t.
The number of people in Florida who voted in this election is NOT the number of people eligible to vote in Florida in 2018. Like all states, the percentage of voter participation is nowhere near 100%. Voter turnout in these midterms in general was about half, so perhaps that was true of Florida as well. The true figure for Florida voters might be 16 million, then. If there are 1 and a half million new voters who are ex-felons, that would be 8-9%. If they vote at the same rate as other Floridians, and that rate is around half (and as I noted in my post, we don’t know the rate at which ex-felons in Florida would vote), that would also be similar. If a substantial majority vote Democratic (and that is likely), that would turn Florida reliably blue.
There are a lot of “ifs” there, of course. But that’s the logic.
Kate:
I’m not saying they all will vote Democratic. But it’s likely that more of them will than will not, at least in my opinion.
That doesn’t mean they shouldn’t be allowed to vote, by the way. I think that’s up to Floridians. In most states, they can vote, and my basic position is that they should be allowed to vote.
I just think it’s likely this will turn Florida blue. I certainly could be wrong about that.
The statistics I’ve found is that probably about a third of the ex-felons are black (I read that at Vox). There are no statistics on how many of the remaining third are Hispanic, etc. In Florida I assume it’s a fairly large group, because of the general population there. The black population of ex-felons would probably be overwhelmingly Democrats . The non-black population might be something like half and half, let’s say (no one really knows), which would give the Democrats an edge that could be significant.
If very few ex-felons vote, of course, however they vote it won’t make a whole lot of difference, probably. But Florida seems to be balancing on a knife edge in terms of the balance between the parties, and even a small change could throw the state into the blue column.
I must note a tiny typo missing “nothing”:
I want to add that noting in this post means that I think that ex-felons shouldn’t be allowed to vote in Florida.
I want to add a bit, noting how very very seldom Neo makes any mistakes. But sometimes it’s easy to miss something as insubstantial as nothing, or at least the “h”.
Felons voting in Florida are more likely to vote Dem, but that’s still the right thing to do.
Reps need to pass laws taking away Fed money from educational institutions which secretly discriminate against Republicans, Christians, and conservatives. That’s most of them.
According to the National Review link, above, and the author is usually solid, along with electing Republicans to all the statewide offices in Florida, voters passed a constitutional amendment requiring that all increases in taxes and fees be presented in separate bills and approved by 2/3 of the legislature. And DeSantis, upon assuming office, will have authority to replace three of the four progressives on the state Supreme Court, changing a 4-3 progressive majority to a 6-1 conservative majority. It will take quite a while for those felons, even if they vote and vote Democrat, to make a dent.
The current population of Florida is 21 million (I had thought 19 million). If 13% are aliens and 16% are minors, the residue would be 15.3 million. Again, 1.5 million is 10% of 15.3 million. Not buying.
Art Deco:
What are you not buying? Do you think the figure is too low or too high? I assume you think it’s too high?
As usual with statistics, one never knows for sure. But the figures I gave are in the ball park of what the only studies we have available indicate. Take a look here, for example, as well as here (some really interesting charts in that last study). See Figure 7: Florida happens to have an unusually high number of ex-felons (that study, from 2010, placed the percentage even higher than the figures I used for this post, which were from a different study).
Neo, I don’t think the ex-cons who would be voting would change the political dynamics of the state very much. The ex-cons who would take the opportunity to vote are very likely to skew white and older. I would be willing to bet that it will make it easier for conservatives in Florida, not harder.
Remember, you are talking about non-recidivists for the most part and in the long run- I doubt those sorts of ex-cons are more likely to vote Democrat. Such ex-cons are more likely to be Caucasian, and definitely over the age of 40- both of which correlate strongly with voting Republican.
Yancey Ward:
Perhaps you’re right. That would be a nice benefit.
It is definitely true that, since ex-felons haven’t automatically had their voting rights reinstated in Florida and that set of circumstances has been true since the middle of the 19th century, there must be a huge backlog of older ex-felons.
However, that wouldn’t mean they are non-recidivists. If they’re older, they could have been in and out of prison several times, or on probation several times, and now be eligible to vote.
Kate on November 7, 2018 at 8:19 pm at 8:19 pm said:
According to the National Review link, above, and the author is usually solid, along with electing Republicans to all the statewide offices in Florida, voters passed a constitutional amendment requiring that all increases in taxes and fees be presented in separate bills and approved by 2/3 of the legislature.
* * *
I love this.
Log-rolling & horse-trading may be how bills move forward, but at least the public that pays the taxes should get to see where the logs rolled and whose horses were traded off.
Never was a fan of universal suffrage, especially in nations with a big share social parasites living on taxpayer’s money. In my view, only taxpayers are legitimate voters, so those living on the government handouts need not apply. And the proper voting age should be raised to 25 years, because most young people now are not sufficiently mature below this age to make sensible choices in anything.
Supremacy of law is a good thing, but supremacy of common sense is much, much better.
Sergey,
I’ll buy that!
Any state with sales tax makes all residents taxpayers.
If you mean *Income tax* then there are work arounds. Merely have a minimum tax of $10 for all residents.
Oh, you mean people like *you* should get the vote, and not *them*. Why didn’t you just say that in the first place!
I’m curious, as an ex-Floridian, how Florida got to be a running joke as a place for weird people. Was it Dave Barry columns? I doubt California will be surpassed in the near term for weirdness, but Florida is coming on strong.
A girl in my Florida high school class married perhaps the least known American mass serial killer — 22 victims, though he confessed to 41. You don’t know his name, but I remember her. She was in the lower track, OK looking though overweight. She just wanted to be happy and that’s what she got.
Jesus wept.
Oh for heaven’s sake, Chester. You know better than that. The main point is that whoever the taxpayers are, it’s their money that’s being spent, so they should be the ones with the say over how it’s spent.
.
As for the practicality of requiring proof of income-tax payment in order to vote, such a system is no more open to corruption than any other.
What’s lacking is the political will to change the system. But I doubt that Sergey intended his suggestion to be considered as fully worked out and ready for institution tomorrow morning before breakfast.
In ancient Athens citizenship was not granted automatically, the young man was required to pass an exam on civics: to know the basic laws and customs and be recommended by two elder citizens of a good reputation. Universal suffrage in a society where civics is absent from school program makes this society an easy prey of demagogy. The favorite trick is to convince one group of people that they are collectively and individually victims of oppression from some other group of people – that is how Nazi and Bolsheviks came to power. Now Democrats in general and feminists in particular try to pull the same trick, with such insane notion of “intersectionality”: everybody should think about oneself as a victim of somebody. We all know to what mayhem such agitation can lead, provoking a civil war or genocide. Some basic knowledge of civics should be a necessary condition for inclusion in voters register.
And another point to Sergey. :>)
.
When I was in grade school, back in the fifties (you know — we walked uphill 20 miles to get to school and walked uphill another 20 miles to get home) we had to pass a test on the Constitution in order to graduate.
You all know damned well how Florida got all mixed up. 70% of its citizens aren’t from here and there are 1.9 million new yorkers. Add a few hundred thousand turd world Caribbean islanders looking for a hand out and you have the makings democrat control.
Was it Dave Barry columns?
Carl Hiassen helped.
Was the serial killer Bolin?
Neo,
I was questioning your assumption that ex-felons would tend to vote democratic, so I looked it up. It appears you are correct.
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/jail-survey-7-in-10-felons-register-as-democrats
Julie near Chicago and Sergey,
I have a pet idea of weighting each citizen’s vote by how much tax they pay. It’d be like voting your shares of stock… the more shares you have (or the more vested you are in the system), the more your vote counts.
If we did this, the wealthy would not be so anxious to vote themselves loopholes to avoid paying taxes. And, the poor would not be able to vote themselves largesse from the public treasury.
Interesting that Democrats, who think themselves peaceful and less violent, also know that felons voting favors them.
AVI – on the “two different parties” thread, this comment applies here:
OKBecky on November 8, 2018 at 2:23 am at 2:23 am said:
“While I was still a young college student (about 2000-2001), a friend interrupted a discussion we were having about politics and current events to say, “You’re so intelligent, and caring, and informed – how can you possibly hold the awful beliefs you do?”
As though my character was separate from my personal beliefs.
I have never ended a friendship due to differences of belief – whether religion, politics, social views… I’ve had a number of friends in the past 15+ years cut me out of their lives because of my beliefs. It’s like they can’t reconcile their personal experience with me with their prejudices about my beliefs, and the prejudice wins out.
I have ended a few friendships based on how the people treated me *while* they disagreed. Vicious personal attacks, slander, character assassination: I don’t tolerate such abuse. And it always seems to surprise them when I tell them (briefly) why I’m cutting off the relationship. The response tends to be surprise that I would take offense at what they said and how they said it, with a confidence that we’ll go back to things as they were before.
…
It occurs to me that the personal obliviousness of many of my left-leaning associates tends to resemble that. Like conservatives don’t have any feelings or humanity that leftists are bound to respect.”
Just a bit of experience here.
I had occasion to spend a little of my time in prison. Not for a felony, nor were any of my prison mates felons; mostly misdemeanants, and a few particularly idiotic fellows who committed summary offenses and were foolish enough to blow off the convictions and subsequently got caught again and a judge was wise enough to give them 30 to 90 to give them a chance to see the error of their ways.
Anyway, WAY back in 2007 somehow a prison discussion on politics got started, and if you think political discussions in your world can get out of hand, just try one in prison and see what can happen. I took an unpopular stand among my mates and they were ready to convince me of my mistake in rather forceful terms, until I asked “How many people in this room are registered to vote”?
Complete silence reigned and a lot of looking at each other ensued. “A show of hands, please”, I continued. Not a hand was raised and everyone seemed to take a renewed interest in cards, board games, and TV.
If experience counts for anything I am not worried one way or the other how ex cons may vote, if they can be bothered to go to the trouble of seeing to it they take the steps necessary to be allowed to do so in the first place.
We are using the word differently in a way that doesn’t completely overlap. When I write “non-recidivists” I mean ex-cons that have not been arrested and convicted again. My point is that you lose the right to vote if once again are convicted and are in the probation system. To vote in Florida as an ex-con, you have to keep your nose clean for the most part, or at least be smart enough to elude the law on their criminal activities. I strongly suspect that the people who can actually do this are going to skew Republican, not Democrat because of the age differences alone.
(and as I noted in my post, we don’t know the rate at which ex-felons in Florida would vote),
I’m more concerned in FL, where I live, with how close a crooked marxist like Gillum got to getting elected. That was WAY too damned close.
I think, as to your concern, it’s nontrivial, but… one thing that might be considered would be — what percentage of ex-felons vote in other states?
But I voted against it on general principle. The argument “but all the OOOOTHER states let them…” just brings up the classic “mom’s adage”: “Yes, and if all of your friends decide to jump off a cliff, are you going to jump with them?”
No, I believe felons needed to go through a vetting process to show that they had BECOME upstanding citizens again, having shown that they were NOT by virtue of their crimes. This is less so on some levels, because there was a time when “Don’t make a felony case out of it” meant something, while EVERYTHING is now a felony case… :-/ But it should still be a matter of a process of looking at the crime(s) committed and the behavior of the ex-con since release.
Kate (@NR-florida-man): Given that the state has no income tax — and, indeed, that it has the lowest overall tax burden of any of the heavily populated states — the combination of these results all but ensures that Florida will remain a low-tax, low-spending place for the foreseeable future.
Not only that, but FL is fairly unique in that not only does it NOT have a state income tax, but the FL Constitution has a specific provision outlawing one. So the legislature can’t come along and decide to implement one, regardless of the will of the people, a la ObamaCare. It would require amending the Constitution, which means it has to be asked of the populace. Not thinking that they’ll get 60% of the voters to agree to an income tax.
GASP…!!!
Seems there’s something going on here in Florida endangering the Senate & Governor vote count results. Smells very, VERY fishy in Demo Dominated Broward county.
F**k!!!!
Broward County is certainly in the news these days, and all of the problems there seem to be … related somehow….