The United States denies voting rights to ex-convicts, parolees, probationers and prisoners on a scale unmatched among democratic nations. State laws establishing voting eligibility vary markedly from no disenfranchisement in some states, to permanent disenfranchisement in others. Existing research suggests that more exclusive laws are associated with larger percentages of nonwhites in the State’s general population and in states with higher percentages of nonwhite prisoners. Little historical research exists explaining how and why certain states have retained disenfranchisement while others have revised these laws. This article adopts a deviant case analysis framework, where California is examined as a seemingly exceptional example of reform in order to refine existing explanations of disenfranchisement. Through extensive archival research and a content analysis of a key media source, this article explains how and why California changed its disenfranchisement laws in 1974, a year existing research would predict a punitive legal shift. The findings suggest that repeal of disenfranchisement may be linked to the activities and framing strategies of reformers, particularly African-American legislators, the presence of advocacy organizations and political context. This research also suggests that media coverage of criminal justice policy issues is an important factor in the political feasibility of reform.
Anderson, Carl W. (1973) Ed. J. Dixon. California state archives: Legislative file: AB1128, Sacramento.
2.
Beckett, Katherine and Theodore Sasson (2000) The politics of injustice: Crime and punishment in America. Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge Press.
3.
Behrens, Angela, Christopher Uggen and Jeff Manza (2003) ‘Ballot manipulation and the “menace of negro domination”: Racial threat and felon disenfranchisement in the United States, 1850-2002’, American Journal of Sociology109(3): 559-605.
4.
Benford, R. D. and D. A. Snow (2000) ‘Framing processes and social movements: An overview and assessment’, Annual Review of Sociology26: 611-639.
5.
Branch, Ann Louise (2004) ‘How Florida Republicans keep blacks from voting’, Los Angeles Times 26 September: 3-3.
6.
Briggs, John V. (1974) In California Constitutional Amendment, Sacramento.
7.
California Department of Corrections (1970-9) Annual reports.
8.
California Department of Corrections (1975) Department of Corrections annual report, 1974.
9.
Collins, Robert M. (2000) More: The politics of growth in postwar America. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
10.
Conine, Ernest (1974) ‘Brown responds to law and order craving: Governor’s race puts spotlight on crime’, Los Angeles Times 4 October: 7-7.
11.
Dixon, Julian (1973) Office of Assemblyman Julian C. Dixon.
12.
Dixon, Julian, Evelyn P. Kaplan and George R. Moscone (1974) Ballot arguments for and against Proposition 10, California Secretary of State, Voting Pamphlet.
13.
Editorial (1974) ‘Pro and con comments on ballot propositions’, Los Angeles Times 8 October: 4-4.
14.
Ewald, Alec (2002) ‘Civil death: The ideological paradox of criminal disenfranchisement law in the United States’, University of Wisconsin Law Review1045: 1045-1137.
15.
Garland, David (2001) The culture of control: Crime and social order in contemporary society. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
16.
Goebel, Julius (1937) Felony and misdemeanor: A study in the history of criminal law. Pennsylvania: University of Pennsylvania Press.
17.
Gottlieb, Michael (2002) ‘One person, no vote: The laws of felon disenfranchisement’, Harvard Law Review115(1838): 1939-1963.
18.
Hobbs, Frank and Nicole Stoops (2002) US Census Bureau, demographic trends in the 20th century: Census 2000 special reports: Series Censr-4. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office.
19.
Hudgens, Joe Ben (1970) Ed. Harold M. Carter, Election Services. Los Angeles, California State Archives: Ramirez v. Brown case file.
20.
Hull, E. A. (2006) The disenfranchisement of ex-felons. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.
21.
Hutton, N. (2005) ‘Beyond popular punitiveness?’, Punishment & Society7(3): 243-258.
22.
Kerry, Edgar (1973) Ed. J. Dixon. Sacramento, letter from California Rural Legal Assistance.
23.
Keyssar, Alexander (2000) The right to vote: The contested history of democracy in the United States. New York: Basic Books.
24.
Los Angeles Times (1974a) ‘51% expect ’30s-type depression, poll finds’, Los Angeles Times 4 November: 5-5.
25.
Los Angeles Times (1974b) Political cartoons, Los Angeles Times8, 9 October and others.
26.
Los Angeles Times (1974c) Republican campaign advertisement, Los Angeles Times 1 November: 5-5.
27.
Los Angeles Times (1974d) ‘Saxbe declares rehabilitation is a myth’, Los Angeles Times 1 October: 12-12.
28.
McGirr, Lisa (2001) Suburban warriors: The origins of the new American Right. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
29.
Manatt, Charles, Kathleen Manatt and Brandon Rottinghaus (2003) ‘Incarceration and enfranchisement: International practices, impact and recommendations for reform’, International Foundation for Election Systems, Washington, DC.
30.
Manza, Jeffrey and Christopher Uggen (2006) Locked out: Felon disenfranchisement and American democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
31.
Mauer, Marc (2002) ‘Mass imprisonment and the disappearing voters’, in Marc Mauer and Meda Chesney-Lind (eds) Invisible punishment: The collateral consequences of mass imprisonment, pp. 50-59. New York: The New Press.
32.
Mauer, Marc and Meda Chesney-Lind, eds (2002) Invisible punishment: The collateral consequences of mass incarceration. New York: The New Press.
33.
Mihaly, Emmery (1972) Ed. Secretary of State. San Francisco, California State Archives: Ramirez v. Brown case file.
34.
Perman, Michael (2001) Struggle for mastery: Disfranchisement in the South 1888-1908. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press.
35.
Pettus, Katherine (2002) ‘Felony disenfranchisement in the contemporary United States: An ancient practice in a modern polity’, Dissertation, Columbia University, New York.
36.
Preuhs, Robert R. (2001) ‘State felon disenfranchisement policy’, Social Science Quarterly82(4): 733-748.
37.
Reagan, Governor Ronald (1971) Ed. J.T. Knox. Letter, California State Archives, Sacramento.
38.
Secretary of State (1972) ‘Summary of voter registration officials survey conducted by respondent Secretary of State’, Sacramento, California. In California State Archives, Sacramento.
39.
Sentencing Project, The (2006) thesentencingproject.org
40.
7th Step Foundation, The (1973) Ed. J. Dixon. California State Archives, Sacramento.
41.
Skelton, George (1974) ‘Democrats take 72 of 100 races’, Los Angeles Times 7 November: 1-1, 32-32.
42.
Sparks, Richard (2001) ‘“Bringin’ it all back home”: Populism, media coverage, and the dynamics of locality and globality in the politics of crime control’, in K. Stenson and R. R. Sullivan (eds) Crime, risk and justice, pp. 194-213. Cullompton, Devon: Willan.
43.
Staff Report (1973) In Assembly Committee on Constitutional Amendments, California State Archives, Sacramento.
44.
Stanford, William (1972) Ed. H. Schanbacher. Memorandum from San Diego County Counsel to Secretary of State’s office responding to Secretary of State’s questionnaire on voting rights of ex-felons.
45.
Tarr, G. Allen (1998) Understanding state constitutions. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
46.
Uggen, Christopher and Jeff Manza (2001) ‘The political consequences of felon disenfranchisement laws in the US’, http://www.northwestern.edu/ipr/publications/papers/2000/disfranchise.pdf
47.
Waxman, Henry A. (1971) In Assembly Committee on elections and reapportionment, Hearing Records, California State Archives, Sacramento.
48.
Zimring, Franklin, Gordon Hawkins and Sam Kamin (2001) Punishment and democracy: Three strikes and you’re out in California. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
49.
Dillenberg v. Kramer (1972) 9th Cir. 469 F. 2d 1222, 1225-6.
50.
Matter of Application of Westenberg (1914) 167 Cal. 309, 319, 139 P. 674.
51.
Otsuka v. Hite (1966) 64 Cal.2d 596, 414 P.2d 412, 51 Cal.Rptr. 284 Supreme Court of California.
52.
Ramirez v. Brown (1973) 107 Cal.Rpt. 137, Vol. S.F. 22916 Supreme Court of California.
53.
Richardson v. Ramirez (1974) 418 U.S. at 78 U.S. Supreme Court.
54.
Stephens v. Toomey (1959) 51 Cal.2d 864, 338 P.2d 182
55.
Truchon v. Toomey (1953) 116 Cal.App.2d 736, 254 P.2d 638.
56.
Washington v. The State (1884) 75 Ala. 582, 1884 WL 489 Supreme Court of Alabama.
