by Dr. Bernard Evans, professor at St John's University and member of JRLC's Executive Board. Cross-posted with courtesy of the St Cloud Visitor.

Felons voting! Really. Is that so bad? Recent news carried a number of stories about voting by felons. Politicians stepped before cameras to assure their constituents – or would-be constituents – that they will be tough on felons. Persons convicted of a felony, it seems, are easy targets for cheap political points especially when the politicians involved ignore all nuances that come with the word, “felon.”

Persons convicted of a felony may be serving time in prison or jail; they may have served their time and are now on parole; they may be on probation. They also may be “off paper,” meaning all their obligations have been satisfied. A total of 5.3 million Americans are denied the right to vote because of laws that prohibit voting by people with a felony conviction. About 4 million of these live, work, pay taxes and raise families in our communities.

Whether such persons are allowed to vote depends upon where they live. Thirty-five states, including Minnesota, deny the right to vote to persons convicted of a felony as long as they remain on paper – that is, incarcerated or on parole or on probation. Other states restore this right as soon as the person leaves prison or jail. Two states (Maine and Vermont) allow inmates to vote. Two others (Kentucky and Virginia) permanently disenfranchise anyone convicted of a felony.

Catholic social teaching speaks of the right to participation – that is, the right to be involved in decision-making processes that affect our lives. The Second Vatican Council in the 1960’s spoke of citizens’ right and duty to vote freely in the interest of advancing the common good. What the U.S. Catholic Bishops said twenty years later about participation in the economy can be applied as well to voting. “Basic justice demands the establishment of minimum levels of participation in the life of the human community for all persons. The ultimate injustice is for a person or group to be treated actively or abandoned passively as if they were nonmembers of the human race. To treat people this way is effectively to say they simply do not count as human beings” (Economic Justice for All, 77). To deny people their right to vote is another way of saying they simply do not matter. This is wrong for the persons directly affected by such laws; it is wrong for the larger community as well.

Voting is the basis of American democracy and the health of our democracy requires the broadest possible voter participation. Restoring the vote to persons convicted of a felony encourages their participation in civic life, encourages them to re-establish healthy ties to the community, encourages them to be responsible citizens.

In 2007 the Minnesota Catholic Bishops joined other religious leaders in the Joint Religious Legislative Coalition (JRLC) in issuing a statement on voting rights for persons convicted of a felony. The statement urged the Department of Corrections and the Minnesota Secretary of State to do a better job of informing felons that they have the right to vote after they are “off paper.” It called for better communication between the justice department and election officials so that ex-felons are not red flagged at the polls even after they have satisfied their obligations. It also encouraged the State of Minnesota to extend the right to vote to felons as soon as they are released to the community and not wait until they are off probation or parole.

All of us in the Catholic community would do well to follow the lead of our bishops on this issue. At the very least we might allow ourselves to become better informed about this topic. With a little more information we might discourage others from targeting for political gain persons who have made mistakes, paid their price and now seek reintegration into our communities.

(Photo source)

There's no doubt anymore about what the Governor's race is about. It is about whether a vigorous state government is needed, for what purposes, and how the tax code should be altered to reflect each candidate's vision.

I am keeping two things in mind as I evaluate the candidates. First, Minnesota's state constitution gives the Governor a lot of power. Hence, Governors, unless they fumble badly, get about 85% of what they want budget-wise. And on top of that, Governors leave a lasting effect on the judiciary. In other words the Governor's race is huge!!!

Second, I'm listening and looking at their websites to see who best has a grip on the shifting tax burdens of the last decade and has a vision for both shared tax burdens and a plan for shared prosperity. Check out their websites, listed here alphabetically: Mark Dayton, Tom Emmer, Tom Horner.

JRLC keeps looking at the fairness and economic impacts of tax burdens and you'll be hearing more about that soon. In the meantime, the tax fairness cards, seen above, keep flying out of the office!

Brian Rusche
executive director

(Photo source)

This we know, all things are connected, like the blood which united one family.

All things are connected.

Whatever befalls the earth, befalls the sonds of the earth.

Man did not weave the web of life; he is merely a strand in it.

Whatever he does to the web, he does to himself.

- Chief Seattle

Does your tradition reflect this belief also, that all things are connected with one another? How do you honor this interconnectedness in your spiritual life? How do you practice this interconnectedness in your public life? Share with us in the comments below!

Have an idea for Tuesday Teachings? Email Alison.

The year 2011 marks the 40th anniversary for the Joint Religious Legislative Coalition! But to find the roots of the JRLC, one must travel beyond the first legislative session for the JRLC in 1971. The JRLC has its roots in a letter sent in the summer of 1968 by the Reverend Edward Flahavan of the Office of Urban Affairs for the Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis to Reverend Willis J. Merriman of the Minnesota Council of Churches. In the letter, Reverend Flahavan proposes “it would be beneficial for our mutual offices to discuss possible cooperation for the upcoming 1969 Legislative Session.” This initiated negotiations for how to combine the lobbying efforts of the Catholic Church and Protestant Denominations. Overtures were also made to the Minnesota Rabbinical Association. Although the union of these two organizations did not coalesce by the 1969 Legislative Session as originally hoped, in 1970 it was officially announced that Minnesota Council of Churches and Minnesota Catholic Conference were forming a “Joint Church Legislative Coalition,” or JCLC. Within a week, the Minnesota Rabbinical Association had signed on as well, and the JRLC was born.

However, the JRLC still had many changes to undergo before it would look like it does today. In 1972, the JRLC held its first “Day on the Hill,” an annual tradition that continues today. In 1974, the Minnesota Rabbinical Association was replaced with the Jewish Community Relations Council. The Joint Religious Education and Research Fund was started in 1976, another program that continues to this day. In 1996, the American Muslim Center of Minnesota became and observing member of the JRLC. The Islamic community became an official part of the Joint Religious Legislative Coalition in 2003, now represented by the Islamic Center of Minnesota. Although the JRLC has changed and grown since its first legislative session, it remains committed to the same fundamental principles in 2011 as it did in 1971.

Nate Hart-Anderson

JRLC's summer intern, Nate Hart-Anderson, has been compiling research of JRLC's beginnings as part of his summer projects. We've enjoyed having him in the office and he's done a great job with this research. Thanks Nate!