Representation: Elections and Beyond

Notes

NOTES Chapter 1. Evaluating U.S. Electoral Institutions in Comparative Perspective I thank Carol Galais for her research assistance and Jack Nagel and Rogers Smith for extremely useful comments. 1. I focus here entirely on electoral institutions and leave aside the choice of a presidential rather than a parliamentary system. The predominant view among political scientists is that parliamentary democracies are “superior” (see Linz 1990). 2. This is clearly not the only reason. As important is the great difficulty of amending the Constitution and overcoming multiple veto points in the decision-making process. Chapter 2. Are American Elections Sufficiently Democratic? 1. This is the question posed to the speakers at the public forum at the National Constitution Center in September 2008 as part of the Penn Program on Democracy, Citizenship, and Constitutionalism. To their credit, none of the participants took the question as an opportunity to call for more or fewer Democratic elections. I am grateful for the helpful comments and criticisms raised at the forum and for the suggestions later provided by the reviewers of the manuscript. Chapter 3. Barriers to Voting in the Twenty-First Century This chapter draws extensively on Chapter 9, “The Story Unfinished,” in Alexander Keyssar, The Right to Vote: The Contested History of Democracy in the United States, rev. ed. (New York: Basic Books, 2009), 258–94; reprinted by permission. 1. Boston Globe, 2 August 1997; Boston Herald, August 3, 1997. 2. Boston Herald, 3 August 1997; Boston Globe, August 13, 1997, July 30, 1998, June 29, October 29, 2000; Durham (N.C.) Herald-Sun, September 10, 2000; Secretary of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, “Massachusetts Statewide Ballot Measures: 1919–2004,” 53. http://www.sec.state.ma.us/ELE/elebalm/balmidx.htm. 296 Notes to Pages 40–43 3. An estimated 960,000 Floridians were barred from voting in the 2004 election (Sentencing Project 2011). 4. In 2009, for example, the State of Washington eliminated the requirement that all fines and fees be paid before voting rights are restored. 5. Ibid. 6. Manza and Uggen 2006: 286–87; Sentencing Project 2008”; news release, June 20, 2008, http://www.sentencingproject.org/NewsDetails.aspx?Ne; Sarasota HeraldTribune , April 6, 2007; Baltimore Sun, April 25, 2007; St. Petersburg Times, September 27, 2007; Ray Henry, Associated Press (Providence, R.I.), November 8, 2006; Lexington Herald-Leader, February 6, March 4, 2008; see also the compilation by the ACLU 2007; ACLU, “Tennessee Legislature Simplifies Voting Restoration for Ex-Felons,” press release, May 17, 2006. For the most complete account of legal changes in the states through 2006, see King 2006. The ACLU of Florida has also published and posted detailed accounts of developments in that state. 7. Manza and Uggen 2006: 287; Hattiesburg American, March 4, 2008; Wood 2009: 5, 14–15; New York Times, July 22, 2004; USA Today, 1 June 2006; Sentencing Project, “Disenfranchisement News,” January 3, 2008; Wall Street Journal, March 31, 2008. 8. Manza and Uggen, 2006: 14; Sarasota Herald-Tribune, April 6, 2007; Chattanooga Times Free Press, October 2, 2006; Sentencing Project, News Update, April 18, 2008; Washington Times, February 15, 2006; New York Times, July 11, 2004. 9. On September 26, 2008, Senator Russ Feingold and Representative John Conyers introduced the Democracy Restoration Act of 2008 (S.3640, H.R. 7136), to restore the franchise to those released from prison. Charleston Gazette, May 27, 2008. Regarding legal challenges, particularly those claiming that felon disfranchisement violated the Voting Rights Act, see Manza and Uggen 2006: 225–27. In the state of Washington, a suit was filed challenging the requirement that ex-felons remain disfranchised until they had paid off all their legal financial obligations. The claim was rebuffed by the Washington Supreme Court. Madison v. Washington, 78598-8 (Washington Supreme Court 2007). 10. Wood 2009: 3; as the map on page 3 makes clear, the states with the most exclusionary provisions tended to be in the South. Data regarding European practices are presented on p. 5. In April 2008, the House of Representatives of Kentucky (one of the two states that retained lifetime disfranchisement) voted to restore the rights of some ex-felons. Louisville Courier-Journal, April 21, 2008. In California, people in jail awaiting trial are permitted to vote. San Jose Mercury-News, February 4, 2008, online edition. 11. Pew Center on the States 2008: 5–9; New York Times, February 29, April 23, 2008; Washington Post, June 12, 2008; UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, 72nd sess., Geneva, February 18...