I read an article from the Washington Post titled “Why
punish ex-offenders with a voting ban?”
The article was written by Charles W. Colson. The author is against the current process
that ex-offenders must go through to get their voting rights restored. Ex-inmates who have served their sentence, proved
themselves to be trustworthy, and are working to get their lives back on track
are prohibited from voting. This is one
way that society is holding them back from a return to a “normal” life. This is a topic that is currently being discussed
with in the presidential campaign. Mr.
Colson is arguing his position on the subject throughout the article. The purpose of the article is to try to encourage
the general public, especially those who oppose the restoration of rights to
criminals, to understand an ex-inmate’s point of view and how this one
restriction can hold them back from feeling as though they are a regular member
of society. The article is meant to
convince the reader that a person should not be punished for the rest of their
life because of a mistake they made, especially when the person has served
their sentence and proven himself to be responsible. Mr. Colson has a passionate stance on this subject. This is evident from his description of his
own personal experience. He served less
than a year in a federal prison and his voting rights were not restored until
30 years later. He feels that society
should help ex-inmates return to a normal life and welcome them back to
civilization rather than hold them back and continuously punish them for crimes
they have already served time for. The
beginning of the article introduces the author and provides a glimpse of his background. He is the founder of the nation’s largest
outreach program for prisoners and their families. He was also convicted of an offense related
to the Watergate scandal and served time in federal prison. The beginning of the article did get my
attention and suggested that what I was about to read was a subject that was
very personal to the author. The end of
the article was well written. It stated
that if we want ex-offenders to become contributing members to society, we must
help them, rather than hold them back.
Also, the opposition of the restoration of a criminal’s rights is a
topic that is currently being used by politicians to make a political gain, but
does not serve the common good. Overall, I feel the author made a strong argument for his position.
