If your time is short:
- California Republican Congressman Doug LaMalfa claims that HR 1 “would force states to restore the voting rights of convicted criminals – including violent criminals convicted of murder or rape.”
- The bill will restore voting rights for people convicted of a crime, but only once they are out of jail or prison.
- The vast majority of states, including California, already restore voting rights for people convicted of a crime, automatically upon release or after a period.
Would Democracy-led HR 1 legislation allow killers and rapists to vote?
This is the dramatic message that Republican Congressman Doug LaMalfa of Northern California wrote in a recent email to a voter.
The voter asked PolitiFact to virtually check the demands of the congressman.
The U.S. House of Representatives on Wednesday approved comprehensive legislation on a party vote, but the bill faces an uphill battle in the equally divided Senate, where it will need 60 votes to pass. It contains provisions that require states to set up automatic voter registration on the same day and make it easier to get a postal ballot. It also contains provisions to increase transparency in the financing of campaigns.
Republican lawmakers are opposed to the bill and have intensified attacks against it in interviews and on social media over the past few days as it got closer to a vote.
Last month, PolitiFact factually investigated several misleading allegations about HR 1, including statements similar to LaMalfa.
The congressman was one of seven members of the GOP House in California who voted to oppose the declaration of last November’s election votes in Arizona and Pennsylvania. Supporters of former President Donald Trump allege election fraud and irregularities in the two swing states, despite a lack of evidence and legal challenges that have gone nowhere.
Here is the specific statement from LaMalfa about HR 1 that caught our attention:
“HR 1 would also require important changes in electoral processes that would dominate electoral practices tailored to thousands of communities across the country. For example, it would force countries to restore the voting rights of convicted criminals – including violent criminals convicted of murder or rape. ”
We focused on the last section for this fact check.
Our research
Language in HR 1 does not explicitly mention murderers or rapists. But LaMalfa’s statement is at least partially correct, as the bill stipulates that citizens convicted of a crime will still be allowed to vote “unless such person is serving a criminal sentence in a correctional institution at the time of the election”. or serve facility. ”
The congressman omitted the last part about the need to get out of jail.
His statement also ignores the fact that many states are already restoring voting rights for people convicted of crimes at the end of their sentence.
In 18 states, including California, criminals only lose their right to vote while locked up and are automatically rehabilitated after being released, according to the National Conference of State Lawmakers. In 19 more, criminals lose their right to vote while imprisoned, but regain it after completing the release or probationary period. In Maine and Vermont, people who are locked up never lose the right to vote.
A LaMalfa spokesperson did not respond to requests for comment.
We asked suffrage experts to assess the claim of the congressman.
“I think it’s accurate, but also incomplete and out of context,” said Justin Levitt, a professor at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles, where he gives constitutional law with a focus on election administration.
Myrna Pérez is director of suffrage and elections at the non-partisan Brennan Center for Justice, which supports HR 1.
Pérez calls LaMalfa’s allegation ‘misleading’, as many states already allow convicted criminals to vote in favor of their sentence.
“The criminal justice system has decided that these people are safe enough to live and work among us,” Perez said, adding that people convicted of crimes are expected to work, pay their bills and, after their release, their children to see. “Why does one of those expectations not contribute to your society?”
Our rule
California Republican Congressman Doug LaMalfa claims that HR 1 “would force states to restore the voting rights of convicted criminals – including violent criminals convicted of murder or rape.”
His statement is partly correct, but omits some important points.
The proposed legislation will restore voting rights for all people convicted of a crime, but only after they have completed their sentence and been released from detention.
LaMalfa also ignores the fact that the vast majority of states, including California, already restore voting rights for people convicted of a crime, either automatically after release or after a period.
Given these important omissions, we rated LaMalfa’s claim Half True.
HALF TRUE – The statement is partially accurate, but omits important details or takes things out of context.
Source list
Rep. Doug LaMalfa, Email to Voter, March 2, 2021
HR1 – For the People Act of 2021, text of the bill, was consulted on March 2021
Justin Levitt, Professor at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles, Email Exchange March 3, 2021
Myrna Pérez, Director of Voting and Elections, Brennan Center for Justice, Telephone Interview on March 2, 2021.
The national conference of state legislators, Felon Voting Rights, was visited in March 2021.
PolitiFact, Misleading Attacks on HR 1, Democrats’ Voting Rights Bill, February 3, 2021
CapRadio provides a reliable source of news because of you. As a non-profit organization, donations from people like you support the journalism that enables us to discover stories that are important to our audience. If you believe in what we do and support our mission, please donate today.