Florida Officially Passes Law Requiring Ex-Felons To Pay Off Huge Fees To Vote

Start your day with TPM.
Sign up for the Morning Memo newsletter

In the final step for what Democrats feel is the complete bastardization of a ballot amendment passed in 2018, the Republican-majority Florida House passed a bill Friday requiring former felons to pay off a host of fines and fees before getting their voting rights back. The measure is now headed for Gov. Ron DeSantis’ (R) desk.

The bill’s passage ends months of impassioned fighting between the parties over how to implement Amendment 4, aka the Voting Rights Restoration for Felons Initiative.

Democrats have maintained that voters don’t want major legislative changes to the provision they overwhelmingly approved. The amendment makes a simple promise to to allow felons — excepting those convicted on murder or felony sex crimes charges — to get back the right to vote after they’ve served their time and paid restitution and court costs.

Republicans have scrambled to add legislative fine print, expanding the definitions of which crimes render felons ineligible for re-enfranchisement and which fees any prospective voter must first pay off.

Opponents of the burdensome financial restrictions — in the form of court fees, fines and restitution — have likened them to a poll tax. Statewide, felons will likely have to pay millions of dollars to get their voting rights back, thanks to the broad parameters in the law’s language and Florida’s unusually high court fees. Critics of the law fear that the Republican-backed provisions will result in lifelong disenfranchisement for poor black ex-felons, even those who committed nonviolent crimes.

The writing was on the wall for the bill by Thursday, when the Senate passed a version of it differing only slightly from the House one that passed last week. The Senate change involves a moderate compromise: a judge can decide whether or not to forgive the money owed, or to convert it into community service hours.

But, as Florida House Democrats Communications Director Marisol Samayoa told TPM, the compromise still falls far short of what Democrats wanted.

“In the House version, you owe money and you cannot vote until you pay it,” she said shortly before the vote Thursday. “In this version, a judge can decide. But there’s no mechanism, no standard for the judge to follow — it’s up to the judge’s discretion. So House Democrats don’t like it.”

Despite the Democrats’ opposition, the bill passed easily, largely along party lines with 67 yay votes to 42 nays.

Latest News

Notable Replies

  1. It would be nice to know if there is a potential court remedy to this.

  2. You get what you vote for. Except when you don’t. But then again, you did. It’s all so confusing.

  3. We’ve got a lot to clean up when we get control of things again.

    Human dignity is somewhere near the top of the list.

  4. The republicans simply cannot win on a level playing field in most states, but through voter suppression, reducing and/or moving polling stations, purging voter rolls, major gerrymandering, they gain electoral victories and thus minority rule. It is like political apartheid, particularly the gerrymandering.

Continue the discussion at forums.talkingpointsmemo.com

84 more replies

Participants

Avatar for ajm Avatar for austin_dave Avatar for spiderpig Avatar for globalguy Avatar for thunderhawk Avatar for irasdad Avatar for inversion Avatar for daveyjones64 Avatar for lastroth Avatar for gr Avatar for ottnott Avatar for ignoreland Avatar for moreyampersand Avatar for fiftygigs Avatar for jacksonhts Avatar for noonm Avatar for john819 Avatar for coimmigrant Avatar for seamus42 Avatar for inthesedays Avatar for outis Avatar for jeromestoll Avatar for anon84323658 Avatar for LeslieD

Continue Discussion
Masthead Masthead
Founder & Editor-in-Chief:
Executive Editor:
Managing Editor:
Associate Editor:
Editor at Large:
General Counsel:
Publisher:
Head of Product:
Director of Technology:
Associate Publisher:
Front End Developer:
Senior Designer: