Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-c47g7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T22:55:53.951Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

5 - Our ‘Crooked Timber’: Why Is American Punishment So Harsh?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 July 2009

Alec C. Ewald
Affiliation:
University of Vermont
Brandon Rottinghaus
Affiliation:
University of Houston
Get access

Summary

“Out of the crooked timber of humanity, no straight thing was ever made.”

Emmanuel Kant

INTRODUCTION

During the last few years, while writing on the disenfranchisement of ex-felons, I often wondered why, almost alone among Western democracies, we in the United States treated people “who had paid their dues” with such contempt. Almost every other democratic nation restores full voting rights to all ex-felons, and a considerable number, including Canada and 17 European countries, now extend the franchise even to offenders behind bars. Several countries consider the franchise so important that they actively encourage inmates to participate in the electoral process. Yet all but 2 of the 50 U.S. states deny prisoners the vote, and most bar probationers, parolees, and other nonincarcerated people from voting, either indefinitely or during a waiting period. Even for those eligible, restoration can include not only complicated bureaucratic procedures but also, until recently, DNA testing. Several states effectively bar some convicts from voting for life, treating them as debtors forever – a policy that “verges on the macabre.” Despite reforms to some American ex-felon disenfranchisement policies in recent years, laws barring all inmates from voting remain relatively popular in the United States – not only among the public, but also among leading Democratic politicians.

In my opinion, the simplest way to explain why almost all U.S.

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Hull, Elizabeth A., The Disenfranchisement of Ex-Felons (Temple, 2006)Google Scholar
Katz, Jesse, “For Many Ex-cons, Voting Ban Can Be for Life,” L.A. Times, Apr. 2, 2000, p. A1Google Scholar
Fletcher, George P., “Disenfranchisement as Punishment: Reflections on the Racial Issues of Infamia,” 46 UCLA Law Review (August 1999), p. 1907Google Scholar
Pinaire, Brian, “Barred from the Vote: Public Attitudes toward the Disenfranchisement of Felons,” 30 Fordham Urban Law Journal (2003)Google Scholar
Eckholm, Erik, “States Are Growing More Lenient in Allowing Felons to Vote,” New York Times, Oct. 12, 2006Google Scholar
Whitman, James Q., “A Plea Against Retributivism,” 7 Buffalo Law Review 85 (March 2004), p. 85Google Scholar
Tonry, Michael, Thinking about Crime: Sense and Sensibility in American Penal Culture (Oxford University Press, 2004), p. 22Google Scholar
White, Elizabeth, “1,000 Incarcerated per Week from ‘04–’05,” Associated Press, May 22, 2006Google Scholar
Williams, Patricia J., “Felonious Intent,” The Nation, June 12, 2006Google Scholar
Gardner, Dan, “Tough Time: Inside the Supermax Pelican Bay Prison, Brutal Conditions Make Convicts More Brutal,” The Ottawa Citizen Sunday, April 28, 2002Google Scholar
Zimring, Franklin E., “Populism, Democratic Government, and the Decline of Expert Authority: Some Reflections on ‘Three Strikes’ in California,” 28 Pac. L.J. 243 (1996)Google Scholar
Beament, Emily, “Sharp Fall in Worldwide Executions,” The Irish Times, Apr. 20, 2006, p. 10Google Scholar
Sarat, Austin, “‘The New Abolitionism’ and the Possibility of Legislative Action: The New Hampshire Experience,” 63 Ohio State Law Journal (2001 Symposium Abstracts), 2002Google Scholar
How the Death Penalty Weakens U.S. International Interests,” 13 William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal309 (2004)
Stop Calling Bush ‘Hitler,’National Review, March 21, 2005
Koh, Harold Hongju, “…On America's Double Standard,” The American Prospect, Sept. 20, 2004Google Scholar
,Human Rights Watch, “Race and Incarceration in the United States,” Human Rights Watch Press Backgrounder, February 27, 2002Google Scholar
Toppo, Greg, “13 Percent of Adult Black Men Barred from Voting,” Associated Press, Sept. 22, 2000Google Scholar
Lederman, Douglas, “Sallie Mae to Create Center to Study Higher-Education Issues,” The Chronicle of Higher Education
Tonry, Michael, “Why Aren't German Penal Policies Harsher and Imprisonment Rates Higher?5 German Law Journal (2004)Google Scholar
Bondeson, Ulla V., Prisoners in Prison Societies (Oxford: Transaction Publishers, 1989), p. 296Google Scholar
“That Manners Are Softened as Social Conditions Become More Equal,” in Democracy in America, Vols. I & II. (Vintage, 1990)
Jacobs, James, New Perspectives on Prisons and Imprisonment (Cornell University Press, 1983), 29, 240Google Scholar
Martinson, Robert, “What Works? Questions and Answers about Prison Reform,” in Rehabilitation, Recidivism, and Research (Hackensack, NJ: National Council on Crime and Delinquency, 1976)Google Scholar
Garland, David, The Culture of Control: Crime and Social Order in Contemporary Society (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2001)Google Scholar
Lab, Steven P. & Whitehead, John T., “From Nothing Works to the Appropriate Works: The Latest Stop on the Search for the Secular Grail,” Criminology, August 28, 1990, p. 405CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, James Q., Thinking about Crime (New York: Vintage, 1985)Google Scholar
Edsall, Thomas & Edsall, Mary, Chain Reaction (New York: W.W. Norton, 1992)Google Scholar
Brennan, Mary C., Turning Right in the Sixties: The Conservative Capture of the GOP (Univserity of North Carolina Press, 1995)Google Scholar
The Conservative 1960s,” 276 The Atlantic Monthly, December 1995; No. 6; pp. 130–5
Tonry, , “Why Aren't German Penal Policies Harsher and Imprisonment Rates Higher?10 German Law Journal (October 1, 2004), p. 8Google Scholar
Tonry, Michael, “Why Are U.S. Incarceration Rates So High?Overcrowded Times, June 1999Google Scholar
Caplow, Theodore & Simon, Jonathan, “Understanding Prison Policy and Population Trends,” in Tonry, Michael & Petersilia, Joan, eds., Prisons (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1999)Google Scholar
Young, Warren & Brown, Mark, “Cross-National Comparisons on Imprisonment,” in Tonry, Michael, ed., Crime and Justice: A Review of Research, Vol. 17 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1994), pp. 1–49Google Scholar
Baldus, David, “Addressing Capital Punishment through Statutory Reform,” Ohio State Law Journal, March 2001Google Scholar
Lynch, James, “Crime in International Perspective,” in Wilson, James Q. & Petersilia, Joan, eds., Crime (San Francisco: Institute for Contemporary Studies, 1995), pp. 22–3Google ScholarPubMed
Lieven, Anatol, America Right or Wrong: An Anatomy of American Nationalism (New York: Oxford University Press, 2004)Google Scholar
Moravcsik, Andrew, “Why Is U.S. Human Rights Policy So Unilateralist?” in Forman, Shepard & Stewart, Patrick, eds., The Cost of Acting Alone: Multilateralism and US Foreign Policy (Boulder: Lynne Riener Publishers, 2001)Google Scholar
Taylor, Humphrey, “The Religious and Other Beliefs of Americans 2003,” The Harris Poll, February 26, 2003Google Scholar
Gallup, George & Lindsay, Michael, Surveying the Religious Landscape (Harrisburg, PA: Morehouse Publishing, 1999)Google Scholar
Grasmick, Harold G., Cochran, John K., & Kimpel, M'lou, “Religion, Punitive Justice, and Support for the Death Penalty,” 10 Justice Quarterly2 (June 1993), p. 291
Kellstedt, Lyman A., Smidt, Corwin E., Guth, James L., & Green, John C., “Cracks in the Monolith? Evangelical Protestants and the 2000 Election,” Christianity Today (2001)Google Scholar
Pomper, Gerald, “The Presidential Election,” in Nelson, Michael, ed., The Elections of 2004 (Washington, D.C.: CQ Press, 2005), p. 48Google Scholar
Krisberg, Barry, Davenport, Elizabeth, Chamlin, Mitchell B., & Bursik, Jr. Robert J., “Protestant Fundamentalism and the Retributive Doctrine of Punishment,” 30 Criminology (February 1992)Google Scholar
Lovato, Roberto, “White Fear,” Pacific News Service, May 18, 2004Google Scholar
Lovato, Roberto, “Fear of a Brown Planet,” The Nation, June 11, 2004Google Scholar
Grasmick, Harold G., Bursik, Robert J., & Kimpel, M'lou, “Protestant Fundamentalism and Attitudes toward Corporal Punishment of Children,” 6 Violence and Victims4 (1991), pp. 283–98Google ScholarPubMed
Grasmick, Harold, Morgan, Carolyn S., & Kennedy, Mary B., “Support for Corporal Punishment in the Schools,” 73 Social Science Quarterly 1 (1992), pp. 177–87Google Scholar
Oosterhuis, Alyce, “Abolishing the Rod,” 21 Journal of Psychology and Theology2 (1993), pp. 127–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wiehe, Vernon R., “Religious Influence on Parental Attitudes toward the Use of Corporal Punishment,” 5 Journal of Family Violence 2 (1990), pp. 173–186CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, George, Moral Politics: How Liberals and Conservatives Think (Chicago: University of Chicago, 2002), p. 203CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heider, Fritz, The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations (Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1958)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grasmick, Harold & McGill, Anne, “Religion, Attribution Style, and Punishment toward Juvenile Offenders,” 32 Criminology 1 (1994), pp. 23–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lupfer, Michael B. & Wald, Kenneth D., “An Exploration of Adults’ Religious Orientations and Their Philosophies of Human Nature,” 24 Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 3 (1985), pp. 293–304CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cullen, Francis T., “Executing the Innocent and Support for Capital Punishment: Implications for Public Policy,” 4 Criminology & Public Policy 1 (2005), pp. 3–38Google Scholar
Applegate, Brandon K., Cullen, Francis T., Fisher, Bonnie S., & Ven, Thomas Vander, “Forgiveness and Fundamentalism: Reconsidering the Relationship between Correctional Attitudes and Religion,” 38 Criminology (2000), pp. 719–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, Mark Lewis, “Behind Bars,” Christian Century, June 28, 2003Google Scholar
Morgan, R., “Privileging Public Attitudes to Sentencing,” in Roberts, Julian & Hough, Mike, eds., Changing Attitudes to Punishment: Public Opinion, Crime and Justice (Cullompton: Willan, 2002)Google Scholar
Beckett, Katherine, Making Crime Pay: Law and Order in Contemporary American Politics (New York: Oxford University Press, 1997)Google Scholar
Baldus, David C., “Racial Discrimination and the Death Penalty in the Post-Furman Era: An Empirical and Legal Overview, with Recent Findings from Philadelphia,” 83 Cornell Law Review (1998), p. 1638Google Scholar
Cooper, Michael, “Place on the Bench Puts Pataki on the Spot,” New York Times, June 21, 2006, p. B1Google Scholar
Pratt, John & Dwyer, David, eds., The New Punitiveness: Trends, Theories, Perspectives (Portland: Willan Publishing, 2005)
Taylor, Jr. Stuart, “D.C. Dispatch: Legal Affairs,” The Atlantic Monthly, Jan. 28, 2004Google Scholar
Crossette, Barbara, “U.S. Rebuffs to Neighbors Should Raise Concerns,” New York Times, Oct. 14, 2003Google Scholar
Will, George F., Restoration: Congress, Term Limits, and the Recovery of Deliberative Democracy (New York: Free Press, 1992), pp. 12, 142Google Scholar
Whitman, James, Harsh Justice: Criminal Punishment and the Widening Divide between America and Europe (New York: Oxford University Press, 2003), pp. 12, 142Google Scholar
Skolnick, Jerome H., “Gentle Europe, Tough America,” The American Prospect Online, May 31, 2003Google Scholar
Frank, Thomas, What's the Matter with Kansas: How Conservatives Won the Heart of America (New York: Henry Holt, 2004)Google Scholar
Madison, James, The Federalist, No. 51 (New York: Modern Library, 1941), p. 337Google Scholar
Elias, Norbert, State Formation and Civilization: The Civilizing Process, vol. 2 (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1982.)Google Scholar
Taylor, Mark Lewis, “Behind Bars,” Christian Century, June 28, 2003Google Scholar
Budziszewski, J., “Capital Punishment: The Case for Justice,” 145 First Things: A Monthly Journal of Religion and Public Life (August-September 2004), p. 39Google Scholar
Applegate, Brandon K., Cullen, Francis T., & Fisher, Bonnie S., “Public Support for Correctional Treatment: The Continuing Appeal of the Retributive Ideal,” 77 The Prison Journal (1997), pp. 237–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×