Arguments
The primary arguments made by Rep. Rangel and supporters of the bill have been economic: by forcing all federal ex-offenders, including those who only offended once, those convicted of non-violent crimes, and those whose offense may have occurred years or even decades ago) to reveal their status to prospective employers severely limits their job opportunities after release. In many cases, this lack of job stability perpetuates a cycle of poverty and other forms of disenfranchisement, becoming a major contributor to recidivism, which in turn increases demands on the resources of the federal prison system and drives up prison costs. The goal of the legislation would be to reward non-violent felons for good behavior and a demonstrated desire and commitment to rehabilitating themselves by assisting them in re-establishing themselves as full members of their communities. Expunging criminal records would carry other benefits as well, removing or dramatically minimizing obstacles towards obtaining housing, education, and the restoration of voting rights.
Another point raised by Rangel has been that serious problems with the federal justice system, such as mandatory minimum sentencing laws, which he alleges are responsible for sending a disproportionate number of women and minorities to prison, could be combated through his bill by making it easier for offenders to move on after their release, rather than being continually reminded of, and being forced to pay, for their past crimes.
Read more about this topic: Second Chance Act (2009)
Famous quotes containing the word arguments:
“Yesterday the Electoral Commission decided not to go behind the papers filed with the Vice-President in the case of Florida.... I read the arguments in the Congressional Record and can’t see how lawyers can differ on the question. But the decision is by a strictly party vote—eight Republicans against seven Democrats! It shows the strength of party ties.”
—Rutherford Birchard Hayes (1822–1893)
“It has often been argued that absolute scepticism is self-contradictory; but this is a mistake: and even if it were not so, it would be no argument against the absolute sceptic, inasmuch as he does not admit that no contradictory propositions are true. Indeed, it would be impossible to move such a man, for his scepticism consists in considering every argument and never deciding upon its validity; he would, therefore, act in this way in reference to the arguments brought against him.”
—Charles Sanders Peirce (1839–1914)
“Children are intensely invested in getting their way. They will devote more emotional and intellectual energy to winning arguments than parents ever will, and are almost always better rested.”
—Jean Callahan (20th century)