logo
Secretary of the State aims to make voting easier for incarcerated people in CT

Secretary of the State aims to make voting easier for incarcerated people in CT

Yahoo09-05-2025

Advocates for incarcerated individuals in Connecticut say it needs to be easier for people in custody to cast their ballots. And while a bill being considered in the legislature seeks to expand access, some say it wouldn't go far enough.
The proposed bill which passed out of committee in March and awaits a vote in the House, would require the Secretary of the State to provide the Department of Correction (DOC) with absentee ballot application forms that eligible individuals in custody could fill out, and to distribute them to those people.
'It is the very least we can do to chip away at this problem,' Secretary of the State Stephanie Thomas said during a forum at the Capitol on Tuesday.
An incarcerated person who wants to vote in Connecticut has to do so by absentee ballot, and they remain voters in the town they last resided, not where the prison is located. Thomas explained that this means incarcerated people — who have no access to the internet — must research the name of their town clerks, write a letter to the clerk requesting an absentee ballot application form, mail that letter to the town, receive the application form, fill it out, mail it back, and wait for the absentee ballot itself to arrive.
'And hopefully this all happens by 8 p.m. on Election Day,' Thomas said.
Absentee ballots are only available 31 days before a general election, Thomas said, and the slow speed of the postal system often prevents the ballots from arriving in time to be counted by a town clerk.
Only people convicted of a felony lose their right to vote in Connecticut — and only while they're incarcerated. People convicted of a misdemeanor, or people awaiting trial who can't afford to post bail, retain their voting rights. According to Department of Correction statistics, about 3,800 of the 11,200 people incarcerated in Connecticut have not been sentenced.
Rep. Matt Blumenthal, D-Stamford, chair of the Government Administration and Elections Committee, said the bill was developed in collaboration with the Secretary of the State's Office and in discussion with advocates.
'Obviously with legislation like this, there's always a balance between trying to provide as much access as possible to the voters and the logistical details which need to be practicable and communicable,' Blumenthal said.
Avery Gilbert, a clinical lecturer at Yale Law School, said the state's voting restrictions for people convicted of felonies should be revisited, too. Some of those individuals who've completed their sentences remain afraid to vote, even after the right is restored.
Gilbert also said simply providing absentee ballot applications to incarcerated individuals isn't enough because the bill doesn't require the Department of Correction to distribute the applications — and it doesn't cover the cost of postage.
'Simply putting absentee ballot applications in facilities is a nice first start. There's no guarantee that those are going to be handed out. There's no guarantee that someone is going to be informed enough to know to put it in the envelope, have the resources to get the postage, mail it, and do all those things in a timely fashion,' Gilbert said.
Sen. Rob Sampson, R-Wolcott, said he opposed the bill — and he voted against it — because he's concerned about simply giving absentee ballot applications to the Department of Correction to distribute. 'I think that there's an opportunity for abuse there,' Sampson said.
Sampson said in similar situations where a large number of voters is living in one place, such as with a nursing home, a local registrar of voters would go in person to the facility to distribute absentee ballots.
Thomas it was difficult to offer in-person voting at a correctional institution, since Democrat and Republican registrars of voters from multiple towns would have to be at the correctional facilities to oversee the process.
Sampson said he believed incarcerated people should instead vote in the town where the correctional facility was located, rather than their hometown.
Blumenthal said while he understands the bill isn't a 'panacea,' legislators are waiting to see how the new absentee ballot application regulations work before making additional demands on the Department of Correction.
'Before we require DOC to take specific action, I think we want to see how this process works on a voluntary basis in terms of DOC's involvement,' Blumenthal said.
The bill does require Department of Correction staff to ensure absentee ballots are delivered to each incarcerated person even if they've been transferred to another facility in the system.
Blumenthal added that some advocates had also expressed concern around DOC staff forcing people in custody to vote rather than just assisting them. And he said he feared covering the cost of postage might make the bill less likely to pass at a time when state finances are limited.
Thomas said her office has created printed and digital materials for incarcerated individuals describing the voting process, and she said her office is working with DOC to schedule voter registration drives at different prison facilities through the remainder of the spring, summer and fall.
Gilbert said that communities with the highest rates of incarceration, like Hartford and Bridgeport, also have the lowest numbers of people voting.
'These are habits, they are behaviors, and they inform and impact generational poverty for years to come,' she said. 'I don't think anybody in this room would disagree that all children's interests should be represented in some way, and incarcerated parents don't have that opportunity to influence resources going to their children's schools, to influence the issues that matter deeply to their community.'
James Jeter, the executive director of the Full Citizens Coalition to Unlock the Vote, echoed Gilbert, saying that many people he knew from his time being incarcerated hadn't even thought about voting. He blamed this partially on the policy of eliminating the right to vote for people convicted of felonies during their time in prison.
'When you talk about civic engagement and even real forms of rehabilitation, how do you make someone more communal and civically minded when conditions that are completely results of policy decisions have really not allowed them to?' he said. 'The degradation of levels of poverty in this state don't allow people to think as a community. They just think about surviving.'
And he added that if one generation in a family hasn't made a habit of voting, the younger generations tend not to either.
Thomas said she knew simply showing up with absentee ballot application forms wasn't going to be enough to convince people to vote. She said her office has uploaded civics information and a voter guide to the tablets incarcerated people use to communicate.
'Yes, we need to look at access to the actual ballot, but I also believe that we need to look more closely at — how do you offset this lack of belief that your voice even has agency?' said Thomas. 'I hope the legislature will take that up in addition to providing access in future sessions."
Emilia Otte is a reporter for The Connecticut Mirror (https://ctmirror.org). Copyright 2025 © The Connecticut Mirror.
This article originally appeared on The Bulletin: Connecticut prisoners could more easily vote in elections under bill

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

NY lawmaker lambastes failed commemoration of Oct 7 attack, as Dem leadership accused of 'antisemitism'
NY lawmaker lambastes failed commemoration of Oct 7 attack, as Dem leadership accused of 'antisemitism'

Fox News

time8 minutes ago

  • Fox News

NY lawmaker lambastes failed commemoration of Oct 7 attack, as Dem leadership accused of 'antisemitism'

The New York assemblyman behind an effort to formally commemorate the Oct. 7, 2023, terror attack in Israel lambasted leadership for tanking what was supposed to be a "poignant" bill remembering the tragedy. Assemblyman Lester Chang, R-Brooklyn – one of the few GOP members from New York City in the 103-47 Democratic-majority chamber – said he had been working on a resolution for New York state to officially remember the terror attack since hostage negotiations began a year ago. "I'm a Navy veteran of 24 years and I did a tour in Afghanistan. So I understand what war is all about," said Chang. "I've seen atrocities out there." Once American figures like then-candidate Donald Trump began helping hostage negotiations, Chang said he directed his staff to craft a message – which he said took more than a month of back-and-forth to make sure it was "balanced" and did not have a partisan streak. "We submitted it in January, as a resolution, and it was rejected… because [leadership] said it was 'controversial,'" Chang said. "We were astounded but not surprised. So we converted it to a bill," he said, adding that, in the end, a bill would be better because a resolution only commemorates an event for that year, while a bill would codify the remembrance for eternity. With a handful of Democratic co-sponsors, Chang and colleagues believed they had the right balance to attempt to put it up for a vote, but as the New York Post reported, it was reportedly ultimately blocked by House Speaker Carl Heastie, D-Bronx, and other top Democrats. Chang said the bill, destined for the smaller governmental operations committee, was redirected to the larger Ways and Means committee, and that four members were "switched out." The top Republican on that panel, Assemblyman Ed Ra, told the New York Post that remembering Oct. 7 and/or combating antisemitism should never be "political." Republican Assemblyman Ari Brown, who, like Ra, represents Long Island, accused Albany Democrats of "veiled antisemitism," telling the Post the legislature is "rotten" with it. The assembly also tanked a resolution from Brown that complimented Chang's bill. Compounding that was, as Chang described, no GOP bills have been successfully put through the process at all this session. "Having me as a Republican [sponsor] – that would [procedurally] choke them – not because of me, the person, but as a member of that party." Chang said he would just as soon "give this bill to a Democrat" to sponsor if it meant commemorating the Oct. 7 attack. He added that, as a person of Chinese ancestry who represents largely Asian and Italian Bensonhurst, he has no religious horse in the race. "That should make it more poignant as a non-Jewish person pushing this bill in a mostly Christian and Buddhist district," he said. At least seven Democrats did come out in support of the Oct. 7 remembrance legislation, all of whom hail from New York City. Senate Minority Leader Rob Ortt, R-Niagara Falls, echoed Chang's concerns in comments to Fox News Digital. "Many New Yorkers had loved ones injured or worse in the terror attacks in Israel on Oct. 7," Ortt said. "The least we can do is commemorate this tragic day." "Instead of taking commonsense action, Albany Democrats would rather play politics, and have time and again refused to defend our Jewish brothers and sisters." Fox News Digital reached out to Heastie for comment and response to the allegations but did not hear back.

What Parents Should Know About the $1,000 ‘Trump Accounts' for Babies
What Parents Should Know About the $1,000 ‘Trump Accounts' for Babies

Time​ Magazine

time16 minutes ago

  • Time​ Magazine

What Parents Should Know About the $1,000 ‘Trump Accounts' for Babies

Almost every baby born in America would get a $1,000 investment account from the government under a program President Donald Trump promoted on Monday. 'This is a pro-family initiative that will help millions of Americans harness the strength of our economy to lift up the next generation, and they'll really be getting a big jump on life,' Trump said at a roundtable at the White House with top business executives. Dubbed 'Trump Accounts' by the Administration, the proposal is a provision in Trump's 'One Big Beautiful Bill,' the sweeping tax and spending package now making its way through Congress. The bill passed the House with the provision included, but the package has faced resistance in the Senate. If the legislation passes, the proposed program would create accounts for children born as early as the beginning of this year. Here's what parents should know about the program. What are 'Trump Accounts'? The 'Trump Accounts' created for newborns under the program would be tax-deferred investment accounts privately held by children's guardians. The government would make a one-time contribution of $1,000 to each account, according to the White House. The accounts would then 'track a stock index and allow for additional private contributions of up to $5,000 per year,' the White House said. The program 'will afford a generation of children the chance to experience the miracle of compounded growth and set them on a course for prosperity from the very beginning,' the White House said. Who would be eligible? The accounts would be available for children born in the country after Dec. 31, 2024 and before Jan. 1, 2029. In order to open an account, at least one of the child's parents or guardians would need to have a Social Security number with the authorization to work in the U.S., The Washington Post reported. How would withdrawing the money work? At the age of 18, the child would be able to withdraw up to half of the money in the account, according to Forbes. When they turn 25, they would be able to access the full account balance for certain purposes, such as small business loans and higher education. Only when the account beneficiary turns 30 would they gain full control of all the funds for any purpose. The Milken Institute, a nonprofit, nonpartisan think tank, estimated in a report released in March that an initial government grant of $1,000 invested in a broad-based equity index fund of U.S. companies would, on average, grow to $8,000 after 20 years, $69,000 after 40 years, and $574,000 after 60 years. How much would the program cost? Lawmakers have not shared a projected cost for Trump Accounts. But the Post estimated that, since there are roughly 3.6 million babies born in the country each year, the cost of the program could be greater than $3 billion a year. What would the impact of the program be? Some economists and policy experts have expressed concern that the program could exacerbate economic inequality. Trump Accounts are similar to 'baby bond' programs that operate in California, Connecticut, and Washington, D.C. But those state programs were intended to minimize the wealth gap by offering support for children from low-income households, whereas the Trump program would be available to people regardless of their socioeconomic status. As a result, experts have noted that families from higher income households would be able to contribute more to the account, on top of the initial $1,000, and therefore have more funds accumulated in the account. Some financial experts have also voiced skepticism of the program, saying the benefits are small compared to other tax-shielded savings options, such as 529 college savings accounts. Others have pointed out that the proposal is coming at the same time that Republican lawmakers are proposing significant cuts to social safety net programs, such as Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. 'Feel like low-income families would prefer their assistance buying groceries not get cut, but that's just me,' Brendan Duke—the senior director for federal budget policy at the nonpartisan research and policy institute, Center on Budget and Policy Priorities— said in a post on X, in response to a post about Trump Accounts.

House Republicans warn Thune over megabill ‘budget gimmicks'
House Republicans warn Thune over megabill ‘budget gimmicks'

Politico

time16 minutes ago

  • Politico

House Republicans warn Thune over megabill ‘budget gimmicks'

Thirty-eight House Republicans are warning Senate leaders against using 'budget gimmicks' as they revise President Donald Trump's 'big, beautiful bill,' adding a new red line as GOP lawmakers clash over the scope of new tax cuts. The Republicans, led by House Budget Vice Chair Lloyd Smucker (R-Pa.), told Senate Majority Leader John Thune in a letter Tuesday that 'that any additional tax cuts' in the party's megabill 'must be matched dollar for-dollar by real, enforceable spending reductions.' House lawmakers who signed the letter include Republican Conference Vice Chair Blake Moore of Utah, House Budget Chair Jodey Arrington of Texas and House Freedom Caucus Chair Andy Harris of Maryland. It's the latest power play orchestrated by Smucker, who in May successfully mobilized 32 colleagues to compel House leadership to commit to finding additional spending cuts to meet overarching deficit reduction targets — if Republicans also enact additional tax cuts in their larger domestic policy package. Smucker's new letter, obtained first by POLITICO, is now seeking to squeeze the other chamber as Thune and his top lieutenants are scrambling to strike a balance between making changes to the House-passed product that senators can support without losing the necessary votes across the Capitol. 'We recognize the Senate will have its own say to make changes to the bill, and we welcome amendments that increase verifiable savings and make the overall package even more sustainable,' the House Republicans wrote in their letter, sent Tuesday to Thune. 'Additional spending reduction strengthens the bill and the nation alike. What cannot change is the architecture established by the House framework.' Specifically, Smucker and his allies want Thune to adhere to the same structure of the House bill, while also disavowing accounting tactics like 'timing shifts' to artificially reduce the cost of the bill and instead find 'genuine savings.' 'Pairing tax relief with spending restraint preserves investor confidence, reins in interest costs, and maximizes economic growth from the bill,' the members said. In both the House and the Senate, Republican leaders can only lose three votes and still pass the measure along party lines.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store