More than a million adults have legal guardians. In seven states, they can't vote.
More than a million adults have legal guardians. In seven states, they can't vote.
www.motherjones.com
More than a million adults have legal guardians. In seven states, they can't vote.
If you have someone making life choices for you does it not make sense that you shouldn't be allowed to vote? Someone has successfully made an argument you aren't fit to run your own life. Not sure why they should be allowed to affect the lives of others. I'm not sure what the difference is, at least in some cases, between people with a guardian and children <18 y/o. And IDK of many clamoring to lower the voting age.
If you want to argue that guardian and/or conservatorships are misused far too often then I'm with you on that.
Funny how Americans treat owing a gun an inalienable right, but voting is a privilege that could be taken off more easily than 'The Second'
I'm game for not letting people capable of basic life choices to either, to be honest.
Guardianships are very often for severe physical disabilities with no intellectual imparement. Those people can't vote either.
Daily reminder that the average 15 year old is smarter than the average 70 year old by literally any psychometric standard.
This implies the people handing out these conservatorship judgements are infallible, which they aren't.
If they submit a properly completed voting document, their vote should count. (It should also be easy to vote.)
As with the disenfranchisement of felons and inmates, there is a perverse incentive to put people you don't want to vote into conservatorship.
Judges, at least in my area, are increasingly explicitly listing which rights are being taken and which rights remain with the individual. For example, financial concerns or driving may be directed to the guardian but the individual still has the right to get married. I would hope that voting would be one of those line items.