Municipal criminal justice reform campaigns that build power.

Local Level Campaigns

Many of the battles we face at the legislative level, aren’t battles that can be won without a strategic plan or a long term vision in place.

Working on municipal legislation taught me the danger of not thinking beyond the moment or beyond the win. Launching local campaigns that can help undergird state legislation is just plain smart organizing, because it allows us to bring people up the engagement ladder in an authentic way.

So I have been thinking a lot during the past few weeks about ways that we can use this organizing energy to build power, not just reform-mindedness (which is likely to fade after a few years and then, if it sticks, might take one or two election cycles to rekindle).

I released a list of what I believe are winnable, high-impact reform campaigns that build power and I wanted to dive into each one and identify the top-line components that you should be looking to have in place, if you choose to replicate the campaign in your locale.

Voting Rights in Local Elections

I believe we can best gain power and enact progressive policies for all Americans through a strategy that focuses our attention on the people who have been denied power and opportunity in America — I’m referring to formerly incarcerated people, who experience legal discrimination and exclusion from the electoral process.

We must not simply encourage voting efforts among communities of people that have been negatively impacted by the criminal justice system. I believe we must actively encourage civic engagement and political participation among formerly incarcerated people, because we are an untapped resource for advancing our progressive initiatives. We cannot expect to pass significant reforms without our engagement and leadership.

When I ran for office, I insisted we spend as much time in ‘low propensity voter’ neighborhoods, as we did in the ‘high propensity’ and I was met with stubborn opposition. I wasn’t upset, but it underscored why I needed a directly impacted field team and staff. It was important for us that we not only win the election, but build power within a disenfranchised constituency. We had to convince our fellow citizens that we could win. This required not only knowing how we were going to win, but also figuring out who we win with — and then convincing them that we’re worth fighting for.

The conventional wisdom is that we should concentrate on the voters that have historically turned out to vote, not those that don’t. While this may be an effective way to continue a legacy of power, it’s not the way I viewed Participatory Democracy. It’s a fundamentally flawed premise, and a failed approach to electoral politics.

Allow all formerly incarcerated people to vote in all local elections.

Let’s look at what organizers, advocates and legacy organizations have been able to do in New York.

On May 4, 2021, Governor Cuomo signed a bill into law that automatically restores voting rights upon release from prison, even if the person is on parole. Previously, under Cuomo’s executive order, the person would have to apply for a review of records. If approved, they would then have to apply for a voting rights restoration from the Board of Elections. Failure to apply would result in an individual being purged from the voter rolls, even if still on parole.

That legislation was the result of years of work done at the local and state level by community leaders.

In 2015, Governor Cuomo introduced and signed legislation to restore voting rights for those who committed a nonviolent felony and completed parole. Previously, those convicted of a nonviolent felony could never vote again unless pardoned by the governor or had their record expunged through a complicated and expensive process.

In 2016, Mayor Bill de Blasio signed a bill to restore voting rights to those who had been convicted of a misdemeanor and had completed their sentence as well as those on parole or probation. Previously, those convicted of a misdemeanor were not eligible to vote until they finished their sentence.

In 2017, New York City approved an ordinance to create automatic restoration of voting rights to all individuals who have completed probation or parole and who do not have a criminal conviction on their record.

In January 2019, the state Senate passed a bill to restore voting rights for people who have been convicted of a felony and completed their sentence, but it stalled in the Assembly.

A month later, New York City announced plans to reinstate voting rights for previously incarcerated people who are on parole or probation. The NYC Board of Elections voted unanimously to extend the New York State Democracy Restoration Act to include parolees.

While these are all incremental victories, they are instrumental ones.

In 1994, the federal government passed the Crime Bill which required states to authorize any person who was convicted of a felony to apply for an absentee ballot for that election. Individuals on parole or probation could only vote by absentee ballot in that crime because it was assumed they wouldn’t be able to return home from wherever they were serving out their sentence on election day.

In 1996, the Massachusetts legislature passed a law which allowed all individuals convicted of a felony to vote after serving their sentence. In the ensuing years, the state saw a massive increase in enrollment from formerly incarcerated people.

In Philadelphia, voters have been able to vote since November of 2016. There has been a demonstrable increase in voter registration and voter turnout amongst formerly incarcerated people who have voting rights restored under that legislation.

The question going forward is how major of a voting bloc that bloc represents.

Voting is still one of the most important ways for us to engage people, but it’s also one of the ways the ‘other’ side is looking to perpetuate the disenfranchisement of people with convictions, people of color and people that live at or below the poverty line.

A political movement, like a religious one, thrives on recruiting new acolytes. This is the natural strategy to try and get a participatory democracy. You don’t make compromises to get people who already agree with you; you go out and get more people to agree with you.

Securing the vote for formerly incarcerated people in your community broadens the voter base, as opposed to deepening it. What that means is, we are activating people who normally are not included in the calculus of political operatives.

In doing so, we strengthen both political power and the material basis of movement building.