Transcripts For CSPAN2 Legal Conviction Consequences 20140812

However, advocates for reform in this area have argued that in many cases the collateral consequences that apply to a given conviction are scattered throughout the code books and unknown to those responsible for the enforcement. This claim should found familiar for the witnesses of this task force since the witnesses have showed the statues are scattered throughout the code. And Supreme Court recognized in 2010 additionally that when a person considering a guilty plea is unaware of serious consequences that will follow this raises questions of fairness and the Constitutional Rights of effective assistance of council. There are several areas where i have serious concerns most notablely with regard to the argument advanced by many, including one of the witnesses today, that congress should force private employers who ignore criminal history when making a hire decision via ban the box and other liege legislation issues. I dont believe that those engage in the conduct should be able to complain about the consequences of their actions. Additionally, over the years, congress has repeatedly seen fit to make criminal history records available to schools, banks, power plants and other vital parts of infrastructure to protect safety. Ban the box runs contrary to that important effort. And as the author of the adam walsh safety act i have concerns to characterize sex offenders who pray on our children as an unjust consequence. Having said that, i have been a proponent to help the offenders and lessen their relapse. 3465 i recommended last year. This bipartisan legislation, would reauthorize and stream line the Second Chance act that helps exoffenders become productive members of society. I want to thank the witnesses and look forward to hearing more from them. It is my pleasure to recognize for his Opening Statement the Ranking Member of the task force the gentlemen from virginia, mr. Scott. Last hearing focused on overincarceration and the needs for evidencebased in individual sentencing. Any ratio of over 3501000 in jail gets a return for incarceration and anything that is over 500 is wasting time and messing up families and it increases crime. Data shows that since 1992, the annual prison cost is up from 9 billion to 60 billion and that increase of prison cost is over six times greater than higher ed education. This hearing focuses on the consequences that impede and undermine reentry. The existing system of state and federal consequences waste the taxpayer money and go against the goal of safety. Just like the federal code, one at at time each and every one of the 45,000 collateral consequences written in state and federal law got there over time. When considered in isolation, a collateral consequence may not appear to be a high hurdle to reentry to success. But taken together the collateral consequences form a tightly woven web that restricts many from overcoming things in their path. Many are masquerading as public policy. Sentencing people before they are convicted based on the code violated without seriousness consideration to the crime or the role of the defendant. The consequences apply across the board to all convicted felons. In the drug context, 60 of convicted federal drug defendants were convicted of offenses with a mandatory sentencing. They are not tailored. And it is onesize fits all. It another example of tough on crime sweeping too broadly and harshly. There is no reliable Scientific Data that demonstrates that any of these collateral consequences improve safety, reduce arrest, or save money to the contrary all of the evidence is just the opposite. Collateral consequences of conviction affect the ability to get social services, housing, student loans, the ability to interact with children and following through with voting in the democratic process. All of these restrictions, among tens of thousands, result in lifelong penalties. They marginalize those with prior convictions and treat them as secondclass citizens. Just like education and housing is the best way to get people away from the cradle to prison pipeline we must apply the same data to redirect those reentering the communities after serving the sentences. When there is no hope of a decent job because employers refuse to hires those with prior convictions we cannot be surprised people return to the path that led them to prison. Often times there is no r revelence to the job applying for. Some instance, someone with an embezzling job shouldnt get a bank job but what does a marijuana charge have to do with a construction job . An individuals use of a criminal record may discriminate against them if there is a dispor impact without job relationship and that could constiitute prejudice. The overly broad denial of all jobs because of any federal record may constitute discrimination. Thank you for holding the hearing and looking forward to the testimony of the witnesses. Without objections other members Opening Statements will be made a part of the record. It is my pleasure to introduce the witnesses. Rick jones is the executive director and Founding Member of the neighborhood defending service of harlem. He is a lecturer at Columbia Law School and he is on the faculty of the National Criminal Defense College in macon, georgia. He currently serves as secretary of the National Association of criminal defense lawyers and previously served that organization as a twoterm member of the board of directors, cochair of the Indigent Committee and a special task force on solving courts and he is currently on the reseration of rights and status of conviction. Mr. Heck is an attorney from ohio. He was a law clerk and then assistant prosecuting attorney. He received his undergraduate degree from Marquette University which was a wise choice and his jd from the georgetown law center. I would ask you to limit your opening remarks to five minutes. I think you are aware of what red, yellow and green means. Mr. Heck, the floor is yours as the prosecution always goes first. Good morning, members of the task force, thank you very much. I appreciate your comment about okay . Thank you. Again good morning. I appreciate your comments about Marquette University. I know it is very dear to your heart. In addition to being the prosecuting attorney from dayton, ohio i am the chair of the American Bar Association and includes 20,000 members and a whole array of the criminal Justice System and process in the american system. That is judges, defense lawyers, professors and other law personal. I am hear to talk about the abas view of collateral sanctions and how it relates to conviction. The american legal system recognizes collateral sanctions result from a criminal conviction in addition to a sentence. There maybe a sentence related to a crime and attached might be these convictions that could be probation or to the prison or both. It might be deporation, loss of professional licenses, felon registration, ineligibility for concern Public Welfare benefits, and loss of a drivers license and more. Collateral consequences have been increasing over the years in variety and severity throughout the country. They have been accumulated with little coordination in state and federal law making it almost ill possible to determine all of the penalties and disabilities that apply to a particular offense. Some collateral sanctions or consequences do serve a public purpose. Keeping firearms out of the hands of people convicted of violence or barring people who have been convicted of embezzlement from certain jobs. Others are more difficult to justify particularly when applied automatically across the board and that is because it results in serious implications not only in regards to fairness to the individual charged but also to the resulting burdens on the community citizens. They can present challenges to the issues of reentry and that is very important. Prosecutors throughout the country are very spear headed and have reentry programs because this is a Public Safety issue as we see it. Nonetheless, not all collateral consequences of conviction are effective. Many have no relationship to safety and prevent an offender from doing Productive Work in order to support a family and the community. This represents one of the more difficulty decisions facing our system. The reality is exoffenders cannot find jobs to provide income to support themselves and their family are likely to commit criminal acts and find themselves back in prison. We have adopted a set of principles. When someone is convicted they should know what is going to happen. And secondally, focusing the attention on the impact and the convicted person can get into reentry and come back into the community and be a productive member of the community. They also call for a significant number of reforms to the law. Number one, the law should identify with particularity the types of collateral sanctions. So if there is a collateral sanctions to a particular crime everyone knows what it is. The collateral conviction project that is funded by the National Institute of justice and completed by the American Bar Association was authorized by congress. We started it in 2009 and just completed it and adopted and found 45,000 collateral consequences and the hope is we can categorize these, and it is open to defense lawyers and prosecutors and everyone can understand what the collateral consequences are, they are readally available and know what is involved. Mr. Jones . Thank you for the invitation to appear this morning. I am going to get into it. 68 Million People are living with a criminal record. 14 adults. 20 million with felony and 14 million arrest every year and 2. 2 Million People in jail or prison and that is more than anywhere else in the world. As a member of the task force that produced this Collateral Damage report, i was able to travel to every part of the country and listen to People Living as offenders. We heard from a chief of police who was dealing with a significant crime problem with a rising murder rate and Widespread Community distrust. He realized he was policing from a place of fear. That was his term policing from a place of fear. He wasnt serving or protecting the community he was at war with the community. His officers didnt know the citizens and distrust and fear was the order of the day. It wasnt until he took the time to get to know the people he was charged with protected that he appreciated their humanity and the crime problem declined. 68 Million People living with convictions, more than the entire population of france. We are in danger of becoming a nation of criminal because we are policing from a place of fear. 14 million new arrest every year. We are prosecuting from a place of fear. 45,000 collateral consequences on the books in this country. 45,000 road blocks to the R Restoration of fear. The time has come from a change in the national mindset. We must move from penalty and endless punishment to redemption and restoration. A great way to end this is to implement the first order. A call for a National Restoration rights. A day where we can celebrate with Educational Programs for employers, job fairs, relief programs and nocost opportunities to cleanup your wrapsheet. There are four steps this task can take that will have an Immediate Impact on the Collateral Damage. First you must repeal federal collateral consequences. 68 Million People living with convictions, mandatory across the board collateral consequences dont make sense. You cannot paint with that broad of a brush. There is no Public Benefit of stripping peoples right to vote. Eliminate the consequences and stop creating new ones. Secondly, you must provide relief to those living with the conviction. 14 million arrest shows the problem. He must create avenues for diversion in the criminal system. Judges and prosecution must be aware of the diversion programs and promote them. It should be unique and tailored to the process. Pardons should be granted in the ordinary process of business and it must be transparent and accessible to all. There should be dedicated staff committed to the review of pardon applications. Third, for those discretionary that remain there must be guidelines with respect to r revelence and passion of time. It should be for anyone who has shown evidence of rehab. Wrap sheets are not a commodity. We should not be creating a market in the buying and selling of peoples conviction records. There are some Law Enforcement agencies that sell wrap sheets and that must stop. Any records disclosed must be accurate. The fbi website, which is the main source of criminal record acquiring, is wrong 50 of the time. It must be cleaned up and maintained and there must be an easily accessible nocost method for individuals to check wrap sheets and make corrections or updates. The time has come to end the economic drain of these consequence and the intrusion to the lives of the citizens and havoc they reach on individuals, families and communities. We need a coherent National Approach to the the rights after conviction. Thank you, mr. Jones. The chair is going to put himself at the end of the question queue just so in case we run out of time all of the other members will be able to ask questions. At this time, well, before recognizing the gentlemen from virginia, mr. Scott, let me say the chair is vigilant in enforcing the five minute rule. Mr. Scott. Thank you. Mr. Heck, banning the box has been mentioned. Is that where you have to check off you have been convicted of a felony. Does that prevent an individual considering your criminal record on an individual basis . The American Bar Association hasnt taken a position on that first of all. I think there are discussions that have to be had on that. I think we are seeing a lot of problems associated with that particular issue. But the point is if you dont check off the box, it doesnt subseque subsequent subsequently take away the consideration of the record but only on a basis on whether it is relevant to the jobs. Are you familiar with the eeoc guidance . Ban the box, you are correct, congressman scott. It doesnt prevent an employer from reviewing and determining the revlancy of the conviction. This allows them to prove their ability to do a job and once an employer is in a position to think this individual is able to do the job and someone who we would like to employ then they have the opportunity to review the persons criminal record and decide whether it is relevant or they are rehabbed or if there has been enough passage of time so it isnt a factor. At the end of the opportunity they have the right to know the record. But you would never get to that point where you would be considered if you checked the box . Your application would have been put in the trash. Collateral consequences, a couple things that are not mentioned. California spend more on Higher Education than prisons and now they have exceeded by large amounts. I think it is counter productive to what we are trying to do. I think any time across the board, the particular offense and offender is counter productive. What about education . Education is the same way. In ohio we have dealt with that and the legislature has over the last year. There are a number of alternatives that we now offer to prison. And i mean a number of different alternatives to try. When we talk about reentry most of the individuals going to prison are going to be released and we should look at that on the front end. If you cut back on the right to get an education and more education the less likely you are to come back so denying education seems to be counter productive. Absolutely. Have you studied the right to vote in terms of being arrested . When the project the American Bar Association just completed looked into that as a collateral consequence i see no reason why no one is restored the right to vote. That is a fundamental right and the American Bar Association things it should be respected and restored. Mr. Jones have you done any studies on the things i mentioned . You dont want to take away peoples right to vote or sense of participation in the democratic process. With respect to the money that the government spends on educating people to hold, to be a barber for example, it makes no sense to educate someone and be a license and when they get out tell them they cannot do that job. It is counter productive and leads to frustration and recidivism. The gentlemen from alabama, mr. Bachus. Thank you, mr. Chairman. One statement here in mr. Jones testimony is even with conviction records the welldocumented failure states when charges are dismissed or records are sealed and the failure of private companies to keep accurate records hurts millions of individuals. That is a separate situation but is that a big problem . That is a big problem. Particularly when people are being denied opportunities without having a conviction, nearly the arrest is enough in many cases to deny a person the opportunity. When records are not updated and someone has been pardons or relieved and those are not added to the record and not known it hurts the person off the bat because all we are seeing is an arrest and not an arrest that leads to a conviction that is denying people opportunities. What if, you know, the fact act has certain strict r regulati regulations on what can be reported in the background check. Is that violated and what is the process for combatting that . Do you know . Or under the eeoc . It is frequently violated particularly in an age where you can get almost anything with a mouse click or a key stroke. So, frequently, employers and other Decision Makers and landlords are making decisions on less than Accurate Information and often inAccurate Information. There needs to be much greater limited access to these records. Much greater regulations over the records. Opportunities for people to update and correct inAccurate Information in their wrap sheets. All of these things need to much stricter guidelines, limited access and an opportunity at nocost for people to correct mistakes in their conviction records or wrap sheets. Do the employers actually get the criminal record or history or are they told whether or not the person meets a certain criteria . Employers are given a persons wrap sheet. They can buy them from consumer reporting agencies or get them in some cases directly for fee or not from Law Enforcement agencies. So the access an employer or Decision Maker has to a persons complete criminal wrap sheet is far too loose and easily available. All right. Im the cosponsor for legislation with mr. Sensenbrenner and others. I think the Second Chance act that helps state and local Government Agencies and Community Organization improve prison reentry nationwide. Do either of you have comments on the Second Chance act and how it might help . With the comments that have been made, prosecutors around the country are supporting and have started reentry programs. It is still important. Without looking up front on what is going to happen to an individual who is citizens to the prison system knowing they are coming back to the community is missing the point of what we are trying to do. We are trying to make productive citizens and help them. And warehousing individuals makes me sense at all. We have to be smarter on crime, who is sentenced to prison, helping with education, helping getting a job, employment and housing when released. So i commend you for supporting that. We certainly support the Second Chance act. Gentlemens time expired. Gentlemen from michigan, mr. N conyers. Thank you. I want you to know i think the overcriminalization panel is one of the most important in the house judiciary committee. What we are doing is working on ways to get this as much legislation as possible. We would welcome any thoughts you have no or in the future about this is it that critical. And after the votes this morning in 2026 rayburn right down the hall we are going to have a personal narratives of witnesses that have experienced some negative collateral consequence so we wanted to invite not only you two distinguished lawyers but everyone here to join us, if you can. My first question to both you is how can we ramp this subject up as effectively and thoughtfully as possible without overdoing it or creating a backlash or anything like that . Do you have any thoughts on this, gentlemen . I do. Thank you for the question. First of all, the collateral consequences project that was funded by the nha and completed by the bar association. We got this grant and many reasons because of the senator from vermont. The 750,000 grant and the American Bar Association invested another 750,000 of its own money recognizing about 45,000 collateral consequences. What the American Bar Association hopes is that congress and the states use the database to identify all of the collateral consequences in the federal system and look at them and say how effective and relevant are they . Some have been overbroad or applied forever. And so they need to limit some of those. We are hoping, again, that congress will take advantage of the monumental project we completed and maybe use it and we will be glad to assist. We intend to. What about going beyond the american bar . You know there are dozens of law organizations and associations across the country, and i am thinking about widening our approach so that we can begin this discussion with them working off of the good initial work that you started. I appreciate the question. Again, i think your point is well taken. As a former president of the National District attorneys association, i know the District Attorneys across the country are concerned about the project and interested in the results. And i know we are going to have conversations. And i know state prosecutor ass ass associati associations are concerned about collateral consequences and the affect it has on the offender and community. You are giving prosecutors a great new description here. I always think of prosecutors as the bad guys that are trying to wrack up the as many convictions with as many severe penalties as possible. I think this is an incredible has there been a turnaround . Have we been making progress that we didnt know about or what . Well, congressman, let me assure you i believe i can speak, not on behalf of nda because i am not the president , but what i am saying is most of the prosecutors realize that. This idea of putting people away maybe in the thought of some prosecutors years ago but that is not the thought today. The thought today is being smarter on crime and identifying those individuals who must be prosecutor prosecut prosecuted. The gentlemens man time has expired. The gentlemen from texas, mr. Gohmert. Thank you for being here and sorry i was late. This is a project that is near and dear to my heart and when ed mace called and asked if i would participate in something that dealt with the problem that i see is a massive problem overcriminalization. Something has a former prosecutor judge, chief justice has driven me crazy. When people want to beat their chest and show how tough they are lets slap a criminal penalty on something. We talked about it, as you know, maybe there are 5,000 crimes and not in 18 u. S. Code where they ought to be as a criminal code. And i have wondered why in the world have we not been able to clean this mess up before. And what i heard was it seems like every time a project gets fired up to try to cleanup the criminal code, that it ends up being a big Santa Clause Christmas bag and people start trying to throw more and more in it and overall you lose too many votes and people go i cannot agree to that. I loved the idea but now you threw that in the bag and i cannot agree to that. It loses the impedious and nothing gets done. So that is one of my concerns as we go here. I hear from people going yeah, you are right. We have to stop this overcriminalization. And also we have to stop the militarization of so many of these federal departments. And you know, the epa doesnt need a swat team. And neither does the department of education for heavens sake. And as we heard about the testimony of the nerd trying to develop a new battery and is pulled over by three suburbans, run off the road, yanked out of the car and boot in the back and arrested because he didnt put a sticker on his package with the line through it. He put ground only but not the sticker. He need to stop that. People are getting that and getting on board. What when we say we are looking into whether or not maybe or not employers shouldnt be able to find out if you committed a crime before they hire you. Oh, wait a minute now, this is a very sensitive industry and you are telling me i dont get to know if he has been stealing from this last job or his daycare job i dont get to know this person has actually molested people in the past . And i can tell you as a judge, where i had a case because of the law trying to protect people, protected a child molester and it wasnt until he molested and destroyed other lives he got stopped. And the juvenile department didnt know about the other instances because of the way he was concerned. So we maybe get into an area where we are going to be far if not careful. Why would it be appropriate to force private businesses to ignore someones criminal history . Thank you for the question. I want to be Crystal Clear about ban the box. It doesnt prevent an employer or Decision Maker from knowing about the criminal record. There needs to be clear guidelines that adhere across the board so Decision Makers understand what is is relevant and what isnt. And there needs to be an opportunity to get the foot in the door and present credentials and employability but once they are done and Decision Makers know and the person has his foot in the door the employer isnt it true those who access criminal histories are subject to strict regulations regarding the use of information under the fair credit act and equal Employment Opportunity . Isnt that true . That is correct. It isnt just wide open. I think there are safe guards and abuses to it. And i think there are collateral consequences that are appropriate. The gentle woman from colorado, ms. Bass. Thank you for holding this hear. This is a critical issue for the nation. I had a town hall earlier in my district and we had several hundred people come to talk about this subject. We used to have a belief in society that if you paid your debt to society you could be reintegrated but it seems like over the last decade we dont have that belief. You can spend time in prison but you can spend the rest of your life with the stigma. In california when i was in the state legislature we had a law that said if you were a felon you could not get a license to be a barber. At the same time in our state prison system we had a barbering program and taught them how to be barbers and didnt low them to get the license whether they left. We had 54 occupations you could not do if you had been a felon. Mr. Jones, you mention there should be a preconsumption of relevance and with ban the box presumption and saying it was 30 years ago and i was a College Student but if you dont check the box and they find out you are subject to termination because you lied. I wasnt sure in if you meant that is what we should do and how we would go about it. Thank you for the question. There are studies that suggest after a certain number of years a person is no more likely, and in some cases less like, to reoffend than anyone in the general society. When we talk about evaluating a criminal record on whether or not they should be accessible to a benefit or whatnot we should see if there is relevance to the community, what the passage of time has been and whether or not there is evidence of rehabbing. When the passage of time is such and evidence of rehab, the conviction shouldnt be relevant to whether or not the person ought to have the wrong charge and the wrong people. Defendants who we charged and my assistant prosecutors try to get a record check, we have to confirm that and make sure it is accurate. Because the input is wrong many times. I have a piece of legislation called the success act and that is looking at a piece of Collateral Damage that says young people who have a concern crime cant get financial aid. I am wondering if in the tens of thousands of Collateral Damage examples you talked about are there a number of relate to education . I think a lot do relate to education directly or indirectly and i think the idea of preventing young people who may have made a mistake from making an amendez and doing what benefits Society Makes no benefit. It is difficult to make the safety benefit from not allowing young people to get an education. The gentlemen from new york. Mr. Jeffries. Thank you, and let me thank the witnesses for their testimony and the work on this important issues. Starting with mr. Heck, you testified earlier today, i believe appropriately that automatic blanket across the board of collateral consequence is counter productive. In that regard, how would you suggest the committee or the Task Force Look at how the collateral consequences you believe maybe appropriate in certain circumstances are narrowly tailored to fit it severity of crime so we dont broadly sweep individuals into this blanket fashion . I do think some collateral consequences if applied across the board are not relevant to that particular case or offender. That is what the law isnt looking at at the offender not the offense. In ohio, if someone owes Child Support and they are not paying the Child Support their drivers license is suspended. I told the prosecutors we are not going to ask for that and say it should not be done. We are asking the person to pay Child Support and saying you cannot have a job to pay it. So we have to look at the collateral consequences and what it is. Some are appropriate. When we craft the law, who should be given the discretion to make the determination of the appropriate action of collateral consequence if one is appropriately under limited circumstances . Should that be the court . Built into the law someway . Should the prosecutor have the opportunity . I dont know if everyone is enlig enlightened. Who should make the suggestion . There is a lot of suggestions on that. I believe it should be the court. I think the judges are in a unique position to see both sides of what is going on and they should make the judgment. Mr. Jones, do you have thoughts on that . I think everybody in the s s system needs to be aware and educated and understand the implications of collateral consequences as we go through the process. I think relief at sentencing by the judges who are able to taylor to the individual and remove and repeal consequences that are not relevant is a good thing. So i think relief is important but all of the players ought to be aware of the collateral consequences and their impact. You mentioned 45,000 collateral consequences which is a staggering number. That is a difficult undertaking but is obviously necessary and we as a task force are going to have to think through how to create Greater Transparency as it relates to those consequences and take steps in my opinion to reduce many of them. You mentioned that 68 Million People in america are living with convictions. Is that right . That number is growing. And 20 million of those individuals have felony convictions which i gather would leave 48 million with misdemeanor criminal violations in some shape or form. If we look at the issues in terms of collateral consequences, has any work been done to look at the consequences associated with those convicted of felonies versus the conscious an consequences of those with misdemeanors . Looking at the legislation proposed, there is always this notion that, you know, firsttime offenders nonviolent misdemeanor people are more often the subject of legislation but the fact of the matter is that at some point everybody is coming home and we need to be thinking about and incorporating and be prepared to embrace all of these folks because no one is merely the product of the worst thing they ever did and we all deserve a Second Chance. I would suggest as you think about the guidelines and relevance that you include everybody including the 20 million folks living with a felony conviction. The gentlemen from georgia mr. Johnson. Thank you, mr. Chairman. We need to reject wholesale demonization of every person who has a brush with the criminal law, persons who are released from prison should be given a Second Chance, and we need to enter into a new age of restoration and redemption. These are things listed in your conclusion, mr. Jones. And i think that those are very important ideals that we should seek to live up to. I will often times it is we ourselves that are the perpetrators of overcriminalization certainly the legislatures are responsible and certainly judges and prosecutors who both are elected are responsible for, you know, getting tough on crime and throwing the book at people and implementing the policies that we inshrine into law. But you are both members of the bar, both attorneys and licensed to practice law, and you know when a person suffers a felony conviction, and even misdemeanor convictions in many states, they are barred from being able to be licensed to practices law. Did you believe that those types of barriers, which are collateral consequences, did you believe those should be removed from a persons ability to practice law . To get a law license . Mr. Heck . Well, i think like any other collateral sanctions, we should look at the offense and offender. And in ohio we have seen it removed and someone convicted of manslaughter or murder have become murders. We have seen it with a lot lesser offenses. And we have seen some cases where someone who was convicted of a theft or a fraud was not given the license to practice law in ohio. So there has to be some type of parody also and fairness and equity if we have collateral sanctions. So you would be against blanket bans on all who have been convicted being ineligible to practices law . I would think blanket bans dont serve a purpose. That means what i ask. Mr. Jones . I would agree. Unless you can show me there is some Public Safety benefit that outweighs the individual right for a person to get a law license after going to school and passing the bar, unless you can show me there is a Public Safety benefit that outweighs the individual practice law, i would say you should not have that restriction or ban. Do you know of any initiative by the aba or state bar to address that issue . The project of collateral consequences didnt entail that. It had to do with categorizing and labeling all of the collateral consequences. How do collateral consequences disporportionately Impact Communities of the poor and people of color . Just like we see it as far as imprisonment is concerned it goes along with that. Because the sanction are attached to the conviction. So i think that once you see the affect it has on arrest you will see it on sanctions as it related to employment and having income and housing. Really has an effect in that regard. The answer is profoundly. There are studies showing africanamerican men who have never had trouble with the law at all are less likely to get a job than a similar white man with a felony convictions. There are studies that show africanamerican men with seven times more likely to be arrested for crimes particularly drug possession crimes when the usage of drugs in the communities is the same. So the impact of these collateral consequences on africanamerican individuals, their families, and society is profound. Thank you. The gentlemens time expired. The gentlemen from tennessee mr. Cohen. These issues affect my voter. Second chance opportunity for employment is one i hear most from voters. Someone had a conviction and cant get a job. A continuing cycle. But more fundamental is the loss of right to vote. And i dont know if this has been addressed extensively, but do either of you know the history of that particular law . I was reading about civil death or however it is called and that seemed to take away your right to vote and everything else. And being described as barbarous and condemned by justice and reason and morality. But we have these laws, does maryland have a law like that, mr. Heck . I have my own thoughts. I dont know but ill tell you this, by the history of disenfranchisement, by the time i get back to new york this afternoon i will know and i will get that to you. I think the history goes back to jim crow. And i think is kind of a sudden thing. And if you look at the southern thing. If you look at the states had those lost their general the same states that Justice Roberts said no longer has to have preclearance because its a wonderful world, according to Justice Roberts. Its hard to fathom when you look at the history of discrimination in this country, and look at it in voting areas where you have preclearance. Those are the same states that put a Scarlet Letter on individuals that says, thou shalt not about. Voting in my district and we had an election and make him a primary election for county office, very important. And about 10 of the people who were registered voted. And so my theory is that people who have convictions in the past were allowed to vote, if they voted, by their simple action of voting they would show they were in the upper 10 of the citizenry. You know, so to say they could we do in tennessee have a lot which i was happy to sponsor and passed that allowed you to get your right to vote restored without going to court, without having the d. E. A. , and bless you, et cetera. But a guy in the house, kind of neanderthal type character put an amendment on the bill which passed and it said if youre behind in your childs up or you couldnt get the right to vote back. Its not something, you know, pretty clearly intended to have a disparate impact. There are two states i believe that this task force ought look at that allow individuals to vote while they are in prison. And i think thats been in vermont, and you can conjecture and spectrum as twice those two states allow that. But i do believe that maine and vermont, someone can correct me if its wrong, those two states allow you to vote while youre in prison. I think everybody thats right. Vermont and which other state . Main. But you have to be eating lobster or cheese or something at the same time. I yield the balance of my time and thank you. Thank you. We still have some time left, so ill now recognize myself for five minutes. Both mr. Jones and mr. Heck have said that we should repeal all mandatory collateral consequences that apply across the board. Now, one part of federal law prohibits anyone who has been convicted of a misdemeanor crime of Domestic Violence from possessing a firearm. Do you believe that congress should repeal this law . As far as my position is concerned, again the aba has not taken a position on the. I think were to look again at the individual involved and the individual crime. So, for example, weve had cases, Domestic Violence is something that is certainly on my radar screen personally, and my office, and something just like child abuse that we take very socially. And women have a Domestic Violence case i think we have to look, is that person and owner of guns or does that person use a gun . Those are the decisions that have to be made. I think a broad simply designation of someone who owns a gun should never be able to own a gun again i think has to be looked at very scarcely, as opposed to using a gun and Domestic Violence. I have no problem with that person not being allowed to own a gun. Yes so do you think the current law which applies to misdemeanors as well as felonies is a good law . The pending on the circumstance. Okay. I can depend on the circumstance. It shouldnt be across the board i dont think it should be across the board. Mr. Jealous . Mandatory, automatic, across the board consequences ought be repealed and after looking at individual tailoring, the denial of opportunities to individual circumstances and individuals, individual people. It should not be across the board automatic mandatory. Im kind of surprised. I think the nra would agree with both of you on this. Let me ask you another question in the time that i have left. When i first was elected to congress, my wife and i owned a two family house that was across the street from an elementary school, and we lived in one half of it, and i rented out the other half. Say somebody came and applied was a person who is a recognized minority, applied to live in the other half, and i found out before leasing it to them that they were registered sex offenders are good my denial of housing, because they were registered sex offenders, not because they were persons of color or protected minority, be a defense in a fair housing complaint . Not in ohio. Because they would not be allowed to live there in ohio. Your singular front across the street from a school, correct . I did. Know, and ill and thats been going on, an increase in the number of feet as well as a number of instances where a convicted sex offender may lead. It started out with in so many feet of a school, so many feet of a bus stop, so many feet of a day care, so many feet from where children will be, so many so that has become more broad. However, in the specific instance that you mentioned, no, because under ohio law that would not be permitted to live there in the. Weve had cases like that. My office has on the civil side, which would also represent, have actually ordered people to move and have got eviction notices for people, and orders, to have them move out because of close proximity to schools. So if i was accused of denying housing under the state or federal fair housing law because i denied them the least because i lived across the street from the school, in ohio i could go to the District Attorney and have him represent me against the fair housing complaint . Well, under ohio law we cant represent an individual natures. But i can assure you we would stand right next to from the standpoint that that convicted sexual of them should not live there. Mr. Jones. Let me say two things about the sex offender issue. And if you look in our report you will see that not only prosecuting attorneys who work in this area but also individuals who are responsible for administering state sex offender registries say the same thing, two points. The first is that anyone is more likely to be abused in that manner by someone within the four corners, the four walls of their home than they are by someone who is either delivering their mail or cutting the grass. You are much more likely to be molested or abused in some way by someone who is under your roof. And secondly the overwhelming majority of arrests in these types of cases are by first offenders. The number of people who are sexual predators, who are serial offenders, is very small. Its not so that these prosecutors and these people who run the sexual registries, what they said is that the residency restrictions that we place on these folks are wrongheaded and dont make sense and are counterproductive because you are more likely to have a problem with uncle sam and you are with the guy whos delivering your mail. Well, my time is expired. I want to thank all of the witnesses for your testimony and good answers to questions. Thank the members for participating. Does anybody wish to put printed material into the record . Gentleman from alabama. Mic, please. [inaudible] im sorry. I asked permission to submit testimony in the record from mr. Jesse will on behalf of justice fellowship, which is an independent Prison Fellowship Ministry which offers his perspective on the challenges of reentering society after he served a sentence for a criminal offense. Without objection. Thank you. Mr. Scott. I ask unanimous consent that the testimony from the robert f. Kennedy center for justice and human rights, bernard kerrick, piper kermit, lamont carey, anthony pleasant, and reports from the sentencing project and state level estimates of disenfranchisement in the United States 2010, and from a report from the sentencing project, lifetime of punishment, the impact of felony drug been on welfare benefits, albeit place in the record. Without objection. And if theres no further business to come before the task force, without objection, the task force stands adjourned. Thank you. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] heres whats ahead today on cspan2. Next we will show you todays washington your program in its entirety. Then a congressional hearing looks into phone scams, and later whats the future for domestic drone usage . A Congressional Committee considers the issue. Join us later today when well show you our interview with dr. Alfredo quinoneshinojosa again in its entirety, from our q a program. Its one of the author and to use from our latest book sundays at eight. You can see the program today at 7 p. M. Eastern here on cspan2. Join us tonight on cspan2 for more booktv prime. Heres a look at whats on cspan3s American History tv tonight. Our focus will be on jewish history. And tonight on cspan, special look at Veterans Health care, one of the major issues before congress this year. We were sure to highlights from cspans coverage of the issue. Heres a brief look at some of that footage. I think the va has the potential to be one of the finest institutions in the world. Weve seen certain aspects of the pharmacy cannot be matched. Its one of the best in the world. A very efficient. There are many Different Things that are efficient within our system. But what we should ask ourselves, when someone came up with the idea of seeing a pattern in 14 days, that was actually, sounded like a good idea. That veterans should be seen probably. What we should question is, if we made a mistake and some overloaded the system, how come peoples names disappeared off lists . How come hundreds of thousands of veterans electronically no longer existed . That should be the question. Retaliation exists because of the culture. This culture of retaliation, thats really the cancer to the veterans administration. Most physicians and nurses, and people who work in the hospital, are