SILENCED in KENTUCKY:
Citizens Without a Vote
This examination of the enduring and far-reaching impact of felony
disenfranchisement in Kentucky – the practice of stripping American Citizens of
their right to vote – is one in a series produced by the Voting Rights Initiative of
the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. The series
includes a national overview and state-level examinations of felony
disenfranchisement in Florida, North Carolina, Virginia, and Iowa.
National Association for the Advancement of Colored People
4805 Mt. Hope Drive, Baltimore MD 21215
SILENCED:
Citizens Without a Vote
KENTUCKY
Fall, 2012
OVERVIEW
Firmly rooted in the nation’s most insidious elements of race relations, felony
disenfranchisement is this country’s enduring nod to Jim Crow— a continued
bridge between states intentional circumvention of the Thirteenth,
Fourteenth, and Fifteenth Amendments and the goal of preventing accrual of
political power in the black community.
Part and parcel to its rapid expansion, were changes to criminal codes that
facilitated disenfranchisement for petty offenses such as larceny and
miscegenation while exempting offenses – such as murder – believed to be
most often committed by white men.
National
Association for
the Advancement
of Colored People
4805 Mt. Hope Drive
Baltimore, MD
21215
With more than 5.8 million citizens unable to vote as a result of a felony
conviction amounting to one out of every 40 adults,i the United States is the
only democratic nation recognized for stripping so many people of their
voting rights even after they are no longer incarcerated.
Seventy-five percent of the nation’s disenfranchised – an estimated 4.3 million
people – are no longer incarcerated. ii As a result, the returning citizen
population includes many individuals who are parents, workers, neighbors,
and taxpayers, forced to live in the margins of democracy despite practicing
responsible citizenship.
HISTORY
After the Thirteenth Amendment abolished slavery in 1865 the nation began
moving through a period of ‘Radical Reconstruction” which many Southern
states hoped to avoid in an effort to keep intact as much of the social
structure that existed during slavery. As part of these efforts, Kentucky
resorted to ‘Black Codes’ as a mechanism for ensuring that newly freed slaves
– for whom citizenship was looming as a result of the Fourteenth Amendment
– would be unable to vote. Particularly in Kentucky some have argued that the
state’s ‘Black Codes’ were mere revisions to the state’s Slave Codes, largely
preserving their form and function and only changing or eliminating
www.resotrethevotes.org
certain words that might offend the constitutional amendments emerging at the Federal
level.
With a staunch commitment to preserving the status quo as it existed prior to the
abolishment of slavery, their goal of circumventing new rights rapidly emerging for
freedmen came easy– especially in regard to the combined rights created by passage of the
Thirteenth, Fourteenth and subsequently the Fifteenth amendment in 1870. In particular,
their goal of preserving political power for the white community and ensuring that
freedmen would not be able to vote with ease was already bridged through the state
constitution. In fact, Kentucky had turned to felony disenfranchisement officially in
1850/1851.iii As a result, when Kentucky expanded its criminal codes via ‘Black Codes’ – as did
many Southern states – it was relatively easy for the state to ground the loss of voting rights
for black men in the broader list of offenses.
Overall, Kentucky’s constitution has undergone four periods of significant amendment: the
revisions of 1792, 1799, 1850 and 1891.iv Meaning, while the felon disenfranchisement
scheme which was written into the state constitution 161 years ago was wholly grounded in
efforts to thwart the black vote, the state has yet to move away from it. To the contrary,
today Kentucky not only disenfranchises upwards of 7 percent of its voting-eligible residents
African Americans continue to be the group of would-be voters most heavily impacted.
While Kentucky’s process for seeking restoration of voting rights has been streamlined in
recent years the revisions are but a band aide on a much larger problem as the state’s felony
disenfranchisement scheme cannot be reconciled with the nation’s position that voting is
one of the strongest indicators of responsible citizenship. Additionally, mere application for
restoration of rights is not tantamount to assurance ones rights will be restored as the
governor has the sole authority to reinstate civil liberties. The racial disparities produced by
the scheme then and now demonstrate that no matter how often the administrative
requirements linked to the issue are amended, its race-based origins cannot be shed.
Ironically, in March 2011 the governor moved legislation designed, in part, to decrease the
state’s prison population by decreasing prison time for certain individuals convicted of
certain types of offenses.v While held out as a ‘landmark justice reform bill’ the breadth of its
utility will be greatly undermined if the state continues to only extend partial citizenship to
its returning citizens. In turn, partial citizenship cannot be reconciled with the nation’s view
on voting as carefully expressed by the Supreme Court in 1964:
“No right is more precious in a free society than that of having a voice in the
Election of those who make the laws under which, as good citizens, we must
live. Other rights, even the most basic, are illusory if the right to vote is
undermined.”vi
www.naacp.org
IMPACT
Kentucky strips an estimated 243,842 citizens – amounting to 7.35 percent
of its potential voters – of their voting rights.vii Only 22,542 of these
individuals are incarcerated.



Overall, Kentucky disenfranchises 1 out of every 14 of its votingeligible citizens.
Nearly 181,000 of these citizens – amounting to 74 percent of
Kentucky’s disenfranchised population -- have completed all the
terms of their sentence.viii
In short, 1 out of every 17 voting-eligible adults living in the
community has been stripped of their voting rights.
In recent years the governor of Kentucky has taken steps to streamline the
voting rights restoration process; the process however, still requires
individuals seeking restoration to submit an application. In turn, every
application that is submitted must be reviewed by the state before rights
can be restored. Mere submission of an application does not guarantee
restoration of rights.
Despite efforts to shorten the application process Kentucky has made little
progress in resolving the race disparities evident in its felony
disenfranchisement scheme. Additionally, administrative changes can do
little to resolve racial disparities that have emerged in Kentucky’s
disenfranchisement scheme due to the large role race continues to play in
the criminal justice system, leading to the disparate incarceration of
minorities.



Nearly 57,000 of Kentucky’s disenfranchised are African American,
representing 22 percent of the state’s voting eligible black
residents.ix
More than 42,500 of these individuals – nearly 75 percent – have
completed all the terms of their sentence.x Thus, despite having
returned to the community and being subject to all the
requirements of responsible citizenship, they cannot lay claim to full
citizenship.
Stated differently, only 5,438 of Kentucky’s disenfranchised African
Americans are physically incarcerated.xi
“No right is more
precious in a free
society than that
of having a voice
in the election of
those who make
the laws under
which, as good
citizens, we must
live. Other rights,
even the most
basic, are illusory
if the right to
vote is
undermined.” –
Wesberry v.
Sanders, United
States Supreme
Court (1964)
www.restorethevotes.org
Felony Disenfranchisement: At-A-Glance
Nationally, 1 out of every 13 voting-eligible
African-Americans has been stripped of their
voting rights.
In FL, KY, and VA more than one in five
African Americans have been stripped of their
voting rights, amounting to more than 20
percent of their adult voting-age population.
Disenfranchised
Kentucky deprives an estimated 243,842
citizens – amounting to 7.35 percent of its
voters – of their voting rights. Overall,
only 22,542 of the disenfranchised are
incarcerated. Additionally, 22 percent of
the disenfranchised are African American.
Post-Sentence
African-American
Incarcerated
Kentucky Total
0
50
100
150
200
www.naacp.org
250
SOLUTIONS

Immediate First Steps. Promote messaging which realigns Kentucky with the American values of
redemption, rehabilitation, and responsible citizenship through Executive Pardon or legislative
initiatives granting automatic restoration of voting rights to all persons who, while having been
convicted of a felony-level offense, are no longer incarcerated. Additionally, once an Executive
Pardon has been granted, require all detention facilities as well as post-release supervisory agencies
to inform returning citizens that their right to vote has been automatically restored.

Institutionalize American Values. Permanently align the state of Kentucky with the American values
of redemption, rehabilitation, and responsible citizenship by abolishing the state’s felony
disenfranchisement scheme altogether.
COMMUNITY ACTION STEPS




Promote Proactive Change. Use mass public education to spotlight the impact felony
disenfranchisement has on voting-eligible citizens. Emphasize the fact that most of Kentucky’s
disenfranchised voters are community residents.
Understand the Options. Abolishing felony disenfranchisement can be challenging because it is
often written into the state constitution. In addition to understanding your legislative process, you
may also have to learn about the various options for amending the constitution as set forth in
Sections 256 through 263.
Identify Likely and Unlikely Allies. Stripping individuals convicted of a felony-level offense of their
voting rights negatively impacts the formerly convicted, their families, the communities they call
home, and the nation’s image as a true democracy. This means the base of people that may stand
with you in opposition to felony disenfranchisement can be diverse.
Send a Clear and Succinct Message. Let the Governor, state legislators, and the public know
community supports full citizenship for everyone. Use online petitions, email, fax, phone, and inperson campaigns to make your position clear. Host town hall meetings and other forums to shed
light on community’s support for full citizenship for all people – invite public officials to attend.
SAMPLE RESOURCES and REFERENCES



Uggen, Christopher and Shannon, Sarah (University of Minnesota), and Manza, Jeff (New York
University) (2012), State-Level Estimates of Felon Disenfranchisement in the United States, 2010
Sentencing Project (2012), Felony Disenfranchisement: An Annotated Bibliography
Kentucky Public and Justice Safety Cabinet: http://justice.ky.gov/NR/rdonlyres/7845144F-9A85-4D61BE3A-3C56F6D57B08/0/Restoration_of_Civil_Rights.pdf.
www.restorethevotes.org
References
i
Uggen, C. and Shannon S. (University of Minnesota) & Manza J. (New York University) for The Sentencing Project, State-level
Estimates of Felon Disenfranchisement in the United States, 2010 at 1 (July 2012).
ii
Id. at 5.
iii
Behrens, A. Uggen, C. & Manza J., Ballot Manipulation and the “Menace of the Negro Domination”: Racial Threat and Felon
Disenfranchisement in the United States, 1850-2002, American Journal of Sociology, 109(3), 559-605 at 565 (2003).
iv
Kentucky’s disenfranchisement language can be found in Section 145 of the State Constitution. Available at:
http://www.lrc.ky.gov/Legresou/Constitu/list2.htm#Revision.
v
See: Kentucky Justice and Public Safety Cabinet (available at: http://justice.ky.gov/).
vi
Wesberry v. Sanders, 376 U.S. 1, 17 (1964).
vii
Uggen, Shannon, & Manza at 16.
viii
Supra, note 1 at 16.
ix
Id. at 17.
x
Id.
xi
Id.