Advertisement

Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Wednesday, August 25, 2021

When drawing state legislative lines, Pennsylvania will count tens of thousands of people locked up in state prisons not in their cell, but at their previous home address before they were incarcerated.

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

Excellent for those districts (mostly urban) that contribute prisoners. Not so good for those districts in which prisons reside (mostly rural). For quite some time, districts in which the prisons resided received an outsize contribution of resources and the sending districts were under resourced. And when you consider that Blacks were over represented in prisons relative to their representation in the population, predominantly Black districts were under funded.

Glad to see this change come about.

#1 | Posted by FedUpWithPols at 2021-08-25 09:48 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Most elected officials fight to get military bases included (I mean Gerrymandered) into their districts. I guess those pols will no longer fight over prisons, which means they will no longer have to show up and speechify to the cons. Like they ever did...

#2 | Posted by catdog at 2021-08-25 09:52 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

If the inmates were sentenced to less than 5 years this makes sense but if there sentence to decades or life prison is where they live now.

#3 | Posted by Tor at 2021-08-25 11:20 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#3 | Posted by Tor

Not by choice though and if released they wouldn't stay. So it still makes sense.

#4 | Posted by GalaxiePete at 2021-08-25 12:52 PM | Reply

Really?

So because I want to live in Malibu that's where I should be counted as living?

#5 | Posted by Tor at 2021-08-25 12:55 PM | Reply

#3 | POSTED BY TOR - But do they vote? I feel like if they are fully supported by the government in a facility with no voting or ties to the area and would leave given the chance, why should they be counted at all?

#6 | Posted by justagirl_idaho at 2021-08-25 01:10 PM | Reply

Tor, you really don't see the issue here, when it comes to allocation of funding?

#7 | Posted by snoofy at 2021-08-25 01:11 PM | Reply

I already said if someone's going to be in prison for a couple of years it seems to make sense that they would be counted as still living where they resided before they went in since chances are they're going to be going back there.

The lifers are permanent residents in the prison which is located in a county and they are going to live there for the rest of their lives.

That being said statisticians should be told which people are inmates.

They're likely should be some way to designate which people are non lifers as well.

#8 | Posted by Tor at 2021-08-25 02:29 PM | Reply

"The lifers are permanent residents in the prison which is located in a county and they are going to live there for the rest of their lives." -- Tor

And that is what I addressed. Do "lifers" vote? If they have no vote they should not count as they are forced to spend the rest of their time where they are and have no say in local politics. Just my $0.02

#9 | Posted by justagirl_idaho at 2021-08-25 02:52 PM | Reply

We count those too young to vote those without the intelligence to vote and those who are here illegally.

It's nothing new either counting as many people as you can in a district is the norm.

#10 | Posted by Tor at 2021-08-25 03:01 PM | Reply

#10 | POSTED BY TOR -- yes but these are held captive and have lost their privileges. They are already counted under government money and do not use the roads/school/etc. As I said this is my opinion. I guess that we just don't agree.

#11 | Posted by justagirl_idaho at 2021-08-25 04:45 PM | Reply

FWIW it is a truly complex situation.

They don't use the roads but food going to them is transported on those roads.

They don't use the schools but many do receive remedial education and sometimes quite a bit more.

They are in the county and yet they are not.

Perhaps they should be counted as half in their county of incarceration and 1/2 in their County of origin?

#12 | Posted by Tor at 2021-08-25 05:00 PM | Reply

Maybe we do a 3/5s deal?

#13 | Posted by ClownShack at 2021-08-25 05:22 PM | Reply

Either way, they should be allowed to vote.

NO ONE should be denied the right to participate in their own governance. Either set up voting booths in the prison or give them mail-in ballots.

#14 | Posted by DarkVader at 2021-08-25 05:53 PM | Reply

Oh yeah lets allow prison inmates to vote.

Because what this country needs is for the boston bomber's opinion to be counted while his victims opinions are not.

#15 | Posted by Tor at 2021-08-25 06:01 PM | Reply

his victims opinions are not.

Is it cause they're dead?

#16 | Posted by ClownShack at 2021-08-25 06:14 PM | Reply

And what, precisely, is the harm in letting the Boston bomber vote?

Are you thinking that his one vote for the "legalize terrorism" candidate is going to make a huge difference? Because guess what? There isn't a "legalize terrorism" candidate.

The harm from not letting the Boston bomber vote is far more clear. It delegitimizes the government. Any government that creates an underclass of citizens who aren't allowed to have any say in the functioning of that government is NOT a legitimate government.

#17 | Posted by DarkVader at 2021-08-25 08:46 PM | Reply

What's the inherit harm in letting him walk down the street?

#18 | Posted by Tor at 2021-08-25 09:12 PM | Reply

Who is going to best represent their interests? The rep from their home district or the rep who benefits from having more people jailed in their district?

#19 | Posted by johnny_hotsauce at 2021-08-26 04:11 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2021 World Readable

Drudge Retort