Question

Thirty-five states prohibit at least some people from voting after they have been released from prison. The rules about which felonies are covered and when the right to vote is restored vary widely from state to state, and often defy logic. In four states, including New York, felons on parole cannot vote, but felons on probation can. In some states, felons must formally apply for restoration of their voting rights, which state officials can grant or deny on the most arbitrary of grounds.

Florida may have changed the outcome of the 2000 presidential election when Secretary of State Katherine Harris oversaw a purge of suspected felons that removed an untold number of eligible voters from the rolls. This year, state officials are conducting a new purge that may be just as flawed. They have developed a list of 47,000 voters who may be felons, and have asked local officials to consider purging them. But The Miami Herald found that more than 2,100 of them may have been listed in error, because their voting rights were restored by the state's clemency process. Last week, the state acknowledged that 1,600 of those on the list should be allowed to vote.

–“Felons and the Right to Vote,”
New York Times editorial board

What kind of evidence do the authors use to support the claim that denying the vote to ex-offenders is antidemocratic? Check all that apply.

anecdote
quantitative information
expert opinion
personal experience
historical information

Answer 1

The authors use quantitative information, expert opinion, and historical information to support the claim that denying the vote to ex-offenders is antidemocratic.

Step-by-step explanation:

The authors use quantitative information, expert opinion, and historical information to support the claim that denying the vote to ex-offenders is antidemocratic.

Quantitative information is provided when the authors mention the number of voters who were listed in error and should be allowed to vote. Expert opinion is used when the editorial board of The New York Times expresses their view on the arbitrary grounds and varying rules regarding the restoration of voting rights. Historical information is used to highlight the origins of felony disfranchisement laws and their disproportionate impact on poor minority members.