Posted on 08/04/2017 3:36:50 PM PDT by buckalfa
For people with criminal records, finding a job can be hard.
Their job applications may go straight to the trash bin if they truthfully answer a question about whether they were ever convicted of a felony.
It usually doesn’t matter if the conviction was a drug charge or other kind of nonviolent crime decades ago when they were young and impressionable. They don’t get the chance to explain.
For years, sympathetic lawmakers and social justice activists have proposed changing South Carolina law to make it easier for people to have certain crimes expunged from their records. But those bills could never overcome the law-and-order argument of the opposition. None passed.
Enter the Greenville Chamber of Commerce, which began lobbying in favor of expanding expungement for the first time this past legislative session.
The chamber’s president, Carlos Phillips, formerly worked for the chamber in Louisville, Ky., at a time when it was leading a campaign to pass similar legislation. That bill ultimately became law thanks in part to the support of Republican Gov. Matt Bevin.
In South Carolina, Phillips and the Greenville Chamber took up an argument used in Kentucky: They reframed the debate as a workforce issue, arguing that expanding the range of crimes eligible for expungement would make thousands of people more employable at a time when many businesses find it hard to find enough workers.
That argument takes on more potency at a time when employers face the tightest labor market since the 1990s.
According to the state Department of Employment and Workforce, South Carolina’s unemployment rate was 4 percent in June, the lowest rate since December 2000.
“We can give folks a second chance, and we can provide a larger pool for employers to choose from, and that’s a win-win,” Phillips said.
In taking up the issue, the Greenville Chamber sought a united front from the state’s business community.
It lined up support from the Upstate Chamber Coalition, an alliance of 11 chambers to which it belongs, as well as the S.C. Chamber of Commerce and the Charleston Metro Chamber of Commerce.
The Greenville Chamber also worked on legal language with the S.C. Law Enforcement Division, which had opposed previous bills.
Chamber involvement made a “huge difference,” according to Ashley Thomas, an attorney with the S.C. Appleseed Legal Justice Center, a Columbia organization that advocates for low-income residents.
Thomas, who has lobbied for expungement bills for four years, said the business community was never involved in any meaningful way until this year.
“It’s been mostly law enforcement and prosecutors and folks like me who look at it from a systemic poverty issue,” she said.
Once the chambers got involved, “all of the negative voices were a little bit more muted,” she said. “It was very interesting to watch for somebody who’s been fighting this fight for a while.”
The chambers succeeded in getting their bill through the House by a vote of 103 to 0.
The measure stalled in the Senate, however, amid concerns by Sen. Karl Allen, a Greenville Democrat who doesn’t think it goes far enough.
Still, Jason Zacher, vice president for business advocacy at the Greenville Chamber, said he thinks the bill stands a good chance of passing next year.
“It has lots of support in the Senate,” Zacher said. “I think we can get it across the finish line next year.”
The bill favored by the chambers would expand expungement possibilities for first-offense drug possession, whether it’s marijuana, cocaine, or methamphetamine.
Offenders could apply for expungement following three years of good behavior.
SLED would continue to keep a record of their crimes, but it would not be available to employers or the general public.
Violent crimes are not covered, nor are drug dealing and driving under the influence of alcohol.
Allen, the senator from Greenville, knows the expungement issue well, having chaired a legislative committee that studied it.
He said the chamber-backed bill would not help the people most in need of expungement, because those people usually have more serious crimes on their records, especially drug dealing.
Allen said he wants to make sure all stakeholders are part of the discussion, which he said didn’t happen this past legislative session.
“The chamber is one stakeholder,” Allen said. “They are a very important stakeholder, and we need their support, but they are not the only stakeholder who has an interest and a voice.”
Expanding the range of crimes eligible for expungement beyond those included in the chamber-backed bill could prove to be politically problematic.
Laura Hudson, executive director of the S.C. Crime Victims’ Council, a Columbia nonprofit that advocates for crime victims, said she would fight any proposal to allow expungement for more serious crimes.
She said Allen favors expungement for carjacking “and all kinds of dangerous things.”
“Law enforcement and crime victims fight every one of those bills because we know they are a threat to public safety,” Hudson said.
She said she doesn’t buy the chambers’ argument that expungement is a workforce issue.
Businesses have a right to know about the criminal records of those they are thinking about hiring, Hudson said, and they can make their own decisions about whether to give job applicants a second chance.
“I know many, many business people who hire folks who have records, but they hire them fully knowing what their record is,” she said.
Fortunately a lot of felons self identify themselves as ex-cons via their tattoos.
I think if I thought I would make crime my career, the last thing I would get is a tattoo.
Actually if I thought I would make crime my career I would become a politician.
Pass a law allowing them to expunge hate crimes and this insanity will stop.
if you choose to break the law there are consequences that you have to live with.
I thought it was up to a business whether they wanted to hire an ex felon. If the government gets involved, then records can be expunged, and for some positions the employers would need to know the criminal background, then make their own decision.
In times before access to databases, people relied upon references. To be considered, you had to get somebody I trusted to vouch for you. If this passes, we would be going back to that.
I rented a house to two non-violent former felons. They are the worst renters I have ever had and that is impressive.
I didn’t actually know they were former felons until I thought that maybe they had been arrested, as I couldn’t find them at home. I put their names into google with the word arrested. They were thieves, drug users; a man and wife team with two kids. They seem to have lots of cash, but never pay rent unless I go over and give them a three day notice. Ten months of three day notices. There is always brand new stuff around the place; some of it left outside in the rain. The problem appears to be in their heads. For example, I went over to collect the rent, which was fifteen days late. They were running the air conditioning with a few windows open and telling me all about their difficulties. (They had all new porch furniture.) Once, they paid part of the rent by having me follow them to a store where they cashed in eight $20 lottery tickets. How many of those tickets did they buy to get eight that paid off a total of about ninety bucks? Nothing they do makes sense.
What I’ve noticed about the felons I’ve dealt with over the years is they make bad decisions; driving without a license, for example, and, they have poor impulse control. Virtually all of them smoked. If I had my choice I would never again hire or rent to a former felon. (I do realize people make mistakes and they can later be good people. If I’ve met those people I never knew about it. I always found out about the bad ones the hard way.)
Too darned bad. If you want a good job don’t get arrested
I became aware of it when some CA 2A discussion boards noted a quiet change to "disqualifying convictions" that stop you from buying a gun in CA. CA uses it's own system (that queries the Fed instant check) but CA has more disqualifiers than Feds.
So all of a sudden all these misdemeanors show as disqualifying. Investigation turned up that CA was allowing convicted felons to reduce felonies to misdemeanors (as the precursor to eventual expungement) and did not want them being able to buy guns. How that works in the long run is beyond me. Of course under Governor-to-be Any Twosome Newsome, guns will be banned completely so I guess that solves their conundrum.
sometimes cops & prosecutors trick kids into bad plea agreements on trumped up charges by telling them if only they take the agreement, their parents &/or employers never will find out if they just pay a small fine....only to find they have been charged with a felony which causes them to lose their job & become unemployable.
I know a young man who at 19 years old fell for such an agreement & lost a good job & couldn’t find a new one for years until a big employer took a chance on him. Two years later, he was named “employee of the year” out of hundreds of employees & the company is benefitting by his expertise & genius in computers with some college education,too. NOBODY works harder than he does or has a better attitude and he will soon become a manager before he’s done. He doesn’t have ANY tattoos.
His crime? In a state which has basically de-criminalized marijuana possession, he got caught with a small amount of marijuana he was smoking late one night on the way home from work. He was carrying a laptop computer which the arresting cops told him “must be stolen” but was NOT stolen. and he had a knife on his belt which he used for protection coming home late at night walking in a bad neighborhood....in a state in which it’s now legal to carry a concealed GUN without a permit! He was charged with carrying a “burglary tool” (the knife”) which also was called a “concealed weapon”...though it wasn’t really concealed but was semi concealed...which is a felony. So basically a kid coming home from work late at night was tricked into possessing a criminal record which made him look like a burglar to employers...until one at least heard his side of the story.
[ Fortunately a lot of felons self identify themselves as ex-cons via their tattoos.
I think if I thought I would make crime my career, the last thing I would get is a tattoo.
Actually if I thought I would make crime my career I would become a politician. ]
You typical Criminal is stupid, You typical politician is smarter than your typical criminal, but not by much.
since farting cross-eyed is a felony in some states in this increasingly repressive “republic.” I think this is a great idea.
Seriously. One cannot become a nurses aide here if one has a felony or a misdemeanor that was pleaded down from a felony charge.
Know one state licensed person who was in a bar when a fight broke out, everyone in the bar was arrested. Took this solid citizen 10K in legal fees to get the charges erased, worth every penny since the individual would have lost livelihood without the necessary state license.
We are creating our own criminal class by our overly punitive charges.
Businesses cannot hire ex-felons because the businesses’ insurers will not insure them.
Everything stupid in this country goes back to the insurance industry.
My store took a chance on a low level drug dealer who turned out to have a very bad temper..He ended up killing a woman in her home,then driving to a field and killing himself....No one knew he was a criminal until we read it in the paper..
These days in our area, police arrest everyone present, even passerbys and rely on the courts to sort it out.
I believe that most people in prison thoroughly deserve to be there. Most are guilty of the crimes for which they were convicted, plus others they got away with.
But, there are also people who are wrongly convicted. Not many, but some.
And then there are those that I call "overly convicted". What you describe seems to be a case of "over conviction", and there are LOTS of those.
Your example is not rare at all. It is a shame more people are not aware of how easy it is to get scared and pressured to taking a conviction to avoid the possibility of a jail term and/or not being able to afford a good attorney (or not wanting to burden family with it). what you thought would never be found out, turns into a scarlet letter. Even decades of a great track record proving it was bum wrap can’t erase the ‘scarlet letter’. If someone was dangerous, they should be locked up. But because they do let dangerous people walk the streets.
Prosecutors for the most part just want a conviction. Young people without good people helping them make choices in dealing with such things are at a big disadvantage. Many are NOT guilty of anything or just guilty of far less than it appears. But know they can’t afford the ‘risks’ of jail or attorneys fees and fines (teens, young families, young single moms, etc).
A non-jail and far cheaper alternative option is often the deciding factor without realizing the long-term implications.
An arrest in those cases usually get tossed and records are expunged
In any case, cases should have a review process to help ensure against over-prosecutions, etc. There should be a way to bring it back before a judge to be ‘reviewed’ after a set amount of years and expunged if it IS SO DESERVED. This would help ensure cases aren’t just pushed through the courts for convictions. And it may even help rehabilitate many knowing they could have a better life if they behaved.
I work with felons all day, exclusively.
It takes three things to be a criminal:
Immaturity
Selfishness
Lack of foresight
Why a business would want to hire an employee with those qualities anyway is beyond me.
Regardless, too many people have begun to think that a person’s choices shouldn’t follow them. Which is reckless and kind of sad commentary.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.