We’ve all heard the rules and regulations for formerly incarcerated people. At first glance, you go, “Yeah, that makes sense. This person did wrong and should not have the same privileges as everyone else, because they can’t be trusted.” This assumption, and often ignorant-minded belief, fails to consider the realities of those who were formerly incarcerated.

In 46 states, including D.C., convicted criminals in prison are not allowed to vote and actively participate in democracy. Many states also remove this right from the possession of those on parole, those on probation, and even those who have already served their sentence to completion.

This means that around 3.9 million Americans are unable to represent their beliefs in voting, with this number disproportionately effecting certain communities.

36% of these Americans are African American men, coming out to 1.4 million that are disenfranchised. Just hearing that number in the context of that sentence should be enough to provoke some progressive thought, but its effects can also be said in much simpler terms.

These 1.4 million African American men — who have been wronged at every step in regard to the actions of their state and federal governments, who have been abused and killed at the hands of law enforcement and systematic racism in their country — are unable to vote and make change where they feel it is needed. Where they experience it so dramatically.

Of course, one might argue that this is just the consequences of their own actions. But if you look at this issue from a larger lens, America is the only democratic country to continue disenfranchising ex-offenders. Although these laws may have had a purpose back during the medieval times, their only use in current times is to protect an unsustainable goal of combatting voter fraud.

Yes, voter fraud is a real issue, but maintaining a completely pure ballot box is just an excuse to alienate ex-offenders and deprive them of a right that they rightfully deserve. This goal is not possible, especially amidst current events, so why put all the blame ex-offenders and those with criminal records for discrepancies in a system where errors could be found elsewhere as well?

The disenfranchisment of ex-offenders is often disproportionate to the degree of the offense itself. Committing something as minor as a single drug sale can lead to a lifetime without the right to vote, no matter what is served or what the punishment itself is.

Regardless of varying opinions on how serious a single drug sale is, in a mature and pragmatic conversation, it is pretty clear to see that it is not serious enough to deprive someone of voting rights for.

Historically, voting rights have been a major component of the American identity. With voting rights initially only being available to white men, then men of all races after so much effort towards social reform, and finally the women’s suffrage movement, voting has been determined as a fundamental characteristic of what it means to be an American.

In depriving ex-offenders of this right, therefore causing further racial discrimination and violating the very basis of democracy, America has set itself back thousands of years. The suffrage movement did not stop with the 19th Amendment, and will not stop until this issue has been addressed.