The Catholic Democratic Governor of Virginia assumed he might make voting accessible en masse to ex-felons. http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-w...ghts-to-felons

He claims he will personally sign off [[a right of power he does indeed wield) each individual ex-felons to have that right, if denied on a mass scale. I'd like to see that.

I have to snuff at the premise present in this: "Republicans suspect the real motive for McAuliffe's order is political," Pam reported. "The governor is a close ally of Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, who could benefit from more African-American voters if the race in Virginia is tight. McAuliffe denied that was his reason for issuing the order." Which is another way of saying Republicans would like to deny votes to individuals for whatever arbitrary reason they can find and uphold, if they know the pending votes would come from African Americans who would not support them.

As this table will showhttp://felonvoting.procon.org/view.r...ourceID=000286 Virginia is not as bad as Alabama, Florida, or Tennessee about the matter.

Michigan does fall in a section of states who aren't hindered by restoring the right to vote to those that did their time and want to reclaim their life of liberty and it's rights in this land. Only in Vermont and Maine [[like fictional Shawshank?) can one actually vote while incarcerated.