logo
A federal Clean Slate Act will enhance public safety and grow our economy

A federal Clean Slate Act will enhance public safety and grow our economy

The Hill10-04-2025
For many of us, spring is a moment of new beginnings, which is why April is designated as Second Chance Month. This time is dedicated to those who are still dealing with the consequences of a criminal record. They are, unfortunately, still being defined by the worst day of their lives. Ninety four percent of employers use background checks to screen out applicants with records. Ninety percent of landlords use background checks to screen out applicants with records. And 72 percent of colleges and universities use background checks to screen out applicants with records.
Last year, I participated in a 'Hill Day' organized by The Clean Slate Initiative. Joined by bipartisan policy advocates from a diverse group of organizations, I escorted people to House and Senate offices so they could share their lived experiences with members of Congress and congressional staff while advocating for a federal Clean Slate Act.
As vice president of Due Process Institute and a long-time conservative advocate, lobbying is certainly not new to me, but this experience was personal. My uncle, a recovering addict, was one of the many impacted people who came to D.C. to have their voices heard. Watching them share their experiences was moving. I hope it served to educate lawmakers about the many barriers that a record sets in front of anyone desperately trying to turn their life around.
More than 70 million Americans have a record — either of an arrest or a conviction. That's almost as many Americans as have a four-year college degree. This includes people who were arrested but never prosecuted and even many who were ultimately deemed innocent of any wrongdoing. It includes people whose crimes were nonviolent or were a result of their drug dependence.
For most people, these records are unnecessary barriers to those seeking to live productive lives because they prevent people from finding meaningful work, obtaining housing and receiving higher education. Sealing a record is the key to providing someone with a meaningful opportunity to move forward.
The Clean Slate Act would streamline the sealing of records for those who have been acquitted, exonerated or were arrested but never ultimately had criminal charges filed against them in the federal system. It would also seal records for thoseconvicted of simple drug possession and low-level, nonviolent marijuana offenses one year after the completion of their sentence (including any term of probation or supervision).
The legislation would also allow people convicted of certain nonviolent federal offenses to petition the court to ask to seal their records, with the prosecuting U.S. Attorney's Office and, if applicable, victims of the offense receiving notification of the petition. Importantly, while records will be sealed for most purposes, law enforcement and courts would still have access to an individual's records.
Republican and Democratic state lawmakers across our nation have recognized the sound public policy behind ensuring people with certain arrest or conviction records have a meaningful second chance; today, more than 40 states have some form of record-sealing or expungement process. A dozen states — including Colorado, Michigan, Utah, Pennsylvania and Oklahoma — have adopted state-level clean slate laws. Now, it's time for Congress to act, ensuring that those who meet the requirements can receive a fair shot at building a better life for themselves.
Still, introducing the Clean Slate Act is only the first step in the process. We have a long way to go before the bill can help millions, and in our way stands the reactionary tendency of some in Congress to oppose criminal legal system reform. Too many in Congress weaponize the issue of public safety.
Unfortunately, the politics of fear has a market, and those who aim for political advantage are eager to push narratives that are easily debunked by available data. Lost in the rhetorical warfare are people who desperately want a better life for themselves and their families but find barriers to gainful employment and safe housing. Keeping these barriers in place only increases the risk of recidivism to the detriment of public safety.
Public safety is strengthened when individuals have a real chance to succeed. Having a job is critical to breaking the cycle of crime and keeping communities safe. Simply put, employment is among the strongest evidence-based solutions for public safety.
Record-sealing is also good for America's employers — particularly small businesses that are desperately looking for workers. In January, there were 913,000 more job openings than there were workers actively seeking a job. The labor shortage that we face — driven by our aging population — is only going to get worse. America needs more workers to grow our economy, but too many barriers to hiring exist for the waiting workforce of skilled workers with a record. Record-sealing opens doors for more people to fully participate in our economy.
As a society, we should want to provide a path forward for people so they can support themselves and their families as a matter of fairness and forgiveness. But we also need to understand that failing to provide that path forward hurts all of us in the long run.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Democrats blast Bessent over Trump baby accounts ‘backdoor for privatizing Social Security' remarks
Democrats blast Bessent over Trump baby accounts ‘backdoor for privatizing Social Security' remarks

The Hill

timea few seconds ago

  • The Hill

Democrats blast Bessent over Trump baby accounts ‘backdoor for privatizing Social Security' remarks

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent is facing heavy backlash from Democrats over a Wednesday remark in which he talked about 'a backdoor for privatizing Social Security.' 'In a way, it is a backdoor for privatizing Social Security,' Bessent said Wednesday during an event with Breitbart News, discussing 'Trump accounts.' These are savings accounts the Trump administration has proposed for kids born between 2024 and 2028 in which the government will put $1,000. It was a part of President Trump's 'big, beautiful bill' that he signed into law earlier this year. Social Security has long been a third rail in politics, and Democrats were quick to accuse Bessent of suggesting he and the administration saw the accounts as a future replacement for Social Security. Sen. Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.) said in a post on the social platform X Wednesday that Bessent was 'saying the quiet part out loud.' ''In a way, it is a backdoor for privatizing Social Security.' – Scott Bessent,' Luján said in his post, which featured a clip of Bessent's comments. 'That means gutting the promise our seniors earned and dismantling Social Security as we know it.' In his own post on X Wednesday, Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.) offered an opinion similar to Luján's. 'Trump Treasury Sec. Scott Bessent said the quiet part out loud: Trump-Republicans want to privatize Social Security, turning it from a dependable safety net to a risky profit center for moneyed special interests at the expense of everyday Americans,' Reed said in his post. Rep. Richard Neal (D-Mass.) said on X that 'Republicans' ultimate goal is to privatize Social Security.' 'And we know that there isn't a backdoor they won't try to make Wall Street's dream a reality,' he added. Later on Wednesday, Bessent sought to clean up his remarks by arguing the new accounts would bolster Social Security. He said in a post on X that 'Trump Baby Accounts are an additive benefit for future generations, which will supplement the sanctity of Social Security's guaranteed payments.' 'This is not an either-or question: our Administration is committed to protecting Social Security and to making sure seniors have more money,' he added. In an appearance on CNBC's 'Squawk Box' Thursday, Bessent said he was 'I was giving an interview, and I was talking about the $1,000 baby bonds that every American citizen, every newborn, is going to get.' 'The Democrats hate this program because the — it brings capitalism and markets to every American, not just their constituents at the upper end, and over time, the compounding is going to be an incredible supplement to Social Security, not a replacement. It is a compliment,' he added.

College Sports Commission to allow NIL payments to athletes from collectives with scrutiny
College Sports Commission to allow NIL payments to athletes from collectives with scrutiny

USA Today

timea few seconds ago

  • USA Today

College Sports Commission to allow NIL payments to athletes from collectives with scrutiny

Booster collectives will be able to continue paying college athletes, but with restrictions, after an agreement between the plaintiff's attorneys in the House vs. NCAA settlement and the new Collegiate Sports Commission. New guidance from the CSC went out to schools Thursday, July 31, replacing a July 10 memo that raised alarms with House attorneys Jeffrey Kessler and Steve Berman and would have essentially put collectives out of business. Dozens of collectives had been lining up to file a class-action suit against the CSC and the power conferences had the original guidance gone into effect. The CSC was created to enforce terms of the settlement and the $20.5 million revenue-sharing cap and has been given the authority to nix deals that don't fall within certain parameters. At issue in this case was whether the NIL deals being offered by collectives met the CSC's threshold of a valid business purpose. The CSC's original guidance focused on whether the deal came from an entity whose business purpose was 'providing goods or services to the general public for provide.' The vast majority of collectives, whose primary function before the House settlement was simply to raise money to pay college athletes, did not meet that standard. The new guidance will not focus on the entity offering the deal, but whether the deal itself meets the standard of delivering the public a good or service for profit. In other words, a paid autograph signing organized by the collective would theoretically be approved as long as it falls within the standard compensation range for such events as determined by Deloitte, the firm hired by CSC to run its online NIL clearinghouse. As outlined in the House settlement, athletes whose deals get turned down can either rework the deal or appeal and enter an arbitration process. "The College Sports Commission will enforce the settlement as written," CEO Bryan Seeley said in a statement. "Pay-for-play will not be permitted, and every NIL deal done with a student-athlete must be a legitimate NIL deal, not pay-for-play in disguise." The net effect is that collectives will still have a role in paying college athletes beyond the revenue sharing cap, a reality the power conferences hoped to eliminate with the settlement, but will not be able to spend unaccountably as they did before. And, for now at least, the CSC will avoid a significant legal challenge although others are expected in the future around issues like Title IX and the allowable range of compensation for certain activities. A joint statement Thursday from the House plaintiffs and the power conferences confirmed that 'in evaluating such payments, the settlement's requirements focus on substance, not labels. Nothing in the Settlement prohibits an Associated Entity or Individual, including collectives, from making NIL payments to student-athletes, as long as such NIL payments have a valid business purpose related to offering goods or services to the general public for profit and fall within the range of fair market value compensation, as defined by the settlement.'

Nancy Pelosi gets defensive over insider trading claim: ‘Why do you have to read that?'
Nancy Pelosi gets defensive over insider trading claim: ‘Why do you have to read that?'

New York Post

timea few seconds ago

  • New York Post

Nancy Pelosi gets defensive over insider trading claim: ‘Why do you have to read that?'

Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi blew up at CNN's Jake Tapper live on air on Wednesday when the broadcaster confronted her about her husband's stock trades and allegations of insider trading. Pelosi, 85, grew defensive when presented with a clip of Trump alleging she grew her fortune 'by having inside information' during an interview on 'The Lead with Jake Tapper.' 'Why do you have to read that?' Pelosi (D-Calif.) scoffed as she gesticulated angrily.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store