AN ACT proposing an amendment to Section 145 of the Constitution of Kentucky relating to voting rights.
Summary
HB773 is a proposed constitutional amendment that would change Kentucky’s rules for restoring voting and civil rights to people convicted of felonies. Under the proposal, a person convicted of a felony other than treason, election bribery, or election fraud would automatically regain the right to vote once any term of imprisonment, probation, or parole is completed, unless those rights are restored earlier by executive pardon. The measure also provides that civil rights would be automatically restored five years after completion of imprisonment, probation, or parole.
The bill would revise Section 145 of the Kentucky Constitution to replace older language that broadly excluded people convicted of felonies from voting until restored by pardon. It also adds rules for people who reoffend after rights have already been restored, making clear that a later felony conviction would again suspend voting rights until completion of the sentence and delay automatic civil-rights restoration for five years after supervision ends. The proposal would be submitted to voters as a constitutional amendment, and it includes instructions to the Secretary of State and county clerks for publication and ballot certification.
Impact
If adopted, HB773 would amend Kentucky’s Constitution and directly affect the state’s felony disenfranchisement and rights-restoration framework. It would shift the state from a pardon-based restoration system to an automatic restoration system for voting rights upon completion of sentence, while creating a separate five-year waiting period for broader civil-rights restoration. The amendment would affect people convicted of felonies, the Secretary of State, county clerks, and election administrators responsible for placing the question on the ballot and informing voters.
Sentiment
No committee transcripts or recorded votes were provided, so there is no direct evidence of legislative debate or formal support/opposition in the available materials. Based on the bill text alone, the measure appears framed as a voting-rights restoration proposal and is likely intended to be presented to voters as a constitutional amendment rather than enacted as a statutory change. The absence of recorded discussion means sentiment cannot be reliably characterized beyond the bill’s reform-oriented purpose.
Contention
The main points of contention likely concern whether automatic restoration of voting rights after felony completion is appropriate, how long civil-rights restoration should take, and whether exceptions should remain for serious offenses such as treason, election bribery, and election fraud. Another possible issue is the continued role of executive pardon versus automatic restoration, since the bill preserves pardon-based restoration but reduces its importance for voting rights. Because no debate transcript is available, the specific arguments for or against these provisions and the identities of supporters or opponents are not documented in the provided record.