By — Stephen Fee Stephen Fee Leave your feedback Share Copy URL https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/poll-nonviolent-criminal-offenses-erased-job-applicants-10-years Email Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Pinterest Tumblr Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Poll: Should employers doing background checks be blocked from seeing nonviolent criminal offenses? Nation Jan 24, 2015 12:08 PM EDT In President Obama’s State of the Union address last week, he cited lowering crime rates and a lowering incarceration rate nationwide as an administration goal. But the after-effects of incarceration — or even just a criminal conviction or arrest — often continue to impact the lives of ex-offenders long after people have served their sentences. Should those ex-offenders be given second chances? On NewsHour Weekend Sunday, we explore how criminal histories are in some cases keeping ex-offenders from findings jobs, which in turn is driving people into dire economic circumstances. The Wall Street Journal reported data from the University of South Carolina last year that Americans with an arrest record by age 23 are twice as likely to end up in poverty as their peers. Advocates add that having even a minor criminal history can create barriers for a person’s future, from employment to housing. A growing number of jurisdictions are now banning preliminary questions about job applicants’ criminal records. But advocates suggest a policy that goes a step further: to seal nonviolent, low-level criminal offenses that are more than ten years old, effectively blocking employers from learning about a potential employee’s criminal record after that time has passed. Should employers doing background checks be blocked from seeing any non-violent criminal offenses? Should nonviolent offenses be sealed from background checks?We wanted to know: what do you think? Should low-level, nonviolent offenses be sealed from appearing in background checks? Answer our poll above and share your views in the comments section below. By — Stephen Fee Stephen Fee Stephen Fee is a producer and on-air reporter for PBS NewsHour Weekend. Since joining the broadcast in January 2014, he's reported on the obesity crisis in Mexico, the safety risks of the US shale oil boom, and the debate over terminally ill people using experimental drugs, among other stories. @stephenmfee
In President Obama’s State of the Union address last week, he cited lowering crime rates and a lowering incarceration rate nationwide as an administration goal. But the after-effects of incarceration — or even just a criminal conviction or arrest — often continue to impact the lives of ex-offenders long after people have served their sentences. Should those ex-offenders be given second chances? On NewsHour Weekend Sunday, we explore how criminal histories are in some cases keeping ex-offenders from findings jobs, which in turn is driving people into dire economic circumstances. The Wall Street Journal reported data from the University of South Carolina last year that Americans with an arrest record by age 23 are twice as likely to end up in poverty as their peers. Advocates add that having even a minor criminal history can create barriers for a person’s future, from employment to housing. A growing number of jurisdictions are now banning preliminary questions about job applicants’ criminal records. But advocates suggest a policy that goes a step further: to seal nonviolent, low-level criminal offenses that are more than ten years old, effectively blocking employers from learning about a potential employee’s criminal record after that time has passed. Should employers doing background checks be blocked from seeing any non-violent criminal offenses? Should nonviolent offenses be sealed from background checks?We wanted to know: what do you think? Should low-level, nonviolent offenses be sealed from appearing in background checks? Answer our poll above and share your views in the comments section below.