Employerswould prefer not to hire persons holding past criminal records. Datafrom statistic firms are of support that a person with felonyconvictions has a high probability of being involved in crimes(Washington Post). In comparison to people without felonyconvictions, the later compares more favorably. Landlords,caretakers, and the housing agents are of the same affiliation. Apartfrom being a threat to tenant’s security, house providers arescared of catering for damages if they cause any. Renting a house toan individual possessing, rape, murder or robbery history exposes theowner to a risk of being sued if they furthered their acts(Capitol.state.tx.us). It is in this regard that this writing focuseson two bills involving Texas residents with felony criminal records.
Duttonwrote the first bill `relating to the consequences of successfullycompleting a period of deferred adjudication community supervision.`He advocated for re-surface of record upon a future commission of asimilar crime. The second house bill by Thompson Senfronia and whichwas passed a law in May by Texas state legislature made changes tothe Property Code. The aimed of the bill was to ensure the cause ofaction does not attack the landlord, housing agent or manager on thebasis of issuing out a person holding past criminal record. When thelater passed to law, the prior failed at its initial phases.
Accordingto House Bill number 476 by Dutton, on the close of a communitysupervision period, if the judge has not continued to arbitration ofguilt, the judge might reject the procedures against the respondentand release the defendant. Such crimes as murder, rapes and robberywith violence are among felony categorized crimes.
Acitizen released under this clause would be accorded equal employmentchances, housing opportunity and professional license to othercitizens without discrimination as long as they qualified equally.Also, according to the bill, a person released or previouslysubjected to community supervision for a similar offense, ifconvicted in future, their past records will be admissible in courtproceedings.
Accordeda chance to vote for the bill, I would vote against it. It is unfairto keep records even after the convict has completed their communitysupervision. Upon completion of community supervision, the convictsare wary of future reputation. Such histories have been used in thepast to deny people employment or terminate contracts if they werehired without prior knowledge. Therefore, I would advocate for totalnon-disclosure. Something that the bill would not support.
Thehouse bill No. 1510 passed into law on 26th May the year 2015. It wasanonymously voted to law my accrual of 145 yeas, 0 nays and 3 werepresent but could not vote. These presents a massive support for aSenate bill. The bill was authored under the leadership of ThompsonSenfronia (Capitol.state.tx.us).
Thebill was created with an aim protecting the landlords against harshlaws. If a landlord, an agent or a house caretaker accommodated aperson under felony and did not know prior to the criminal offense,the bill provides no law breakage. However, it does not remain silenton house owners who act out of negligence. According toCapitol.state.tx.us, if a caretaker, house manager, or a landlord hadprior knowledge of the tenant’s history, then he or she will beaccused to have broken the law if they cause a disturbance in future.
Thebill was established with an aim of accommodating wrong doers in thesociety. The fact that one has broken the law before does not makethem fewer humans. However, as the literature says, one is neverenough and therefore, no assurance can be accorded to theirtransformation. On this regard, it is only fair to establish such alaw that present each party with a role to play in such situation.Additionally, the bill operates under the rights of properties whileconsidering the welfare of every individual involved. Given a chanceto vote for or against, I would vote in favor of the bill. It isillogical to sure a landlord who just provide housing to tenantswithout discrimination. Furthermore, the landlord operates a businessand, therefore, cannot limit customers. However, since the law doesnot allow for chances of ignorance from the landlord, it issues thehousing provider with responsibility. The landlord is burdened with arole in scrutinizing the conduct of people they allow in theirpremises not only to avoid liability but also because of publicsecurity.
Inconclusion, the two bills were meant to protect the welfare of Texasresidents with past criminal records. The first one was aimed atprotecting future mistreatment of past convicts of a felony. Thesecond bill was made with an intention of establishing harmonybetween the house owners and the tenants or employees and theiremployers. It is impressive to understand the grounds of rejection ofthe first bill while the second one was eventually passed to law.Even when the first bill was rejected, future amendments can see itpassed to the law since it was not totally out of order. It is alsoimportant to understand that convicts of a felony are equal humans,only with slight behavioral problems.
Millionsof Ex-cons Still Can’t Get Jobs. Here’s How the White House CouldHelp Fix That.Washington Post, 2015. Web. 17 Oct. 2015.<http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/storyline/wp/2015/01/22/millions-of-ex-cons-still-cant-get-jobs-heres-how-the-white-house-could-help-fix-that>.
TexasLegislature Online – 84(R) History for HB 476.Capitol.state.tx.us, 2015. Web. 17 Oct.2015.<http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLookup/History.aspx?LegSess=84R&Bill=HB476>.
TexasLegislature Online – 84(R) History for HB 1510.Capitol.state.tx.us, 2015. Web. 17 Oct.2015.<http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLookup/History.aspx?LegSess=84R&Bill=HB1510