Although the 1990s was clearly a decade of policies that emphasized the punishment of criminals, empirical evidence shows that rehabilitative ideals for offenders remained part of the public's aspirations for sentencing and corrections. This philosophical confusion about the purpose of punishment is relevant to the felon voting debate, in that the arguments for and against the disenfranchisement of offenders is apparently rooted in a philosophy of punishment. The review of the current literature reveals that the research methodology, sampling techniques, and study participants vary widely in the measurement of opinions on felon disenfranchisement. The methodologies used to examine the felon-voting opinions of certain members of the U.S. population have included survey research (Pinaire et al., 2003; Manza et al., 2004); focus groups (Heuman et al., 2005); and interviewing (Cardinale, 2004; Steinmetz, 2003; and Wahler, 2006). In addition, the sampling techniques have included random sampling of adults across the country, as well as snowball and convenience samples of ex-felons, inmates, parolees, the general public, and college students and faculty. Regardless of the research methodology, sampling technique, and sample size or composition, these members of the American public believe that convicted felons, depending on their correctional status or offense, should be eligible to vote. This opinion is particularly strong for nonincarcerated probationers, parolees, and ex-felons. Examples of legislative changes that reflect this position, coupled with public opinion research cited in this article, suggest that felon voting prohibitions may no longer be acceptable to most Americans. 35 references