Martha Stewart was charged, tried and convicted of a crime in 2004. As she neared the end of her prison sentence, a well-known columnist wrote that she was “paying her dues,” and that “there is simply no reason for anyone to attempt to deny her right to start anew.”

    Surely, the American ideal of second chances should not be reserved only for the rich and powerful. Unfortunately, many federal and state laws impose post-conviction restrictions on a shockingly large number of Americans, who are prevented from ever fully paying their debt to society.

    At least 65 million people in the United States have a criminal record. This can result in severe penalties that continue long after punishment is completed.

    Many of these penalties are imposed regardless of the seriousness of the offense or the person’s individual circumstances. Laws can restrict or ban voting, access to public housing, and professional and business licensing. They can affect a person’s ability to get a job and qualification for benefits.

    In all, more than 45,000 laws and rules serve to exclude vast numbers of people from fully participating in American life.

    Some laws make sense. No one advocates letting someone convicted of pedophilia (恋童癖) work in a school. But too often collateral (随附的) consequences bear no relation to public safety. Should a woman who possessed a small amount of drugs years ago be permanently unable to be licensed as a nurse?

    These laws are also counterproductive, since they make it harder for people with criminal records to find housing or land a job, two key factors that reduce backsliding.

    A recent report makes several recommendations, including the abolition of most post-conviction penalties, except for those specifically needed to protect public safety. Where the penalties are not a must, they should be imposed only if the facts of a case support it.

    The point is not to excuse or forget the crime. Rather, it is to recognize that in America’s vast criminal justice system, second chances are crucial. It is in no one’s interest to keep a large segment of the population on the margins of society.

51. A) Her past record might stand in her way to a new life.

解析：推断题，由文中的well-known columnist和人名Martha Stewart定位到第一段a well-known columnist wrote that she was “paying her dues,” and that “there is simply no reason for anyone to attempt to deny her right to start anew.”一个知名的专栏作家觉得Martha Stewart已经受到了惩罚，任何人都不应该试图剥夺一个人重新开始的权利，言外之意就是，作家觉得Martha Stewart的入狱经历可能会影响到她以后的新生活。B选项她的公司破产，D选项她的刑期被延长并未提及，C项由这个知名专栏作家的态度可以看出Martha Stewart的案子引起了公众关注。因此，选A。