# The Voting Rights Act **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 23, 2013, 1:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-voting-rights-act/651160 "2013-02-23T13:25:23Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2013, 3:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-voting-rights-act/651160/61 "2013-03-01T15:38:59Z")
Nitpick: as **Bricker** pointed out on the first page, the Voting Rights Act has nothing to do with poll taxes or literacy tests. ---
**Author:** ![Kepler1571](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/db5fbb/32.png) [@Kepler1571](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kepler1571)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2013, 3:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-voting-rights-act/651160/62 "2013-03-01T15:49:10Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > There was, section 5 of the VRA (the preclearance part) was set to expire after five years. However, “Congress reauthorized the Act in 1970 (for 5 years), 1975 (for 7 years), and 1982 (for 25 years); each reauthorization was litigated as unconstitutional, and each time the Supreme Court upheld its constitutionality. Most recently, in 2006, Congress extended §5 for yet another 25 years.” I know that part. I was wondering whether the attempt has been made to reauthorize and extend (which reinforces the intent of the original measure), not defeat reauthorization (which just skulks out of it). Edit: never mind, I see the part later in your post that covers this. Thank you. > [@](#): > > A temporary measure has been extended beyond the point of reason. Agreed, but the temporariness here should be the higher standard being applied to the subject states, not the protection of rights qua rights. > [@](#): > > Also, the “slave states”? That would include Maryland, New York, New Jersey, and Delaware, you know. Well, there was a little thing called the War of Northern Aggression fought over it… 😃 But having lived in both Boston and North Carolina I can state the former was a far, far more racist place. ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2013, 3:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-voting-rights-act/651160/63 "2013-03-01T15:53:01Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > And had New York, New Jersey or Delaware used prohibited methods of disenfranchisement, they could have been added to the list of covered jurisdictions under the procedure described in Section 2 of the Act. Agreed, just pointing out that using “the slave states” to mean “the South” is ignorance. In addition to New York, New Jersey, Delaware, and Maryland, it also included Missouri, the New Mexico Territory and the Utah Territory > [@Really Not All That Bright](#): > > Right, but they can’t do it just because almost nobody has bailed out. They _can_ do it because Congress did not reauthorize the act on the basis of an existing record of minority disenfranchisement, as is being argued here, since the 14th Amendment doesn’t give Congress prophylactic power. Agreed again, I mentioned that figure as evidence that the bailout process is difficult, which explains, at least as much and almost certainly more so than continued disenfranchisement, why so many jurisdictions are still required to preclear. If I implied that this was a basis for overturning the law, that was not my intention. ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2013, 3:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-voting-rights-act/651160/64 "2013-03-01T15:56:40Z")
> [@davidm](#): > > _Every_ jurisdiction is covered by voting rights laws. No one can have a poll tax or a literacy test, for example. Right, but not because of the VRA. > [@davidm](#): > > The preclearance restriction is there to protect voters in areas that have historically attempted to suppress them. We can’t assume that a local culture has changed simply because some arbitrary amount of time has passed. Prejudices can be passed from generation to generation. Jurisdictions can bail out by showing good behavior for 10 years. It’s not that simple, see the requirements I quoted, nor is it without costs. > [@davidm](#): > > Who should the government be more concerned about, those whose franchise may be at risk or those who feel a little sting? Some hurt feelings may simply be the price that has to be payed in order to keep us from back sliding on this. I’m pretty sure that those who couldn’t vote felt more than just a little sting. In that case, let’s make every jurisdiction in the US preclear through the DoJ. Would you be opposed to this? > [@davidm](#): > > I’ll add that I believe that it’s more than just a coincidence that it’s mostly Republicans who are fighting the VRA while at the same time doing things like instituting voter ID laws and shortening early voting times throughout the country. Does anyone believe that they won’t attempt to institute those things in the currently protected jurisdictions if preclearance is overturned? Again, then, let’s preclear everywhere. ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2013, 4:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-voting-rights-act/651160/65 "2013-03-01T16:00:01Z")
> [@Kepler1571](#): > > Agreed, but the temporariness here should be the higher standard being applied to the subject states, not the protection of rights qua rights. That’s what I meant, Section 5 was meant to be temporary, not the entire VRA. > [@Kepler1571](#): > > Well, there was a little thing called the War of Northern Aggression fought over it… Yep, and my slave-holding state of Kentucky was on the Northern side. ---
**Author:** ![Honesty](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/f04885/32.png) [@Honesty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Honesty)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2013, 4:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-voting-rights-act/651160/66 "2013-03-01T16:09:03Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > It’s both. > > I submit that we can ensure equal voting rights for all without the VRA’s preclearance system. This board cracks me up. Let me get this straight: 200 years of slavery, 100 years of legal segregation and disfranchisement, followed by 47 years of of “freedom” (and I use that word loosely), and we’re supposed to trust the South and conservatives to play nice when they have been placing their foot on the back of minorities’ neck since they arrived on these shores? LOL! It’s absurd and it’s even more absurd that the Supreme Court of the-fucking-United States is debating whether the Act is constitutional. White people reneged on the Civil Rights Movement - first it was Affirmative Action (which is now destroyed) and now it’s the Voting Rights Act. What’s next? Equal employment? Housing? Pay? Here’s a real question for all of you: Why bother pretending MLK dream was achievable and make legislation to that end but quickly start dismantling it a few years after MLK dies? This effort (as well as previous efforts) is nothing but a bold-face attempt to roll back the gains of the Civil Rights Movement in order to stifle the power of minorities at the ballot box. - Honesty ---
**Author:** ![Honesty](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/f04885/32.png) [@Honesty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Honesty)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2013, 4:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-voting-rights-act/651160/67 "2013-03-01T16:11:56Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > Yep, and my slave-holding state of Kentucky was on the Northern side. [Barely.](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kentucky_in_the_American_Civil_War) ---
**Author:** ![Honesty](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/f04885/32.png) [@Honesty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Honesty)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2013, 4:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-voting-rights-act/651160/68 "2013-03-01T16:15:43Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > Again, then, let’s preclear everywhere. I agree, what’s good for the goose is good for the gander. ---
**Author:** ![Jas09](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/d07c76/32.png) [@Jas09](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jas09)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2013, 4:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-voting-rights-act/651160/69 "2013-03-01T16:22:55Z")
I will just note the political irony of GOP-nominated justices undoing the Voting Rights Act (perhaps one of the most popular bills in the country, certainly amongst minorities) at the same time the party is trying to rid itself of the “unfriendly to minorities” label. Actions speak louder than words. ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2013, 4:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-voting-rights-act/651160/70 "2013-03-01T16:25:36Z")
> [@Honesty](#): > > This board cracks me up. Let me get this straight: 200 years of slavery, 100 years of legal segregation and disfranchisement, followed by 47 years of of “freedom” (and I use that word loosely), and we’re supposed to trust the South and conservatives to play nice when they have been placing their foot on the back of minorities’ neck since they arrived on these shores? LOL! It’s absurd and it’s even more absurd that the Supreme Court of the-fucking-United States is debating whether the Act is constitutional. Whether it’s useful or needed is a separate question from whether it is unconstitutional. The Supreme Court is doing its job. > [@Honesty](#): > > White people reneged on the Civil Rights Movement - first it was Affirmative Action (which is now destroyed) and now it’s the Voting Rights Act. What’s next? Equal employment? Housing? Pay? Here’s a real question for all of you: Why bother pretending MLK dream was achievable and make legislation to that end but quickly start dismantling it a few years after MLK dies? This effort (as well as previous efforts) is nothing but a bold-face attempt to roll back the gains of the Civil Rights Movement in order to stifle the power of minorities at the ballot box. Depends on why the legislation is being dismantled, does it not? If it’s unconstitutional, of course it has to go. If it’s not needed, then it should probably go. If it’s neither, then we can keep it. > [@Honesty](#): > > Barely. And yet, Kentucky wasn’t made a covered jurisdiction in 1965. Point being, racism and discrimination isn’t a state-level yes-or-no matter, particularly over decades. > [@Honesty](#): > > I agree, what’s good for the goose is good for the gander. Alright then. Assuming the VRA remains constitutional, I’d rather extend it to every jurisdiction or make it easier for jurisdictions to bail out. The continued focus on the South is what’s problematic, not the aims of the VRA as such. And as was noted earlier, perhaps it could be brought to bear against more modern forms of disenfranchisment, like voter ID laws. ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2013, 4:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-voting-rights-act/651160/71 "2013-03-01T16:28:31Z")
> [@Jas09](#): > > I will just note the political irony of GOP-nominated justices undoing the Voting Rights Act (perhaps one of the most popular bills in the country, certainly amongst minorities) at the same time the party is trying to rid itself of the “unfriendly to minorities” label. Actions speak louder than words. You can’t really correlate judicial opinions to parties like that. Also, the last time the VRA went to SCOTUS, it was an 8-1 decision in favor of making bailout easier, not split among GOP / Dem nominated judges. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2013, 4:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-voting-rights-act/651160/72 "2013-03-01T16:44:18Z")
> [@Leaper](#): > > There’s some hubbub in liberal circles over Scalia calling the VRA the “perpetuation of a racial entitlement” in oral arguments. Supposedly there was shock in the gallery upon this pronouncement, but I sorta take this report with a grain of salt. [Full quote](http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/scalia_reauthorized_voting_rights_act_was_perpetuation_of_racial_entitlemen/?utm_source=maestro&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=weekly_email): > [@](#): > > Scalia noted that opposition [in Congress] to the law has decreased with each reauthorization, until no one opposed it in 2006, according to The BLT account. > > “I think that’s attributable to a phenomenon that has been called the perpetuation of racial entitlements,” Scalia said. “Once you enact them, it’s very hard to get out. I’m fairly confident this will be re-enacted in perpetuity” unless a court steps in to examine the justification. “The concern here is this is not the kind of question you can leave to Congress.” So he seems to be quoting somebody else, but I can’t find anyone else who used the phrase “perpetuation of racial entitlements”. ---
**Author:** ![Kearsen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/82dd89/32.png) [@Kearsen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kearsen)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2013, 4:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-voting-rights-act/651160/73 "2013-03-01T16:48:11Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > I’d be more than willing to grant the same entitlement to Justice Scalia - as long as he is willing to meet the eligibility requirement and lose his vote for a hundred years first. These and comments like these are the primary reason that racism will never die. It isn’t the fact that racism doesn’t still exist, I imagine that it does but its getting smaller and less effective. This is plain and simple punishment of everyone for a crime ,people long dead, committed. You are the cause of the perpetuation of this thinking. You will NEVER make amends for things long past. Fix it and move forward. You may bring up the past as long and as often as you want, as long as it propels us all forward but that isn’t how the past gets brought up or used. It gets used as a bludgeoning tool to keep harping about how bad someone once had it. Times have changed, the ones who keep looking for some method of redress or compensation for something other people did, a long long time ago, are misplacing all that energy. ---
**Author:** ![Jas09](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/d07c76/32.png) [@Jas09](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jas09)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2013, 4:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-voting-rights-act/651160/74 "2013-03-01T16:48:30Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > You can’t really correlate judicial opinions to parties like that. > > Also, the last time the VRA went to SCOTUS, it was an 8-1 decision in favor of making bailout easier, not split among GOP / Dem nominated judges. You and I know that, sure (although the argument could be made that after time it becomes clear which party will nominate justices that will support, for example, AA). Either way, the headlines will read “Conservative Justices Overturn Voting Rights Act”. Then you will have Democratic Senators and Representatives denouncing the decision. You will have Republican ones either supporting it or remaining quiet. This will, IMO, have the effect of continuing the popular narrative that the GOP is disinterested in, if not antagonist towards, minority rights. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2013, 4:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-voting-rights-act/651160/75 "2013-03-01T16:51:59Z")
> [@Kearsen](#): > > This is plain and simple punishment of everyone for a crime ,people long dead, committed. Are you under the impression that everyone who was alive in 1964 is dead? ---
**Author:** ![Jas09](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/d07c76/32.png) [@Jas09](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jas09)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2013, 4:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-voting-rights-act/651160/76 "2013-03-01T16:56:44Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > Are you under the impression that everyone who was alive in 1964 is dead? Hell, the justice most antagonistic to the VRA (based on oral arguments) was 28 years old in 1964. ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2013, 4:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-voting-rights-act/651160/77 "2013-03-01T16:57:00Z")
> [@Jas09](#): > > You and I know that, sure (although the argument could be made that after time it becomes clear which party will nominate justices that will support, for example, AA). Right, I meant more that Supreme Court justices aren’t party to efforts by the party that nominated them to re-brand their image, and won’t change their judicial opinions accordingly. > [@Jas09](#): > > Either way, the headlines will read “Conservative Justices Overturn Voting Rights Act”. Then you will have Democratic Senators and Representatives denouncing the decision. You will have Republican ones either supporting it or remaining quiet. This will, IMO, have the effect of continuing the popular narrative that the GOP is disinterested in, if not antagonist towards, minority rights. Yeah, I think you’re correct here. I remember how in 2006, when the VRA was up for renewal again, [rumor had it](http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/pending/voting.asp) that if Congress didn’t renew the VRA, black people would then immediately be legally unable to vote. ---
**Author:** ![davidm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/davidm/32/225_2.png) [@davidm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/davidm)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2013, 4:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-voting-rights-act/651160/78 "2013-03-01T16:57:11Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > Right, but not because of the VRA. > > It’s not that simple, see the requirements I quoted, nor is it without costs. > > In that case, let’s make every jurisdiction in the US preclear through the DoJ. Would you be opposed to this? > > Again, then, let’s preclear everywhere. Then we’re in agreement. Let’s preclear everywhere, including my states attempts at an onerous voter ID law. ---
**Author:** ![Kearsen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/82dd89/32.png) [@Kearsen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kearsen)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2013, 4:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-voting-rights-act/651160/79 "2013-03-01T16:59:04Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > Are you under the impression that everyone who was alive in 1964 is dead? The people in power who were interested in denying minorities the right to vote are. ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2013, 5:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-voting-rights-act/651160/80 "2013-03-01T17:00:25Z")
> [@davidm](#): > > Then we’re in agreement. Let’s preclear everywhere, including my states attempts at an onerous voter ID law. Fine by me. I would support either: 1. Preclearing every jurisdiction in the U.S. 2. Making the bailout process faster and easier. The status quo serves to stigmatize certain jurisdictions, primarily in the South, while failing to extend the same protections to all U.S. citizens. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-voting-rights-act/651160.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-voting-rights-act/651160.md?page=5)