How do you feel about House Republicans' refusal to renew the Voting Rights Act of 1965?

Question

The Voting Rights Act of 1965 removes barriers to all qualified registered voters regardless of race, physical disabilities, or profiency of language. Some Republican members of the U.S. House of Representatives refused to debate the matter, although it was guarenteed to pass.

http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=439295

http://news.yahoo.com/s/usnw/20060622/pl_usnw/naleo_condemns_derailment_of_voting_rights_act_renewal113_xml

http://www.clarionledger.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060622/OPINION01/606220321

http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/nation/14875508.htm?source=rss

http://www.dailytexanonline.com/media/storage/paper410/news/2006/06/22/WorldNation/Republicans.Quarrel.Over.Voting.Rights.Act.Renewal-2117894.shtml?norewrite200606231629&sourcedomain=www.dailytexanonline.com

ttp://www.usdoj.gov/crt/voting/intro/intro_b.htm

Answer 1

Loathe as I am to defend ANY Republican, I think that there is more going on here than a small group of John Birch Society-style conservatives 'going off the reservation' and ttrying to turn back the hands of time all by themselves.
It may be possible that there were numerous parts stuffed into the renewal of the act (in political jargon, its called pork-barrel politics) that the small group took exception to. This practive is not at all uncommon, where something unpopular is packaged within something that is extremely popular (or time-critical) so it will pass into law as well.
While I am not at all sure of what was contained within the renewal, it might have been something about the wording that would allow for contentious debate in the future (such as granting the right to gay marriage to those subject to the Act in the chance that it became federal law), or contravened the authority of individual states' right (it has happened many times before, and took forever to fix). As well, it might have been a provision in the renewal calling for the closure or heavy regulation of a corporation in the Republican's state of constituency.
So, it might not have had anything to do with the Act itself, and the Democrats (who can play dirty pool almost as good as the Republicans) retaliating for not being yes men.
Obviously, more research should be done before assigning blame.

Answer 2

Good Grief!
Did you read any of the articles you've cited, beyond the titles? The reason the Republicans help off is bilingual ballot and federal over-site of southern states.

First, states have enough trouble counting English only ballots without some group or another griping about the outcome.
Second, the US Constitution gave states the right to oversee their own elections.
The only thing being objected to are those two stipulations.

To a couple of other answerers to this question:
Read your history....the Republican party was CREATED to be against slavery! Tell me how the Democratic party can uphold the interests of both the KKK and Black voters?? Both of these groups claim membership in the Democratic party. Al Sharpton and Jessie Jackson are both Democrats and Black. David Duke and Robert Byrd have both been the Democratic representatives for federal office and are both either present or former members of the KKK. Consider that the next time a Democrat starts talking to you about diversity.

Answer 3

Not quite sure. It could be a couple things...

- There was no need given that those barriers (socially at least) pretty much don't exists anymore (at least to the extent they did in the 50's)

- They're being typical dorks and want to open up potential for voter disenfranchisement.

Update--

Well the "official" story is that they felt it "unfairly" applied to certain states (hmm.. R's worried about being unfair-- warning 1)

They wanted to amend and update apparently.

On the surface may not be an issue- but TRUST is the key here and many don't trust them. And with mid-terms this year it makes one wonder.

Temp provisions (whatever those may be) apply until 2007 anyway.

Realistically, I can't imagine states putting poll-taxes or literacy tests in play.

Lastly, there was a blurb indicating R's were concerned that certain localities would have to print ballots in multiple langagues to reflect the local population. That I have an issue with (but could live with). Here in AZ, ballots are in English AND Spanish and so are voter materials (pamplets, initiatives, etc.) Oddly enough, AZ was one of the states singled out for previously having racist voting practices. Don't think that's even the case these days.

Vote early an vote often....

Answer 4

Media don't worry about it. This has been a net rummor mill issue for years. The changes made made the law are pretty settled issues 40 years later. The problem today is lack of voters and fraud. Not barriers such as poll taxes or literacy tests( might help). All this really represents, is a issue for the Black caucus to cry about and raise hell over rather than deal with todays issues.

Answer 5

I expect nothing less from that group...the rethuglican party is a very racist party and any excuses that they or anyone who chooses to defend their actions is ridiculous. I cannot imagine what the Blacks that voted for Bush think of his bunch now. They should be ashamed.

Deana_Joe you have your facts wrong. Any fool knows that the KKK would NEVER belong to a party that included blacks and gays!!! They are rethuglicans, Libertarians and were Dixiecrats.

Nothing is sacred in the rethuggs thirst for power. There is a congressman in Texas who says that you should have to be able to read and write english to vote!!! That is reminicent of a time when this country charged a poll tax for voting. I suppose that you and those like you that this doesnt affect will never see what this really is. It is called disenfranchising voters....when it happens to the lily white, the educated and the rich, holler, maybe we will listen.

Answer 6

Nothing like going back to the Jim Crow laws (see link)!

What do you expect from a Congress that has slowly been stripping away our civil liberties?

Look - throughout the history of America, black and white people (and a few other races as well) have spilled blood to defend the freedoms we enjoy.
Pity those ignorant bastards in Congress that insult the death of so many who made that freedom real.

Every American citizen is afforded the right to vote.
Democracy works when we go to the polls.
Each of us have a responsibility to learn about and participate in elections.
If we don't, this is the kind of government we get.

Answer 7

A sad commentary on the hard work and dedication of the many people and hard fights to get the barriers removed. Maybe all the congressional republicans should have to pass one of the old litercy tests to be able to vote: "How many bubbles are there in a bar of soap?"

Answer 8

I don't get it? Did you not vote in the last election? I guarentee you, if the Supreme Court hears of a case of someone being unfairly treated in the voting process, ANYWHERE in the line from REGISTERING to VOTING, THAT LAW WILL be back in Congress in a HURRY! The Supreme Court Reigns SUPREME over EVERY THING in America!!

Answer 9

Well since elections in this country have been stolen most of the time by both republicans and democrats why do "they" need anyone to have any voting rights?
"The person who cast the vote means nothing....the person that counts the vote means everything." - Joseph Stalin

Answer 10

It proves that the Republican party is the party for the white elite. I am white and I believe that the constitution of the United States is for ALL citizens and not for the privileded few.