Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login

Disenfranchise No More

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Election Reform Donate to DU
groovedaddy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-18-11 12:28 PM
Original message
Disenfranchise No More
Mississippi voters just approved a new law requiring voters to show photo identification at the polls. But that law will not go into effect immediately, thanks to the Voting Rights Act. Instead Mississippi will get in line behind Texas and South Carolina as the Department of Justice examines each states voter ID laws, in a process known as preclearance. The Justice Department will allow each law to go into effect only if the state can show its law will not have a racially discriminatory purpose or effect. Such proof may be hard to come by: a recent study by The Associated Press found that African-American voters in South Carolina would be much harder hit by that states ID law than white voters because they often dont have the right kind of identification.

But this important preclearance procedure may not be around much longer. Before the next election season rolls around, the Supreme Court could well strike down this provision of the law as an unconstitutional infringement on states rights, leaving minority voters essentially unprotected from efforts to diminish their voting power. Congress needs to act before then to protect voting rights everywhere.

Back in 1965, Congress enacted the preclearance provision to prevent states with a history of discrimination from making changes in voting practices without first getting permission either from the Justice Department or, at the states option, from a three-judge federal court in Washington. In determining which jurisdictions should be covered, Congress used a formula based in part on voter turnout in 1964. The formula was reverse engineered to make sure it covered the states with the worst records of discrimination. The original provision was to last five years and covered much of the South. Congress renewed it twice in the 1970s, adding coverage for language minorities, including Hispanics and American Indians in all or parts of other states, including Arizona, California and Texas. It renewed the law twice more, most recently in 2006, to last until 2031.

Following renewal, an obscure Texas utility district backed by ideological opponents of the act challenged the constitutionality of the preclearance provision, claiming that it went beyond Congresss power because Congress could no longer show that the law was necessary to prevent racially discriminatory voting.
Refresh | +2 Recommendations Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
shraby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-18-11 01:30 PM
Response to Original message
1. Another thing that needs looked into is the shorting of
voting machines in minority areas..another form of disenfranchising..also the voting machines per se where the votes tend to be flipped which seems to disenfranchise Democrats in particular.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
demodonkey Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-20-11 06:50 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. And, the piece-of-S*%T voting machines themselves!

God only knows how many are disenfranchised, and not necessarily through fraud. The machines are crap.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
Bill Bored Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-21-11 09:10 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. The VRA, if enforced, can be the key to getting rid of the crappy machines:
Edited on Mon Nov-21-11 09:11 PM by Bill Bored
Sec. 8. Whenever an examiner is serving under this Act in any political subdivision, the Civil Service Commission may assign, at the request of the Attorney General, one or more persons, who may be officers of the United States, (1) to enter and attend at any place for holding an election in such subdivision for the purpose of observing whether persons who are entitled to vote are being permitted to vote, and (2) to enter and attend at any place for tabulating the votes cast at any election held in such subdivision for the purpose of observing whether votes cast by persons entitled to vote are being properly tabulated.

Any voting system that does not permit such observation violates the VRA. I would argue that certain DREs make such observation impossible and that with optical scanners, it's only possible if a full hand count is done at the poll site on election night.

Of course, we could just ignore the VRA, but even GW Bush allowed it to be renewed until 2031! We have that long to use it to get rid of potentially fraudulent voting systems. At the rate we're going, we might just be able to get there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Sep 22nd 2023, 07:33 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Election Reform Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC