Tuesday, June 25, 2013

So, If I Understand You Correctly...

It hasn't accomplished anything in 48 years and therefore it is a "vital law"?
"The landmark civil rights law that Congress passed almost five decades ago, and reauthorized with overwhelming bipartisan support only seven years ago, has been an important tool to protect voters in places with a history* of discrimination. The law is as necessary today as it was in the era of Jim Crow laws. We must act immediately to rewrite this vital law.” link
--Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT)

 *history: From Chief Justice Roberts's opinion:

"In 1975, Congress reauthorized the Act for seven more
years, and extended its coverage to jurisdictions that had
a voting test and less than 50 percent voter registration or turnout as of 1972.
In 1982, Congress reauthorized the Act for 25 years, but
did not alter its coverage formula.
In 2006, Congress again reauthorized the Voting Rights
Act for 25 years, again without change to its coverage
formula. "
So the plan was to keep this law which discriminated against some states and parts of some others based on conditions in 1972? Why not base it on more current discrimination?

Too hard to find is a more obvious reason for being stuck in the 70's.  And therefore, it is not that the law was useless, it is that it worked and is no longer needed.

No comments: