Congress to Consider Voting Rights Act

NVMojo

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Oct-17-05 04:22 PM
Original message

Congress to Consider Voting Rights Act

WASHINGTON (AP) - Supporters of the Voting Rights Act acknowledge they know no member of Congress who wants to scrap it. But with hearings beginning Tuesday, Congress is hardly their biggest concern.

The House Judiciary Committee this week holds the first two of what could be more than a dozen congressional hearings into extending key provisions of the 1965 law for another 25 years. While congressional approval may seem inevitable, advocates insist exhaustive hearings are necessary to ensure the extension stands up in court.

"We're trying to build a record," said Laughlin McDonald, attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union's Voting Rights Project. "We are anticipating a challenge to what Congress might do."

more...

http://www.lasvegassun.com/sunbin/stories/bw-cong/2005/oct/17/101709114.html

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

MichiganVote

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Oct-17-05 06:12 PM
Response to Original message

1. What's to consider. Do your jobs! Vote it through and solve

some real problems for a change.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Realityhack

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Oct-17-05 06:30 PM
Response to Reply #1

2. Did you even read the original post?

Never mind the linked artical.

The ACLU knows what it is doing and they have good reason to be concerned about legal chalanges. As the linked article mentioned they have already seen the law eroded and want the extention to not only be sound but also to clarify some things so those erosions are reversed.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

MichiganVote

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Oct-17-05 06:52 PM
Response to Reply #2

3. Yes, I read the article.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

donco6

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Oct-17-05 09:51 PM
Response to Original message

4. At first blush, what's to argue about, but . . .

then you read this:

In recent years, the Supreme Court and U.S. Justice Department have narrowly interpreted several of the original act's key elements, much to the chagrin of civil rights activists.

Most glaring, they say, was the 2003 case Georgia v. Ashcroft. The Supreme Court seemed to suggest in its ruling that states can change their district lines provided black voters are still able to influence an election, regardless of whether their preferred candidates are elected.

McDonald says that was never the intent of the Voting Rights Act, which was established to ensure minority representation - or at least their right to pick candidates of their choice. He says he'd like Congress to clarify that as part of the extension.

I think a little illumination would be beneficial, don't you?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

DU AdBot (1000+ posts)

Sun May 05th 2024, 08:51 AM
Response to Original message

Advertisements [?]

Top

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
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.