House delays vote
The House decided yesterday to postpone voting on the renewal of the Voting Rights Act, a law from the civil rights era designed to protect African Americans and other minorities from discrimination at the polls. A bill to extend the law for 25 years has support from the White House, top legislative leaders of both parties and a key, GOP-controlled committee that passed it 33 to 1, but Republican lawmakers from Texas objected to certain provisions of the law, notably, the requirement that the state must get permission, or “preclearance,” from the Justice Department or a federal court before making changes to voting standards, practices or procedures.
The rule was aimed at states with a history of discrimination in voting. The original 1965 law targed six states–Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina and Virginia. Texas, Arizona and Alaska were added in 1975, when the law was expanded to protect people who have limited knowledge of English.
Congressmen form the Southern states feel that there is no more racial discrimination, and believe that if their state must submit to preclearance, all states should be required to do so. Some lawmakers are also seeking an amendment allowing the Justice Department to decide every year whether states need preclearance. That makes sense to me because there are some states like Florida that should be considered for preclearance. Other lawmakers are against that type of amendment because it would inevitably result in several states suing for relief from the provisions while the law hung in the balance.
Another provision objected to was the law’s requirement that jurisdictions print ballots in other languages if 5 percent or more of their voting-age populations have limited English skills. Many congressfolks believe that one must read, write, and speak English in order to be able to vote here in the United States. Some feel that it is the voter’s responsibility to bring an interpreter with them to translate the ballot, rather than printing them in other languages.
Advocates say that the provisions, while appearing to help only immigrants, were also designed to help native-born, U.S. citizens who did not receive adequate schooling in English reading comprehension. Unless the provisions allow for touchscreen machines with screen readers in every polling place, I can understand where the above misunderstanding arises. Not that I’m against printing ballots in other languages in areas where people who speak those languages are 5 percent or more of the population. There are several states where this has already occured, and we’re not just talking Spanish, either. Alaska and Arizona has large populations of Native Americans who do not speak or read English well. California and New York has huge numbers of Chinese and other Asian Americans who aren’t fluent in English. Washington, DC has large numbers of naturalzed citizens from African nations where French is spoken. Yes, English is the official language here, but it must be realized that we are a nation where many languages are spoken, and not everyone learns English at the same pace, so accommodations should be made.
I imagine that we’ll have to wait and see how this is resolved. House Republicans say that they are committed to passing the Voting Rights Act legislation as soon as possible. The Senate has not yet voted, so it will be interesting to see if they will have the same issues as the House Republicans. I’m convinced that they will, but who knows? I’ll keep you posted.