In June of this year, the Supreme Court decided that the fourth section of the Voting Rights Act (VRA) was unconstitutional and should not be enforced as law. This five-four ruling nullified what has been law since 1965: the preclearance section to the VRA, which necessitated each state receiving preclearance from the federal government before any voting restrictions be made law.
This law was initially put in place to curb rampant racism keeping African-Americans from voting, mostly in southern states. The atmosphere of the country, and opportunity afforded to black citizens, has changed immensely since 1965.
When the constitution was signed, power was resigned to the national government on the terms that the states would have power over themselves in some aspects. This dual sovereignty is one of the things that keeps our system of checks and balances in check. So, allowing states to act of their own governmental accord with voting rights seems like a long awaited privilege from an overprotective parent to their now grown up child.
Section four of the VRA was used as recently as this year to stop Texas from imposing “restrictions” on voters, particularly requiring people to show photo identification to vote. A similar law was just passed by North Carolina Governor Pat McCroy.
At its simplest, such laws make sense but now there is uproar. Politicians like former Secretary of State Hilary Clinton argue that because of this law “anyone who says racial discrimination is no longer a problem in American elections must not be paying attention”. Politicians are arguing that this will lead to gerrymandering and change how whole districts could vote. Jon Greenbaum, chief counsel for the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law stated that, “The Supreme Court has effectively gutted one of the nation’s most important and effective civil rights laws.”
At one time this law may have been necessary to allow men and women of color to vote — it’s no secret that during the civil rights movement the south especially did all it could to withhold rights from black citizens. But allowing changes to legislation once based on racial discrimination doesn’t have to mean backsliding into racist tendencies.
If we’re really trying to overcome racial discrimination then reverse racism needs to be nipped in the bud the same as racism was fought then.
The repeal of section four of the VRA and the subsequent voting laws passed by states such as Texas or North Carolina isn’t holding anyone back from voting. The only thing it’s asking for is something that is required to purchase Sudafed, alcohol, cigarettes, and walk into a slough of buildings every day: a photo ID.
Similar laws being passed also states that a voter must register to vote at least one day before election day, and early voting must happen within ten not 17 days like before. During the 2000 presidential election, there were multiple recounts and incidents of there being more votes than people registered to vote. Requiring a photo I.D. that matches with registration lists would be a simple way to keep voting booths, and the people running them, honest.
Voting in our country is a right and a privilege that not every country receives. Therefore, to decide who wins in our elections it shouldn’t be too much to ask for some documentation proving citizenship to this country.
If minorities are the ones who typically don’t have the documentation being asked for, then it can’t be considered racist. Racism too often is a cry from the ignorant, a cheap shot played by a slighted person at another person who has no control over the color of their skin.
There are no laws in place to withhold someone from gaining proof of identification if they are a US citizen. If they choose not to take advantage of their rights, it is just that, their choice. Politicians who want to warp this into a fight for the underdog are using racial tension as a weapon rather than trying to quell it like they claim.
Politics isn’t about class or race definition; it’s about the dissemination of knowledge being protected by our fellow countrymen. The pursuit of knowledge and truth by us as citizens should be held in a high esteem. This means researching politicians before an election, taking time out to register sooner than the day of an election, and having put aside the time to acquire proper documentation proving your citizenship. After berating President Barack Obama to prove his citizenship, why can’t we all be required to prove ours?