Voting Rights Act of 1965
This was an extraordinary act to address an exceptional situation allowing the Federal government to interfere with state, county, and municipal election administration. Once the exceptional situation has become insignificant or has been remedied, this act should be automatically be repealed.
The US constitution and the Declaration of Independence make such a Voting Rights Act entirely unnecessary. See e.g. the 14th and 15th Amendment of 1868 and 1870 respectively.
Why not repeal the old law and pass a new law should the exceptional situation still exists and let’s have a debate about it. This clinging to outdated and perhaps harmful laws is one of the significant nuisances of representative democracy.
The US Supreme Court Lauds The Act
In Shelby County v. Holder it reads: “There is no doubt that these improvements are in large part because of the Voting Rights Act. The Act has proved immensely successful at redressing racial discrimination and integrating the voting process. … Today both of those towns [Philadelphia, MS & Selma, AL] are governed by African-American mayors. Problems remain in these States and others, but there is no denying that, due to the Voting Rights Act, our Nation has made great strides.”
How much progress would have been made had the Voting Rights Act never been enacted? Does anyone really believe that without this Act there would not be African American mayors or US President today? Less draconian/authoritarian measures would have probably done the job as well. Future generations would have rejected racial discrimination anyway had the civil unrest and activism continued.
The Voting Rights Act was a big government wielding a big club thereby further undermining federalism in the USA.
US Supreme Court Justices Are Only Too Human
Given the centrist and leftist leanings of the Justices of the US Supreme Court the most recent decision on this Act (a 5 to 4 vote) can only be seen as some kind of awful compromise. The leftist Justices are like Soviet Comrades, basically always voting in unison even when their mediocre intellect should have told them otherwise, because of their ideological biases.
Another Renewal For 25 Years In 2006?
How much more stupid does it get? What were our elected representatives thinking?
Although the US Supreme Court previously warned the US Congress, our eager and inept lawmakers voted to renew this anachronistic law for another 25 years in 2006. It was dutifully signed into law by then President Bush, who rarely vetoed anything. Why he did not veto it is a mystery to me.
The Chief Justice Again
The Chief Justices legacy is already tarnished by his foolish decision on Obamacare. I blogged about this here, and here.
In Shelby County v. Holder he stated (emphasis and comment added):
1. “Striking down an Act of Congress “is the gravest and most delicate duty this Court is called on to perform. … We do not do so lightly.” [Well, the Court did not really strike down the Act, it only corrected parts of it. It is actually the duty of the Judiciary to entirely strike down excessive laws enacted by legislatures.]
2. “… we [US Supreme Court in 2009] expressed our broader concerns about the constitutionality of the Act. … “
3. “Our decision in no way affects the permanent, nationwide ban on racial discrimination in voting found in §2.” [A superfluous statement as it is already covered by the US Constitution and Declaration of Independence.]
4. “We issue no holding on the §5 itself, only on the coverage formula. Congress may draft another formula based on current conditions.” [Man, you got to make up your mind about whether this Act is constitutional or not. To encourage Congress to add more insult to injury is remarkable.]
No comments:
Post a Comment