Congres Recess Unfinished Business Voting Rights Act
Congress Leaves for Recess with Unfinished Business While members of Congress are home for the July 4th recess, tell them renewing the Voting Rights Act must be priority! June 30, 2006 - When House and Senate members leave Washington, D.C. today for the July 4th recess they will be leaving behind the unfinished business of renewing the Voting Rights Act (VRA). This is in part because - despite strong bipartisan support and the co-sponsorship of the Republican and Democratic leaders of both the House and Senate AND the Chairs and Ranking members of the Senate and House Judiciary Committees - the bill to renew and restore the VRA (H.R.9/S.2703) has been stalled by a small, vocal band of extremists who are working to derail its passage. And because the House and Senate face very tight legislative calendars this year, time is of the essence. Members of Congress are in their home states from today until July 9th. While home, it is critical that they hear from you about the importance of moving quickly to pass H.R.9/S.2703 without any harmful amendments. Three Things You Can Do Next Week to Help Renew & Restore the Voting Rights Act: 1. Click and take action - sign the Pledge to Protect Voting Rights. Visit http://civilrightscoalition.org/ct/Zdxraes1YuHR/ to indicate your support for the Voting Rights Act (VRA) and its renewal. Then forward the pledge to others and encourage them to sign it as well! In the coming weeks, we will work with our coalition partners to deliver to Congress the pledges and petitions gathered around the country. 2. Make a few important phone calls. Members of Congress must hear their phones ringing with calls to support the VRA! First, call the local offices of your representative and senators? local offices. (Find contact information at http://www.congress.org and sample message points at http://civilrightscoalition.org/campaign/VRAfourthofjulyaction/explanation.) Then call these important congressional leaders, all of whom can be reached at (202) 224-3121: House Speaker Hastert, House Majority Leader Boehner, House Minority Leader Pelosi, Senate Majority Leader Frist, Senate Minority Leader Reid, and Senate Judiciary Committee Chair Specter. Finally, call the White House at (202) 456-1111 and urge the president to put the full weight of his office behind ensuring quick action to renew the VRA. 3. Get personal- talk with your representative and senators face-to-face. Call their local offices to request a meeting with your representative and senators. Email us at grassroots@civilrights.org if you schedule a meeting, as we may know of others in your area who could join you. You might also make a point of seeking out and talking with your elected officials at the events they're sure to attend over the holiday (parades, picnics, fundraisers, townhalls, etc.). Not sure what to say? Go to http://civilrightscoalition.org/campaign/VRAfourthofjulyaction/explanation . -------------------------------------------------- Click the link below to encourage your friends and family to make their voices heard this July 4th! http://civilrightscoalition.org/join-forward.html?domain=civilrights&r=mdxraes1GaSZ If you received this message from a friend, you can sign up for The Civilrights.org Network at: http://civilrightscoalition.org/civilrights/join.html?r=mdxraes1GaSZE

House rejects changes to Voting Rights Act By LAURIE KELLMAN, Associated Press Writer 12 minutes ago WASHINGTON - The House voted Thursday to renew the 1965 Voting Rights Act, rejecting efforts by Southern conservatives to relax federal oversight of their states in a debate haunted by the ghosts of the civil rights movement. The 390-33 vote sent to the Senate a bill that represented a Republican appeal to minority voters who doubt the GOP's "big-tent" image. All of the "no" votes came from Republicans, in defiance of their own leaders. "The liberties and freedom embedded in the right to vote must remain sacred," House Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Ill., said in a statement. "Principles like these cannot wait for discrimination to rear its ugly head." Southern conservatives complained that the act punishes their states for racist voting histories they say they've overcome. "By passing this rewrite of the Voting Rights Act, Congress is declaring from on high that states with voting problems 40 years ago can simply never be forgiven," said Rep. Lynn Westmoreland, R-Ga., one of several lawmakers pressing for changes to the law to ease its requirements on Southern states. "I sincerely hope the U.S. Senate corrects these problems so when the bill returns to the House for final passage I can vote for it," said Rep. John Shadegg (news, bio, voting record), R-Ariz., whose state is one of those under federal scrutiny. The House overwhelmingly rejected amendments that would have shortened the renewal from 25 years to a decade and would have struck its requirement that ballots in some states be printed in several languages. Supporters of the law as written called the amendments "poison pills" designed to kill the renewal because if any were adopted by the full House, the underlying renewal might have failed. Supporters used stark images and emotional language to make clear that the pain of racial struggle — and racist voting practices — still stings. Rep. John Lewis (news, bio, voting record), D-Ga., displayed photos of civil rights activists, including himself, who were beaten by Alabama state troopers in 1965 as they marched from Selma to Montgomery in support of voting rights. "I have a concussion. I almost died. I gave blood; some of my colleagues gave their very lives," Lewis shouted from the House floor, while the Rev. Jesse Jackson, another veteran of the civil rights movement, looked on from the gallery. "Yes, we've made some progress; we have come a distance," Lewis added. "The sad truth is, discrimination still exists. That's why we still need the Voting Rights Act and we must not go back to the dark past." The very debate over changes to the act is testament to the influence of Southern conservatives, even over their own GOP leaders who had hoped to pass the renewal as a fresh appeal for support from minorities on Election Day. With rare bipartisan support among leaders of the House and Senate, the renewal was widely expected to sail through Congress and on to the White House for President Bush's signature. Republican leaders, however, were forced to postpone a House vote last month when conservatives rebelled during a closed meeting. Unable to satisfy the dissenters and eager to pass the bill this week, Republican leaders announced late Wednesday they would allow the House to consider amendments, none of which passed. The amendment that would have extended the act for a decade, rather than the 25 years in the bill, was rejected 288-134. The proposal to strike requirements in the law that ballots in districts with large populations of non-English speakers be printed in other languages failed 238-185. "What unites us? It's our language, the English language," said Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (news, bio, voting record), R-Calif. Without the amendment, the act is "hurting America by making it easier not to learn English." Democrats made clear early in the day they would vote against the renewal if any of the amendments were added. "Any one of them would be a weakening of the Voting Rights Act," said Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi of California. The White House also weighed in during the debate, saying in a statement that the Bush administration "supports the intent" of the renewal. The statement did not take a position on the amendments proposed by lawmakers who represented the GOP's conservative base. Their objections to the renewal already were being echoed by some Senate colleagues from the same states. Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., noted that the act doesn't expire until next year. "It's 13 months away and we're creating a political situation that doesn't need to be created," Coburn said in an interview. He said changes such as those proposed by the House amendments needed time for consideration. Rep. Alcee Hastings (news, bio, voting record), D-Fla., called lawmakers who wanted to loosen the requirements in the law "ideological soul mates" of lawmakers who opposed the 1964 Civil Rights Act. "For them, this is not a debate about fairness, it is about ideology. Ideology has no place in today's debate," Hastings said. "We should do this not for the partisan benefit but because, as John Kennedy said, it is right." ___ The bill is HR-9. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060713/ap_on_go_co/voting_rights;_ylt=AkVPjy2cHG1MnBlUHlsV2Ais0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTA3OTB1amhuBHNlYwNtdHM-

Senate voted 98 to 0
By Charles Babington Washington Post Staff Writer Friday, July 21, 2006; Page A01 The Senate voted 98 to 0 to renew key provisions of the Voting Rights Act yesterday, permitting the federal government to continue its broad oversight of state voting procedures for the next quarter-century, and allowing Republicans to claim equality with Democrats in protecting minorities' clout at the ballot box. The act requires several states, mostly in the South, to obtain Justice Department approval before changing precinct boundaries, polling places, legislative districts, ballot formats and other voting procedures. It also requires many jurisdictions throughout the nation to provide bilingual ballots or interpreters for voters whose English is not strong. Those two provisions caused a mini-revolt among House Republicans last week. GOP leaders had to scramble -- and rely on heavy Democratic support -- to defeat proposed amendments that they said would dilute the bill and prove politically embarrassing. The law, first passed in 1965, retains near-iconic status in civil rights circles, even though some elected officials say it is no longer needed. GOP leaders were eager to renew it before the November elections. Unlike the House, where some Southern Republicans opposed provisions that focus on their states, the Senate passed the bill unanimously after hours of one-sided debate in which member after member praised leaders of the 1960s desegregation movement. President Bush, addressing the NAACP's annual convention while the debate was underway, said he looked forward to signing the measure. "A generation of Americans that has grown up in the last few decades may not appreciate what this act has meant," he said. "Condi Rice understands what this act has meant," Bush said, referring to the secretary of state, an African American who grew up in Alabama in the 1950s and '60s. The disharmony evident during the House's deliberations on the act barely touched yesterday's Senate proceedings, in which lawmakers from both parties and all regions agreed that the Voting Rights Act remains pertinent and necessary. Several black House members -- including Rep. John Lewis (D-Ga.), who worked alongside the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. in the 1960s -- were on the Senate floor for the vote. Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.) shook hands with Rep. Melvin Watt (D-N.C.), chairman of the Congressional Black Caucus, when the result was announced. "As we reflect on the true wrongs that existed in the 1950s and 1960s and where those wrongs may have taken place, we owe it to history . . . to pay tribute to those who took the law and made it a reality," Sen. Johnny Isakson (R-Ga.), whose House colleagues led the opposition in the other chamber, said during the debate. Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.) was a bit more grudging. "While I support this bill, I continue to have some serious concerns with several aspects of it," including its "extension for an extraordinary 25 years," he said from the floor. The defeated House amendments, he said, "would have strengthened this bill and updated it to reflect the reality of profoundly improved race relations" in Georgia. The act, originally signed by President Lyndon B. Johnson, outlawed practices such as poll taxes and literacy tests that many Southern jurisdictions used to depress black voter turnout. As amended over the years, it required such jurisdictions to obtain federal "pre-clearance" for an array of voting-related practices that might have the effect of reducing minority voters' influence. Some local and national officials say the targeted oversight is no longer justified and is a relic of days when Southern states could not be trusted to treat all citizens justly. But others say abuses still occur. "Where would the citizens of Georgia be -- particularly low-income and minority citizens -- if they were required to produce a government-issued identification or pay $20 every five years in order to vote?" Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.) asked in reference to measures approved by the Georgia Legislature but challenged in federal courts under the Voting Rights Act. Civil rights activist Jesse L. Jackson said in an interview that the Senate vote called for "restrained celebration," because the Bush administration's Justice Department has shown tepid enthusiasm for enforcing the voting law. "This Justice Department, right down the line, has chosen states' rights," Jackson said. Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) called the vote a major success. "The Voting Rights Act has worked," he said. "We need to build upon that progress by extending expiring provisions." Sen. Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.) called the act "the cornerstone of our civil rights laws. We honor those who fought through the years for equality by extending the Voting Rights Act to ensure that their struggles are not forsaken and not forgotten, and that the progress we have made not be sacrificed." Caroline Fredrickson, director of the ACLU's Washington Legislative Office, praised the extension of the law's key provisions and urged vigilant enforcement. "We must look ahead to make sure the promise is as true and strong as it was in 1965," she said. "Malicious attempts by lawmakers to derail reauthorization show the continuing need for this law and its enforcement." She urged Bush "to sign this legislation as soon as possible." http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/20/AR2006072001217.html?referrer=email