I am so torn on this one. In truth, there are now remedies for the very notion that someone would be asked to count jelly beans in a jar (as an example of what was happening pre-1965) before being allowed to vote. The very concept would elicit loud guffaws of laughter. And, I do not understand why so many of my fellow Black Americans feel that the presentation of acceptable identification in order to vote is tantamount to violation. I looked in my own wallet and I have counted at least five pieces of identification issued by the state of Missouri, a state university in DC and also in Maryland, as well as credentials issued by the Library of Congress. I'm od'd on ID. So, why is it so hard to get your voter registration card in the mail, sign and return, and then show up on voting day with at least a state issued driver's or non-driver's license?
Is it that we wanted the ceremony, the memorial victory of these laws? Were they a touchstone with Dr. King and the struggle? I believe the end result is more important. We will never be asked to complete Herculian tasks and neither are there Damoclesian potentially fatal swords hanging over our heads when we step into the ballot booth.
Isn't that the point of the movement and not the symbolism of laws which are now, as the Supreme Court says, are antiquated? Is it really coming down to the fact of Clarence Thomas being able to finally spit his venomous verse on the subject (and my opinion is inclusive of his regard for his Yale degree)? Is that all that "we" are after this time? Petty children clinging to a thread bare, blood stained relic of our past?
I don't know. Do you?
La Vonda R. Staples
St. Louis MO
On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 11:07 AM, Emeagwali, Gloria (History) <emeagwali@mail.ccsu.edu> wrote:
Ku Klux Kourt Kills King's Dream Law,
Replaces Voting Rights Act
With Katherine Harris Acts
Tuesday, 25 June 2013 13:34
By Greg Palast<http://truth-out.org/author/itemlist/user/44685>
Truthout<http://truth-out.org/>
[http://truth-out.org/images/2013_June_Images/2013_0625pa_.jpg]Protestors gather outside of the U.S. Supreme Court in support of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, in Washington, Feb. 27, 2013. The Supreme Court on Tuesday morning, June 25, 2013, announced a vote of 5 to 4 in the Shelby County, Ala. v. Holder case, striking down part of the act. (Photo: Christopher Gregory / The New York Times)
They might as well have burned a cross on Dr. King's grave. The Jim Crow majority on the Supreme Court just took away the vote of millions of Hispanic and African-American voters by wiping away Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965.
When I say "millions" of voters of color will lose their ballots, I'm not kidding. Let's add it up.
Last year, the GOP Secretary of State of Florida Ken Detzner tried to purge 180,000 Americans, mostly Hispanic Democrats, from the voter rolls. He was attempting to break Katherine Harris' record.
Detzner claimed that all these brown folk were illegal "aliens."
But Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act requires that 16 states with a bad history of blocking black and brown voters must "pre-clear" with the US Justice Department any messing around with voter rolls or voting rules. And so Section 4 stopped Detzner from the racist brown-out.
I'll admit there were illegal aliens on Florida voter rolls - two of them. Let me repeat that: TWO aliens - one a US Marine serving in Iraq (not yet a citizen); the other an Austrian who registered as a Republican.
We can go from state to state in Dixie and see variations of the Florida purge game.
Yet the 5-to-4 Supreme Court majority ruled, against all evidence, that, "Blatantly discriminatory evasions [of minority voting rights] are rare." As there's no more racially bent voting games played in states including Florida, Georgia, Arizona and Alaska (yes, pre-clearance goes WAY north of the Confederacy), then, the justices said, there's no more reason for pre-clearance.
Truthout needs your support to publish grassroots journalism and share new visions for a just and sustainable future. Contribute now by clicking here!<https://members.truth-out.org/donate>
Whom do they think they're fooling? The court itself, just last week, ruled that Arizona's law requiring the showing of citizenship papers was an unconstitutional attack on Hispanic voters. Well, Arizona's a Section 4 state.
You'll love this line from the Ku Klux Kourt majority. They wrote that the "coverage" of Section 4 applies to states where racially bent voting systems are now "eradicated practices."
"Eradicated?" I assume they didn't see the lines of black folk in Florida last November. That was the result of the deliberate reduction in the number of polling places and early voting hours in minority areas. Indeed, if the Justice Department, wielding Section 4, didn't block Florida from half its ballot-box trickery, Obama would have lost that state's electoral votes.
And that's really what's going on here: the problem is not that the court majority is racist. They're worse: they're Republicans.
We've had Republicans, like the great Earl Warren, who put on the robes and take off their party buttons.
But this crew, beginning with Bush v. Gore, is viciously partisan. They note that "minority candidates hold office at unprecedented levels." And the Republican Supremes mean to put an end to that. See "Obama" and "Florida" above.
And when they say "minority," they mean "Democrat."
Because that's the difference between 1965 and today. When the law was first enacted - based on the personal pleas of Martin Luther King - African-Americans were blocked by politicians who did not like the color of their skin.
But today, it's the color of minority voters' ballots - overwhelmingly Democratic blue - which is the issue.
In California - one of the "Old South" states that is singled out for pre-clearance - an astonishing 40 percent of voter registration forms were rejected by the Republican Secretary of State on cockamamie clerical grounds. When civil rights attorney Robert F. Kennedy and I investigated, we learned that the reject pile was overwhelmingly Chicano and Asian - and overwhelmingly Democratic.
How? Jim Crow ain't gone; he's moved into cyberspace. The new trick is lynching by laptop: removing voters, as was done in Florida and Arizona (and a dozen other states) by using poisoned databases to pick out "illegal" and "felon" and "inactive" voters - who all happen to be of the Hispanic or African-American persuasion. The GOP, for all the tears of its consultants, knows it can't rock these votes, so they block these votes.
Despite the racial stench of today's viciously antidemocratic ruling, the GOP majority knew they were handicapping the next presidential run by a good 6 million votes. (That's the calculation that RFK and I came up with for racially bent vote loss in 2004 - and the GOP will pick up at least that in the next run.)
And the court knew full well that their ruling today was the same as stuffing several hundred thousand GOP red votes into the ballot boxes for the 2014 Congressional races.
The races have not yet started, but the "Katherine count" has already begun.
***
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the "USA-Africa Dialogue Series" moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin.
For current archives, visit http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
For previous archives, visit http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue-
unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "USA Africa Dialogue Series" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to usaafricadialogue+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
La Vonda R. Staples, Writer
BA Psychology 2005 and MA European History 2009
"If your dreams do not scare you, they are not big enough."
Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, This Child Will Be Great; Memoir of a Remarkable Life by Africa's First Woman President.
You received this message because you are subscribed to the "USA-Africa Dialogue Series" moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin.
For current archives, visit http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
For previous archives, visit http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue-
unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "USA Africa Dialogue Series" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to usaafricadialogue+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
No comments:
Post a Comment