EDITORIAL: Voting wrongs

The Washington Times ^ | May 4, 2009 | Editorial

[Scanian]

George Orwell's "Animal Farm" introduced the absurd proposition that "all animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others." Now comes a small utility district in Texas to challenge a situation in which Congress treats some American states as more equal than others. The utility district, which argued its case before the Supreme Court Wednesday, is right.

In Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, Congress required nine mostly Southern states, along with parts of seven others, to ask permission (or "preclearance") from the Justice Department whenever they make even the slightest change in any election procedure. Even if a covered jurisdiction merely wanted to move its voting booths from a school gym to the same school's cafeteria, the change would be dependent on approval from some bureaucrat at the Department of Justice.

The department, with other important work to do, often dawdles over this task. Sometimes it has failed to provide formal approval until after the jurisdiction in question has missed the deadline to print its ballots. As Alabama Gov. Bob Riley noted in an amicus brief for Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District Number One v. Eric Holder, Jr., Alabama has sometimes been prohibited from timely implementation even of electoral changes mandated by the federal government itself. The result is what Mr. Riley described as a costly "nightmare" with "taxing and absurd results."

[Scanian]

"All states are not treated equally"

[Menehune56]

The leftist party will no doubt saddle up on the issue of repealing section 5 as the return of Jim Crow.

[SES1066]

"All states are not treated equally"

The solution for the USSC is to require ALL or NONE absent proven (not alleged or statistical) discrimination. The idea of some of the cities like Chi town having to fulfill these requirements would get Daley's President to change this toot-sweet!