Commentsview comments in forum You need to be a member of CKA and be logged into the site, to comment on news. |
Share
|
Mobile
All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner.
The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2026 by Canadaka.net
The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2026 by Canadaka.net
Uncle Sam
Posted By:
2013-06-25 10:27:51
People are acting like they re-instituted poll taxes and shit like that. Sigh. The United States has enough problems without fearmongering.
Except.....that Republican legislaturs all over the US, especially where sections 4&5 were aimed have succeeded at doing everything possible to make sure non-whites have as hard a time voting as possible.
You mean like Florida where the Justice Department refused Florida's request to purge dead people from the voter rolls?
I suppose the Supreme Court didn't think it necessary to protect the rights of the metabolically challenged.
Except.....that Republican legislaturs all over the US, especially where sections 4&5 were aimed have succeeded at doing everything possible to make sure non-whites have as hard a time voting as possible.
You mean like Florida where the Justice Department refused Florida's request to purge dead people from the voter rolls?
I suppose the Supreme Court didn't think it necessary to protect the rights of the metabolically challenged.
Did they vote
Except.....that Republican legislaturs all over the US, especially where sections 4&5 were aimed have succeeded at doing everything possible to make sure non-whites have as hard a time voting as possible.
You mean like Florida where the Justice Department refused Florida's request to purge dead people from the voter rolls?
I suppose the Supreme Court didn't think it necessary to protect the rights of the metabolically challenged.
Did they vote
Probably.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0512/76443.html
(That should have been in the Obscure Cultural references thread)
By a margin of 5-4, the justices quashed section 4 of the 1965 Voting Rights Act.
They ruled that an updated formula was needed to decide which jurisdictions' election laws need monitoring.
The law requires all or parts of 15 US states, mostly in the South, to receive federal approval for election changes.
Alabama Governor Robert Bentley told the Birmingham News the decision was "the most significant ruling" in his lifetime.
"Was there a reason to pass the Voting Rights Act 48 years ago? Yes, there was," Mr Bentley said. But he said "areas of discrimination" had been "addressed".
"As governor, I can assure you we're not going to have discrimination in the state of Alabama based on race, especially related to voting," he said.
The Voting Rights Act was intended to stop practices such as literacy tests, poll taxes or similar measures to keep black people from voting, in states with a history of racial discrimination.
I agree with Alabama Governor Robert Bentley. Section 4 of the 1965 Voting Rights Act was a product of it's time, and is irrelevant today. The law should be updated to reflect modern society.
Bringing it in two years before an election, instead of two weeks as the GOP was trying to do in too many states in 2012...
The summary of these laws and etc. is quite at odds with your narrative of their being proposed just two weeks prior to last year's election.
http://www.brennancenter.org/analysis/e ... ws-roundup