Skip to comments.Bush extends landmark Voting Act
Posted on 07/29/2006 10:33:34 PM PDT by Jedi Master Pikachu
Mr Bush says he is willing to defend the law in the courts
US President George W Bush has signed into law a 25-year extension to the Voting Rights Act, one of the key pieces of civil rights legislation.
The 1965 act gives federal authorities jurisdiction over voting practices in nine, mainly southern, states.
It was renewed for the fourth time by Congress, despite objections of some members from the states covered by it.
Speaking at a White House ceremony, Mr Bush said Congress had reaffirmed that all men were created equal.
"My administration will vigorously enforce the provisions of this law, and we will defend it in court," the president added.
Relatives of some of the key figures of the civil rights movement, including Rosa Parks and Martin Luther King, were present at the White House signing ceremony.
The law was originally drafted to curb abuses in states which had prevented minorities from voting in elections.
Critics from the affected states argue the act represents a continuing form of punishment for historical practices which have long since been corrected.
There were also some objections from legislators worried about the growing influence of Spanish - the act contains a provision allowing ballot papers to be printed in languages other than English.
What are some freeper views on this?
If the Senate was held by State legislature appointed representatives, this probably would've died without renewal.
Pandermatic...by any pol especially short prior an election cycle.
So we're saying we still need this kind of legislation, because of the abuses that are going on in states, especially southern states. In other words, we haven't moved past civil rights yet?
I see the loon Conyers is right in there behind Bush.
This should have never passed in the 60's, and is still a tool to manipulate the citizens. Enforce the laws equally among all citizens, and there is going to be no problem with voting rights. This is just a way to make sure we CANNOT have an English only ballot.
Flame away, but especially considering how important it is to some and how harmless it is to anyone else, I see nothing wrong with this at all.
I get the impression that the British media know nothing about our government and history.
No big deal - - just your standard pandering to the race hustlers and their permanent victim class.
Why? Is any group or race being denied the right to vote? I think not- even illegal aliens are able to vote.
No, we're saying that the States have no representation in the Congress anymore, and that populism rules both houses of the legislature.
Populism was supposed to be the domain of the House, and States' rights was supposed to be the domain of the Senate. The Voting Rights Act of 1965 is no longer necessary, but its populist appeal is such that its renewal is inevitable as long as the States have no direct representation of their interests.
Bogus, totally bogus. There is no need for this. It is all politics in an attempt to secure votes.
Reminds me of "Brown 25".
There were a lot of northern states way back then that had some anti-minority laws on the books too. It was not just the south, they were just a little behind.
I didn't single out the south.
You didn't have to.
"Flame away, but especially considering how important it is to some and how harmless it is to anyone else, I see nothing wrong with this at all."
THAT needed repeating.
Harmless? I think not.
I've been living with stereotypes such as yours
all of my life, but it still hurts.
Keep your assumptions to yourself. You know nothing about what I think, but it's interesting the assumption you make. I said nothing about the south, and thought nothing about the south, merely of how the act affects blacks who approve of it.
But there will always be those crybaby "poor me" 'victims' who think everyone's talking about them, when in fact it's not always about you. Sometimes people simply care about someone else's interests, and aren't trying to slam you. But you go on with the victim pose, as in your FReepmail to me. When you grow up maybe you won't buy into that ideology of victimhood, but it's just too attractive for some sorts.
What stereotype did I express, and how did it "hurt" you?
Please, none of this mindreading bull--cut and paste the "stereotype" I expressed.
P.S. I just realized whatever answer you give will be as paranoid and witless as your previous posts, so don't bother. Have a good night.
You've in the past accused me of wearing a white hood.
BTW, you mentioned my freepmail to you.
I'll post mine if you will post your reply.
Or, to save time, I'll just post your reply,
since you were so thoughtful as to go into
Washington D.C are now Slave Masters to the VRA Southern States.