Meanwhile, no renewal of Voting Rights Act

[B-Boy]

Must be more of that good ol' compassionate conservatism. This is one story that the media seems to be burying, if they are covering it at all. Sad, but it speaks volumes about the GOP, and their quest in making this a redneck nation IMO...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2006/07/14/rep-lewis-recounts-his-e_n_25038.html

[spinetingler]

I thought I saw on the news that it got renewed.

[Shinola]

The Republican's problems with the act aren't wholly unreasonable. Most just don't want a fifty year extension (see last night's debate), which seems like a fair enough request to me. Also, there's the whole language thing, but Republicans are always going to take a position that works toward a common language, which in itself isn't at all unreasonable either, in my opinion (though this might be the wrong legislation to be fighting that fight).

Voting rights should be protected, but I think it's simply prudent to re-examine the legislation by which we do that, in order ensure the effectiveness and necessity of all of its provisions. Nobody, nobody, is trying to disenfranchise voters.

[B-Boy]

Nobody, nobody, is trying to disenfranchise voters.

Like all of those people, mainly minorities, who were not allowed to vote in Florida in the '00 election b/c they were supposed felons and/or ex-cons?

You are correct when you wonder if this is the legistlation to bicker over wording about, though. This should be cut and dried, and I hope 'Tingler is correct in that it was renewed. This is a no-brainer that should not be dragged out like it has been.

[spinetingler]

This should be cut and dried, and I hope 'Tingler is correct in that it was renewed.

Cleared the House. Senate is up next.

[rikki]

Nobody, nobody, is trying to disenfranchise voters.

Least of all Katherine Harris, who kept requesting that more and more Florida voters be purged from the voting rolls in 2000. The database company's initial effort at purging felons yielded a few thousand deletions. That was not enough for Harris, so she had them illegally delete people who had committed felonies in other states or simple misdemeanors. That still wasn't enough, so she forced the company to purge people whose names and birthdays were similar to those of known felons. Finally she had around 50,000 voters to purge, but we don't know exactly how many were actually purged because the rolls were kept at the county level, and some assented to her request, others declined, and the media never pursued the story.

Thanks to the Help America Vote Act, voter rolls are now kept at the state level, so the next time the appointed head of elections in a state run by a Presidential candidate's brother is also co-chair of that candidate's state campaign, she'll be able to handle the purges herself.

The use of machines with non-neglible failure rates (punchcard machines, for example) is not an effort to disenfranchise any voter in particular, just the population of voters using the machines. Likewise, understaffed precincts with long lines do not disenfranchise any voter in particular, just the population of voters underserved.

And the use of machines with proprietary inner workings that prevent anyone from verifying the machines are programmed correctly, counting accurately, and secure from manipulation is not an effort to disenfranchise any voter in particular; it's just an opportunity to disenfranchise voters.

Chancellor Weaver's handling of term limits in Knox County was not an effort to disenfranchise voters; it was just an effort to undermine their will and spoil their ballots.

Everything is fucking peachy with American democracy, because nobody, nobody is trying to disenfranchise voters.

[metulj]

The Republican's problems with the act aren't wholly unreasonable.

Are you kidding? It's about the language? So the voting rights act won't be a good idea 50 years from now or at anytime during the interceding period? When wouldn't we need voting rights protect? When does that fantasy period of US history begin? Come fucking on.

[gordongekkojr]

somebody 'splain to me what part is actually getting renewed

Its my understanding that Section 2, which is the general prohibition against voting discrimination, of the VRA is permanent and is not up for renewal.

Please correct me if I'm wrong but what's getting renewed is the "preclearance" section

or something like that?