[Congressional Record Volume 152, Number 89 (Tuesday, July 11, 2006)]
[House]
[Pages H4963-H4964]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




FANNIE LOU HAMER, ROSA PARKS, AND CORETTA SCOTT KING VOTING RIGHTS ACT 
           REAUTHORIZATION AND AMENDMENTS ACT OF 2006, H.R. 9

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mrs. Drake). Pursuant to the order of the 
House of January 31, 2006, the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. 
Butterfield) is recognized during morning hour debates for 5 minutes.

[[Page H4964]]

  Mr. BUTTERFIELD. Thank you, Madam Speaker.
  Madam Speaker, it is my understanding that the House leadership has 
agreed to bring to the floor this week the Fannie Lou Hamer, Rosa 
Parks, and Coretta Scott King Voting Rights Act Reauthorization and 
Amendments Act of 2006. I want to thank the Speaker and the majority 
leader for their willingness to go forward with this debate prior to 
our upcoming recess.
  Madam Speaker, the 1965 Voting Rights Act changed America. It created 
the opportunity for minority citizens to fully participate in 
democracy. Prior to the enactment and enforcement of the act, black 
citizens in the South were disenfranchised, primarily because of the 
literacy tests and because of the design of election systems that 
submerged concentrations of black voters into large, majority-white 
election districts. The result was that African-American communities 
could not elect candidates of their choice to office.
  Why? It was because black voters did not comprise sufficient numbers 
within the district and white voters refused to vote for candidates who 
were the choice of the minority community. And so the votes of black 
citizens were diluted, which is a clear violation of the principle of 
one-person, one-vote.
  The Voting Rights Act permits minority citizens to bring Federal 
lawsuits when they feel their vote is being diluted. Hundreds of these 
lawsuits have been successfully litigated in the Federal courts. In my 
prior life, I was a voting rights attorney in North Carolina. As a 
result of court ordered remedies, local jurisdictions have been 
required to create election districts that do not dilute minority 
voting strength. When I was in law school 32 years ago, there were 
virtually no black elected officials in my congressional district. 
Today, I count 302.
  The Voting Rights Act also requires some jurisdictions to obtain 
Department of Justice pre-clearance to any change in election 
procedure. This, at first blush, may appear to be unfair to those 
jurisdictions, but the jurisdictions that are covered have a 
significant history of vote dilution and this requirement of pre-
clearance simply assures that the jurisdiction does not intentionally 
or unintentionally make changes in their election procedures that will 
discriminate. This is called section 5. Section 5 has prevented many, 
many election changes that would have disenfranchised minority voters. 
It serves a useful purpose and should be extended.
  A short story, Madam Speaker, and then I will close. In 1953 in my 
hometown of Wilson, NC, the African-American community worked very hard 
to teach the literacy test and qualify black citizens to vote. They 
then organized and elected an African American to the city council in a 
district with a large concentration of black voters. That was big news. 
When it was time for reelection in 1957, the city council, arbitrarily 
and without notice or debate, changed the election system from district 
voting to at-large voting which resulted in the submerging of black 
voters. The change also required voters to vote for all city council 
seats on the ballot. If not, the ballot was considered spoiled. It was 
called the ``vote for six rule.''
  Needless to say, that candidate, Dr. G.K. Butterfield, was handily 
defeated. If section 5 had been in place in 1957, this jurisdiction 
would not have been able to implement the changes and this community 
would have continued to have representation.
  Madam Speaker, we have made tremendous progress in this country with 
respect to civil rights and voting rights. We must not turn back. I 
urge my colleagues on Thursday to vote for another 25-year extension of 
section 5 of the Voting Rights Act and require covered jurisdictions to 
get the Department of Justice to analyze the voting change to determine 
if it will have the effect of diluting minority voting strength.

                          ____________________