[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 152 (2006), Part 12]
[Senate]
[Pages 16228-16229]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




      VOTING RIGHTS ACT REAUTHORIZATION AND AMENDMENTS ACT OF 2006

  Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I have been advised by Chairman Specter's 
staff that the chairman is correcting the Record regarding some 
materials that were inserted last Thursday, July 20, 2006, during 
debate on reauthorization of the Voting Rights Act. I thank the 
chairman for correcting the Record. Contrary to how it appeared in the 
Record, those materials did not reflect work of the bipartisan staff of 
the Judiciary Committee.
  I understand that the chairman filed a committee report last night on 
S. 2703, the Senate bill reported by the committee last Wednesday. I 
have yet to see a copy of that final report, nor is it yet publicly 
available. Indeed, no draft committee report on S. 2703 was circulated 
to the committee until July 24, 2006, 5 days after the Judiciary 
Committee unanimously voted to report it and the chairman had reported 
it, and four days after the Senate unanimously passed H.R. 9, the bill 
that President Bush signed into law this morning. That draft report did 
not contain findings based on the extensive record created in both the 
House and Senate.
  In this highly unusual development, as the report filed should 
indicate, it does not reflect the views of a majority of the Senate 
Judiciary Committee. This, in spite of the fact that all members voted 
to report the bill favorably.
  Fortunately, we had the foresight to include legislative findings in 
the body of the legislation itself. Those findings, based on the 
record, were adopted by the House and unanimously by the Senate last 
week. I want to thank Chairman Sensenbrenner, Ranking Member Conyers, 
Congressmen Watt and Lewis, and all those who worked so hard to 
assemble and consider that record in the House. Their outstanding work 
gave us in the Senate a great start, which we supplemented with nine 
additional hearings. The findings remained the same and were adopted in 
identical form by both Houses. It is that bill and those findings, 
based on the extensive record that 18 members of the Judiciary 
Committee voted to report as part of S. 2703 last Wednesday, July 19 
and that 98 Senators voted for in adopting H.R. 9 last Thursday, July 
20.
  With regard to committee consideration, after nine hearings, the 
committee held a special business meeting at my request to debate S. 
2703 on July 19. At our business meeting, the committee debated and 
voted on only one substantive amendment, Senator Coburn's amendment 
related to section 203 of the Voting Rights Act. It was debated and 
then defeated. Other than an amendment I offered at Senator Salazar's 
suggestion to add the name of Cesar Chavez to the short title, which 
was adopted, no other amendments were offered. The record is the 
record. As reported by The Houston Chronicle the next day, Senator 
Cornyn said: ``I decided that any amendments would be defeated, so I 
decided not to offer any.''
  As Chairman Specter's deadline approached yesterday for filing views 
to be included in a highly unusual committee report, the Democratic 
Senators learned that the document the chairman was prepared to sign 
and file had changed dramatically from the document he had circulated 
as a draft report on July 24, 2006. As sponsors of the Senate 
legislation who have supported it pressed for its enactment and voted 
for it, we felt compelled to file views registering our disappointment 
that the views then being circulated did not reflect our views, did not 
properly reflect the record supporting our bill, and did not fully 
endorse the bill we introduced, sponsored and that we and all members 
of the committee voted to report favorably to the Senate. After we 
filed our views, I understand the report was revised even further to 
incorporate what had previously been styled as supplemental views into 
a new and not previously circulated version.
  I will ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record a copy of 
the signature page showing that even then only nine Republican members 
of the committee, less than a majority, endorsed the report.
  Of course, at the time of floor debate and consideration of H.R. 9 in 
the Senate, no Senate committee report on S. 2703 was available to 
Senators. Fortunately at the time of Senate floor debate and 
consideration of H.R. 9 in the Senate last week, Senators had available 
to them an extensive record to inform their votes. We had the 
voluminous Senate Judiciary Committee record, including thousands of 
pages of testimony. We had the full record before the House of 
Representatives, including thousands of pages of testimony. We had the 
House Committee Report and the full debate on the floor of the House of 
Representatives, including debate surrounding four substantive 
amendments to H.R. 9 that were all rejected.
  Leading up to final passage of the Voting Rights Act reauthorization, 
I provided the Senate with some of the extensive evidence received in 
the Judiciary Committee about the persistence of discriminatory 
practices in

[[Page 16229]]

covered jurisdictions that supports reauthorization of this crucial 
provision. I provided evidence regarding the need for fixes to two 
Supreme Court decisions to clarify Congress's intent regarding the 
Voting Rights Act to reinforce the original purpose of the act. I also 
pointed to evidence supporting the extension of the act's critical 
bilingual language assistance provisions. I included statements in the 
Congressional Record from Tuesday and Wednesday and available to all 
Senators during the course of the debate. I referred to that evidence 
early in the debate last Thursday.
  Most importantly, of course, at the time we voted, all Senators had 
before them the detailed findings in section 2 of the legislation based 
on the record and all Senators endorsed those findings with their 
votes. For example, those findings explicitly include:

       ``Evidence of continued discrimination includ[ing] . . . 
     the hundreds of objections interposed, requests for more 
     information submitted followed by voting changes withdrawn 
     from consideration by jurisdictions covered by the Voting 
     Rights Act of 1965, and section 5 enforcement actions 
     undertaken by the Department of Justice in covered 
     jurisdictions since 1982 that prevented election practices, 
     such as annexation, at-large voting, and the use of multi-
     member districts, from being enacted to dilute minority 
     voting strength; . . . the number of requests for declaratory 
     judgments denied by the United States District Court for the 
     District of Columbia; . . . the continued filing of section 2 
     cases that originated in covered jurisdictions; and . . . the 
     litigation pursued by the Department of Justice since 1982 to 
     enforce sections 4(e), 4(f)(4), and 203 of such Act to ensure 
     that all language minority citizens have full access to the 
     political process.'' In addition, those findings include, 
     ``[t]he continued evidence of racially polarized voting in 
     each of the jurisdictions covered by the expiring provisions 
     of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 demonstrates that racial and 
     language minorities remain politically vulnerable, warranting 
     the continued protection of the Voting Rights Act of 1965.''

  These findings the Senate adopted in its unanimous vote for H.R. 9 
and as a reauthorization measure also incorporated the statutory 
findings within the following provisions of the Voting Rights Act of 
1965: section 203(a); section 4(f)(1); section 10(a); and section 
202(a).
  By passing the legislation, Congress has adopted and reaffirmed the 
detailed findings in H.R. 9. The Senate unanimously adopted these 
findings. Nothing inserted in the Record thereafter can diminish the 
force of those findings contained within the enacted legislation 
itself. As several courts have properly recognized, postpassage 
``legislative history'' is a contradiction in terms.
  Earlier today, we celebrated the reauthorization and revitalization 
of the Voting Rights Act when President Bush signed that bill into law. 
I know that many in his party are unhappy with him, but I think he did 
the right thing. The Voting Rights Act is one of the most important 
laws Congress has ever passed. I am proud to say that our democracy and 
our Nation have been better and richer for it.
  The Voting Rights Act is the keystone in the foundation of civil 
rights laws and is one of the most important methods of protecting all 
Americans' foundational right to vote. Several generations have kept 
the chain of support for the Voting Rights Act unbroken, and now our 
generation has done its part to continue that legacy and revitalize the 
act.
  Keeping the Voting Rights Act intact is important, but enforcing it 
is equally important. Now that Congress has passed this bill--and the 
President has signed it--it is up to the President to ensure that this 
law and all of its provisions are enforced fully and faithfully. I was 
pleased today to hear the President commit to aggressive enforcement 
and to defend the act from legal attacks. Article I of the Constitution 
provides for the Congress to write the laws, and article II provides 
for the President to enforce them. Congress has done its part, and now 
the President must do his. I commend him for saying that he will. That 
was the most important thing the President said today.
  The President has not always been a supporter of this important civil 
rights law. While Governor of Texas, President Bush fought against some 
of the key antidiscrimination provisions Congress just reauthorized, as 
noted in a front page story in today's Washington Times. Today the 
President acted on behalf of all Americans and did the right thing 
despite the backbiting and criticism within his party. I commend him.
  Now his responsibility is to faithfully execute the law and 
aggressively enforce its provisions. I trust we will not see another 
after-the-fact Presidential signing statement undercutting the 
commitment he made today in his public statement and by signing the 
Fannie Lou Hamer, Rosa Parks and Coretta Scott King Voting Rights Act 
Reauthorization and Amendments Act of 2006.
  The enactment of this law is a triumph for all Americans and a 
testament to efforts of its supporters in the House and Senate. On 
several occasions there were attempts by some to derail this bill. 
Those efforts continue. Fortunately, the findings in the act itself and 
the record we have built supports this important measure. We know that 
effective enforcement of these provisions is vital in stamping out 
discrimination that, unfortunately, still exists in this Nation today. 
As the President has acknowledged, the wound is not healed and there is 
more to do to protect the rights of all Americans to vote and have 
their votes count.
  I ask unanimous consent that the signature page to which I referred 
be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

         Arlen Specter
         Orrin Hatch
         Chuck Grassley
         Jon Kyl
         Jeff Sessions
         Lindsey Graham
         John Cornyn
         Sam Brownback
         Tom Coburn

                          ____________________