[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 159 (2013), Part 2]
[Senate]
[Pages 1606-1608]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                           VOTING RIGHTS ACT

  Mr. LEAHY. Less than 7 years ago, Republicans and Democrats in the 
Senate and in the House of Representatives joined together to 
reauthorize key expiring provisions of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. 
We explained and documented our findings that this landmark civil 
rights law was still needed because of continuing discrimination and to 
preserve the progress that had been made. Because of this extensive 
record and the acceptance of the Voting Rights Act's importance in our 
country, our 2006 reauthorization of this crucial law was marked by 
Members of Congress from both parties and from every corner of the 
Nation coming together to renew one of the cornerstones of American 
Democracy.
  It is a sad irony that on the same day we will be honoring Civil 
Rights icon Rosa Parks by unveiling her statue in the U.S. Capitol, the 
first full statue of an African American to stand in the halls of 
Congress, across the street the Supreme Court will be hearing arguments 
from those challenging the constitutionality of the Voting Rights Act 
reauthorization named in part for her. In the pending case, the 
challengers seek to strike down Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act even 
though that critical section has protected constitutional guarantees 
against discrimination in voting where 100 years of prior civil rights 
laws failed. The Supreme Court got it right four years ago when it 
upheld the constitutional authority of Congress to reauthorize Section 
5 against a similar challenge. Neither the words of the Constitution 
nor the importance of these critical provisions for protecting the 
right to vote has changed in the last four years. Under the specific 
words of the 14th and 15th Amendments, Congress has the power to remedy 
discrimination and enforce the Amendments by enacting laws that address 
racial discrimination in connection with voting. That is what we did 
nearly unanimously less than 7 years ago. And over the past year lower 
courts have repeatedly upheld both its constitutionality and its 
protections. In light of the lengthy court findings from just the last 
year, there can be no doubt that the operation of the Voting Rights Act 
is continuing to protect American voters from discrimination.
  In his historic ``I Have a Dream'' speech, Martin Luther King, Jr. 
proclaimed: ``When the architects of our republic wrote the magnificent 
words of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, they 
were signing a promissory note to which every American was to fall 
heir.'' The Voting Rights Act is one of our most important means for 
enforcing this promise and upholding the Constitution's guarantee of 
equal rights and equal protection of the law. Reauthorizing and 
restoring the Voting Rights Act was the right thing to do, not only for 
those who fought and bled for its passage but also for those who come 
after us--our children and our grandchildren. We owe it to them to 
continue our commitment to this vital Act. No one's right to vote 
should be abridged, suppressed or denied in the United States of 
America.
  As we celebrate Black History Month and the significant progress we 
have made as a Nation, let us not forget the promissory note to future 
generations and the continuing need for civil rights laws such as the 
Voting Rights Act.
  Our Nation has grown stronger since its Founding as more Americans 
have been able to exercise their right to vote. The actions taken by 
previous generations--through a Civil War, through Constitutional 
amendments, and through the long struggles of the civil rights 
movement--have worked to break down barriers that stood in the way of 
all Americans participating in our Democracy.
  It has not been an easy road. The pervasive discriminatory tactics 
that led to the original Voting Rights Act were deeply rooted. As a 
nation, this effort to ensure equal protection dates back more than 140 
years to the ratification of the 15th Amendment in 1870, the last of 
the post-Civil War Reconstruction amendments. Yet, it took 95 years 
from the passage of the 15th Amendment and a historic struggle for 
civil rights for people of all races to begin the effective exercise of 
the rights guaranteed by that Amendment. The struggle reached a crucial 
turning point on March 7, 1965, on the Edmund Pettus Bridge in Selma, 
AL, when state troopers brutally attacked John Lewis and

[[Page 1607]]

his fellow civil rights marchers who were trying to exercise their 
civil rights. The events of that day, now known as ``Bloody Sunday,'' 
were a catalyst to the passage of the landmark Voting Rights Act, which 
finally ensured a century after the enactment of the Civil War 
amendments that the Constitution's guarantees of equal access to the 
political process, regardless of race, would not be undermined by 
discriminatory practices.
  Prior to the Voting Rights Act, minorities of all races faced major 
barriers to participation in the political process, through the use of 
such devices as poll taxes, exclusionary primaries, intimidation by 
voting officials, language barriers, and systematic vote dilution. 
Section 5 provides a remedy for unconstitutional discrimination in 
voting by requiring certain jurisdictions with a history of 
discrimination to ``pre-clear'' all voting changes with either the 
Justice Department or the U.S. District Court for the District of 
Columbia. This remedy combats the practice of covered jurisdictions 
shifting from one invalidated discriminatory voting tactic to another, 
which had undermined efforts to enforce the Fifteenth Amendment for 
nearly a century.
  In 2006, congressional leadership stood together on the steps of the 
Capitol to introduce a bill to reauthorize and reinvigorate the Voting 
Rights Act--an historic announcement in an era of intense partisanship. 
We came together in recognition that there are few things as critical 
to our Nation, and to American citizenship, as voting. In sharp 
contrast to the tremendous resistance and bitter politics which met the 
initial enactment of the Voting Rights Act, our efforts in 2006 
overcame objections through discussions, the hearing process and by 
developing an overwhelming record of justification for extension of the 
expiring provisions. The legislation contained specific findings about 
the need for reauthorization and concluded that without reauthorization 
the gains we have made would be undermined. Our efforts reached 
completion when President Bush signed the bill into law after a 
unanimous vote in the Senate and nearly unanimous vote in the House.
  At that time, I was the ranking member of the Senate Judiciary 
Committee and the lead Democratic Senate sponsor of the 
reauthorization. Over the course of 19 hearings, the Senate and House 
Judiciary Committees developed a comprehensive record supporting the 
continuing need for a reauthorized and reinvigorated Voting Rights Act. 
In the Senate Judiciary Committee alone we received testimony from 46 
witnesses, including a range of constitutional scholars, voting rights 
advocates, and Supreme Court practitioners, regarding the need for 
reauthorization of the expiring provisions of the Voting Rights Act. In 
addition, the Committee gathered and considered thousands of pages of 
testimony, articles, letters, and other evidence from these witnesses 
and other sources discussing these issues. This evidence, along with 
voluminous evidence gathered in the House--under the leadership of 
then-Judiciary Chairman James Sensenbrenner, Mel Watt, John Conyers and 
John Lewis--provided an overwhelming demonstration that Section 5 
continues to be an effective and necessary tool for protecting minority 
voting rights.
  At the time the Senate voted, we had before us the House Committee 
Report, the full debate from 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. Before we voted, I also provided the Senate with some 
of the extensive evidence received over several months of hearings in 
the Judiciary Committee about the persistence of discriminatory 
practices in Section 5 covered jurisdictions.
  The record gathered by the Judiciary Committee included three 
categories of evidence supporting the continuation of Section 5. First, 
we found evidence that even with Section 5 in place, covered 
jurisdictions continued to engage in recurring discriminatory tactics, 
often in subtle forms that play on racially polarized voting to deny 
the effectiveness of the votes cast by members of a particular race. 
Second, we found evidence that Section 5 provides an effective 
deterrent against bad practices in covered jurisdictions. Finally, we 
found evidence that Section 5 plays a vital role in securing the gains 
minority voters have achieved against the risk of backsliding.
  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; [and] . . . the continued filing of 
     section 2 cases that originated in covered jurisdiction . . .

  By passing the legislation, Congress adopted and reaffirmed these 
detailed findings, including Congress' determination that:

       [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.

  Now some suggest that Section 5 should be a victim of its success. In 
my view abandoning a successful deterrent just because it works defies 
logic and common sense. When Congress finds an effective and 
constitutional way to prevent violations of the law, the courts must 
uphold it. In fact, since 1966, whenever the Supreme Court has reviewed 
or even cited to the Voting Rights Act, it has affirmed the Act as a 
valid exercise of congressional authority. That is what the Court 
rightly did again in 2009.
  Nothing we have seen in the time since Congress reauthorized the 
Voting Rights Act in 2006 or since the Supreme Court again upheld 
Section 5 in 2009 has invalidated Congress' determination to 
reauthorize that critical remedy for racial discrimination in voting. 
In fact, the events of last year's election only serve to remind us 
anew of the continuing need for Section 5. Last year, panels of judges 
appointed by presidents of both parties found that Texas intentionally 
discriminated against minority voters in redistricting, and that Texas 
failed to demonstrate that its voter ID law does not impose greater 
burdens on minority voters. A separate panel of three Federal judges 
approved South Carolina's voter identification law under Section 5 
starting this year, with judges appointed by Republican and Democratic 
Presidents noting that South Carolina legislators passed a less 
restrictive law than they desired specifically in order to comply with 
the Voting Rights Act. Without Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, 
worse laws would be in place and the fundamental rights of many 
Americans would be diminished.
  The Voting Rights Act is one of the most important laws ever passed 
by Congress, transforming America by ushering the nation out of a 
history of discrimination into an era of greater inclusion. The Act has 
been a tremendous source of protection for the voting rights of those 
long discriminated against and a great deterrent against discriminatory 
efforts cropping up anew. As we celebrate Black History Month, we 
should reflect not only on how far we have come, but how far we still 
must travel to truly secure the guarantees of the Constitution for all 
Americans.
  Ensuring that all Americans are able to vote and have their vote 
counted should be an issue of concern to Democrats and Republicans, and 
a matter of conscience for all of us regardless of political party. 
That is how it was in 2006, when members of Congress, Republicans and 
Democrats, stood together on the Capitol steps to reaffirm

[[Page 1608]]

our commitment to full democratic participation by reauthorizing the 
key expiring provisions of the Voting Rights Act of 1965.
  I am confident that this week when the Justices review the 
substantial record relied upon by America's elected representatives in 
Congress, they will again do the right thing. Congress is at the height 
of its power when giving enforceable meaning to the 14th and the 15th 
amendments. That is what Congress did when passing the Voting Rights 
Act in 1965, and what we did when we voted nearly unanimously to extend 
the vital remedies of Section 5 in 2006. Now the Supreme Court is 
called upon to respect the role of Congress by upholding this vital 
civil rights legislation as it rightly did in 2009.
  There are few things as critical to our Nation, and to American 
citizenship, as voting. Like the rights guaranteed by the First 
Amendment, the right to vote is foundational because it secures the 
effective exercise of all other rights. As people are able to register, 
vote, and elect candidates of their choice, their interests and rights 
get attention. The very legitimacy of our government is dependent on 
the access all Americans have to the political process. Our democracy 
and our Nation have been better and richer for the protection of the 
Voting Rights Act. Now is no time for backsliding. Now is the time to 
renew our commitment to the right to vote for all Americans.

                          ____________________