Is the voting rights act going to be renewed?

[Wabbajack]

I know it's set to expire in 2007.

Will the puke congress renew it?

[davepc]

1. Only 3 special provisions expire, not the whole act.

Section 6, 42 U.S.C. § 1973d
Section 8, 42 U.S.C. § 1973f
Section 5, 42 U.S.C. § 1973c

I don't know what the point is of continual renewing provisions with expiration dates. Congress should either make them permanent or allow them to expire.

[burrowowl]

3. What is the content

of these provisions? The way things are going we may need them.

[davepc]

4. debatable

Section 6, 42 U.S.C. § 1973d - allows the Fed to send an agent to register voters if the local government officials refuses to register them.

Section 8, 42 U.S.C. § 1973f - this lets the Attorney General send inspectors to polling stations to make sure that registered black voters are actually allowed access to the ballots, and allowed to vote, and that their votes are counted (i know, i know) but the original spirit of the law was to ensure that white ballots didn't get put in one pile (that got counted) and black ballots got put in another pile that got thrown out.

I don't think it was designed for a situation where 1,000 black people go to vote, vote, then the vote tallies out 700 votes for bush and 300 votes for kerry, even if the votes actually voted the exact opposite. (or whatever the election stealing allegations are -- I'm not too up on the specifics on how the republicans rig the elections) To prove fraud in that situation you would have to know who each individual voted for, and then it wouldn't be a secret ballot and that opens up a whole 'nother can of worms.

Section 5, 42 U.S.C. § 1973c - Jurisdictions had to submit any changes in election law to federal review in certain cases to ensure that the changes wouldn't dis-enfranchise black voters.

The text of this one is a fun read:

§ 1973c. Alteration of voting qualifications and procedures; action by State or political subdivision for declaratory judgment of no denial or abridgement of voting rights; three-judge district court; appeal to Supreme Court
Release date: 2005-02-25

Whenever a State or political subdivision with respect to which the prohibitions set forth in section 1973b (a) of this title based upon determinations made under the first sentence of section 1973b (b) of this title are in effect shall enact or seek to administer any voting qualification or prerequisite to voting, or standard, practice, or procedure with respect to voting different from that in force or effect on November 1, 1964, or whenever a State or political subdivision with respect to which the prohibitions set forth in section 1973b (a) of this title based upon determinations made under the second sentence of section 1973b (b) of this title are in effect shall enact or seek to administer any voting qualification or prerequisite to voting, or standard, practice, or procedure with respect to voting different from that in force or effect on November 1, 1968, or whenever a State or political subdivision with respect to which the prohibitions set forth in section 1973b (a) of this title based upon determinations made under the third sentence of section 1973b (b) of this title are in effect shall enact or seek to administer any voting qualification or prerequisite to voting, or standard, practice, or procedure with respect to voting different from that in force or effect on November 1, 1972, such State or subdivision may institute an action in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia for a declaratory judgment that such qualification, prerequisite, standard, practice, or procedure does not have the purpose and will not have the effect of denying or abridging the right to vote on account of race or color, or in contravention of the guarantees set forth in section 1973b (f)(2) of this title, and unless and until the court enters such judgment no person shall be denied the right to vote for failure to comply with such qualification, prerequisite, standard, practice, or procedure: Provided, That such qualification, prerequisite, standard, practice, or procedure may be enforced without such proceeding if the qualification, prerequisite, standard, practice, or procedure has been submitted by the chief legal officer or other appropriate official of such State or subdivision to the Attorney General and the Attorney General has not interposed an objection within sixty days after such submission, or upon good cause shown, to facilitate an expedited approval within sixty days after such submission, the Attorney General has affirmatively indicated that such objection will not be made. Neither an affirmative indication by the Attorney General that no objection will be made, nor the Attorney General’s failure to object, nor a declaratory judgment entered under this section shall bar a subsequent action to enjoin enforcement of such qualification, prerequisite, standard, practice, or procedure. In the event the Attorney General affirmatively indicates that no objection will be made within the sixty-day period following receipt of a submission, the Attorney General may reserve the right to reexamine the submission if additional information comes to his attention during the remainder of the sixty-day period which would otherwise require objection in accordance with this section. Any action under this section shall be heard and determined by a court of three judges in accordance with the provisions of section 2284 of title 28 and any appeal shall lie to the Supreme Court.

Crystal clear, isn't it?

[burrowowl]

5. Thanks for your reply

Some women from a battered women's shelther were bussed in to vote where I was an election judge and the repuke head judge finally let them fill in provisional ballots as per HAVA (I was not able to 'overse' what he was doing, but I went out to check candidate signs within the perimeter and the women came out at the same time and said they had voted for Kerry, the final results for the precinct were short all of the provisional ballots filled in) but at the county level, I think many of these ballots were rejected.
Thanks for your reply and yes the 3rd is wonderful legal self-referencing.

[wli]

2. the Federalist Society Klansmen want to bring back Jim Crow