Voting Rights Act dates to 1965 but is still necessary today

On the 50th anniversary of the March on Washington, which marked a high-water mark in the civil rights movement for justice and rights denied to African-American citizens for a century, it is well to remember the sacrifices of Medgar Evers, the four girls killed in the Birmingham Church bombing, and scores of others killed in the struggle for civil rights.

These include Martin Luther King Jr., President John F. Kennedy and so many others.

Contrasting this is the U. S. Supreme Court’s June 25 decision voiding Section 4 of the U.S. Voting Rights Act of 1965, in a shamefully partisan ruling that ignores the 2006 ratification of the act by the Congress, which extended Section 5 for another 25 years. Congress found that the electoral systems in nearly all of the covered jurisdictions are still suffering from actual effects of a Jim Crow system that was a remnant of slavery for 100 years after the Civil War.

The court’s ruling invalidated a key provision of the act, which had required states with a history of discriminatory voting practices to get federal approval before changing voting laws.

This non-democratic decision came from a court that also allowed unrestricted campaign contributions from foreign and domestic corpora- tions last year through its Citizens United decision, which also ignored 100 years of judicial case precedence aimed at preventing election fraud and corruption.

While it is true that much progress has been made since 1965, it is also true that last year Republicans in particular sought to restrict voting in many states.

And only enforcement of the Voting Rights Act by the Justice Department prevented many abuses in the 2012 national election.

My father’s family has been in Texas since being carried there as slaves in 1840, and my mother is from Selma, Ala., so I know well the violent discriminatory history there and in many other Southern states.

Now, states such as Texas and North Carolina that have historically limited the voting rights of African-Americans have begun instituting new hurdles.

Just weeks after the Supreme Court invalidated the key element of the Voting Rights Act, North Carolina’s governor signed a new law requiring a state-approved photo ID in order to vote and shortening the period for early voting.

Voter ID laws create problems by disenfranchising minorities, the poor, students and the elderly.

According to the Brennan Center, about 11 percent of U.S. citizens, roughly 21 million, don’t have government-issued photo IDs. These tend to be young people, those without college educations, Hispanics and the poor.

Obtaining photo IDs can be costly and burdensome, and many who live in rural areas have trouble accessing ID offices. Legal scholars argue that photo ID laws create a new "financial barrier to the ballot box."

The Advancement Project has already filed suit against a voter ID initiative in Missouri. The ACLU is fighting new voter restrictions in Florida.

I support the call for congressional action to restore necessary protections for a healthy democracy in which all eligible U.S. citizens can vote without undue, clearly politically motivated obstructions.

The Voting Rights Act was passed in 1965 and is still relevant and necessary today. The freedom to vote was clearly impaired by the U.S. Supreme Court’s action on June 25.

The right to vote is guaranteed under the 13th Amendment, 19th Amendment and 26th Amendment of our Constitution.

State laws should not interfere or hamper this right.

The continuation of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act is necessary to ensure voting rights are not suppressed.