See, Even the Wall Street Journal Agrees with Me

In an op-ed that sounds much like my arguements regarding the Voting Rights act, the Wall Street Journal takes on the Voting Right Act reauthorization and illustrates its point with a real life scenario--New York's 11th Congressional district. A few months ago, I argued that the Voting Rights Act will negatively impact any efforts at redistricting reform, because of the existence of retrogression and vote dilution. I also wrote a post in which I argued that "majority-minority" districts are nothing more than affirmative action for elections and limit the ability of minority candidate to translate their success in such districts into higher office. Back in March I wrote:

As a result of these legal interpretations, a number of majority-minority districts created in the 1980's and 1990's yielded a large influx of minority Representatives in those decades, generally to a positive impact on national politics. But the problem is that these Representatives, despite their years of experience have not been able to make the leap to the next level of governmental power, whether that be moving from the state legislature to the U.S. Congress, or the U.S. Senate or a governor's chair, or even the Presidency/Vice Presidency. Some will blame racism, but I don't buy such charges as the foundation of why otherwise talented people cannot make the leap. Rather, the reason can be blamed on the very VRA by-product which provided them with the opportunity to be a Representative, majority minority districts, has denied them the skill and experience necessary to build a winning coalition at the next level.

Today the WSJ wrote:

Ironically, such rhetoric is one reason so few minorities are able to seek and win higher office. Once you're appealing to people on completely racial grounds in order to win a House seat, you have a hard time making the broader appeals necessary to win statewide.

The big issue I have with regard to the Voting Rights Act renewal is that lawmakers seem oblivious to the impacts the act is having on our elections. Admittedly,there was a time for the Voting Rights Act, but in its current form, that time has passed. While the actual language of the law is pretty good, I am not particularly a big fan of the interpretations that have come about and I hate the way in which states with a bad history are practically enslaved by that history. Part of the lawhave become obsolete and stand in the way of real electoral competition.

But more than that, the Voting Rights Act has become a mechanism of separation and polarization all in the name of something good. The Congress who wrote the Act probably would be shocked at how it has become used, both as a racial and electoral weapon. The current version of the VRA needs revamping, but the bills before the House and Senate now are not worthy of the original Voting Rights Act name.


Hat Tip: Professor Hasen