HR 4: John Lewis Voting Rights Act
In 2013, the Supreme Court’s decision in Shelby County v. Holder gutted key provisions of the Voting Rights Act and set the stage for the rampant increase in voter suppression we’ve seen throughout the country. The original Voting Rights Act of 1965 required states with a record of racial disrimination and voter suppression to submit any change in election procedures for approval in advance before any changes could take place. This approval process was called preclearance. H.R. 4, which is named after the late congressman and civil rights icon John Lewis, a man who risked his life for the right to vote, would restore the Voting Rights Act after it was gutted by the Supreme Court in 2013 and re-establish the preclearance requirements ... However, voter ID, and other voter protection elements are wildly popular with voters ( 75% support voter ID).
Archive Related Items

Chuck Schumer Sets Mid-January Deadline for Possible Filibuster Changes

1/3/22
from The Wall Street Journal,
1/3/22:

Democrats tie push on election laws to anniversary of Jan. 6 attack on Capitol by Trump supporters

Mr. Schumer laid out his plans regarding the filibuster in a letter to colleagues at the start of the second session of the current Congress and as the country approaches the first anniversary of the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol. In that siege, supporters of former President Donald Trump stormed the Capitol in a failed attempt to stop Congress from certifying President Biden’s election victory. Democrats argue that many Republican-led states’ changes to their voting laws were designed to restrict voters’ access to the ballot, and that new federal legislation is required to protect voting rights.

Republicans say the Democrats’ elections proposal would wrest power from the states and glosses over the need to better safeguard elections. They paint calls to change the Senate’s filibuster rules, which give the minority power by requiring 60 out of 100 votes to advance most legislation, as a power grab.

“An evenly divided Senate breaking and forever changing rules that require a supermajority is like a football team declaring its opponent’s end zone starts at the 40 yard line,” tweeted Sen. Mike Lee (R., Utah). A simple majority in the 50-50 Senate is required to change or eliminate the filibuster, but Sens. Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona have raised objections, leaving the fate of any changes uncertain.

More From The Wall Street Journal (subscription required):



365 Days Page
Archive Related Items
Comment ( 0 )