Page 4 - Coverage Formula News Today

Way to come up with another coverage formula thats narrowly tailored so it passes constitutional muster. >> ari, im reading from your article that you posted on our website you noted that hearings are being led in the judiciary committee on the constitution headed by trent franks there. one of only 33 republicans who voted against reauthorizing the vote rights in 2006 and you had noted 390 members voted for it there. so does this already spell doom? >> i dont think it spells doom. i think hes a ...

These states are republican led. whats your thought here? is it realistic to think they will even consider work with democrats on this issue? >> yes. i think hope springs eternal. you know, im a native of selma as you rightfully said and a member that represents the civil rights district and i can tell you while progress has been made in electoral politics we have a long ways to go. i think that as long as theres discriminatory impact that affect all americans the ability to vote we as elected o...

Supreme court decision. theyve got to pass a new coverage formula. its an issue of democracy and voting rights. i put jobs, i put education, i put voting rights right at the top. we need congress to lead. we need congress to discontinue obstructing. we need action now. >> do you have any confidence on this congress moving on the voting rights issue. the only way theres going to be an alternative now to the supreme court is there has to be a new voting law in place and i know i was on a call with...

I cant read the tea leaves. i dont think any of us can. certainly were at a point where we dont have anything. and so hopefully, im hopeful, that a bipartisan congress will look at this and say, you know what, we realize the discrimination still exists in voting. we need to stop it. none of us should be tolerant of it and that they will come together to work with us on a coverage formula. >> nancy pelosi this week said, and again were talking about how this would -- if a fix would probably origi...

Setback. it crippled the voting rights act but if, in fact, congress can come together and really develop another coverage formula, then we still have section 5. and we intend to make sure that we use every tool that we possibly have, including advocacy within the community, public policy in terms of pushing back on bad laws, section 2 where we can, and certainly justices can help us in that effort, but ultimately were expecting congress to act. the supreme court was extremely clear racial discr...

Way that it had before. the only real question was exactly what the court was going to do. so what the court wound up doing was they upheld section 5 of the voting rights act which requires state and local governments with a history of diskrings to go to the federal government and get approval before they can make any changes to the voting procedures. even things like moving a polling place across the street. so the court left that intact. it said you can still have that. but you need to change ...

The law signed by president johns in 1965, a response to widespread efforts in the south to prevent blacks from voting. >> were marching today. >> civil rights veteran john lewis watched as the law was signed. >> without the voting rights acof 1965, there would be no barack obama as president of the united states of america. weve come too far, made too much progress to go back. >> this decision represents a serious setback for voting rights and has the potential to negatively affect millions of ...

Of 1965, there would be no barack obama as president of the united states of america. weve come too far, made too much progress to go back. >> this decision represents a serious setback for voting rights. and has the potential to negatively affect millions of americans across the country. >> in a 5-4 ruling the courts conservatives said the areas covered by the voting rights act have changed but the law has not kept up. the act requires states with a history of voter discrimination to get permis...

Was discriminatory effect on that plan. and so for the supreme court to rule, to strike down the coverage formula in the shelby county case i think is not only ironic, but its really tragic. i really hope that we in congress will act quickly to make sure that we protect the right to vote for all americans. >> well, you know, jeff, when you look at the fact that the chief justice roberts, he wrote a majority opinion, quote, our country has changed. and while any racial discrimination in voting is...

The united states. what the supreme court did today i think was not only an act of judicial overreach, but it was a real betrayal of minority voters in this country and it was a slap in the face to congress because congress reauthorized the act in 2006. they amassed a 15,000-page record. they looked rigorously at not just what happened in 1965 or 1975, or 1982 when the voting rights act was reauthorized, but they looked at what had been happening in the covered jurisdictions under the voting rig...