Texans, others stall voting rights renewal
GOP bloc decries regulatory burden; Democrats livid

Paper: Dallas Morning News, The (TX)

Date: May 19, 2006

WASHINGTON - A revolt by Texas Republicans and other Southern lawmakers is threatening the Voting Rights Act, the landmark civil-rights law enacted to overcome the legacy of poll taxes and literacy tests.

House leaders planned a routine vote this week to extend the LBJ-era law for 25 years, avoiding a potentially ugly eruption of racial politics.

But a Georgia-Texas coalition of conservatives slammed on the brakes, angry over the special regulatory burdens of the act.

Allies from across the South gathered Thursday afternoon to strategize and take stock of their initial victory - cancellation of the planned House vote this week.

For 40 years, Texas and eight other states have had to get permission for any change in election law or procedure, major or minor - from ballot design to precinct boundaries. Justice Department lawyers review proposals to guard against cloaked efforts to discriminate against minorities.

Parts of seven other states are also covered.

Fiercely contested congressional redistricting plans in Texas, Georgia and elsewhere have undergone that evaluation in recent years.

Although Democrats and civil-rights advocates haven't always been pleased with the outcomes, they still view the law as vital.

But opponents of a lengthy extension say the targeted states have made huge leaps since President Johnson signed the law in 1965.

"Why should one state have to live under a federal law when somebody a few miles away is exempt? All or nothing. It's an issue of fairness," said a senior Texas Republican, Rep. Henry Bonilla of San Antonio.

Civil-rights advocates are livid at the delay, and Democrats accuse the Southern Republicans of insensitivity.

"Every election we have lots of intimidation," said Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson, D-Dallas, arguing that without the current protections, "the intimidation would be even more overt....Unfortunately, we still have people who'd rather not have minorities vote."

Rep. Lynn Westmoreland, a Republican from a mostly white district south of Atlanta, has led the resistance. "What we're seeing is a passionate response to this from the Georgia delegation and a growing insurgency within the Texas delegation as well," said his spokesman, Brian Robinson. "We're going to have big enough numbers to wage quite a battle."

The debate is laden with racial overtones and old wounds.

Republicans don't want to alienate black and Hispanic voters, and critics generally avoid outright demands to repeal the Voting Rights Act.

Instead they have framed the argument as an effort to modernize and take into account years of racial progress.

States that discouraged minority voters in 1964, 1968 or 1972 - with poll taxes, tests of "good character" or literacy - and also experienced low minority turnout have been subjected to federal oversight.

Blacks account for about one-third of Georgia's electorate, and roughly the same proportion of statewide elected officials, including the attorney general and chief justice.

Yet the state remains under supervision because of low minority turnout in the 1964 contest between Barry Goldwater and LBJ.

"We're going to be covered by this bill until 2032 based on who voted for Lyndon Johnson. Seriously," Mr. Robinson said. "Maybe there's a problem you didn't know about in Wisconsin, or Pennsylvania. Let those who have corrected the problems of the past go."

The critics want new evaluation formulas based on more recent elections, which would likely relieve Texas and most of the other states of their preapproval requirements, though a few states, including Nevada and California, could find themselves scrutinized more closely based on recent voting patterns.

President Bush called for renewing the Voting Rights Act in December and reiterated that stance three weeks ago, calling the act "a very important part of the civil-rights legislation. Everybody ought to be encouraged to vote."

House Judiciary Committee Chairman James Sensenbrenner, R-Wis., said the extension enjoys "broad bipartisan support," citing the 33-1 vote by which it cleared his committee last week. An aide said Thursday that a floor vote is expected soon.

Congress last extended the law in 1982. Mr. Sensenbrenner played a central role in persuading President Reagan to sign it. Last summer, the chairman promised the NAACP that he would secure another 25-year extension, and everything seemed on track two weeks ago when he joined the Democratic and Republican leaders from the House and Senate on the Capitol steps in a show of unity.

Behind the scenes, the revolt was gathering steam.

Texas Republicans, including most of the freshmen, signed on early. They brainstormed the issue at their weekly lunch last week, members said, and again Thursday.

"If it's good enough for a handful of states, it's good enough for the whole country," said freshman Rep. Louie Gohmert, R-Tyler.

Rep. Kenny Marchant, a GOP freshman from Coppell, said Texans don't like being singled out and will fight to change that, though, "I don't think that necessarily means we'll vote against it [renewal of the act] if it isn't that way."

But legal scholars have warned that the Supreme Court could strike down expansion of the law, noting that decades ago, the court gave its OK in part because the law only targeted states with proven records of discrimination.

Rep. John Lewis, D-Ga., a lion of the civil-rights movement, called the delay an 11th-hour "attempt to dilute the Voting Rights Act. This act was good in 1965. It's effective. It was signed by President Lyndon Johnson, the man from Texas, and it made America a better place."

The Senate Judiciary Committee hasn't voted on the extension. Mr. Westmoreland's office says a number of Southern senators on the panel support the Georgia congressman's resistance effort.

Texas Republican Sen. John Cornyn, who is on that committee, has no problem with the delay.

"It doesn't expire until 2007. We've got some time to work on it," he said. "There's more than the Voting Rights Act at stake. There's political calculations going on, and I want to try and make sure I understand what that's all about."

He said he also shares concerns about another element of the law, one regarding language assistance. Jurisdictions with high numbers of people whose native language isn't English must print bilingual ballots. Some must also provide translators.

"In order to be an American citizen, you have to learn English. Why would we continue to publish ballots in a language other than English?... That's a pretty compelling argument," Mr. Cornyn said.

But Rep. Solomon Ortiz, D-Corpus Christi, called the assistance vital given that citizenship requires only basic English proficiency.

"If we want to have these people emerge into our system," he said, "we need to also allow them to understand how our system works and have them understand what they're voting on."

E-mail tgillman@dallasnews.com

Copyright 2006 The Dallas Morning News

Author: TODD J. GILLMAN

Section: NEWS

Page: 1A

Copyright 2006 The Dallas Morning News