The Democratic Party of Hanover alongside the Hanover NAACP[1]
righty rejected the county’s efforts to relieve themselves of requirements
mandated by the Voting Rights Act of 1965[2].
In particular, Hanover County is seeking exemption from
Section 5 of the law. Section 5 requires Southern states to seek and win approval
from the U.S. Justice Department and courts before election changes can be
made.
Hanover County supervisors[3]
all agreed to ask for exemption from preclearance requirements mandated under
the Voting Rights Act of 1965, a law which made discriminatory voting practices
illegal.
Hanover County Registrar, Teresa F. Smithson, did make a
valid point for exemption when she commented that “bailout status means simply
we have proven that we’re not a racist location anymore and that we will not
disenfranchise voters based on color.”
It’s hard to argue that hanging the Voting Rights Act of
1965 over the head of localities in the South is not a means of branding these
localities in some way racist.
But the past has left indelible scars that haven’t yet
healed in the South, evidenced by the Hanover County NAACP’s rejection of the
supervisors’ move to end their requirements under the Voting Rights Act of
1965. As Robert Barnette, president of the Hanover County NAACP, explained, “We
feel like if we don’t have someone looking over our shoulders, our voting
rights could be further eroded.”
The legacy of the past in the South has left an entire group
of people feeling like their voting rights are only a few short breaths away from being stripped again. Can a democratic form of
government function appropriately when a sizable group of people feel this way
about their democratic institutions?
Even though the requirements under the Voting Rights Act of
1965 subject localities to a lengthy process of approval, for now at least, the
time and energy is worth the relief that is gained by an entire group of people
whose history of voting rights has been far too restricted[4].
No comments:
Post a Comment