U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops Clueless on Voting Rights

In yet another indication that the civil rights discussion in this country hasn't moved beyond the tired old rhetoric of the 1960s and has failed to recognize the significant gains made by minorities (Hello - our 2 most recent Secretaries of State, for example, have been black.), the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops is calling for the renewal of the Voting Rights Act of 1965:

WASHINGTON (July 11, 2006) — The U.S. Catholic Bishops urged Congress to renew the Voting Rights Act, landmark civil rights legislation, as the House of Representatives prepares to vote on the bill this week. In a July 10 letter Bishop Nicholas DiMarzio of Brooklyn, chairman of the bishops’ Domestic Policy Committee, asked House members to vote for The Fannie Lou Hamer, Rosa Parks, and Coretta Scott King Voting Rights Act Reauthorization and Amendments Act of 2006 (H.R. 9).

“Reauthorizing the Voting Rights Act is necessary to preserve and protect the right to vote for all Americans,” wrote Bishop DiMarzio. “The right to vote is essential to our democracy, and H.R. 9 protects this right. I urge you to vote to renew and restore this vital law.”

The U.S. Catholic Bishops have long played a leadership role in securing and protecting the right of all citizens to vote. The bishops’ conference supported the last renewal of the Voting Rights Act in 1992. Local dioceses and parishes and Catholic institutions are encouraged to participate in non-partisan voting registration efforts.

The letter follows.

On behalf of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, I write to urge the House to renew the Voting Rights Act. I understand it is scheduled for floor consideration this week. It is critical that the vote occur this week. I urge all members to vote for it and oppose any weakening amendments.

***
The Catholic bishops are proud of our past leadership role in securing civil rights, including the right to vote. “No Catholic with a good Christian conscience can fail to recognize the rights of all citizens to vote,” wrote the Administrative Board of the National Catholic Welfare Conference (predecessor of the bishops’ Conference) in 1963. Portions of the Voting Rights Act were last renewed in 1992, with the support of the bishops’ Conference. Our Conference has continually emphasized the importance of voting and the right and responsibility of each citizen to vote, and has encouraged dioceses, parishes and other Catholic institutions to participate in non-partisan voting registration efforts.

My Comments:
The controversial bit of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 is contained in Section 5 of that law. Section 5 requires certain Southern states to submit any law affecting the electoral process to the United States Attorney General for approval. Got that? A federal political appointee has veto power over the electoral laws of certain sovereign states.

Now, I'm not going to pretend that such a law wasn't necessary 40 years ago when those same Southern states were thumbing their noses at the federal courts and at federal civil rights legislation and doing their damndest to disenfranchise blacks. But can anyone offer a legitimate explanation for why such measures are still in place 40 years later? Hell, Reconstruction lasted less than a decade.

In short, renewal of this aspect of the Voting Rights Act is merely a symbolic gesture meant to convey the message "Hey, we still care about civil rights and voting rights." That's an admirable message, but it deserves more than empty gestures, and shouldn't come at the expense of the sovereignty of states that are, by any measure, no longer guilty of the transgressions the Voting Rights Act of 1965 was enacted to curtail.

But hey, supporting empty symbolic gestures seems to be the strong suit of the USCCB.


UPDATE
To give some indication of just how empty this gesture is, one of the key arguments you'll hear coming from the left for the need to renew the Voting Rights Act is the alleged disenfranchisement of blacks in Ohio during the 2004 Elections.

But there's one problem with that line of argument: Ohio isn't a "covered jurisdiction" under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. In other words, the Voting Rights Act provisions in question don't apply to Ohio.


UPDATE # 2
I don't take issue with renewal of the other aspects of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, only with the renewal of Section 5.


UPDATE # 3
President Bush is apparently clueless on voting rights as well, because he supports renewal of all aspects (including Section 5) of the Voting Rights Act.