“Today’s Supreme Court decision is an encouraging step toward restoring constitutional order. The Supreme Court recognized that states have the ability to run fair elections and today’s political realities do not justify such an assault on federalism.”
Sowell: Who’s Racist Now?
The latest from Thomas Sowell:
I am so old that I can remember when most of the people promoting race hate were white.
Apparently other Americans also recognize that the sources of racism are different today from what they were in the past. According to a recent Rasmussen poll, 31 percent of blacks think that most blacks are racists, while 24 percent of blacks think that most whites are racist.
The difference between these percentages is not great, but it is remarkable nevertheless. After all, generations of blacks fought the white racism from which they suffered for so long. If many blacks themselves now think that most other blacks are racist, that is startling.
The moral claims advanced by generations of black leaders — claims that eventually touched the conscience of the nation and turned the tide toward civil rights for all — have now been cheapened by today’s generation of black “leaders,” who act as if it is all just a matter of whose ox is gored.
Even in legal cases involving terrible crimes — the O.J. Simpson murder trial or the charges of gang rape against Duke University students — many black “leaders” and their followers have not waited for facts about who was guilty and who was not, but have immediately taken sides, based on who was black and who was white.
Among whites, according to the same Rasmussen poll, 38 percent consider most blacks racist and 10 percent consider most whites racist.
Broken down by politics, the same poll showed that 49 percent of Republicans consider most blacks racist, as do 36 percent of independents and 29 percent of Democrats.
Perhaps most disturbing of all, just 29 percent of Americans as a whole think race relations are getting better, while 32 percent think race relations are getting worse. The difference is too close to call, but the fact that it is so close is itself painful — and perhaps a warning sign for where we are heading.
Is this what so many Americans, both black and white, struggled for, over the decades and generations, to try to put the curse of racism behind us — only to reach a point where retrogression in race relations now seems at least equally likely as progress?
What went wrong? Perhaps no single factor can be blamed for all the things that went wrong. Insurgent movements of all sorts, in countries around the world, have for centuries soured in the aftermath of their own success. “The revolution betrayed” is a theme that goes back at least as far as 18th century France.
The civil rights movement in 20th century America attracted many people who put everything on the line for the sake of fighting against racial oppression. But the eventual success of that movement attracted opportunists, and even turned some idealists into opportunists.
Over the generations, black leaders have ranged from noble souls to shameless charlatans. After the success of the civil rights insurgency, the latter have come into their own, gaining money, power and fame by promoting racial attitudes and actions that are counterproductive to the interests of those they lead.
None of this is unique to blacks or to the United States. In various countries and times, leaders of groups that lagged behind, economically and educationally, have taught their followers to blame all their problems on other people — and to hate those other people.
This was the history of anti-Semitic movements in Eastern Europe between the two World Wars, anti-Ibo movements in Nigeria in the 1960s, and anti-Tamil movements that turned Sri Lanka from a peaceful nation into a scene of lethal mob violence and then decades-long civil war, both marked by unspeakable atrocities.
Groups that rose from poverty to prosperity seldom did so by having racial or ethnic leaders. While most Americans can easily name a number of black leaders, current or past, how many can name Asian American ethnic leaders or Jewish ethnic leaders?
The time is long overdue to stop looking for progress through racial or ethnic leaders. Such leaders have too many incentives to promote polarizing attitudes and actions that are counterproductive for minorities and disastrous for the country.
Former U.S. Attorney General Gonzales on ruling: “Section 4 of the VRA was woefully outdated, not reflective of today’s society”
The Section 5 preclearance requirements were meant to address disenfranchisement of African Americans in Southern states. However, its application is based on a formula in Section 4 of the VRA that the Court in Shelby found was woefully outdated, not reflective of today’s society and oblivious to progress made since 1965 in the levels of voting participation by minorities.…Lost in much of the media criticism of the decision is any acknowledgment that the Court left intact Section 2 of the VRA, the substantive law protecting the voting rights of Americans. Following this decision, the U.S. Attorney General warned jurisdictions that the Civil Rights Division will be closely monitoring their actions to ensure the protection of voting rights under Section 2. If, over time, those efforts prove inadequate, Congress can pass legislation and revise the Section 4 formula to reflect the realities of modern America.
NC Congresswoman Foxx: In 2013, should the law compel states to receive federal approval for every election policy?
“Chief Justice John Roberts, who authored the court’s opinion on Shelby v. Holder, wrote that ‘Our country has changed, and while any racial discrimination in voting is too much, Congress must ensure that the legislation it passes to remedy that problem speaks to current conditions.’ I agree, and that is one reason I did not support the reauthorization of the Voting Rights Act in 2006. If Congress chooses to reconsider the VRA coverage formula – that is used to determine which states are subject to ‘pre-clearance’ from the DOJ – I hope it will also consider the entirety of Section 5 and whether in 2013 the law ought to still compel select states to receive federal approval for each and every one of their proposed federal election policies.”
Senator Graham, South Carolina on VRA ruling: “We will no longer be singled out and treated different than our sister states”
U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina) made this statement on the Supreme Court decision Shelby County v Holder.
“Voting is a fundamental right guaranteed to all United States citizens.
I will continue to do everything in my power to ensure elections are
free and fair for every South Carolinian.
“Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act was a necessary tool to preserve
voting rights, but due to the reform and advances in South Carolina
election law, it is no longer necessary. The Supreme Court noted this
tremendous progress in South Carolina’s electoral system and it was the
underpinning of their decision. I concur with the Court that our state
has made tremendous progress.
“The Supreme Court decision now puts South Carolina on equal footing
with every other state in the nation. As a South Carolinian, I’m glad
we will no longer be singled out and treated differently than our sister
states.”
“Texans overwhelmingly support Greg Abbott on voter ID”
Houston Chronicle: Texans across party lines support Voter ID overwhelmingly.
Tennessee General Assembly clarifies photo ID law
Link.
Virginia Congressman Frank Wolf on VRA ruling: “Extra federal oversight has been costly and there’s been a lot of delay”
…Wolf, who said he was the only member of Virginia’s delegation to vote for reauthorizing the act in 1982, said the United States has changed in the intervening decades.
“I don’t think there’s discrimination now in state of Virginia,” Wolf said. “I think in the areas I represent, it’s totally honest and ethical. It’s more open and honest than in many areas of the country, including some big cities. I think the act has been successful.”
Virginia localities now will not have to undergo unnecessary steps when making minor election-related decisions, Wolf said. “The last couple of years, it’s been a work product for lawyers,” he said of the extra federal oversight. “It’s been costly and there’s been a lot of delay.”
Bad News for Redistricting Junkies: Three at Last
On Shelby on WMAL-AM Washington DC
My interview this morning with the fantastic Larry O’Connor on WMAL. Topics: Preclearance of Prisoner DNA testing, Tom Perez’s conference room meeting Monday, DOJ Voting Section perjury, Shelby, 10th Amendment, Mississippi and individual liberty.