Anyone who’s known me over the past few years will know that, generally speaking, I avoid commenting on current politics.  Anymore, it seems we’re just going from one knee-jerk reaction to the next knee-jerk reaction without the benefit of any real discourse.  To say that this is a sad state of affairs is understating the case in leaps and bounds.  We can argue all day long about the who, the what, the where, and more importantly, the why all day long.

I bring this up because SCOTUS’s decision on Section 4 of the 1965 Voting Rights Act triggered just such a knee-jerk reaction from my cousin (mirrored with the dozens I’ve seen pasted across Twitter) that Civil Rights is now set back 50 years.  Having the benefit of actually reading nearly half a dozen articles (from both “liberal” and “conservative” leaning sites), I chose to engage him with my opinion that I don’t believe that it’s quite the “death knell” everyone portrays it to be.  While it’s certainly disconcerting and does “open the door” to future possible discrimination, what the ruling does is invalidate Section 4 only.  Section 4 creates the scenario that makes certain jurisdiction (states and a few counties) subject to federal oversight of election process changes.  Section 5 actually enforces the oversight, but Section 4 creates the conditions to qualify for additional oversight.

While it’s true that the conditions laid out in Section 4 basically make Section 5 a moot point right now, that’s not to say that it goes away entirely.  SCOTUS has basically said “Congress, you should use more relevant data than something from 40 years ago.”  Makes sense to me, right?

Then people go on to say “well, Congress isn’t getting anything done” – there’s a certain measure of truth there.  But I made the comment to him (and he has yet to respond) that this is such an “under the radar topic” that Congress might just surprise us.  Believe it or not, Congress does actually accomplish things.  It’s just not on the “tentpole” issues that are major headlines to news outlets.  Those are the issues where we see the “partisanship bickering” because Congress actually has to campaign on their visible record.  It’s easy to tell your constituents “I voted against (or for) immigration reform, while my opponent is against my stance.”  It’s not so easy to do on “lower profile” issues or where you might actually agree with something.  Continue reading