Voting Rights Act: Section 5 Needs To Be Amended

Voting rights has long been a scrutinized process in our nation’s history of voting, since America gained it’s independence from Britain. Our country has come a long way since then, with many revisions to how voting practices are conducted. The main concern of voting rights is discrimination towards race, gender, and minority groups. With the passage of the Voting Right Act of 1965, a milestone against a long history of discrimination, requires a periodic reinstatement of the Act by congress and signed off by the current president of the United States. Over 40 years have passed since the Act was first approved which brings up many questions to some previsions in the Voting Rights Act, such as section 5. Is it unconstitutional that congress can require a “pre-clearance” on certain jurisdictions that have had a history of voting discrimination? I believe that section 5 is constitutional, but it should apply to all states not just those who showed to be discriminative in the 1960’s.

Gerrymandering is a clear reason why section 5 of the Voting Rights Act is so important to remain in effect, even though gerrymandering is technically covered by section 2, “Pursuant to Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, 42 U.S.C. 1973c, jurisdictions covered by the Act’s special provisions must obtain preclearance of any redistricting plan prior to implementation.” Gerrymandering is a term used to describe a political party who redistricts its states boundaries to benefit that party in which it discriminates against race, color, and non English speaking groups. Texas had the most recent controversy with the Republican Party trying to gain the advantage for the 2004 mid term election. Texas is seen as being a Republican controlled state, but the fact is, democrats have dominated congress for 130 years. Gerrymandering had allowed the democrats to dominate for so long. Texas is not the only state to have issues with redistricting Arizona, Colorado, Illinois, Montana, North Carolina, and Rhode Island all have been under the spotlight in recent years.

Section 5 points out only nine states that are covered by this provision which is grossly unequal and unfair as a nation of fifty states. All states should be evaluated by the Attorney General every decade or as often as redistricting is being considered in that state. Discrimination these days are more technical and based off of good reasoning, it can be done legally. This is a problem that seems to lack the attention of the American public. What people fail to realize is how well developed our government tactics have become in order to gain control. Discrimination must be watched very closely, not only by law, but by the people who these laws it effect. Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act should remain constitutional and with all fifty states being included in this provision, it will continue the principle of the constitutional checks and balances.


1965 Voting Rights Act under question by the Supreme Court.
Bail out of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act
Section 5 Covered Jurisdictions
Voting Right Act: Section 5
Gerrymandering
Section 5 redistricting provision
Redistricting analysis
Texas Redistricting Controversy