Here's the decision: http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12p...6_6k47.pdf

Last time the VRA came up for a vote was in 2006 and it was upheld unanimously. But lots has changed in Congress since then.

Democrats are going to want to put a new formula in place, one that may actually expand the scope of states subject to federal approval to include those states aggressively pursuing voter ID laws.

Politically, the GOP is going to have a hard time fighting against legislation aimed at reducing minority voter disenfranchisement, given their new branding and minority outreach efforts.

Personally, I support the SCOTUS ruling. The VRA was designed to eliminate voter disenfranchisement, with the goal of not needing the law one day. The only way to see how much progress has been made is to give those states another chance. Hopefully they don't let us down and go back to their old ways.

Requiring some ID is racist?

(06-25-2013 01:12 PM)Smaug Wrote:  Requiring some ID is racist?

That's a completely different debate with lots of dedicated threads. I'm just saying that the dems will likely see that as an opportunity to design a new formula that will expand the oversight.

(06-25-2013 01:13 PM)AtlanticLeague Wrote:  

(06-25-2013 01:12 PM)Smaug Wrote:  Requiring some ID is racist?

That's a completely different debate with lots of dedicated threads. I'm just saying that the dems will likely see that as an opportunity to design a new formula that will expand the oversight.

My comment wasn't on the court's decision, but your commentary.

(06-25-2013 01:16 PM)Smaug Wrote:  

(06-25-2013 01:13 PM)AtlanticLeague Wrote:  

(06-25-2013 01:12 PM)Smaug Wrote:  Requiring some ID is racist?

That's a completely different debate with lots of dedicated threads. I'm just saying that the dems will likely see that as an opportunity to design a new formula that will expand the oversight.

My comment wasn't on the court's decision, but your commentary.

In that case, if you get to design the formula, you can make anything you want racist. Whether or not it actually is will continue to be up for debate.

Photo ID laws will be implemented and challenged back up to SCOTUS who will rule on whether or not they're constitutional. That's our process.

National legislative actions should never be focused on one section of the country and exclude any other.
Just like the busing ruling years ago that applied to Charlotte should have been nationwide. When enacted many years
later they had riots in Massachusetts about it's implementation.

(06-25-2013 01:22 PM)GoApps70 Wrote:  National legislative actions should never be focused on one section of the country and exclude any other.
Just like the busing ruling years ago that applied to Charlotte should have been nationwide. When enacted many years
later they had riots in Massachusetts about it's implementation.

That's a valid argument, but not one that SCOTUS agreed with. They didn't rule the entire VRA unconstitutional, just the outdated formula it relied on to determine its scope.

(06-25-2013 01:10 PM)AtlanticLeague Wrote:  Here's the decision: http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12p...6_6k47.pdf

Last time the VRA came up for a vote was in 2006 and it was upheld unanimously. But lots has changed in Congress since then.

Democrats are going to want to put a new formula in place, one that may actually expand the scope of states subject to federal approval to include those states aggressively pursuing voter ID laws.

Politically, the GOP is going to have a hard time fighting against legislation aimed at reducing minority voter disenfranchisement, given their new branding and minority outreach efforts.

Personally, I support the SCOTUS ruling. The VRA was designed to eliminate voter disenfranchisement, with the goal of not needing the law one day. The only way to see how much progress has been made is to give those states another chance. Hopefully they don't let us down and go back to their old ways.

You will be let down. It has changed a bit down there but when you have states like Alabama and Mississippi still having segregated proms, well, I wouldn't count on not going back to their old ways down there. You still have 30-40 years to go. When the old white racists down there finally croak and the younger generation that is a bit more open minded you might get past the need for such laws.

(06-25-2013 02:05 PM)RobertN Wrote:  

(06-25-2013 01:10 PM)AtlanticLeague Wrote:  Here's the decision: http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12p...6_6k47.pdf

Last time the VRA came up for a vote was in 2006 and it was upheld unanimously. But lots has changed in Congress since then.

Democrats are going to want to put a new formula in place, one that may actually expand the scope of states subject to federal approval to include those states aggressively pursuing voter ID laws.

Politically, the GOP is going to have a hard time fighting against legislation aimed at reducing minority voter disenfranchisement, given their new branding and minority outreach efforts.

Personally, I support the SCOTUS ruling. The VRA was designed to eliminate voter disenfranchisement, with the goal of not needing the law one day. The only way to see how much progress has been made is to give those states another chance. Hopefully they don't let us down and go back to their old ways.

You will be let down. It has changed a bit down there but when you have states like Alabama and Mississippi still having segregated proms, well, I wouldn't count on not going back to their old ways down there. You still have 30-40 years to go. When the old white racists down there finally croak and the younger generation that is a bit more open minded you might get past the need for such laws.

If you're right, then those laws will be struck down, the VRA will be expanded, and the GOP will find itself even more isolated from independent voters.

Never assume Robert is right.

(06-25-2013 02:05 PM)RobertN Wrote:  

(06-25-2013 01:10 PM)AtlanticLeague Wrote:  Here's the decision: http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12p...6_6k47.pdf

Last time the VRA came up for a vote was in 2006 and it was upheld unanimously. But lots has changed in Congress since then.

Democrats are going to want to put a new formula in place, one that may actually expand the scope of states subject to federal approval to include those states aggressively pursuing voter ID laws.

Politically, the GOP is going to have a hard time fighting against legislation aimed at reducing minority voter disenfranchisement, given their new branding and minority outreach efforts.

Personally, I support the SCOTUS ruling. The VRA was designed to eliminate voter disenfranchisement, with the goal of not needing the law one day. The only way to see how much progress has been made is to give those states another chance. Hopefully they don't let us down and go back to their old ways.

You will be let down. It has changed a bit down there but when you have states like Alabama and Mississippi still having segregated proms, well, I wouldn't count on not going back to their old ways down there. You still have 30-40 years to go. When the old white racists down there finally croak and the younger generation that is a bit more open minded you might get past the need for such laws.

So substituting Dem Lib racists will be better for everyone?

(06-25-2013 02:13 PM)Smaug Wrote:  Never assume Robert is right.

http://www.nationaljournal.com/politics/...g-20130625

It looks like there will be plenty of material for such a debate.

The states are not going to want a new formula that includes them.

(06-25-2013 02:26 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  The states are not going to want a new formula that includes them.

But the RNC won't want to be associated with laws that are viewed as discriminatory. It's going to turn into yet another in-fight within the GOP. Expect the Dems to exploit it for all it's worth.

MSNBC is hyperventilating over the decision. The only contact they've had with the South is watching the 1967 movies, "In The Heat of the Night" and "Guess Who's Coming to Dinner".

(06-25-2013 02:32 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  MSNBC is hyperventilating over the decision. The only contact they've had with the South is watching the 1967 movies, "In The Heat of the Night" and "Guess Who's Coming for Dinner".

Publicly the Dems are outraged, but secretly they have to be excited. There are so many ways for the Dems to get political mileage out of this. It's the GOP that should be upset, they're about to get set up for more brand tarnishing.

(06-25-2013 02:13 PM)Smaug Wrote:  Never assume Robert is right.

Given the way the Republicons ran the last election and a number of people posting on here, it is pretty safe to say that I am correct.

(06-25-2013 02:27 PM)AtlanticLeague Wrote:  

(06-25-2013 02:26 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  The states are not going to want a new formula that includes them.

But the RNC won't want to be associated with laws that are viewed as discriminatory. It's going to turn into yet another in-fight within the GOP. Expect the Dems to exploit it for all it's worth.

It will be difficult to craft a new formula that primarily hits the South using modern data.

I doubt many northern reps want to saddle their states with that mess.

(06-25-2013 02:35 PM)RobertN Wrote:  

(06-25-2013 02:13 PM)Smaug Wrote:  Never assume Robert is right.

Given the way the Republicons ran the last election and a number of people posting on here, it is pretty safe to say that I am correct.

Heh.

(06-25-2013 02:38 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(06-25-2013 02:27 PM)AtlanticLeague Wrote:  

(06-25-2013 02:26 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  The states are not going to want a new formula that includes them.

But the RNC won't want to be associated with laws that are viewed as discriminatory. It's going to turn into yet another in-fight within the GOP. Expect the Dems to exploit it for all it's worth.

It will be difficult to craft a new formula that primarily hits the South using modern data.

I doubt many northern reps want to saddle their states with that mess.

Agreed. That's why no new formula will be passed unless/until states start disenfranchising voters or a voter ID law makes it to SCOTUS. The dems will fight for one but it won't make it through because it'll be something extreme to put the GOP on the defensive.

In the mean time, the red states have to try and not do anything too blatantly racist. I wouldn't be surprised to learn that certain governors have already been contacted by the RNC.