Fighting For Black Political Power As Voting Rights Act Turns 60
Signed into law by President Lyndon Johnson on Aug. 6, 1965, the Voting Rights Act offered the first real promise of full political participation for Black Americans across the South. The safeguards and protections established by the Voting Rights Act of 1965 paved the way for a more representative government that began to reflect the will of the people, by the people.
Civil Rights groups have commemorated the day, reflecting on the resilience and determination of our predecessors, as we face an increasingly hostile anti-democracy minority running recklessly across the federal government.
We care about your data. See our privacy policy.
Despite efforts to restore and expand the protections afforded by the Voting Rights Act of 1965, the moral clarity from 60 years ago is lacking in congressional leadership. Ahead of the landmark anniversary, Sen. Reverend Raphael Warnock, supported by the Senate Democratic Caucus, reintroduced the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act.
If passed, the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act would restore geographic preclearance under an updated formula, create new nationwide practices of pre-clearance for voting practices with known discriminatory effects. It would further bolster protections against vote dilution, denial, and abridgement as we've seen in many states post- Shelby County v. Holder .
According to the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, over 200 civil rights and democracy organizations signed on in support of the reintroduction of the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act in the Senate.
'Extremists who prefer a White, Christian and male controlled country don't mind destroying our rights to see a return to the days when Black people, Latinos, Asian Americans and Native Americans could be blocked from the ballot but told it's not due to racism,' said Maya Wiley, president and CEO of The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights. 'We are not just celebrating 60 years of voting rights, we're calling out more than a decade of deliberate harm aimed at voters of color.'
According to Wiley, overcoming the expansive and arguably unconstitutional overreach that undermines our rights requires the passage of a suite of pro-democracy reforms, including the Freedom to Vote Act, the Native American Voting Rights Act, and the DC statehood bill. She said this freedom package was necessary to protect our communities and hold 'anti-voter' politicians accountable.
'Those in power see the rise of a multiracial democracy as a threat, and they are doing everything they can to silence it,' Wiley said. 'We will keep rising up and speaking out for the fundamental right to decide who represents us and what they do with our power.'
And yet, at the state level, community coalitions are stepping up efforts to combat the growing reach of authoritarianism on multiple fronts. Texas has grabbed the national attention as Republicans steeped in white entitlement and resentment demand five extra congressional seats as they further deny and restrict Black voters' right to fair representation.
With over four million Black Texans, the largest Black population in the country, it's unsurprising that the Lone Star State is ground zero for the latest Republican scheme. Speaking with NewsOne about the politically motivated mid-decade redistricting effort, Resha Thomas, project director for the Texas Black Action Fund, said the move was grounded in fear.
'We are not even in our final stages on the maps that were redistricted in 2021,' Thomas said. 'It's a fear from those who have been used to retaining power in the state of Texas.'
Fear of Black power and political representation has long been a driving force of anti-democracy factions in this country. It's part of why the Voting Rights Act was even needed in 1965, despite the passage of the 15th Amendment nearly 100 years earlier.
'If they're able to succeed in the state of Texas, they are looking to do this in other states,' she said.
Thomas said, calling the Texas mid-decade power grab an attack 'not only on access to voting, but representation.'
'It's like who do you call when you have a veteran who's seeking services?' she said. 'It means if you have concerns or issues around your SNAP benefits or Medicaid, having limited resources of having someone answer that phone and help advocate for you.'
The current far-right assault on democracy follows a calculated decades-long attack on the federal courts that paved the way for this moment. But a disingenuous opinion by Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts in Shelby County , claiming the end of discrimination as we knew it in 1965, gave Texas and several other Republican controlled states free rein to get back into the disenfranchisement business. Trump and his cronies are simply exploiting the loopholes and chaos the Roberts court has inflicted on the very institutions meant to serve the people.
'What we're telling folks is there's a lot to come,' Thomas said. 'We've just finished six and a half, almost seven months of this new administration. We still got years to go.'
If the need for doing more than just showing up to vote wasn't clear before, hopefully, people are finally getting the message loud and clear. For Tiffany Roberts, public policy director for the Southern Center for Human Rights, the long road ahead has been fortified by movement groundwork that laid the foundation for passing critical legislation, such as the Voting Rights Act.
As she reflected on the act's 60th anniversary, Roberts called for people to reconnect with why our ancestors fought for the right to vote.
'We've reduced it to just literally going to the ballot box,' she said.' But we've forgotten that the point of it is for the place where we live and raise our families to reflect our values and our dignity.'
For Roberts, part of the shift also requires people to understand that we cannot simply focus on the right to vote alone. The right to vote exists in direct relationship with all the other rights and issues that flow from it.
She also challenged people's complacency and acceptance of restrictions on core freedoms, such as the right to protest and free speech, which has paved the way for where we are now.
'We will talk about the dire straits that we are in and still believe that our advocacy must be comfortable,' Roberts said. 'If the state is unchecked, that means that the power of life and death is in the hands of people who really only wanted us to labor for free and build the wealth of this economy under draconian conditions.'
SEE ALSO:
Florida Supreme Court Backs DeSantis in Diluting Black Voter Power
Celebrating Juneteenth Amid Resurging Fascism 160 Years Later
SEE ALSO
Fighting For Black Political Power As Voting Rights Act Turns 60 was originally published on newsone.com
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Buzz Feed
19 minutes ago
- Buzz Feed
Vance Responds to Trump's 'MAGA Heir' Rubio Comment
Following Donald Trump's comments about who he believes will be his successor, Vice President JD Vance has responded. If you missed it, earlier this week, Trump was asked during an LA 2028 Olympic press conference whether he believes JD is his apparent "heir" for the 2028 presidential election. "I also think we have incredible people, some of the people on the stage right here. It's too early, obviously, to talk about it. Certainly, [JD is] doing a great job and he would be probably favored at this point," Trump concluded. Now, JD has responded. During a sitdown with British Foreign Secretary David Lammy, reporters asked Vance for his thoughts on Trump's statement. 'My view on the politics of 2028 is I'm not really focused even on the election in 2026, much less one two years after that,' JD said. 'If we do a good job for the American people, the politics will take care of itself.' There you have it, folks! We're still recovering from 2024 and already looking ahead to 2028.
Axios
an hour ago
- Axios
"Watts Rebellion" 60th anniversary renews call for Kerner Report plan
The 60th anniversary of a shocking uprising in Los Angeles, which foretold similar unrest in cities throughout the 1960s and 1970s, is being marked with calls to revisit solutions to poverty outlined in a famous report. The big picture: Activists and scholars have unveiled an updated edition of the 1968 Kerner Report that recommends a slew of initiatives to combat inequality, racial injustice and child poverty — issues stubbornly still here. Many of the original recommendations were never adopted, but activists say they are hopeful now amid the rise of progressive candidates from New York to Albuquerque, N.M., running for office. Catch up quick: Just days after President Johnson signed the landmark Voting Rights Act, 21-year-old Marquette Frye was arrested for alleged drunk driving on the edge of Los Angeles' Watts neighborhood on Aug. 11, 1965. Onlookers witnessed police roughing and arresting him, his brother and his mother — all Black — generating anger that turned into rioting and arson throughout the area. Six days of unrest resulted in 34 deaths, over 1,000 injuries, nearly 4,000 arrests and the destruction of property valued at $40 million. Nearly 14,000 National Guard troops were sent to patrol a 46-mile area. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. cut short a visit to Puerto Rico and visited the ravaged scenes, convincing him that the civil rights struggle should go North and West and focus on economic inequality. Over the next few years, similar uprisings would spark in Detroit, Chicago, Washington, D.C., Newark, N.J., and hundreds of other cities amid racial tension, lack of jobs and frustration over ongoing discrimination and police excessive force. Zoom in: The issues that generated the unrest haven't gone away and have possibly gotten worse, Alan Curtis, president of the Eisenhower Foundation, told Axios. "Today, we have so much information on how market fundamentalism hasn't worked," said Curtis, who edited the new " Creating Justice in a Multiracial Democracy: The Kerner Commission Updated." Curtis said more fact-based policies that tackle child poverty and police abuse are needed, and the nation needs to have an honest discussion outside of ideological camps. The update recommends that the nation fund public education based on student needs instead of property status, Congress pass federal police reform, expand media diversity and talk about poverty during elections. The intrigue: Former U.S. Sen. Fred Harris, the last living member of the Kerner Commission, told Axios last year that more people are in poverty than in 1968. "And it's tougher to get out of poverty today than it was then," said Harris, who died last November at 94. State of play: The U.S. Census said there were 36.8 million people in poverty in 2023 — 11.1% of the population. Around 20% of Latinos and 17% of Black Americans live in poverty today. What they're saying: "The past 60 years have been a combination of success and retrenchment. Most of the retrenchment has happened in the last decade," National Urban League president Marc Morial told Axios. "We're in a fight because our population has changed. You have more Black people, Hispanics (and) Asian Americans" living in the U.S. now," Jamarr Brown, a national director at Color Of Change PAC, told Axios. The Urban League's latest "State of Black America" report warns of an "organized effort" to dismantle civil rights enforcement, DEI protections, and Black political power. The other side: Paul Gessing of the Rio Grande Foundation, a libertarian think tank in Albuquerque, N.M., Flashback: Johnson created the 11-member commission as Detroit was engulfed in a raging riot. Five days of violence would leave 33 Black people and 10 white people dead, and more than 1,400 buildings burned. During the summer of 1967, more than 150 cases of civil unrest erupted across the United States. Bipartisan Kerner Commission's members included former Illinois Gov. Otto Kerner, New York Mayor John Lindsay, U.S. Sens. Edward W. Brooke of Massachusetts and Fred Harris of Oklahoma. Commission members toured cities and found that many Black residents complained about the lack of jobs and poor relations with local police. Black residents also told the commission that they had moved North to escape the poverty and racism of the South and found few jobs and old racism. The country, the report famously warned, was "moving toward two societies, one black, one white — separate and unequal."
NBC News
an hour ago
- NBC News
Trump's meeting with Putin poses high stakes for the Ukraine war — and his legacy
WASHINGTON — An unkept promise of Donald Trump's presidency is that he'd end the war between Russia and Ukraine in one swift diplomatic masterstroke. Trump made threats. He applied pressure. Still, the bombs keep falling, the casualties continue to pile up. Now, Trump is betting that a face-to-face meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin will yield the elusive breakthrough and possibly quell concerns among voters about his handling of the war. The summit taking place Friday on friendly turf, the red state of Alaska, amounts to one of the biggest gambits of Trump's second term. Hosting the meeting raises expectations that he'll stop the fighting. The president faces traps in sitting down with Putin, who is well-versed in the territorial issues at stake, but he also enjoys economic and military leverage. Creating a durable peace that will preserve Ukraine's independence will test the dealmaking skills that are Trump's point of pride. 'If you roll into the meeting not prepped, you can get jammed by Putin,' said Michael McFaul, who was U.S. ambassador to Russia in the Obama administration. 'Summits are to achieve an objective that advances American national interests. They're the means to end, and I sometimes feel that Trump feels the meeting is an end in itself.' Inside the Trump administration, a national security official acknowledged that forging a peace accord won't be easy. One of the combatants won't be at the table: Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, who has refused to relinquish territory to Russia that was illegally annexed. 'Whether or not there's a breakthrough in the next week or two, we'll find out,' said the Trump administration official, speaking on condition of anonymity. 'Ultimately, Putin and Zelenskyy have to be able to agree on something fundamentally. Third parties can do anything they want, but these two men have to agree to things.' Sitting in a room with Putin, a canny negotiator in his own right, Trump may be lured into endorsing a peace deal that carves up Ukraine, foreign policy experts caution. "I worry that in the eagerness to look like a peacemaker, President Trump will say, 'Yeah, that sounds like a good idea to me,'" McFaul said. "Putin will say, 'Donetsk [a city in eastern Ukraine] was always part of Russia.' And Trump will say, 'You're right about that.' "Putin is good at those stories," McFaul continued. "He knows his history, and he can be engaging in his narrative. That's what the president needs to be ready for and his team needs to get him ready for." Another possibility is that Putin tries to stall the president further, promising concessions he has no intention of making in hopes of consolidating gains on the battlefield, one former U.S. official said. Putin may try to 'divert President Trump from Trump's goal of stopping the war and establishing a ceasefire by promising things later,' said William Taylor, who was charge d'affaires at the U.S. embassy in Ukraine during Trump's first term. 'Then, Putin continues to fight and continues to kill Ukrainians." No matter what the outcome, Putin comes away with at least a symbolic victory: He's getting a large, bright stage at a time when he's an international pariah. Two years ago, the International Criminal Court issued an arrest warrant for Putin, accusing him of war crimes involving the abduction of Ukrainian children. The warrant substantially limited potential locations for the two world leaders to meet. 'President Trump — just by going to a meeting with Putin, who for most of the democratic world is a rogue, imperialist dictator — is giving him legitimacy,' McFaul said. The summit will inevitably invite comparisons to one held in Helsinki in 2018. At a joint news conference with Putin that year, Trump came off as eager to forge a personal connection after years of icy bilateral relations between the U.S and Russia. Citing Putin's denial of interfering in the 2016 presidential race, Trump said at the time: 'I don't see any reason why it would be' Russia that meddled in his victory over Hillary Clinton that year. (He later claimed he had misspoken, affirming that he believed the U.S. intelligence community's conclusion that Russian meddling had occurred but added that there 'could be other people also' who interfered in the 2016 election). This time around, Trump is more seasoned and has grown impatient with Putin's conduct of the war. He has suggested that his wife, Melania Trump, has influenced his view of Putin, reminding him of the damage that Russia has inflicted on Ukraine. For his part, Putin is more diminished. As of this summer, Russian casualties were expected to hit one million. If he chooses, Trump could punish Russia for prolonging the war by slapping secondary sanctions on countries that purchase Russian energy, a step he has threatened to take. 'Trump is in a stronger position this time than in that first meeting,' Taylor said. 'If President Trump goes into the meeting with Putin and exercises the political, military and economic leverage that he's got, there could be a ceasefire.' Trump heads into the summit facing difficulties at home. His administration has struggled to stem the backlash from his base over the Jeffrey Epstein case. Last week, Trump fired the head of the Bureau of Labor Statistics following a hiring report that showed weak jobs growth. A recent poll from the University of Massachusetts Amherst showed that Trump's approval rating was 38% — a six-point drop from April. 'He's pretty close to the theoretical floor in this polarized era for approval ratings,' said Alexander Theodoridis, director of the poll. Among Trump voters, support for his handling of the Russia-Ukraine war stood at 64% compared to other issues in which they approved of his performance by significantly higher margins, Theodoridis said. A total of 85% of Trump's 2024 voters approved his performance on immigration issues; 78% favored his work on jobs; and 71% on tariffs. Statecraft is a proven way for presidents to improve their standing at home. A commander-in-chief enjoys far more latitude in shaping events in the foreign policy arena than when it comes to domestic affairs. The summit, said Sen. Chris Coons, a Delaware Democrat who serves on the Foreign Relations Committee, 'will change the subject in a positive way for Trump if he actually stands up to Putin and demands a just peace for Ukraine.' 'That would be a positive diversion,' Coons added. 'But it would be the worst of both worlds if it [the summit] is intended both to be a diversion from the domestic focus on things like tariffs and Epstein, and he fails to be strong.' An added incentive for Trump to end the conflict could be an award that he seems to covet. His White House appears to be methodically building a case that he has earned the Nobel Peace Prize, drawing attention to various efforts to reduce tensions in global hotspots. January 31 is the deadline for nominating candidates for the 2026 peace prize. The Nobel selection committee will announce the winner in October of that year. On Friday, Trump held a ceremony in the White House to mark a U.S.-brokered accord ending hostilities between Armenia and Azerbaijan. Questioned by reporters, the leaders of both countries touted Trump's candidacy for a prize that three other American presidents have won. Barack Obama was the most recent winner in 2009. Still, the peace deal between Armenia and Azerbaijan would be merely an amuse-bouche compared to ending the conflict between Ukraine and Russia, a nuclear-armed power. "Putin is clearly in a weaker position," Taylor said. "This invasion of Ukraine has turned out to be a disaster for him. And Trump has the cards this time. He's got leverage, experience and confidence. He's eager to solve this problem and end the war. He sees that Putin is the problem. Putin is standing between him and the end of the war."
