Holder’s Overheated Rhetoric From Columbia, South Carolina
Attorney General Holder took to the hustings on Martin Luther King day to lambast the Republicans for their insistence on passing ID laws to combat voter fraud. His choice of locations—Columbia, South Carolina—was no random event. Holder's decision to speak in the capital of South Carolina and the location of its governor Nikki Haley, was meant to reinforce his determination to continue the investigation under the Voting Rights Acts.
It was par for the course that Holder invoked King’s statement that “without equal access to the ballot box, America’s minority citizens would have ‘dignity without strength.’” But he did little to reflect on the enormous progress that has been made on voting rights issues in the 43 years since King’s death. There is a vast difference between systematic exclusion from the polls on grounds of race, and the incidental effects of a voter ID law that may have some modest differential impact by way of race.
These subtleties are lost on Holder, who has proved himself to be of the most dogmatic and closed-minded Attorneys General. He thinks that he has strong evidence of abuse by merely saying that a “growing number of citizens are worried about the same disparities, divisions, and problems that Dr. King fought throughout his life to address and overcome.”
Statistical sampling is not Holder’s strength and so he did not speak of the growing number of citizens who are concerned about the entire structure of the Voting Rights Act, Section 5 of which imposes extensive pre-clearance obligations on those states, Texas included, that had as of 1965 a history of racial discrimination. The sad feature of the VRA is that its obligations are all keyed to events that occurred before 1965. In the most recent Supreme Court confrontation on this issue, in Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District v. Holder, the VRA received a very testy reception from the Supreme Court because of its evident obsolescence. The title of the case tells it all. Do we really see a cause célèbre in the organization of local utility districts?
The record on voter ID has different issues. But even so, it seems clear that fraud prevention is a perfectly legitimate state objective. It is also clear that various forms of ID are required to cash checks and to sign up for a rental car. Elections are subject to manipulation. The relaxed rules on write-in ballots create more opportunities for fraud. Holder pays lip service to the risk, but does nothing to ask whether the South Carolina laws, or anything else, have done enough to make ID cards available. He does not address the complex patterns of voting which have seen higher levels of black turnout in some districts than of white turnout.
The issue requires a lot of hard thought, and a little bit of prosecutorial restraint. It does not do much good for Holder to whip up public resentment. Nor is it a credit to the Attorney General that he has such a one-track mind that he cannot see two sides to any issue. He should have taken the occasion of MLK Day to remark on the enormous racial progress in this country since Dr. King’s death. But instead he just fights the old battles, oblivious to the simple fact that the good guys won on voting rights a long time ago.
- Comment (13)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (1)
Comments :
Jul '11
Re: Holder’s Overheated Rhetoric From Columbia, South Carolina
What else can't folks without a photo ID do?
Donate blood, fly on an airplane, ride on Amtrak, buy beer in my local grocery store even though I am 57, enter some federal buildings, use credit cards in some places.
So, showing it in order to vote is somehow over the top.
Plus, Northwest Austin MUD didn't even exist in 1965, but was covered by VRA Section 5 anyway because Texas is covered.
Aug '11
Re: Holder’s Overheated Rhetoric From Columbia, South Carolina
jpark
What else can't folks without a photo ID do?
Donate blood, fly on an airplane, ride on Amtrak, buy beer in my local grocery store even though I am 57, enter some federal buildings, use credit cards in some places.
So, showing it in order to vote is somehow over the top.
Plus, Northwest Austin MUD didn't even exist in 1965, but was covered by VRA Section 5 anyway because Texas is covered. · Jan 16 at 2:55pm
Add to that - pay for anything at any US post office using a credit or debit card, even a single stamp, if you visit a US postal worker. Of course if you instead choose to bypass the lines and use a kiosk, no ID is necessary.
What a country!
Dec '10
Re: Holder’s Overheated Rhetoric From Columbia, South Carolina
And he focuses exclusively on that because noting ANY progress would imply the bankruptcy of the entire structure of his agency. Holder is a menace and must be removed.
Aug '11
Re: Holder’s Overheated Rhetoric From Columbia, South Carolina
There is no question that as the wheels literally abandon this administration, the entire edifice of their presumed "moderation" is coming apart. And Holder's department seems to be in front of this disintegration. We have Fast and Furious, the Arpaio action, decisions to ignore drug prosecution, to challenge voter ID laws, to abandon the Defense of Marriage Act, and on and on. There is no consistency ideologically, except that a cherished constituency sits on the department's side of the decision in each case. Everything is political. Principles exist as needed. Justice is ephemeral, an end, and politics is the means. A boat with this many holes will undoubtedly sink. I only hope that republicans can remain principled when their time inevitably comes. No doubt the anti-capitalist logic now being espoused gives me pause.
May '10
Re: Holder’s Overheated Rhetoric From Columbia, South Carolina
First the First Lady (adored by Ann Coulter for some reason) and now the Attorney General, both taking the race card out for a test.
It is going to be an exceedingly ugly year, people.
Dec '10
Re: Holder’s Overheated Rhetoric From Columbia, South Carolina
Early voting in the Florida Primary began today, in Hillsborough County (and 4 other areas). Why? Because of the VRA and a "past history of discrimination". In Tampa, perhaps the most liberal part of Florida, home district of Representative Kathy Castor (check her voting record to discover a Wasserman-Schulz clone). Please bear this in mind when you watch the GOP convention in Tampa, the completely non-representative area of Florida. As Austin is to Texas.
In the meantime, "...various forms of ID are required to cash checks and to sign up for a rental car.", how about some more pertinent occasions? Can you be issued Electronic Benefit Transaction (EBT) cards, without proper ID? Can you receive SSI benefits without ID? Can you receive Medicare or Medicaid benefits without ID? Who wants to bet that a significant proportion of those that have no ID are just rural and have no use for governmental interaction, at all? Or illegal aliens?
Dec '10
Re: Holder’s Overheated Rhetoric From Columbia, South Carolina
Richard, this is a very important subject. It is important to understand real civil rights and the way in which this society has gone so very wrong.
In 1964 the Civil Rights Act was passed. The 1964 Civil Rights Act established a standard of civil behavior for society in general across a variety of social diffences such as class, race, and gender.
I think that this was a proper bill and more importantly a proper function of the government. We are not a laissez faire society we are a regulated free market democratic republic. The regulation of reasonable non-prejudical behaviour is a proper function of government and the 1964 Civil Rights Act was a good application of this function in the American context.
When this proper application was applied flaws were discovered in the 1964 Bill. The most glaring flaw was that the evidentiary requirements for winning a Civil Rights law suit were just too high. It was just too hard to win a Civil Rights law suit so few people even tried.(cont.)
Edited on Jan 16 at 11:19pmDec '10
Re: Holder’s Overheated Rhetoric From Columbia, South Carolina
(cont. from #7)
Thus the original concept of "Affirmative Action" was born. The original concept was simply to streamline the evidentiary requirements. Now a reasonable amount of Civil Rights lawsuits could be won. With a greater probability of victory many more people were willing to come forward with complaint.
The original affirmative action came in about 1968-9. If that had been the stopping point and no more so called civil rights legislation had been passed this society would have been served incredibly better then what happened.
In 1973 the first quota-based affirmative action was established. The idea was that irrespective of any actual behavior of real individuals, if the percentage of say black to white was not roughly equal to the percent predicted by some theoretical model then the government would simply impose a non-market solution and require that a quota of the people needed should be equal to the preconceived percentage.
The key to understanding all this is to realize that the Quota System dropped the requirement of proving actual prejudice altogether. The presumption was that the difference between the "correct percentage" and the actual percentage was due to a historical pattern of prejudice. (cont.)
Edited on Jan 16 at 11:23pmDec '10
Re: Holder’s Overheated Rhetoric From Columbia, South Carolina
(cont. from #8)
In short the Quota System divorced the requirement of proving actual prejudice entirely from winning a Civil Rights case. Now the madness was fully unleashed.
At the Harvard Medical School about 1974 the admissions office began to experience problems. The new quota-based affirmative action rules and requirements were causing problems. The MCAT tests (entrance tests like the SATs except for Medical School) were based on a maximum score of 800. The average entrant to the Harvard Medical School was scoring in the 700s at a minimum. To obtain the 'required by quota' number of entrants for the black minority, the admissions office had to allow black entrants who had only scored in the 400s to enter Harvard Medical School.
Students who only scored in the 400s on their MCATs, often were students who did not do well, even in High School, and had difficulty finishing their undergraduate degrees. These very weak students upon entering Harvard Medical School were dropping out in the first semester simply because they couldn't keep up with the work. (cont.)
Edited on Jan 16 at 11:31pmDec '10
Re: Holder’s Overheated Rhetoric From Columbia, South Carolina
(cont. from #9)
The catch 22 for the admissions committee was evident. To obtain the quota of black entrants they had to lower standards down to MCATs in the 400s. However, this failed as a strategy because with these students dropping out in the first semester the quota of black graduates of the Harvard Medical School could not be met. How would the admissions committee solve this impossible gordian knot?
Where there is an insane and corrupt will there is always a way no matter how destructive the results are. The solution was simple. Create a seperate but not equal curriculum called Black Medicine. Black Medicine was a dumbed down Medical curriculum that someone who had only scored in the 400s on their MCATs could pass. They, of course, would only be given a degree in Black Medicine.
This was actually the system instituted at the Harvard Medical School to solve the quota problem. No one asked who would be willing to be a patient of a doctor degreed in Black Medicine. Perhaps they thought they could keep secret the reality of the inferiority of the educational accomplishment of the holders of degrees in Black Medicine. Who knows. (cont.)
Edited on Jan 16 at 11:28pmDec '10
Re: Holder’s Overheated Rhetoric From Columbia, South Carolina
(cont. from #10)
In 1978 Gd had mercy on American Society. The Bakke decision was handed down from the Supreme Court limiting the Quota System enough to rid the country of insane solutions like Black Medicine. It did not get rid of the Quota System only weakened it.
When Clinton was elected he tried to slip Lani Guinier in as Assistant Attorney General. She was intent on bringing back the full force of the Quota. Luckily the memory of horrors like Black Medicine ended her chances.
When evidence of an actual act of prejudice isn't required to install a massive government program to right an alleged prejudical wrong, anything is possible. If Obama gets a second term watch out for the return of Black Medicine.
Jul '11
Re: Holder’s Overheated Rhetoric From Columbia, South Carolina
How fascinating James. When I went to med school at LSU we could not fail a single class and if so you were dismissed. Unless you were black of course, and we had a few who took 6 or 7 years due to the no fail policy. There was one guy who got caught cheating( an expellable offense) who had the NAACP involved and maintained his standing. I really fail to see how racism towards all other students compensates for generations of slavery, discrimination and abhorrent behavior. Eric Holder sees a nation of cowards, chooses to be a racist, and fails to appreciate how far we have come as a society. Can someone impeach this man?
Edited on Jan 16 at 11:37pmMay '10
Re: Holder’s Overheated Rhetoric From Columbia, South Carolina
Just more of the same.
Edited on Jan 17 at 4:14am