Terri Sewell to co-chair Congressional Voting Rights Caucus

2
23
Terri Sewell Congressional Voting Rights Caucus
Rep. Sewell at the Congressional Voting Rights Caucus launch

U.S. Rep. Terri Sewell, Alabama’s lone Democratic in Congress, can add another title to her already impressive resume: co-chair of the newly formed Congressional Voting Rights Caucus.

Created in response to the alleged voter suppression tactics enacted by states since the Supreme Court struck down key provisions of the Voting Rights Act in its 2013 Shelby v. Holder decision, the Caucus held its first press conference Tuesday to announce its formation.

According to the caucus’ website, it will work to “help educate the public about their rights as voters, advance legislation that blocks current and future suppression tactics and brainstorm creative ways to bring our election process into the 21st Century.”

“A democracy means nothing w/o every American having the same access to the ballot box,” Sewell said on Facebook after the press conference.

Co-chaired by Sewell and U.S. Rep. Marc Veasey of Texas, the caucus already boasts 49 members, including well-known Democratic U.S. Reps. Sheila Jackson Lee of Texas and Elijah Cummings of Maryland.

2 COMMENTS

  1. No new legislation is needed. The Supreme Court struck down only one provision in the Voting Rights Act — which was indeed unconstitutional, and which was never a permanent part of the Act anyway — and there are plenty of other voting-rights laws available to ensure that the right to vote is not violated. What’s more, the principal bill that has been drafted is bad legislation. For example, it does not protect all races equally from discrimination; it contains much that has nothing to do with the Supreme Court’s decision; and it itself violates the Constitution by prohibiting practices that are not actually racially discriminatory but only have racially disproportionate effects. The bill is also not really bipartisan; at Senate hearings, it was clear that no Republican there would favor it, because it is designed to give a partisan advantage to the Left.

Comments are closed.