Legalities
Life, Politics and the Law From ABC News Correspondent Jan Crawford Greenburg
Jan Crawford Greenburg is a correspondent for ABC News' bureau in Washington DC. She covers politics, the Supreme Court and provides legal analysis for ABC News. She is a graduate of the University of Chicago's law school and is a member of the New York bar.
RECENT POSTS
MONTHLY ARCHIVES
« Previous | Main | Next »
Are Southerners More Racist than Northerners?
April 29, 2009 4:52 PM
For all the complex legal arguments over today’s blockbuster Voting Rights Act case, the core issue is a pretty simple one: How long does the South have to pay for the sins of its shameful past?
The landmark 1965 legislation passed Congress during one of the darkest chapters in our nation's history. Throughout the South, African Americans were systematically turned away from polls and denied the right to vote. Protesters seeking change were savagely beaten. Some lost their lives.
The Voting Rights Act, strong-armed through Congress by LBJ, was necessary to protect the right to vote, and it applied in states that used poll taxes, tests and other devices to exclude blacks--in other words, throughout much of the entire Deep South.
But today, some 45 years later, much has changed. Blacks have held elected office at the highest levels in the South. Voter disenfranchisement in some places is lower than the nationwide average. Yet those same Southern states still are subjected to the restrictions of the federal law because of their past transgressions--even though in some areas they fare better on voter equality than states like Ohio and Massachusetts, which are not covered by the act.
The Southern states (Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina and Texas, as well as Alaska and Arizona) remain fully under the thumb of the federal government, and must get permission before making any change--no matter how minor--in voting procedures. Complying with the federal law cost those states and a handful of counties and municipalities across the country $1 billion in the past decade, one court filing estimates.
Today's arguments in the Supreme Court were incredibly compelling, and they got straight at this question, as raised by Chief Justice Roberts, to a lawyer defending the Act:
"Is it your position today that Southerners,” Roberts asked, “are more likely to discriminate than Northerners?"
To defend the Voting Rights Act's continuing targeted coverage of the South, the lawyer had to concede the answer essentially is yes—because discrimination there, he said, is more repetitious.
But some of the numbers show otherwise. As Justice Alito pointed out, the differential in Latino and white voter registration in Texas is 18.6 percent. That sounds like a high number--until you realize the difference Latino and white voter registration in California is 37 percent; Colorado is 28 percent; New Mexico is 24 percent. The nationwide differential in Latino and white voter registration is a whopping 30 percent, Alito pointed out.
As Justice Kennedy said: "The government of the United States is saying our states must be treated differently. No one is questioning the validity, the urgency, the essentiality of the Voting Rights Act. The question is whether it should be continued with this differentiation between the states."
I had the privilege of talking at length yesterday with Congressman John Lewis, who put his life on the line in Alabama a generation ago for voting rights. He thought he was going to die on the Edmund Pettus Bridge on “Bloody Sunday,” after he was beaten unconscious during the march from Selma to Montgomery.
His voice is heavy and somber, and he speaks with moral authority when he recounts the violence of the past, the impossible “literacy” tests (“How many gumballs are in this jar?”) and the tricks whites in the South played to disenfranchise blacks.
He says the Voting Rights Act remains critically important today, even in the Age of Obama, to ensure the march of progress continues.
Lewis attended today’s arguments, and he said afterward he was “hopeful” the Court won’t rule a key section of the law is unconstitutional. I asked him about Kennedy’s point: Why should the law continue to single out the South?
Lewis said there was discussion a few years ago about broadening the Act to cover the whole country, but there wasn't a lot of enthusiasm in Congress for it.
That’s not particularly surprising. Keeping the focus on the South is easier—and if you’re a politician from New England or the Midwest or the West, a whole lot more enjoyable than looking into your own mirror.
April 29, 2009 | Permalink | User Comments (108)
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
living in the South i would say that without the Voting Rights Act that President Johnson signed in 1965 the South would revert back to the "how many gumballs are in the jar" immediately. every year attempts are made to change voter districts to disenfranchize african-americans and hispanics (and that is WITH the voting rights act!).
Posted by: Paul Wall | Apr 29, 2009 5:22:23 PM
Why Alaska and Arizona?
Posted by: Lib Driver | Apr 29, 2009 5:30:21 PM
Look where the Republicans are. If it is disenfranchisement of voters, the GOP doesn't care if your are black, white, yellow, or whatever. I'd be happy to restrict those southern states so they can not change the rules against us all.
Posted by: Thinking | Apr 29, 2009 5:41:05 PM
In all of the southern states I've lived in( Al, Ga, SC, NC, and TN) I can say that there are a lot of racist people. In my own experience, Alabama was the worst by far.
The Voting Rights Act should stay as it is.
Posted by: Tina | Apr 29, 2009 5:56:13 PM
I would urge you to read South of Haunted Dreams for one man's answer to that question...
Posted by: samhiguchi | Apr 29, 2009 6:04:48 PM
Blacks and Liberals are not going to be satisfied until blacks hold every elected office and every job in the country. That is every job but theirs.
Liberals and blacks hold the same policy of you giving up your job and money so it can be given to the poor neglected welfare queen so she can say its disgusting what you get for free. But not their money.
Posted by: karen | Apr 29, 2009 6:11:12 PM
I have lived in two of the most segregated places in the country Milwaukee, WI and now in Ohio. It was nowhere near as segregated where I grew up in the south in the Ohio valley. Yet you want to scapegoat the South still to this day? Am I the only person who remembers the violent anti busing riots in Boston of all places???? Talk about revisionist history. You are entitled toyour own views ABC but NOT your own FACTS!!! Get it right!!! Or be ignored!!!
Posted by: hmn | Apr 29, 2009 6:15:11 PM
I live in FL for 15 years and was constantly amazed at how many educated people seemed to forget that the Civil War was over and everyone was free and should be treated equally. I actually heard 2 attorneys say one time that they wouldn't celebrate Martin Luther King's b'day as they weren't going to celebrate a [bad word that I care not to repeat] birthday. I wondered where the KKK sheets were. I was in total shock. Another time, an office manager couldn't wait to get to the rest room to wash her hands as she'd shook hands with a young Afro-American who'd just applied for a courier position. I did have a client call me a Yankee one time.
Posted by: runningmom1 | Apr 29, 2009 6:16:29 PM
Just move into a project in Chicago where blacks destroy everything given to them for free and no white people can visit with out being shot then tell me who is more racist. WHY DOES THE MEDIA HAVE TO PLAY THE RACE CARD NOW> Obama their savior did not kill any innocent civilians today in Pakistan again
Posted by: fun not | Apr 29, 2009 6:19:25 PM
No matter the skin color, southerners tend to be more racist.
Posted by: james | Apr 29, 2009 6:22:02 PM
In Virginia, times are really changing. It is easy to tell because this state has turned blue. The good-ol' boys riding around in their pickup trucks with confederate flags in the back that live in the woods, are getting over-run by educated blacks, asians and hispanics driving BMW's and Lexuses that live in middle and upper-class neighborhoods. I for one am all too happy to see the changes. That old racist mentality is tired and stupid.
Posted from Va. Beach.
Posted by: Meagan | Apr 29, 2009 6:33:21 PM
No hmn your not the only one who remembers the Boston ani-segergation riots, I was in the middle of it as a orgainizer for lots of demonstrations against segregation. South Boston, Dorchester and Charlestown. I also remember on April 5, 1976 during a antibusing rally highshcool students attacked a black man Theodore LANDSMARK at city hall with a American flag (that photo won a pulizer prize )AND I certainly remember Louise DAY-HICKS.
Posted by: CusterwasSiouxed | Apr 29, 2009 6:39:04 PM
You have to ask???
Posted by: Lambofgoth | Apr 29, 2009 6:47:48 PM
Is the author of this piece aware that there are black "northerners" as well as black "southerners." So, I hope her question also is asked of that segment of the population.
For that matter, is Japan more racist than the US? Try to be black and get ESL job over there...ain't going to happen. Try to be a Koren born in Japan and see how well you're treated.
Then of course, there's the Hutus and the Tsutsi. Is the hatred of two different tribes for each other considered racist, or just ethnic violence?
Posted by: Caroline Miniscule | Apr 29, 2009 6:49:43 PM
I am white, female and grew up in the South. I saw a lot of racism and sexism growing up. I managed to get out by joining the military, and have sworn never to go back. I have brought my children up to never tolerate that kind of behavior.
Posted by: Malkittens | Apr 29, 2009 6:50:49 PM
>>every year attempts are made to change voter districts to disenfranchize african-americans and hispanics
The only african-americans and hispanics who are trying to be disenfranchised are those that are illegal aliens, or who are dead, but whom the Democrats want to be able to vote anyway.
Posted by: Caroline Miniscule | Apr 29, 2009 6:53:12 PM
The comments to this article demonstrate very clearly that racism - whether south or north - is alive and still very virulent.
We still have much further to go
Posted by: John Joe Bob | Apr 29, 2009 6:53:15 PM
>>>His voice is heavy and somber, and he speaks with moral authority when he recounts the violence of the past, the impossible “literacy” tests (“How many gumballs are in this jar?”)
So what do we have instead? Here in VA, black and latino candidates for police jobs, successfully sued the city of Virginia Beach because the tests were racist. The racist portion? A math test. 70% of whites passed, 60% of minorities. Rather than take a remedial math class, the test was ruled discriminatory. The black and latino candidates were hired, and received back pay as well.
Then there's the case of the firefighters. If not enough blacks pass the test to get promoted...nobody gets promoted.
It's ridiculous. Instititional racism is all the other way now.
Posted by: Caroline Miniscule | Apr 29, 2009 6:56:15 PM
Let's try again.....
I grew up in Arkansas during the integration fights and Gov. Faubus fiasco and during that time we (the young white people) routinely harmed and disrespected the blacks that lived in "###### town", I don't know what it's like now, I left 43 years ago and never went back, but I bet the most change is that much of white population has found new areas to congregate.
These old arthritic fingers fail me sometimes....
Posted by: JR | Apr 29, 2009 6:59:26 PM
Although things are better, the South is still more racist.They are also more sexist and anti-gay while proclaiming they are the bible belt.....go figure.
Posted by: mensarino | Apr 29, 2009 7:01:30 PM
Post a comment
