Entitlements

The nerve of those presumptuous uppity colored folks, not only do these people expect to vote they want it to be free of obstruction. What’s wrong with these people are they completely unaware of the 3/5 Compromise? Apparently this is the thinking of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia because according to him the 1965 Voting Rights Act (VRA) contributes to the “perpetuation of racial entitlement.” Someone needs to explain to the Justice that voting for all citizens is a right and not an entitlement. Or maybe it’s just that a person of racist ideals would assume that White people allowing people of color to vote qualifies as an entitlement. The question before the court is whether states with a long history of racial discrimination must still get permission from the Justice Department before changing their voting laws as required by the VRA. The whole reason for the Voting Rights Act was that these states were exercising White entitlements to control and suppress the voting process and it was enacted to ensure these state governments would no longer continue such practices. The questionable tactics used in the recent election such as limiting voter accessibility makes evident the flaw in Scalia's statement.

Is it possible that this idiot thinks that post emancipation everything was suddenly all honky-dory for Black folk. Justice Scalia, apparently suffering from selective amnesia should be reminded of our nations historical racism and of all those who were washed down the streets with fire hoses, subjected to beatings and lynching, attacked by dogs and jailed just to secure the right to vote. It really wasn’t that long ago and quite honestly when it comes to voting rights not a lot has changed. You should be able to cast your ballot at your local church, school gymnasium or the neighborhood You Buy We Fry (50% off your order when you vote) without fear of intimidation or restriction and without having to conquer logistical hurdles placed in your path. Too bad it’s not that simple. The very states who insist that discrimination is a thing of the past and are fighting to eliminate the VRA are the very ones with the most obstacles. Both Texas and Louisiana have been cited for violating the VRA recently when attempting to redistrict. In fact, the case before the Supreme Court to overturn the act comes from Alabama of all places…two words, George Wallace.

So we’ve now twice successfully elected an African-American President and contemptuous legislators and jurist such as Scalia cynically assert that we have overcome. Of course we haven’t and voters are still in need of protection. The VRA was created to ensure the blatantly racist states of the segregated South would no longer be able to overtly deny African-Americans the right to vote. Detractors who wish to eliminate the VRA advocate that the law is outdated and no longer necessary as these states have eliminated voter deterrents. Even if this were true, just because you haven’t had any robberies at your home since you installed an alarm system doesn’t mean you should disable it. At any rate, long voting lines and insufficient voting machines in areas populated by minorities would suggest otherwise. Jim Crow laws such as poll taxes and literacy test requirements are being replaced by calls for voter I.D. cards, registration restrictions and early voting cuts to discourage minority voting. Unfortunately disenfranchisement is alive and well and safeguards continue to be necessary in order to ensure that discriminatory laws are defeated before they are implemented, which is the sole purpose of the Voting Rights Act. So, yes Mr. Scalia, minorities do feel entitled to vote for one simple reason, they are entitled to vote.