Statements on Introduced Bills and Joint Resolutions

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. BLUMENTHAL. Mr. President, I am so proud and honored to be with my colleagues Senator Leahy, Senator Durbin, and Senator Warnock--all of us who are championing the Senate version of the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act. I think any of us would be honored to be spearheading a bill named for one of our heroes.

This bill has particular significance to all of us because we lived through the time--the summer of 1965--when States mercilessly attacked John Lewis and 600 others as they crossed the Edmund Pettus Bridge in Selma, AL, in peaceful protest to protect their right to vote.

In the wake of that attack, as the Nation came together to grieve, President Johnson joined with Congress to pursue, as he put it, ``an end to voting discrimination in America.''

Roughly a week after the attack, President Johnson called for comprehensive voting rights legislation. Two days later, Congress announced that it would take up that legislation. So by early August, just 5 months after ``Bloody Sunday'' in Selma, the Voting Rights Act was passed by Congress with broad bipartisan support and became, again in the words of President Johnson, ``one of the most monumental laws in the entire history of American freedom.''

Today, with the introduction of this legislation, we honor the legacy of John Lewis. We honor everyone involved in that great movement at the time that advanced civil rights and liberty, the most fundamental being the right to vote, and we honor the fight itself to protect the franchise.

A century after the Civil War ended, our Nation had failed to eradicate the blight of racial discrimination in voting. The promise of equality--political equality as well as economic equality--remained unfulfilled for Black citizens.

The Voting Rights Act did what even the 14th and 15th Amendments failed to do, proving to be a uniquely powerful tool with the capacity to meet ever-new forms of discrimination through its preclearance regime.

Then, in 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court, in Shelby County--well known to all of us--gutted, absolutely eviscerated the highly effective preclearance regime, jeopardizing the progress the Voting Rights Act made over the course of half a century.

As Justice Ginsburg said in her moving and powerful dissent in Shelby, until Congress enacted the Voting Rights Act's preclearance requirement, early attempts to cope with the vile infection of racial discrimination in voting ``resembled battling the Hydra. Whenever one form of voting discrimination was identified and prohibited, others sprang up in their place.''

Today's reinvigorated efforts to deprive members of minority groups from equal access to the ballot box through more subtle, second- generation barriers prove that a new preclearance regime is needed now more than ever.

This year alone, we have experienced the most destructive legislative session for voting rights in generations, with States and localities enacting a torrent of new voting restrictions, all of it designed to suppress the vote, to curtail the franchise, to move back the clock on voting rights.

Between January 1 and July 14 of this year, more than 400 voting restriction bills have been introduced in 49 States--49 States--and 18 States successfully enacted 30 laws that make it harder for people to vote.

These laws make mail voting and early voting more difficult. They manipulate the boundaries of districts to reduce minority representation, and they have led to the purge of up to 3.1 million voters from the rolls in areas that were once covered by the Voting Rights Act preclearance requirement.

In short, this threat is more than just speculative, far from imaginative or suggestive. The threat is real and urgent. In fact, it is more than a threat. It is action now moving forward in States.

Today's legislation would confront this resurgence of voting restrictions very directly. The new John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act includes new formulas to revive preclearance.

By focusing specifically on jurisdictions with a proven history of discrimination and on preventing specific known discriminatory practices from taking effect in areas of increasing diversity before they can do damage, this new preclearance coverage formula responds to the Supreme Court's concerns and will allow the Voting Rights Act to keep pace with present conditions and America's rapidly changing demographics.

The bill also reinvigorates the Department of Justice's ability to challenge discriminatory laws already in effect, reversing the Supreme Court's latest attack on Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act in Brnovich v. Democratic National Committee. That 6-3 partisan decision was a stunning display of judicial overreach--a highly political, highly partisan decision that gives new meaning to the phrase ``judicial activism,'' a case of judicial overreach.

Protecting the right to vote, very simply, should not be a partisan issue. In fact, voting rights are widely supported throughout American society--on the left, right, center, private, and in public sectors.

Since the original inception of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, overwhelming bipartisan majorities of both Houses of Congress reauthorized the Voting Rights Act five times.

Let me repeat: Both Houses of Congress, bipartisan majority, overwhelming vote, five times since the original passage of the Voting Rights Act in 1965.

And for nearly a century after the Civil War and before the Voting Rights Act, the scourge of racial discrimination in voting challenged our Nation's core commitment to these ideals of democracy. From that century of sacrifice and suffering came the Voting Rights Act and its extraordinary commitment to realizing our Nation's highest ideals; and for decades, it worked with bipartisan support overwhelmingly.

The Judiciary Committee, under the leadership of Senator Durbin and Senator Leahy, has documented powerfully the need for this Act.

And my Subcommittee on the Constitution has held one hearing already. We will have another shortly that will set the record--in fact, provide the evidentiary support--that the Supreme Court erroneously found lacking in its Shelby decision.

As a tsunami of voter suppression bills crashes against the shores of our democracy, my hope is that today we can renew a bipartisan commitment to protecting voting rights in this country.

I am proud to help lead this effort in the Senate, and I want to thank my colleagues again for being on the floor today.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source