Date: 2015-03-16
Speaker: JACKSON LEE (democrat)
Chamber: H

Let me thank my colleagues and thank Congresswoman KELLY and Chairman BUTTERFIELD for the opportunity to carry forward the spirit of the 50th commemoration of the march over the Edmund Pettus Bridge. Let me also begin by thanking our colleague Congresswoman TERRI SEWELL and all of the Alabama delegation for their hospitality and their spirit of unity. In fact. Mr. Speaker. I am so moved by that experience that I frankly believe that now is the time to move the bill that is bipartisan that is a response to the United States Supreme Court to the floor of the House. to the Committee on the Judiciary and to the floor of the House. Leader CLYBURN was very apt in describing a very significant point that really answers the question of the Supreme Court. If I had my way. coming from the State of Texas. I frankly believe that the reauthorization that we did through the Committee on the Judiciary. of which I am a member. and which I was very much engaged in in 2006 and 2007. was a thorough expose of the value of the Voting Rights Act. We did 15.000 pages of testimony. and witness after witness from different perspectives indicated that the formula that we were using at that time on the preclearance was an effective formula. Of course. the Supreme Court challenged the data. and I would only argue that it is appropriate to update the data. I welcome that. But we have gone even further. As has been articulated by the bill that has just been introduced by a number of us. we have crafted a formula that says it is an even playing field. an even playing field for a State to opt in because they have voting rights abuses for all people or to opt out because they have a smooth. evenhanded process for citizens in their State to vote. So I believe it is important that the message get out of what the Voting Rights Act stands for and what it meant for those foot soldiers to cross that bridge. They crossed that bridge. and they were willingand were bloodied. franklyto do something nonviolent. and that is to petition their leaders at the voting box. I cant imagine that there is any Member here in this place. in this august Congress. that would not want to go to their constituents. whether they live in South Dakota or Utah or Mississippi or New York or Texas. as I do. that there is an unfettered right to vote. I will soon be introducing a Voting Rights Act that establishes the date that we signed the Voting Rights Act by the President that came from Texas. Lyndon Baines Johnson. with the leaders of Martin Luther King and JOHN LEWIS and many others standing at his side. to introduce that as being Voting Rights Act Day. to reinforce the value to Americans of the importance of voting. Who would want to oppose the idea that voting is not important? So I am looking forward to having Members join on the simple premise that it is important to vote in America and that it is important to commemorate the signing of the Voting Rights Act and make it Voting Rights Day. That inspiration came as we saw the thousands that were marching across the Edmund Pettus Bridge. Let me just clarify for a moment. under section 5. the submitting jurisdiction under the Voting Rights Act of 1965 and H.R. 885. Voting Rights Amendment Act of 2015. has to prove that the proposed changes are not retrogressive. that they do not have the purpose and will not have the effect of denying or abridging the right to vote on account of race or color. We have expanded that. again. to go by acts. by occurrences that would keep someone from voting. So I believed that this past weekend. or the weekend of Bloody Sunday. was a moving moment that would draw us together. that would allow us to understand H.R. 885. And might I say this: I know that many of us will be willing to have teachins to ensure that our colleagues understand the importance of this legislation and that we do it in a bipartisan manner. Let me conclude my remarks by saying. earlier today I stood on the floor and asked for a bipartisan approach to the approval of the Attorney General nominee by the other body. I say that from the spirit of recognition of the three branches of government. A President has nominated a very wellqualified. distinguished member of the bar. Loretta Lynch. to be the next Attorney General of the United States of America. We understand differences of opinion with legislation. I have no quarrel with those differences. I happen to support the human trafficking bill and recognize that there is a disagreement on language that I agree with the disagreement. but that disagreement can be worked out through ongoing talks and however they want to approach it or a vote on the floor. But Loretta Lynch. the Attorney General nominee. should not be held up captive to disagreements on legislation and moving toward a constitutional crisis. All of this. Mr. Speaker. is wrapped up together. The Department of Justice enforces the Voting Rights Act. enforces the voting rights of Americans. As we look to the future. as we formulate the understanding of the three branches of government. to avoid a constitutional crisis of not having the leadership that is timely for the work that has to be done. I would hope the Senate would move forward. and I would hope that all of us would honor the Voting Rights Act and the message of Selma that we stand together under this wonderful flag and stand for voting rights for all. Since its passage in 1965. and through four reauthorizations signed by Republican presidents (1970. 1975. 1982. 2006). more Americans. especially those in the communities we represent. have been empowered by the Voting Rights Act of 1965 than any other single piece of legislation. Section 5 of the Act requires covered jurisdictions to submit proposed changes to any voting law or procedure to the Department of Justice or the U.S. District Court in Washington. D.C. for preapproval. hence the term "preclearance." Under Section 5. the submitting jurisdiction has the burden of proving that the proposed change(s) are not retrogressive. i.e. that they do not have the purpose and will not have the effect of denying or abridging the right to vote on account of race or color. In announcing his support for the 1982 extension of the Voting Rights Act. President Reagan said. "the right to vote is the crown jewel of American liberties." And Section is the "crown jewel" of the Voting Rights Act. But a terrible blow was dealt to the Voting Rights Act on June 25. 2013. when the Supreme Court handed down the decision in Shelby County v. Holder. 537 U.S. 193 (2013). which invalidated Section 4(b). the provision of the law determining which jurisdictions would be subject to Section 5 "preclearance."