What Part Of “It’s The Law” Do They Not Understand?
A Colorado Congressman says he’ll introduce a bill to repeal the language requirement of the Voting Rights Act (VRA). News Taco reported on the fact, and according to the Denver Post U.S. Rep. Mike Coffman has got it in his head that Section 203 of the VRA
is an unnecessary and unfunded federal mandate that can be a financial hardship for some jurisdictions because of the increased cost of translating and printing election materials and mailing larger ballots.
I bring it up because there’s value in up-ending the idea to see what lies in the underbelly of this thing. At face value this is about language and budgets: the self-righteous attitude says that voters should know English because it’s a requirement of citizenship and that eliminating ballots other than English will save money.
But what the proposed bill really does is limit the civil rights of U.S. citizens – precisely what the VRA was enacted to protect. Coffman would destroy years of history and struggle in order to accomplish his goal.
Where have we heard that before, the idea of taking something to the brink of collapse in order to score a political point?
This is no minor thing. Part of the American promise is that the rights of its citizens should be protected. It goes to the core of what Americans expect of their country, much like we expect that our country will pay its debts. But apparently there are members of congress who would just as well set those promises aside for the sake of an ideological priority.
Lets be honest, Coffman’s bill would affect a very select group of voters, language minority citizens who are more apt to vote for a Democrat than a Republican. These people are bona fide citizens with every right that citizenship entails. It’s possible that they’re immigrants who may feel more comfortable navigating the voting process in a language other than English.
Community organizers in Coffman’s home state feel the same:
“We are talking about U.S. citizens, whether they were born here or not,” said Elena Nunez, program director with Colorado Common Cause.
“For us, this is a serious concern to our community because any effort to create barriers marginalizes our community,” said Olivia Mendoza, director with the Colorado Latino Forum.
The frustrating thing is that we’ve already had this debate, back when the VRA was enacted and subsequently re-authorized. It the law: made so with every consideration of due process, debated, countered and voted on. So what is it that Coffman is really trying to do?
This isn’t so much about languages as it is about the people who speak them. It’s a blatant attempt to keep certain people from voting under the guise of eliminating redundancy and budget waste. But it’s also about the law – verified, codified and enforced. Eliminating it would destroy an important pillar of our democracy, but we’ve already seen how extremists on the right have no qualms about hijacking a political process and bringing our democracy to the brink of collapse.
We should assume no differently this time around.
Follow Victor Landa on Twitter: @vlanda
[Photo courtesy coffman.house.gov]
