Bush's Voting Rights Extension Hypocrisy

On July 27th, 2006 George W. Bush signed into law an extension of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, an important bill that came out of the civil rights movement, with a strong endorsement that it "broke the segregationist lock on the voting box." Furthermore, he asserted that "my administration will vigorously enforce the provisions of this law, and we will defend it in court."

Yet at the same time the Bush Administration has been gutting the DOJ's Civil Rights Division that enforces this law. According to a July 23 Boston Globe article, in the Fall of 2002, John Ashcroft changed the hiring system to be overseen by administration political appointees rather than career lawyers. Thus a majority of people are being hired for their ideological stances rather than their experience in civil rights. It shows in the recent hiring statistics: "42 percent of the lawyers hired since 2003, after the administration changed the rules to give political appointees more influence in the hiring process, have civil rights experience" as opposed to "two years before the change, 77 percent of those who were hired had civil rights background" in the Division's voting rights, employment litigation, and appellate sections. Furthermore, these hirings since 2003 have had strong conservative credentials including 11 lawyers who were members of the conservative Federalist Society, 7 from the Republican National Laywers Association, and 2 who even volunteered for Bush-Cheney campaigns. Also "several new hires worked for prominent conservatives" including Kenneth Starr (we all remember that dirt bag), former attorney general Edwin Meese, Trent Lott, and Judge Charles Pickering.

This shift in hiring procedures has reflected in the types of cases the Civil Rights Division has taken on. They are "bringing fewer voting rights and employment cases involving systematic discrimination against African-Americans and more alleging reverse discrimination against whites and religious discrimination against Christians."

Thus Bush's strong support for extending the Voting Rights Act of 1965 seems to be just a good PR ploy rather than actually having any weight. He has the power to undermine it when it comes to enforcing the law which is what his administration is doing. This is further illustrated in his administration's support of a 2005 Georgia law requiring that all voters there get photo identification cards (costing $20 if they don't have driver's licenses) which would discourage poorer, mostly minority people. Its important that people remain vigilant over such acts by the Bush administration.

The shifting nature of the Civil Rights Division is perfectly illustrated in this excerpt from a Boston Globe editorial about the debate in the CRD over the Georgia Voting Law:

"Five career officials reviewed the law. Four of them, appointed before the hiring changes, thought the Justice Department should reject it, a power granted under the Voting Rights Act. The one hired under the new rules said the law was fair. His superiors, also political appointees, agreed"

Fortunately, the Georgia law was struck down in Federal Court but it is scary what the Bush administration is doing to undermine the Civil Rights Division and the laws that are within its enforcement jurisdiction.