Voting Rights and Districting
By Tom Niewulis web site: https://samueladamsreturns.net
Voting Rights are under attack by the democrats, the American Marxists / Gramsci-ites and all the Constitutionally uneducated. Their claims are total misinformation since the Voting Rights issue was settled on February 3, 1870. It is called the 15th Amendment to the U. S. Constitution. So let’s start simply – with this:
Amendment XV
The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.
The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.
There is a sad history of the full recognition of this amendment in practice throughout a number of the Reconstruction States. Here is a tidbit of history from usconstitution.net regarding this amendment:
‘The last of the Reconstruction Amendments, the 15th Amendment was designed to close the last loophole in the establishment of civil rights for newly-freed black slaves. It ensured that a person’s race, color, or prior history as a slave could not be used to bar that person from voting. Though a noble idea, it had little practical effect for quite some time, as the Southern states found myriad ways to intimidate blacks to keep them from voting. The Congress passed the amendment on February 26, 1869, and it was ratified on February 3, 1870 (342 days).
Though ratification of the 15th Amendment was not a requirement for readmittance of the Confederate states to the Congress, one of the provisions of the Reconstruction Acts required that the states include a provision in their new constitutions that included a near-copy of the text of the 15th. All of the CSA states except Tennessee, which was immune from the Reconstruction Acts, eventually ratified the 15th Amendment.’
Granted there were issues with the whole conflagration of the Reconstruction Acts. Yet it is important that before allowing the present enemies of the Constitution and Republic in the Federal Congress to do exactly what the Anti-federalist predicted, nationalizing elections, we must look at the additional clarification on voting rights that happened in the 20th Century.
Cornell law school notes that after a quick peek at the Voting Rights Act (VRA) of 1973 as codified at 42 U.S.C. §§ 1973 to 1973aa-6. The VRA is a federal civil rights law that protects minorities from discriminatory voting practices. Even more so, in 1975 Congress extended the law to protect members of ‘language minorities.’ This includes voters who speak Spanish, Native American languages, Alaskan Native Languages and Asian languages.
The Conrell Law School reference further notes that:
‘The VRA prevents voting discrimination in several ways. It prohibits literacy tests or similar “tests or devices” as a prerequisite to voter registration, and requires jurisdictions with significant language minority populations to provide non-English ballots and oral voting instructions. The act also allows protects minorities from vote dilution. In areas with particularly bad discrimination problems, the act authorized federal examiners to directly register voters and observe polling places. Finally, it requires areas with a history of voting discrimination to “preclear” changes to their voting laws.’
For the full summary and deeper clarification of ‘Vote Dilution’ and ‘Preclearance and Bail-out,’ from Cornell Law School Voting Rights Act.
Not withstanding the 15th Amendment, what does the Constitution delineate regarding voting in the first place? Elections are only mentioned twice in the U. S. Constitution. Here are the words written by the Founders of our Republic:
Article 1, Section 4, Clause 1: The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators.
Article 1, Section 5, Clause 1: Each House shall be the Judge of the Elections, Returns and Qualifications of its own Members, and a Majority of each shall constitute a Quorum to do Business; but a smaller Number may adjourn from day to day, and may be authorized to compel the Attendance of absent Members, in such Manner, and under such Penalties as each House may provide.
But wait, there are other amendments with clauses regarding voting rights that are contained in the Constitution and once you hear these you will begin to discern that the proposed ‘John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act’ violates provisions in these amendments.
Let us start with the 14th Amendment (my emphasis added):
Section 2: Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, [being twenty-one years of age,]* and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.
Digest this for a while especially those emphasized words.
Now the 13th Amendment deals with Washington D. C. very clearly so why do the democrats want it to become a state? Well, that is a deeper discussion but, the citizens of Washington D. C. have voting rights and defined representation.
13th Amendment, Section 1:
The District constituting the seat of Government of the United States shall appoint in such manner as Congress may direct:
A number of electors of President and Vice President equal to the whole number of Senators and Representatives in Congress to which the District would be entitled if it were a State, but in no event more than the least populous State; they shall be in addition to those appointed by the States, but they shall be considered, for the purposes of the election of President and Vice President, to be electors appointed by a State; and they shall meet in the District and perform such duties as provided by the twelfth article of amendment.
The Anti-federalists predicted the manipulation of elections and voting rights by the following writers: (all taken from THE ANTIFEDERALIST PAPERS Edited by Bill Bailey)
- #59 by Vox Populi, The Danger of Congressional Control of Elections October 30,1787
- #61 by Federal Farmer Questions and Comments on the Constitutional Provisions Regarding the Election of Congressmen
- A NEWPORT MAN, in The Newport Mercury, March 17,1788
- #26, The Use of Coercion by the New Government (Part I) “A FARMER AND PLANTER” printed in The Maryland Journal, and Baltimore Advertiser, April 1, 1788
- #36, Representation and Internal Taxation (Federal Farmer essay No.III)Richard Henry Lee, 10 October 1787
I must bring this quote from Richard Henry Lee to print here since it strikes the notes of fulfilled prophecy in the course of our present human situations in this Congress. (My emphasis added)
‘…The people of this country, in one sense, may all be democratic; but if we make the proper distinction between the few men of wealth and abilities, and consider them, as we ought, as the natural aristocracy of the country, and the great body of the people, the middle and lower classes, as the democracy, this federal representative branch will have but very little democracy in it, even this small representation is not secured on proper principles.—The branches of the legislature are essential parts of the fundamental compact, and ought to be so fixed by the people, that the legislature cannot alter itself by modifying the elections of its own members. This, by a part of Art. 1. Sect. 4. the general legislature may do, it may evidently so regulate elections as to secure the choice of any particular description of men.—It may make the whole state one district—make the capital, or any places in the state, the place or places of election—it may declare that the five men (or whatever the number may be the state may chuse) who shall have the most votes shall be considered as chosen—In this case it is easy to perceive how the people who live scattered in the inland towns will bestow their votes on different men—and how a few men in a city, in any order or profession, may unite and place any five men they please highest among those that may be voted for—and all this may be done constitutionally, and by those silent operations, which are notimmediately perceived by the people in general.—I know it is urged, that the general legislature will be disposed to regulate elections on fair and just principles:—This may be true—good men will generally govern well with almost any constitution: but why in laying the foundation of the social system, need we unnecessarily leave a door open to improper regulations?—This is a very general and unguarded clause, and many evils may flow from that part which authorises the congress to regulate elections—Were it omitted, the regulations of elections would be solely in the respective states, where the people are substantially represented; and where the elections ought to be regulated, otherwise to secure a representation from all parts of the community, in making the constitution, we ought to provide for dividing each state into a proper number of districts, and for confining the electors in each district to the choice of some men, who shall have a permanent interest and residence in it; and also for this essential object, that the representative elected shall have a majority of the votes of those electors who shall attend and give their votes.’
Let me sum this up quickly since I want to introduce the debacle of not only the Redistricting issue in Ohio but Across the whole Nation.
Simply put, S.2747 – Freedom to Vote Act and H.R.4 – John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act of 2021 are complete frauds on the Citizenry. I’m going to leave the full analysis to a think tank that I have some trust in, Heritage. So as to not make this longer than it is, read an exceptional analysis here: Destroying Election Integrity: The Unnecessary and Unconstitutional John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act (S. 4/H.R. 4) October 29, 2021.
Redistricting Debacle
There are a number of folks that are now bringing up destruction of the Congressional and State offices Redistricting. This is an issue that I have been addressing for well over a decade. The national redistricting plan by Eric Holder and Obama has it roots in the Kozak Plan that I mention over and over.
What is happening in State Houses and the Courts across the nation has been in the works since 1950’s. With that, you will have to wait for the rest of the story.
*****
Advertisement
*****
Categories: Uncategorized