HAVE NOW WERE NOT YET ON THE
BOOKS.
THERE WAS A DIFFERENT SUPREME
COURT AND UNDERSTANDING THE
SUPREME COURT PRESIDENT.
SO, YES, WHAT IS HAPPENING NOW
IS NOT JIM CROW LITERALLY.
BUT THE HISTORICAL PARALLELS,
WELL, THEYRE PRETTY
ILLUMINATING NONETHELESS.
IN THE "NEW YORK TIMES", THEY
POINT OUT A LOT OF PEOPLE HAD
MISCONCEPTIONS.
THE LAWS THAT DISENFRANCHISED
BLACK AMERICANS IN THE SOUTH AND
ESTABLISHED JIM CROW DID NOT
ACTUALLY SAY THEY WERE
DISENFRANCHISEING BLACK
AMERICANS AND CREATING A ONE
PARTY RACIST STATE.
TRUE.
THIS IS WHAT SPRINGS TO MIND.
WE THINK OF THESE IMAGES,
SEGREGATING WATER ROOMS AND
BATHROOMS, WHITES ONLY.
RESTAURANTS, BUSINESSES,
SEGREGATION THAT WAS CLEAR AND
OBVIOUS ON ITS FACE.
VOTING LAWS, HOWEVER, DID NOT
WORK THAT WAY.
THIS IS REALLY IMPORTANT TO
REMEMBER.
RIGHT?
BECAUSE WE HAD THE 15th
AMENDMENT.
THE RIGHT TO VOTE IN TRYING,
PAVED WITH THE BLOOD OF HUNDREDS
OF THOUSANDS OF UNION SOLDIERS
AND FREED SLAVES.
RIGHT?
SO IT WAS ILLEGAL AND
UNCONSTITUTIONAL IN THE
CONSTITUTION TO DENY THE RIGHT
TO VOTE BASED ON RACE.
SO THE WHOLE DECADES-LONG REGIME
OF JIM CROW AND VOTING RIGHTS
WAS COMING UP WITH REGULATIONS
THAT WERE RACE NEUTRAL ON THEIR
FACE.
THERE WAS NO STATUTE THAT SAID
BLACK PEOPLE CANNOT VOTE.
INSTEAD, SOUTHERN LAWMAKERS SPUN
A WEB OF RESTRICTIONS AND
REGULATIONS MEANT TO CATCH MOST
BLACKS AS WELL AS MANY WHITES
AND KEEP THEM OUT OF THE
ELECTORATE.
THAT HAS BEEN THE ENTIRE CAT AND
MOUSE GAME TO STOP MULTI-RACIAL
DEMOCRACY IN THIS COUNTRY FOR
OVER A CENTURY.
FOR A MAJORITY OF THE TIME, IT
HAS BEEN A NON-SLAVE COUNTRY.
RIGHT.
SINCE THE CIVIL WAR.
THE MAJORITY OF THE TIME THERE
WERE THESE RULES IN PLACE.
THIS IS WHAT IT LOOKED LIKE ON
THE ACTUAL FRONT LINES OF THE
VOTING RIGHTS FIGHT IN 1965 IN
SELMA, ALABAMA.
>> THE DALLAS COUNTY COURTHOUSE
STEPS BECAME A DRAMATIC STAGE AS
PERSPECTIVE VOTERS LINED UP FOR
THE REGISTRARS OFFICE INSIDE.
THE KEY ACTOR WAS SHERIFF JIM
CROW
CROW.
MORE THAN HALF OF DALLAS COUNTY
CITIZENS WERE BLACK.
BUT LESS THAN 1% WERE REGISTERED
BY 1965.
THROUGHOUT MUCH OF THE SOUTH,
CUSTOM AND LAW LONG PREVENTED
BLACKS FROM REGISTERING.
IN SELMA, THE REGISTRARS OFFICE
WAS ONLY OPENED TWO DAYS A
MONTH.
REGISTRARS WOULD ARRIVE LATE,
LEAVE EARLY AND TAKE LONG LUNCH
HOURS.
FEW BLACKS WERE GETTING IN,
GETTING IN WAS NO GUARANTEE OF
BEING REGISTERED.
>> OH, NO, NO, NO, THE OFFICE IS
JUST CLOSED TODAY, MAAM.
THE REGISTRAR NOT HERE.
IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH RACE.
WE JUST TOOK SOME DROP BOXES OUT
OF YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD.
NOTHING ABOUT RACE HERE.
THATS A CLIP FROM THE AMAZING
PBS EYES ON THE PRIZE, WHICH I
RECOMMEND EVERYBODY WATCH IF YOU
CAN.
YOU CAN SEE WHY THIS IS A
PROBLEM AND WHY IN 1965 WITH A
LOT OF PRESSURE AND BLOOD AND
SWEAT AND TEARS AND PROTESTS,
THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT HAD TO
STEP IN WITH THE VOTING RIGHTS
ACT.
IT HAD A FEW BRILLIANT
PROVISIONS, ONE BEING IF CERTAIN
STATES OR LOCALITIES, OR
DISTRICTS, WITH A HISTORY OF
DISCRIMINATORY PRACTICES WANTED
TO CHANGE THEIR VOTING
PROCEDURES, THEY HAD TO GO
THROUGH A PROCESS CALLED
PRE-CLEARANCE.
THEY HAD TO EVALUATE WHETHER IT
WAS A HARMLESS CHANGE OR ANOTHER
ONE OF THE OLD TRICKS THAT HAVE
RULED FOR SO MANY YEARS.
THE KEY INNOVATION THERE IS THEY
WERE CONCERNED WITH WHAT THE
EFFECT OF THE LAW WOULD BE.
THE DESPERATE IMPACT.
SO NO ONE CAN SAY, OH, WOW,
CLOSING THE REJS STAR OFFICE
EARLY HURTS ALL THE BLACK FOLKS
WHO WORK UNTIL 35:00?
WHO WOULD HAVE GUESSED?
WE WANTED THE REGISTRARS OFFICE
TO BE CLOSED EARLY BECAUSE IT
SAVED MONEY, YOU SEE.
NOW, CONSERVATIVES GUTTED
PRECISELY THAT PROVISION OF THE
VOTING RIGHTS ACT, RIGHT?
BACK IN 2013, CONSERVATIVES,
JOHN ROBERTS, FAMOUSLY WRITING
THINGS HAVE CHANGED DRAMATICALLY
IN THE SOUTH AND THROWING OUT
THE PRE-CLEARANCE REQUIREMENT,
AT LEAST THE FORMULA FOR TELLING
CONGRESS TO COME ONE A BETTER
FORMULA FOR WHICH AREA SHOULD BE
COVERED BY IT?
REPUBLICANS SINCE THEN HAVE
SHOWN ZERO INTERESTS IN THE
DOING THAT, EVEN THOUGH THEY ARE
IN CONGRESS.
THEY COULD TAKE IT UP IF THEY
WANTED TO.
SO WHAT IT MEANS IS THAT COURT
DECISION SET OFF NEARLY A DECADE
OF ATTEMPTS TO SUPPRESS THE
VOTE, BATTLES IN STATE AFTER
STATE AS REPUBLICANS GET BACK TO
WELL LETS SAY NEW TRICKS.
SO HERE WE ARE IN THE YEAR 2021.
THE REPUBLICAN GOVERNOR OF SOUTH
CAROLINA OR STATE I SHOULD NOTE
FOR HISTORICAL ACCURACY, THE
NULLIFICATION CRISIS AT
FT. SUMPTER IS ARGUING AGAINST
ANOTHER FEDERAL BILL HR-1 THAT
WOULD PROTECT AND RESTORE VOTING
RIGHTS.
>> THIS BILL HR-1 THREATENS THE
CONSTITUTIONAL SOVEREIGNTY OF
THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA.
AROUND THOSE ARE NOT JUST WORDS.
THATS VERY IMPORTANT.
THIS COUNTRY, OUR STATE, IS
BUILT ON THE SOVEREIGNTY OF THE
STATES.
THIS BILL TAKES THAT AWAY.
>> THE SOVEREIGNTY OF THE
STATES, THE COUNTRY IS BUILT,
SOVEREIGNTY OF THE STATES.
ITS A CLAIM YOUVE HEARD BEFORE
IN AMERICAN HISTORY, A VOTING
LAW WOULD BE AN EGREGIOUS
AFFRONT OF THE SOVEREIGNTY OF
THE STATES, OF THE GREAT STATE
OF SOUTH CAROLINA.
HOW CAN ANYONE LISTEN TO
GOVERNOR MENRY McMASTER PRAYING
ABOUT THE DIGNITY AND THINK THIS
HAS ANYTHING AT ALL TO DO WITH
JIM CROW?
THE DIRECTOR OF THE ROBERT A.
LEVY CONSTITUTIONAL STUDIES
WROTE ABOUT WHAT HE CALLS THE
OUTRAGEOUS DOUBLE STANDARD FOR
THE BACKLASH OF THE GEORGIA
NATIONAL REVIEW THIS WEEK.
HE JOINS NE NOW.
ITS GREAT TO HAVE YOU ON.
>> THANK YOU.
>> I WANT TO START WITH A
HISTORICAL CONCEPTUAL SETTING.
ONE IS THAT CLEARLY IT IS THE
CASE THAT IS A CONCEPTUAL
MATTER.
WHAT COULD DEVISE A NEUTRAL
VOTING CHANGE THAT ACTUALLY IS
DESIGNED TO OR HAS AN EFFECT
THATS DISPROPORTIONATE
RACIALLY, RIGHT?
>> IN PARTICULAR, YOU HAVE
LEGISLATORS SAYING, YOU KNOW, I
WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT DEMOCRATS
DONT VOTE OR I WANT TO MAKE
SURE THAT RACIAL MINORITIES
DONT VOTE.
IF YOU HAVE EVIDENCE OF THAT
KIND OF INTENT, THEN AND YOU ARE
HARMING ONLY AREAS THAT ARE
PREDOMINANT DEMOCRAT OR
MINORITY.
THATS SUSPECT.
>> RIGHT.
BUT I GUESS ITS INTERESTING TO
INTRODUCE THE POINT OF INTENT.
RIGHT?
TO ME, YOU KNOW, IN SOME CASES
IF YOU GO THROUGH THE HISTORICAL
RECORD, PARTICULARLY JIM CROW
LAWS, YOU DO CATCH LEGISLATORS
SAY THINGS LIKE THE GOAL OF THIS
LAW IS TO RESTORE WHITE
SUPREMACY OF THE STATE.
THATS FROM A FELLOW
DISENFRANCHISEMENT BACK IN THOSE
DAYS.
A LOT OF TIMES THEY DONT SAY
THAT.
THEY SAY THINGS LIKE NO, NO, NO,
WE JUST WANT TO PROTECT BALLOT
INTEGRITY.
SO IN A HISTORICAL SENSE, ITS
ALSO JUST A HISTORICAL MATTER
THAT PEOPLE HAVE USED FACIALLY
RACE NEUTRAL CHANGES IN THE
PROJECT OF KEEPING PARTICULARLY
BLACK PEOPLE AWAY FROM THE
POLLS?
>> WELL, TO THE EXTENT THE VOTER
REFORMS IN SHELBY COUNTY OR
OTHERWISE ARE MEANT TO SUPPRESS
VOTES, THEYVE DONE A
TREMENDOUSLY BAD JOB.
VOTER TURNOUT HAS INCREASED.
MISSISSIPPI AND GEORGIA HAVE
GREATER BLACK TURNOUT RIGHTS
HAND THE WHITE TURNOUT RATES.
WHETHER ITS IN INDIANA OR
GEORGIA OR TENNESSEE, PEOPLE
CAME OUT MORE TO VOTE, INCLUDING
BLACKS.
SO I MEAN, YOU KNOW, YOU CAN
TALK ABOUT VOTER SUPPRESSION.
BUT ITS JUST AS MUCH OF A MYTH
AS REPUBLICANS GOING AROUND
TALKING ABOUT VOTER FRAUD ALL
OVER THE PLACE.
>> WELL, THATS NOT TRUE.
RIGHT.
FIRST OF ALL, WE KNOW THERE ARE
DESPERATE IMPACTS LIKE IN THE
STATE OF GEORGIA.
SO WE KNOW THAT BLACK VOTERS --
>> IM NOT SURE.
>> WE KNOW THAT BLACK VOTERS,
FOR INSTANCE, WAIT IN LONGER
LINES THAN WHITE VOTERS?
>> ITS NOT GOOD TO HAVE LONG
LINES, THATS WHY THE GEORGIA
LAW SAYS YOU HAVE TO CREATE MORE
OPPORTUNITY NEXT TIME.
>> WAIT A SECOND.
IF WE SAY YOU HAVE 51 MINUTES ON
AVERAGE FOR BLOCK VOTERS VERSUS
SEVEN MINUTES FOR WHITE VOTERS.
YOU CAN SAY WHEN ALL WAS SAID
AND DONE, THE BLACK VOTER VOTED
IN A HIGHER RATE.
WHICH THATS GREAT.
THIS IS DATA WE GOT FROM
JONATHAN RODEN, WHO DID A GREAT
STUDY OF THIS, ITS THE CASE YOU
ARE TAXING PEOPLE.
IF PEOPLE MANAGE TO OVERCOME
THAT.
THATS GOOD.
YOU AND I AGREE.
>> YOU KNOW WHO SET UP VOTING
PLACES?
>> YOU SHOULDNT HAVE A
DESPERATE TIME TAX ON PEOPLE
LIKE THAT RIGHT?
>> YOU KNOW WHO SETS UP POLLING
PLACES?
ITS COUNTIES AND THE DEMOCRATIC
OVERWHELMINGLY THE DEMOCRATIC
COUNTIES IN PLACES WHERE A HIGH
PERCENTAGE OF THE BLACK VOTE IS
IN GEORGIA AND ELSEWHERE.
SO FOR WHATEVER REASON, THEY
SHOULD CREATE AN INCENTIVE, HAVE
THE COUNTIES DO MORE AND THE
STATE IS TRYING TO EXPAND
OPPORTUNITIES FOR EARLY VOTING,
FOR ABSENTEE VOTING AND IN FACT
IN GEORGIA, THERE IS MORE OF
THAT OPPORTUNITY IN PLACES LIKE
NEW YORK OR DELAWARE.
>> RIGHT.
OF COURSE.
WELL, THE DIRECTION OF THE
CHANGE MATTERS.
HERES MY QUESTION TO YOU ABOUT
GEORGIA, WHICH IS A LAW YOUVE
DEFEND AND YOU THINK ITS CRAZY
THAT ANYONE IS READING TOO MUCH
INTO THIS.
MY QUESTION WITH THIS AND I WANT
TO SEE IN IOWA AND TEXAS, WHAT
IS THE PROBLEM ARE YOU SOLVING?
ITS LIKE IF YOU COME TO ME AND
SAY WE WILL NOW CHANGE THE
BALLOT MATCHING, THE SIGNATURE
MATCHING WITH THE VOTER I.D.,
AND THE OTHERS SAY THATS
PERFECTLY FINE.
THATS RACE NEUTRAL.
WHY DOES THAT MATTER?
I MY QUESTION TO YOU IS WHAT IS
THE PROBLEM YOU ARE SOLVING?
>> ARE YOU HONESTLY DOG
DISSERVICE TO YOUR VIEW, BY
SAYING THAT SIGNATURE MATCHING
IS SOMEHOW MORE ACCURATE OR LESS
SUSCEPTIBLE TO SUPPRESSING VOTES
THAT THE OFFICIALS DONT LIKE
THAN MATCHING UP BY COMPUTER THE
SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER OR THE
DRIVERS LICENSE, ALL THESE
THINGS THAT BLACKS HAVE AT THE
SAME RIGHT THAT WHITES DO.
AND, IN FACT, STATES LIKE
COLORADO OR MAJOR LEAGUE
BASEBALL MOVED ITS ALL STAR
GAME HAS EVEN MORE OF THAT, THEY
HAVE ALL MAIL-IN BALLOTS AND
MORE OF THAT BALLOT INTEGRITY
MEASURES.
CHRIS, WE CANT AGREE ON SO MANY
THINGS.
ESPECIALLY THAT YOU WANT TO MAKE
IT EASY TO VOTE AND HARD TO
CHEAT AND INCREASE PUBLIC
CONFIDENCE IN ELECTIONS.
IN GEORGIA, THERE IS NOT THAT
CONFIDENCE ON EITHER THE LEFT OR
THE RIGHT AND THAT IS WHY THIS
LAW WAS POSED.
>> THAT PUBLIC CONFIDENCE,
THATS THE CRUX OF IT, HERE,
RIGHT, WHAT YOU JUST
ARTICULATED, WHICH IS THE
RATIONAL THAT MANY GEORGIA
REPUBLICANS ARTICULATED, TO
RESTORE CONFIDENT.
AGAIN WE ALL LIVE IN THE WORLD.
WE READ THE NEWS, WE UNDERSTAND
THE CONTEXT HERE.
THE CONTEXT OF THAT CONFIDENCE,
PARTICULARLY ON SAFE BALLOT
SIGNATURE MATCHING IS THE
PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES,
THE MOST POWERFUL MAN IN THE
WORLD FORMERLY AND THE LEADER OF
THE REPUBLICAN PARTY WAGED A
CAMPAIGN TO SAY THAT BALLOT
MATCHING SPECIFICALLY WAS
FRAUDULENT, THERE WERE MANY
FRAUD LEN VOTES.
THEY WERE PARTICULARLY COMING
FROM BLACK COUNTIES
PREDOMINANTLY IN PLACES LIKE
FULTON, GWINNETT AND OTHER
PLACES.
THATS WHAT IS CAUSING THE LAW.
SO TO TURN AROUND AND SAY, WELL
WHY WOULD YOU PEOPLE THINK
THEYRE UP TO NO GOOD AFTER WE
JUST WATCHED THIS STRIKES ME --
>> SOMETIMES THEY MAKING A RAT
STATEMENTS FROM TIME TO TIME.
SIGNATURE MATCHING IS A SHAM
SCIENCE.
IM GLAD THEYRE MOVING TO AN
OBJECTIVE, THAN IS YOUR CURLY Q
MATCHING WHATEVER YOU WERE
WRITING TEN YEARS AGO WHEN YOU
WERE A YOUNGER PERSON IN A
DIFFERENT BODY.
>> THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THERE IS
A PROBLEM WITH IT.
ITS EVOLUTION IN TERMS OF A
PROBLEM THAT IS HAPPENING AFTER
THIS MASSIVE, MASSIVE
DISLOCATION.
>> NEITHER SYSTEMIC VOTER
SUPPRESSION NOR SYSTEMIC VOTER
FRAUD.
BUT WE INTRODUCE CERTAIN
MEASURES TO INCREASE PUBLIC
CONFIDENT.
THE GREATEST ARGUMENT FOR VOTER
I.D., WHICH IS HUGELY POPULAR,
INCLUDING AMONG NON-WHITES AND
DEMOCRATS AND ESPECIALLY IN
GEORGIA ISNT THAT IT PREVENTS
FRAUD, IT INCREASES PUBLIC
CONFIDENCE IN THE ELECTION.
>> THE LOGIC IS IT WILL BE
TREMENDOUS PUBLIC CONFIDENCE FOR
REPUBLICANS IN GEORGIA IF YOU
SAID ONLY REPUBLICANS COULD WIN.
THATS THE DOG THAT WERE