The House passed the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act on Tuesday evening. The bill would empower nonwhite voters and enable the federal government to move against racial discrimination in voting.
The bill, named for the late Rep. John Lewis, a Democrat from Georgia and civil rights advocate who died last year, passed the House 219 to 212 along party lines. It now goes to the Senate, where it stands an exceedingly slim chance of passing.
Democrats and progressives have been pushing for the bill’s passage for years. If signed into law, it would restore and strengthen a rule shot down by conservative Supreme Court justices in 2013 that weakened protections from the landmark 1965 Voting Rights Act. Previously, jurisdictions with a history of racial discrimination in voting had to gain approval from the Justice Department if they were seeking to change their election rules, a process called preclearance.
The Supreme Court shot down that part of the Voting Rights Act eight years ago when it ruled that the way that Congress was deciding which jurisdictions had to undergo preclearance was outdated. Law experts like Attorney General Merrick Garland argue that the original preclearance process was “enormously effective,” though the John Lewis Act would create updated rules for preclearance to fit with modern practices of discrimination.
The bill also addresses another Supreme Court decision from earlier this year, from Brnovich v. Democratic National Committee, that also severely weakened the section of the Voting Rights Act that limited states’ abilities to create racist voter suppression laws.
Voting rights advocates have lauded the bill for its potential to help tamp down racist voter suppression in the election process and stem the tide of voter suppression laws being passed by Republicans across the country.
But, partially because of that very potential, the bill stands a very low chance of gaining any Republican approval in the Senate, where it would need 60 votes to overcome a filibuster — the outdated practice that progressives have called for abolishing.
“The House passed the For the People Act AND the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act,” said Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Washington) on Twitter. “We’re tackling the urgent voter suppression crisis happening across our nation. It’s time for the Senate to do the same. End the filibuster.”
Other lawmakers called for the full passage of the For the People Act, or H.R.1, on top of the John Lewis Act to continue upholding voting rights in the U.S.
“The House passed HR 4, the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act — restoring key voting provisions undone by the Supreme Court,” tweeted Rep. Jamaal Bowman (D-New York). “But the work continues. And it must continue in the form of HR 1’s passage to bring about a new era in our multiracial democracy.”
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-New York) echoed that sentiment, saying “The House just passed HR 4, restoring the Voting Rights Act of 1965. But our work isn’t done. The Senate must also pass HR 1, which would enact automatic voter registration, vote-by-mail, and early voting in every state.”
Both H.R.1 and H.R.4, however, face opposition not only from Republicans but also from Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin (D-West Virginia), who has said that he is in favor of the John Lewis Act, but with caveats, which significantly weaken the bill. Manchin also said he is supportive of some parts of the For the People Act — but the parts he does not support happen to be the most significant ones, such as the campaign finance transparency proposals.
We’re not backing down in the face of Trump’s threats.
As Donald Trump is inaugurated a second time, independent media organizations are faced with urgent mandates: Tell the truth more loudly than ever before. Do that work even as our standard modes of distribution (such as social media platforms) are being manipulated and curtailed by forces of fascist repression and ruthless capitalism. Do that work even as journalism and journalists face targeted attacks, including from the government itself. And do that work in community, never forgetting that we’re not shouting into a faceless void – we’re reaching out to real people amid a life-threatening political climate.
Our task is formidable, and it requires us to ground ourselves in our principles, remind ourselves of our utility, dig in and commit.
As a dizzying number of corporate news organizations – either through need or greed – rush to implement new ways to further monetize their content, and others acquiesce to Trump’s wishes, now is a time for movement media-makers to double down on community-first models.
At Truthout, we are reaffirming our commitments on this front: We won’t run ads or have a paywall because we believe that everyone should have access to information, and that access should exist without barriers and free of distractions from craven corporate interests. We recognize the implications for democracy when information-seekers click a link only to find the article trapped behind a paywall or buried on a page with dozens of invasive ads. The laws of capitalism dictate an unending increase in monetization, and much of the media simply follows those laws. Truthout and many of our peers are dedicating ourselves to following other paths – a commitment which feels vital in a moment when corporations are evermore overtly embedded in government.
Over 80 percent of Truthout‘s funding comes from small individual donations from our community of readers, and the remaining 20 percent comes from a handful of social justice-oriented foundations. Over a third of our total budget is supported by recurring monthly donors, many of whom give because they want to help us keep Truthout barrier-free for everyone.
You can help by giving today. Whether you can make a small monthly donation or a larger gift, Truthout only works with your support.