Relevancy of the Voting Rights Act in Modern Times

Ratified in 1868, the fourteenth amendment guarantees equal protection of all persons under the law. In the 1960’s though, African Americans were still being discriminated against because of the color of their skin. After the broadcast of 600 peaceful African Americans being attacked and beaten after attempting to cross the Edmund Pettus Bridge in Selma, Alabama, President Lynden Johnson decided it was time to create some legislation to prevent incidences such as this from happening in the future. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965 have been hailed as some of “the most far-reaching bills on civil rights in modern times” (Schmidt et. al. 2010, 98). At that time in history, they were exactly what the country needed to stop itself from the discriminatory practices that were so wide spread. Both have evolved over time, being altered and continually renewed by Congress. In recent years, especially since the election of Barack Obama, the necessity for the continued provisions included in the Voting Rights Act particularly, have come into question. The effects of the Civil Rights Act and Voting Rights Act have been apparent, such as increasing drastically the amount of minority voters and elected officials, but they also have limitations, such as overseeing the districts which are pegged at historically segregated communities, which makes one consider whether an update of legislature to fit our more progressive racial attitudes is in order.

Two events in the 1960’s were the main reasons that President Kennedy’s team drew up and sent to Congress a Civil Rights Act bill: the Birmingham campaign and George Wallace’s refusal to desegregate the University of Alabama. The Birmingham campaign consisted of sit-ins ...

... middle of paper ...

...ngress does not overturn section 5, they should take a quick glance at the progressive country we have turned into since the 1960s and take current attitudes into consideration. The most effective civil rights legislation in history should continue to do what it what made to do, keep moving our country forward.

Works Cited

Blum, Edward. The unintended consequences of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. Washington, D.C. : Aei Pr, 2007. Print.

Kenworthy, E. W. . "Civil rights bill passed, 73-27; Johnson urges all to comply; Dirksen berates Goldwater." New York Times 19 June 1964, Print.

Liptak, Adam. "On Voting Rights, Test of History v. Progress." New York Times 27 April 2009, Print.

Schmidt, Steffen, Mack Shelley, II II, and Barbara Bardes. American Government and Politics Today, 2010-2011. Mason, OH: Wadsworth Pub Co, 2010. 91-113. Print.