Introduction
The general problem to be addressed in this paper revolves around the fact that voting suppression in politics and policies against Blacks is increasingly becoming a major issue of concern. Historically, voter suppression was dominant during the Reconstruction era with reference to Jim Crow laws. However, in the recent past, state legislatures have been enacting laws, most of which make it harder for Blacks to vote. The problem started with Supreme Court ruling in the case of Shelby County v. Holder (2013). Immediately after the ruling, voters in Texas and North Carolina, which were previously covered by Voting Rights Act, moved with swift to enact new voter ID laws and other voter suppression restrictions. Hardy (2019) noted in their study that voter ID laws tend to disenfranchise people of color and marginalized groups. Similarly, both Alabama and Mississippi enforced separate laws in 2014 where photo ID became the main requirement before being allowed to vote. Several other punitive measures were adopted including the closure of several polling places, specifically in those states previously covered by section 4 of Voting Rights Act (1965).
The Voting Rights Act (1965) was signed into law with the aim of addressing the discriminatory voting practices adopted in many of the Southern states after the civil war. In the years before the Act was enacted, African Americans in these states faced a lot of challenges in voting. These challenges revolved around tactics such as poll taxes, literacy tests, grandfather clause and whites-only primary elections. However, the signing of the Voting Rights Act (1965) into law paved way for more changes such as the Twenty-sixth Amendment to the U.S constitution and the National Voter Registration Act (1993).
The Act continued to shape the American politics and democracy until recently when state legislators started introducing bills that are considered a threat to civil rights. In fact, threats to voting rights, and the emerging voter suppression tactics, are some of the recent issues of concern for civil rights groups. This was witnessed in the 2018 mid-term elections where voting laws and regulations disproportionately affected voters of color, especially in high-stake races. Therefore, the specific problem that this paper seeks to address revolves around the high number of laws being enacted by states, which analysts believe makes it more difficult to vote. This study seeks to highlight and discuss the explicit and convert forms of black voter suppression both history and contemporary.
Framework
This project was chosen because the issue of black voter suppression is increasingly becoming a hotly debated political issue in the U.S. Werner (2019, 189) argued in their study that the process of voting should be easy and accessible to all. However, this has not been the case since the Supreme Court’s 2013 ruling on Shelby County v. Holder (2013).Chief Justice Roberts observed in his ruling that the world had changed greatly since the civil rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s (Hardy 2019, 224). As a consequence, this researcher was interested in understanding the historical and systematic suppression both in politics and policies against the Blacks during the reconstruction era and 20th century.
Furthermore, the country has witnessed a high number of anti-voter bills in the past two years. One such bill is Texas Senate Bill 1(2021) which, as argued by Ura (2021, para 5), violates key provisions of Texas Constitution that strives to protect the right to vote. Ura (2021) further observes that the Bill was informed by a high voter turnout during the 2020 general elections despite the challenges of voting during the COVID-19 pandemic. This increase in voter turnout was witnessed particularly among Blacks and other voters of color. Therefore, this bill was introduced with the intention of suppressing these votes. Some of the provisions proposed in this bill included expanding the power of poll watchers and making it difficult for voters to receive assistance.
This research was motivated by prior scholarship that focused exclusively on studying restrictive voter identification laws in U.S. The questions that emerged from this scholarship revolve around what motivates the state legislatures to introduce Voter ID laws and how have the voter ID laws evolved from 2012 onward? Similarly, this scholarship informed the researcher the need to establish the history black voting suppression in the U.S prior to 2001. All these questions came up while reading through Hicks et al.’s (2015, 19) study. In this study, the authors examined restrictive voter ID legislation in the U.S from 2001 through to 2012.They evaluated the likelihood of a state legislature to introduce a voter ID law and the probability of the state government to adopt it. These two issues informed the researcher’s need to undertake a study on the explicit and covert forms of Black voter suppression in the contemporary society with a focus on recent voter suppression laws. Besides highlighting some of the states with restrictive voter ID laws, this research, guided by Hicks et al.’s (2012) findings, needed to identify other forms of black voting suppression laws existing in the contemporary society.
How the Issue Impacts Civil Rights and Representative Democracy
Voter suppression has a major impact on specific civil rights such as the right to voting. However, these rights are being threatened by the recent voter suppression laws being passed in different states. These laws place a huge burden on eligible voters’willingness to exercise their most special constitutional right. Since 2013, after the Supreme Court freed nine states previously covered under Section 4 of Voting Rights Act (1965) to change their election laws, over 400 bills have been enacted in 48 states (Liptak 2013). These laws make it harder for black people to exercise their special right to cast a ballot. Once against the Voting Rights Act is under attack with a focus now shifting on the issue of redistricting.
In Alabama, the redistricting plan was drawn after the 2020 census – the plan targeted seven seats in the U.S House of Representatives. One of the districts indicated in the plan was identified as a majority-Black district. However, the move was not received well, especially by the registered voters and several other organizations. They argued that the state had illegally and strategically placed Black voters in one district while dividing other clusters into multiple districts.
Additionally, citizens have a right to elect the leaders of their choice, who in return vote for policy initiatives. This is a form of democracy known as representative democracy. Werner (2019, 186) describes voting as a fundamental principle and “all Americans deserve the equal opportunity to make their voices heard in our democracy”. In fact, voting in federal elections is one of the two special rights that U.S citizens enjoy. However, the problem comes in when the same leaders choose to introduce and pass legislation that creates new barriers for those citizens. Some of the barriers introduced that impact representative democracy include shortening early voting period and strict voter ID. A good example here is Georgia which reduced early voting from 45 to 21 days – black votes in Georgia account for 37 percent of early voters (Manheim, Marshall and Elizabeth 2019, 213). Similar changes were adopted in Wisconsin and West Virginia.
Voter suppression also affect representative democracy through policies such as restrictions on Sunday voting as is the case of Georgia and Texas – this move impacted mainly voters of color. In Georgia, Manheim, Marshall and Elizabeth (2019) observed that the voters of color were more likely to vote on Sundays than white voters. The authors further maintained that most of the Sunday voters do not transition to other days after cuts was made (Manheim, Marshall and Elizabeth 2019). Another tactic that is increasingly being utilized is long waits. According to Wilder (2020), voters of color face longer wait times during Election Days. For instance, voters of color around the country “reported longer wait times in the 2018 midterms” (Wilder 2020, para. 8). Overall, voter suppression has a negative impact on both civil rights and representative democracy.
Results
The process followed in undertaking this research was guided by the main research question. In answering the question, the researcher employed document analysis as the search strategy. Mackieson, Aron, and Marie (2019, 285) defined document analysis as “systematic procedure for reviewing or evaluating documents, both printed and electronic material”. This qualitative research method requires that data be analyzed and interpreted in order to develop a clear understanding and empirical knowledge. It is important to note that most of the data utilized in this research were sourced from Google scholar which offers a simple way to a wider search for scholarly literature. Most of the materials used include peer reviewed journals, and books. The result section was further divided into three other subsections.
The first subsection revolves around articles on history of suppression in U.S and narrowing down to voting suppression against blacks during reconstruction era. The second subsection will focus on articles on voter suppression after the reconstruction era. In the last subsection, the focus will be on providing an in-depth discussion about the explicit and covert forms of Black voter suppressionin the contemporary society. More emphasis will be on the recent voter suppression laws and Donald Trump’s 2016 presidential election campaign.
How Early Americans Decided Who to Vote
The main problem that the Founding Fathers wrestled with in the early 1787 revolved around the issue of suffrage. During this time, voting was strictly practiced by wealthy white landowners. The framers of the constitution, as explicated in McKeever’s (2020) article, were torn between whether or not to extend the voting rights to commoners who had decided to join them in the American Revolution. However, the only worry the framers had related to the fact that the commoners might overrule their interests. This forced them, as argued further by McKeever (2020), to rely refer to Article 1, Section 4, of the Constitution. It states that “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 make or alter such regulations” (U.S. Constitution, art. 1, sec. 4). As a result, many states started adopting measures that allowed them advance their interests.
A few years later, each state introduced a different set of voter requirements which ultimately favored the Whites. While most of them expanded eligibility at first, they later started adopting new restrictions with a focus of providing near-universal suffrage for white men. According to McKeever (2020), only 5 of 16 states practiced white-only voting. However, 2 years later every new free or slave state with the exception of Maine denied black people the right to vote (McKeever 2020). The same trend continued and in 1807, New Jersey, which had initially allowed all inhabitants to vote, passed a law that disenfranchised women and black men. Maryland, on its part had initially banned Jewish from voting – this only changed after 1828 (McKeever 2020). However, it was not until the end of the Civil war in 1865 did the federal government weigh into the issue.
Voting Suppression against Blacks duringthe Reconstruction Era
During Reconstruction era, Congress made a series of constitutional amendments to guarantee the voting rights of those formerly enslaved. For instance, the Fifteenth Amendment which was ratified in 1870 “prohibited denying the vote based on race, color, or previous condition of servitude” (Epperly et al. 2020, 735). The only limitation here was that the states were left in charge of their own elections. Similarly, the political life in the South became favorable in the Reconstruction era – Black men gained power in some parts of the South. However, women, immigrants and Native Americans were still not able to vote. As observed in (McKeever 2020, para. 15), Mississippi became the first state to send two black in Senate as members of the Republican Party. As for women they were still not able to vote even after the 19thAmendment.
The white Democrats were not happy with Mississippi’s decision to give blacks the power to vote. Therefore, they launched a campaign of intimidation which is one of the oldest forms of voter suppressions in the 1875. This form of suppression succeeded and in 1881, white Democrats regained their power in Mississippi. In fact, they went ahead to convene a state constitutional convention in 1890 with the hope that their supremacy will last long. The “Democrats widely admitted that the convention was designed at circumventing the Fourteenth Amendment” (Nicoletti, 2019, 476). The new state constitution took advantage of the state’s power to determine how and when elections should be held. This led to the adoption of tactics such as poll taxes and literacy tests which aimed at shutting out black voters. These two forms of voter suppression worked because the blacks were initially denied education that could enable them overcome the set hurdles.
Other Southern states, informed by Mississippi’s actions, enacted their own restrictive laws, also known as Jim Crow laws. These laws’ original intention was to legalize racial segregation. Besides denying blacks the right to vote, Jim Crow laws also did not allow them to hold jobs, get an education or other opportunities (Hswen 2020, 129). The Southern states paired these laws with violence and intimidation with the aim of suppressing the black vote. These tactics worked well and by 1892 (15 years after the reconstruction), Mississippi had managed to reduce the percentage of eligible black voters to 6 percent from the initial 90 percent (Nicoletti 2019).These voter suppression tactics persisted for the next 70 years after the reconstruction.
Voter Suppression after the Reconstruction Era
A few notable changes occurred in the Southern states starting from 1880 onwards. However, the defeat of the Lodge Elections Bill (1890) was a clear sign of Republicans’ lack of commitment to black voting rights. The Bill, drafted and proposed by Henry Cabot Lodge, aimed at allowing federal circuit courts to appoint, upon receiving petitions from 500 citizens, federal supervisors for congressional elections. The supervisors’ rules included“attending elections, inspecting registration lists, verifying doubtful voter information, administering oaths to challenged voters and certifying the vote count” (McConarty 2020, 390). However, this bill as explicated further by McConarty (2020) failed because the opposition thought it was meant to guarantee and enforce the ability of blacks, mostly republicans, to vote in the Southern states as enshrined in the constitution.
The commitment to competing in the South and voting rights were adversely affected by the significant defeats in 1890 and 1892 elections. Similarly, the deaths and retirements of the once vocal Republicans left only a few of them to continue the fight. However, as Epperly et al. (2020) notes, “the old guard was replaced by younger men to whom abolition and reconstruction seemed irrelevant” (Epperly et al. 2020, 733). The new breed of leaders was committed to the promotion of business as a form of building a national party (Brandwein 2011). As a matter of fact, this new approach saw them win a unified government in 1896 election without necessary being competitive in the South (Ferree, Clark and James 2021, 200). In the same year, Louisiana managed to register 130, 000 Blacks as voters. However, several restrictive measures were adopted at the start of 20th century and in 1904 only 1,342 blacks were registered to vote (Ferree, Clark and James 2021, 200). During this time, violence was no longer a form of voter suppression because the laws framed to favor the Democrats.
Several voter suppression tactics that were common during the reconstruction era were struck down in the early 20th century. Most of these tactics, including intimidation, violence, poll taxes, and literacy, were limited to Blacks. Other forms of suppression included good character tests, grandfather clauses and whites-only primary elections. First, the Twenty-fourth Amendment to the U.S constitution of 1964 declared poll taxes unconstitutional in federal elections. The same extended to the state and local elections through a judgment rendered in the Supreme Court in 1966. The Civil Rights Act (1964) played a significant role of banning the practice of applying literacy tests to only black men. Similarly, the Supreme Court struck down grandfather clauses and whites-only primaries in 1915 and 1944 respectively.
The Voting Rights Act which was later signed into law became a major milestone in the fight against black voter suppression. According to Snodgrass (2015, 123), the Act “outlawed the discriminatory voting practices adopted in many southern states after the civil war.” The Act holds that any jurisdiction covered by special provisions could not implement any change that might affect voting. This can only occur after the matter is determined by either the Attorney General or the United States District Court for the District of Columbia as having no discriminatory intention. In addition to this, the Attorney General could compel those counties covered by these special provisions to appoint federal examiners to review qualifications of persons who wanted to register as voters. Similarly, those counties with federal examiners could still be required to allow federal observers to monitor activities in the polling place.
The signing of the Act into law was just the beginning, other changes soon followed – they all aimed at getting more people registered to vote.The first of these changes was the Twenty-sixth Amendment to the U.S constitution in 1971. The aim was to lower the age of voting from 21 to 18 to allow many people, both men and women across the country, to register as voters. Section 1 of these Amendment statesthat “the right of citizens of the United States, who are eighteen years of age or older, to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of age” (Epperly et al. 2020, 700). In 1993, the National Voter Registration Act, commonly known as Motor Voter Act was adopted. The Act was introduced to help enhance voting opportunities for all Americans. The Act removed most of the restrictions
Black Voter Suppression in the Contemporary Society
The progress made following the adoption of the Voting Rights Act was disrupted after the 2013 U.S. Supreme Court against some of its provision. Chief Justice John Roberts observed that the world had changed greatly since the civil rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s. According to the majority decision, section 4 of the Voting Rights Act was unconstitutional. Section 4(a) of the Act, as explained by the Department of Justice “established a formula to identify those areas and to provide for more stringent remedies where appropriate. The first of these targeted remedies was a five-year suspension of ‘a test or device,’ such as a literacy test as a prerequisite to register to vote” (Hardy 2019, 800). The court, on the other hand, ruled that “the coverage formula set forth in Section 4(b) of the Act was unconstitutional. Consequently, no jurisdictions are now subject to the coverage formula in Section 4(b) or to Sections 4(f) (4) and 5 of the Act. Accordingly, guidance information regarding termination of coverage under Section 4(a) of the Voting Rights Act (i.e., bailout) from certain of the Act’s special provisions is no longer necessary” (Shelby County v. Holder 2013). Consequently, different state legislatures started enacting and enforcing laws most of which remain controversial.
However, different states had already put in place new requirements way before the 2013 court ruling. Other measures that came after the court ruling include Voter ID laws, cutbacks to early voting and closing polling places. Voter identification laws have been cited severally in literature including the recent study of Fraga and Michael (2022). According tothe authors, these laws tend to “imposes a disproportionate burden on racial minorities” (Fraga and Michael 2022, 1091). Their analysis relied on the county turnout data from 2012 to 2016. From this, the findings indicated a significant gap in turnout between more and less racially diverse counties. Fraga and Michael (2022, 1091) concluded that strict voter ID laws appear to discriminate. In a different study, Hajnal et al. (2017) observed that strict voter identification laws have raised concerns over voter suppression. It is clear that strict identification laws may affect the turnout of racial and ethnic minorities.
Furthermore, voter identification laws are viewed as a strategy to derail the long-term progress made on voting rights. In fact, a total of 34 states have different sets of identification requirements at the polls (Fraga and Michael 2022, 1091). Another 7 states have strict photo ID laws – “voters must present one of a limited set of forms of government-issued photo ID in order to cast a regular ballot” (Fraga and Michael 2022, 1091). States with strict photo ID laws include Arkansas, Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Mississippi and Missouri.
Recent Voter Suppression Laws
Florida Senate Bill 90
Senate Bill 90(2021), signed by Governor DeSantis, requirea voter who decide to vote using mail to either provide a Florida driver’s license or last four digits of social security numbers. According to Wilder, S.B. 90 was introduced after “Black voters in Florida cast their mail ballots at a higher rate in 2016” (Wilder 2021, para. 7). In essence, S.B. 90 introduced requirements which aimed at limiting the use of mail ballot drop boxes. Wilder (2021) further noted that the law limits both the availability and accessibility of mail ballot drop boxes. Similarly, those eligible to vote must indicate on the mail box their state ID number or Social Security Number – the law does not provide any alternative for voters without such information.Additionally, S.B. 90 also limits those who can assist voters with returning their mail ballots
Georgia S.B. 202
Georgia S.B. 202 (2021) was signed into law by Republican Gov. Brian Kemp. S.B 202 gained national attention for making it a crime to distribute water to voters waiting in line. According to Wilder (2021), giving voters water or snacks is a common practice, especially in those states with long wait times. Besides food, the law also contains other aspects that are controversial. For instance, Fawaz, Kate and Monica (2022, 105) argued that the S.B.2020 gives state-level officials the authority take up the powers of county election boards. Wilder (2021) further added that the law gave authority to any voter to go to county clerk’s office with and challenge voter registration process of other people. Similarly, the law put in place a procedure that could be used to remove and replace any professional election official.
Iowa Senate File 413
Senate File 413 gained national attention after it emerged that the bill was drafted within two weeks and hurriedly sent to the governor’s desk. Wilder noted that “republicans hurried through slates of new voting restrictions after the 2020 elections” (Wilder (2021, para. 4). Some of the restrictions introduced include reducing the number of early voting to nine days, cutting the acceptable time periods for absentee ballot requests, few drop box locations and short hours for in-person voting on the Election Day. Similarly, the law meant that any ballots received after Election Day could not be received – even if they were mailed in time. Lastly, Iowa voters who miss a single election risk having their registration status changed to inactive.
Montana House Bill 176 and Senate Bill 169
House Bill 176 (2021) and Senate Bill 169 (2021) were regarded as two of the most suppressive laws ever witnessed in Montana. In fact, these laws saw Democrats get sued in what was termed as most punitive voter suppression laws. Montana Youth Action and Forward Montana Foundation argued that the laws, besides being unconstitutionally restrictive to young Montana’s right to vote, inflicted an even greater burden on them. The District Court, in its ruling on S.B. 169 noted that it targeted “one class of voters, young people, and students from out-of-state in particular”. The secretary failed to present sufficient evident to refute the claim that S.B. 169 disproportionately violates the rights of the aforementioned groups to vote. The Montana Supreme Court further affirmed the decision of temporarily preventing the implementation of these laws. According the court, House Bill 176 eliminates Election Day voter registration while the Senate Bill 169 introduces strict ID requirements to vote.
The use of Redistricting
Redistricting has also emerged to be another form of suppression for Black voting. In Florida, Leon County Circuit Judge Layne Smith stated that the new map being proposed “runs afoul of the Florida constitution’s Fair Districts Amendments because it dismantles northern Florida’s 5th congressional district” (Hardy 2021, para. 7). The judge further noted that the population of black residents in the 5th district is more than 40 percents – redistricting will diminish the ability of African America to elect the representative of their choice.
In Alabama, a redistricting plan for its seven seats in the U.S House of Representatives was drawn after the 2020 census. One of the districts indicated in the plan was identified as a majority-Black district. However, the move was not received well especially by the registered voters and several other organizations. They argued that the state “had illegally packed Black voters into a single district while dividing other clusters of Black voters across multiple districts” (Piereson 2021, p. 23). They further maintained that the redistricting plan aimed at minimizing the number of districts where black voters were more likely to elect a candidate of their choice. The move, according to them was in violation of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act which advocates against introducing racial discrimination in the voting policies.
The issue of redistricting in Louisiana triggered the need to clarify the definition of blackness in redistricting. Louisiana GOP officials were advocating for a narrower definition of the term. However, as explicated in Jealous’ (2022, para. 5), the move would necessitate the return of “one-drop-rule”, an approach that was previously used to define a black person “as anyone with ancestors who were considered Black”. Adopting this kind of definition as cautioned by the authors would diminish the long-term achievement of the Voting Rights Act in which racial and minority groups have the freedom of determine for themselves who they wish to vote for.
Donald Trump’s 2016 Presidential Campaign
Trump’s 2016 presidential election campaign was accused severally of using dubious means to deter millions of black people in battleground states from voting. According to Channel 4 News, the team “deliberately targeted them with negative Hillary Clinton ads on Facebook. They targeted 3.5 millions black American in 16 swing states, most of which were won narrowly by Trump after black democratic vote collapsed (Murillo 2022). The report linked Cambridge Analytica with orchestrating this strategy after it gained access to millions of Facebook profiles. The strategy revolved around segmenting the voters into 8 categorizes. One was identified as deterrence which comprised of voters thought likely to vote for Clinton or not at all. According to Channel 4 the main goal was to dissuade the group from backing the democrat – the firm targeted them with “dark adverts” on their Facebook feeds which accused Clinton of lacking sympathy with African Americans”. An example of an attack used by the digital campaign team was known as “super predator” commercial which showed a clip of Clinton’s controversial remarks made in 1996 (Murillo 2022). This in the end suppressed the turnout of black votes.
Implications
This project was a gateway to more knowledge and insight for this student. While the researcher gained a lot from this project, the most critical information acquired relates to the Voting Rights Act (1965). For instance, the student learned that the aim of the Act was to eliminate legal barriers at the state and local level that prevented African American from exercising their democratic right to vote. The student further learned about the three amendments that extended the voting rights. Firstly, the Nineteenth Amendment, ratified in 1920, was introduced to guarantee women the right to vote. Secondly, the Twenty-fourth Amendment was adopted in 1964 with the aim of removing poll taxes which was to prevent African Americans from voting in the federal elections. Lastly, the Twenty-sixth Amendment was adopted in 1971 to help lower the voting for all elections to 18 years.
Furthermore, this project allowed the student to gain more knowledge on voter identification laws. Many states have already enacted or scheduled to begin enforcing voter identification requirements. This project has helped the student learn more about why these laws are being introduced and the controversies behind them. For example, those states that have enacted laws claim voter identification is one of the most effective ways of addressing the issue of voter fraud and safeguarding the integrity of the election process. The student also learned that those opposing the laws feel they deprive many voters of their rights to vote as well reduce participation in federal elections. The most important piece of knowledge gained from the study on these laws is that not all American voters are aware of their states’ voter ID requirements.
As states continue to enforce voter identification requirements, many academics, liberal commentators and left-leaning activists maintain that these laws are a threat to American Democracy. The many measures being introduced in different parts of the country threatens the most special right of citizens in the United States – the right to vote. It is important to note that it is only by voting that the Americans get involved in democratic process. Democracies grow when citizens are allowed to vote for leaders of their choice and those that will represent their interests. Since the signing of Voting Rights Act (1965), the United States has witnessed a steady increase in disenfranchisement practices all aimed at giving one party an advantage over the other. However, the 2013 Supreme Court ruling in Shelby County v. Holder ended up putting the American Democracy at risk. The number of strict voter identifications laws introduced from 2013 onward are all aimed at obliterating the principle of one person, one vote from the American Democracy.
One major idea from the course is that voting is a core right of democratic citizenship. The struggles witnessed in attaining it all points to the need to protect it. Initially, voting was a preserve of property owners and then for the whites. However, in 1971 right after the passage of Voting Rights Act (1965), voting became a right for all U.S citizens over the age of 18 years. As evidenced in the course, the right to vote is the foundation to many other rights. This project demonstrates clear that black voting suppression is not a new phenomenon – it has been in existence for many years. However, the tactics keep evolving as evidenced in some of the voter identification laws being enforced in different states. If states continue passing these restrictive laws, only a few citizens will be eligible to vote. This is a threat to democracy since low numbers of American citizens exercise their right to vote.
In line with above group identity plays an important role of shaping people’s political participation. Shaw et al. (2019) defined group identity as the “process of individuals coming together and agreeing to act in ways they consider mutually beneficial”. Therefore, identity can be used as a tool to frame political claims and promote political ideologies. However, group identity as political tool, can be used to gain power and recognition through dubious means. It can easily stimulate political action such as the recent introduction of restrictive voting identification laws with the aim gaining political mileage.
Moreover, the American Democracy is peril due to the high number voting suppression tactics being adopted such as gerrymandering, misinformation and intimidation. For in 2021, about 20 states relied on the census data to redraw congressional maps. These maps are a new form gerrymandering only intended at taking voting power away from communities with black voters. For instance, Stop the Steal Movement uses tactics that are aimed turning supporters against the voting system, thus discrediting the elections. These tactics, if continued, may end up establishing one-party rule which is a greatest blow to democracy.Recent research on suppression in politics and policies has provided a more complete understanding of the tactics being to suppress black votes. Current findings suggest that
Conclusion
Recent research on suppression in politics and policies has provided a more complete understanding of the tactics being used to suppress Black votes. The findings suggest that the main problem that the Founding Fathers wrestled with in the early 1787 revolved around the issue of suffrage. The earliest problems in the voting process revolved around whether or not to extend the voting rights to commoners who had decided to join them in the American Revolution. However, a few years later, the issue of voting was handled at the state level. Each state adopted a different set of voter requirements that appeared to favor the whites. Several other changes were adopted during the Reconstruction Era. For instance, the Congress made a series of constitutional amendments to guarantee the voting rights of those formerly enslaved. However, the passage of Voting Rights Act (1965) “outlawed the discriminatory voting practices adopted in many southern states after the civil war.” The findings further notes that the progress made by Voting Rights Act was interrupted by the 2013 Supreme Court case. This saw many states start enacting voter identification laws aimed at suppressing black votes.
However, research is further needed to conclusively establish the relationship between districting and black voter suppression. For instance, how do you establish the underlying partnership of a district or overall map? Therefore, once we establish a clear understanding of relationship between black voting suppression and tactics such as redistricting, states can work on finding common ground for all political parties.Overall, the findings met the expectations of the researcher and fully answered the research question regarding the explicit and covert forms of black voter suppression both historically and contemporary.
Bibliography
Brandwein, Pamela. Rethinking the Judicial Settlement of Reconstruction. Cambridge University Press, 2011.
Epperly, Brad, Christopher Witko, Ryan Strickler, and Paul White. “Rule by Violence, Rule by Law: Lynching, Jim Crow, and the Continuing Evolution of Voter Suppression in the US.” Perspectives on Politics 18, no. 3 (2020): 756-769.
Fawaz, Leila, Kate Mize, and Monica Vu. “SB 202: Revisions to Georgia’s Election and Voting Procedures.” Georgia State University Law Review 38, no. 1 (2022): 105.
Ferree, Karen E., Clark C. Gibson, and James D. Long. “Mixed Records, Complexity, and Ethnic Voting in African Elections.”World Development 141 (2021): 105-418.
Fraga, Bernard L., and Michael G. Miller. “Who Do Voter ID Laws Keep from Voting?.” The Journal of Politics 84, no. 2 (2022): 1091-1105.
Hajnal, Zoltan, NazitaLajevardi, and Lindsay Nielson. “Voter Identification Laws and the Suppression of Minority Votes.”The Journal of Politics 79, no. 2 (2017): 363-379.
Hardy, Lydia. “Voter Suppression Post-Shelby: Impacts and Issues of Voter Purge and Voter ID Laws.” Mercer L. Rev. 71 (2019): 857.
Hicks, William D., Seth C. McKee, Mitchell D. Sellers, and Daniel A. Smith. “A Principle or a Strategy? Voter Identification Laws and Partisan Competition in the American States.” Political Research Quarterly 68, no. 1 (2015): 18-33.
Hswen, Yulin, Qiuyuan Qin, David R. Williams, K. Viswanath, John S. Brownstein, and S. V. Subramanian. “The Relationship between Jim Crow Laws and Social Capital from 1997–2014: A 3-Level Multilevel Hierarchical Analysis across Time, County and State.”Social Science & Medicine 262 (2020): 113-142.
Jealous, Ben. “Redistricting is Voter Suppression Too.” The Louisiana Weekly (2022): 5.
Liptak, Adam. “Supreme Court Invalidates Key Part of Voting Rights Act.” New York Times (2013).
Mackieson, Penny, Aron Shlonsky, and Marie Connolly. “Increasing Rigor and Reducing Bias in Qualitative Research: A Document Analysis of Parliamentary Debates using Applied Thematic Analysis.”Qualitative Social Work 18, no. 6 (2019): 965-980.
Manheim, Lisa Marshall, and Elizabeth G. Porter. “The Elephant in the Room: Intentional Voter Suppression.” The Supreme Court Review 2018, no. 1 (2019): 213-255.
McConarty, Colin. “The Federal Elections Bill of 1890: The Continuation of Reconstruction in America.” The Journal of the Gilded Age and Progressive Era 19, no. 3 (2020): 390-405.
McKeever, Amy. “Voter Suppression has Haunted America since it was founded”. National Geographic (2020).
Murillo, Matthew. “Did Voter Suppression Win President Trump the Election: The Decimation of the Voting Rights Act and the Importance of Section 5.” USFL Rev. 51 (2017): 591.
Nicoletti, Cynthia. “Sowing the Wind: The Mississippi Constitutional Convention of 1890 by Dorothy Overstreet Pratt.” Journal of Southern History 85, no. 2 (2019): 476-477.
Piereson, James. “The Racial Redistricting of Alabama; The Supreme Court has a Chance to Reaffirm the Colorblind Ideals behind the Voting Rights Act.” Wall Street Journal (Online) (2022): 34.
Shaw, Todd, Louis DeSipio, Dianne Pinderhughes, and Toni-Michelle C. Travis. Uneven roads: An introduction to US racial and ethnic politics. CQ Press, 2018.
Shelby County v. Holder. 2013. 570 U.S. 529.
Snodgrass, Mary Ellen. The Civil War Era and Reconstruction: An Encyclopedia of Social, Political, Cultural and Economic History. Routledge, 2015.
Ura , Alexa. “The Hard-Fought Texas Voting Bill is poised to become Law. Here’s what it does” The Texas Tribune (2021).
Werner, Annika. “What Voters Want from their Parties: Testing the Promise-Keeping Assumption.” Electoral Studies 57 (2019): 186-195.
Wilder, William. “Voter Suppression in 2020.” Brennan Center for Justice (2021).