On Politics, History, Racism, and SCOTUS

I can't.

I honestly just can't.  I have lost any and all ability to can today, ladies and gentlemen.  And only part of that comes from the fact that I am wading through a dataset that seems intent on destroying me.

The Voting Rights Act was passed in 1965 as a crucial response to the prevalence of Jim Crow Laws throughout the American South.  Jim Crow Laws were, in case you are unaware, a series of laws throughout states and municipalities which, through enforcement of "poll taxes" or "literacy tests" (I use scarequotes here for a reason -- the actual results of these tests or costs of these poll taxes varied greatly depending on the color of your skin), restricted the access of African Americans to the polls, in spite of the Fifteenth Amendment which guaranteed them that right to vote. (Seriously, though.  Track down a copy of the Alabama Literacy Test and tell me if, when someone slapped that down in front of you because they didn't like the way you looked, you would be able to pass and vote. (Though are you really surprised these laws were in effect less than 100 years after many of these same people thought that people were property?))

In 1965, Congress voted to pass measures which restricted the rights of states to impose discriminatory voting regulations which kept a significant portion of the population from being able to go out to the polls.  An essential piece of the legislation included a stipulation that areas with histories of these kinds of regulations, as well as repeatedly low voter turnout and registration numbers (because that doesn't look suspicious at all), would have to get federal approval before making changes to their voting regulations and voting procedures.

Well, today the Supreme Court overturned that stipulation. In a time where voter ID laws have come under intense criticism for their potentially racist limitations on the ability of minorities to vote, a restriction that has prevented actual legally-binding discrimination and a breach of the US Constitution for more than forty years has been overturned by the body responsible for protecting the Constitution.

Do I think the implications of this are as heavily racist as they would have been in the '60s -- no, at least not on the surface.  But I do think it's democratically-questionable.  Note: many of the areas which have been subject to this clause in the past, including Shelby County, AL, which was involved in specifically this Supreme Court case, are predominantly Republican.  Minority votes are, by-and-large, opposed to the Republican party.  Do I think there's going to be a massively racial backlash?  Probably not, because it's typically a bad PR move.  But do I think there's potential for party politics that will, ultimately, have racial consequences to prevent a large amount of the opposition constituency from turning out to the polls?  Absolutely.

Congratulations, SCOTUS.  I can't.

Furiously yours,
Rachel Leigh

P.S., Let's hope they do better on Prop 8/DOMA than they did with this one.  Love is love, my friends.

On SCOTUS, Obamacare, and Perspective

Let's get a perspective check, shall we?

While we've been squabbling over whether a government should provide health care to its citizens (heads up, America: the rest of the first world has already made a decision on this issue and, even today, we're still way behind the trend...so, awesome).

In the 12 hours since the SCOTUS decision about Obamacare

• Roughly 15,000 people died from malnutrition and starvation.  What did you throw away today?
• 820,000,000 people struggled to find safe, clean drinking water (Meanwhile, I have gone to the Brita in my fridge today three times to fill up my water bottle, and can't even begin to comprehend what it would be like to not have access to drinkable water)
• Roughly 3600 people have contracted HIV (for which we have yet to develop an affordable, accessible cure), in spite of worldwide programs designed to increase awareness and stop the spread of the disease
• 360 people were raped or sexually assaulted in the United States alone

I'm not saying there aren't things worth fighting about.  There absolutely are.  I think affordable access to medical care, education, and housing is the right of all people.  But there are bigger issues, within our borders and outside our reach to keep in mind.  We forget that the world has ACTUAL problems, problems with some obvious and not-so-obvious solutions that we can't seem to fix.  And when we get so wrapped-up in what side of the aisle we fall on or whether the wealthiest taxpayers should be taxed 34 or 35 percent, we lose sight of these real, tangible, terrifying problems and we forget to fix them.

If all this can happen in 12 hours, what could we do with a week?  A month?  A decade?  What could the world look like if we didn't get so off track?

Sorry that got so serious.  I promise, the next post will involve a picture of a kitten.

Seriously yours,
Rachel Leigh

Sources:

• Worldometers.info (http://www.worldometers.info/)
• The United Nations AIDS Clock (http://www.unfpa.org/aids_clock/)
• The Rape, Abuse, and Incest National Network [RAINN] (http://www.rainn.org/statistics/)
• Basic math skills on the calculator on my laptop