Voter discrimination. Todays hearing on evidence of current and ongoing voting discrimination is part of the series of hearings of the house judiciary subcommittee on constitution several rights and liberties, for this year. The current need for reinvigoration of the preclearance requirement of the section five of the Voting Rights act. To consider other ways to strengthen the civil rights. Im not sure why we say reinvigoration. That seems to be one of the words we toss around. Its not really reinvigoration. Its degradation. Section four was cut out so we need to have a section for to activate section five. Section five is made dormant because of the Supreme Court staying section four wasnt adequate. So we need to find a new section. Awaken the dormant power of section five. Its widely considered the effective civil rights statute ever enacted on congress. Enormously successful and expanding federal authority to present protect the fundamental right to vote. When the central enforcements was section five preclearance provision. Required certain jurisdictions with a history of discrimination. Against minority groups, predominantly those that ended in the deep south. Two of pain provable to the voting laws, before those changes could take effect. Purpose of reading occurrence was to be sure they jurisdictions that were most likely discriminated against, minority voters, shown by a finding of congress would bear the burden of proving that each of the voting laws were not discovered terry before changes could take effect. Therefore not discriminate in fact against people, they shouldnt be taken that action against. If providing a mechanism to make sure the new voting rose and practices with a history of discrimination would be to all voters. 1965, jurisdictions, it was renewed, a list of jurisdictions then in 2013, shall be older, our Supreme Court said, we did win the past, and with the ousted in the senate by 98 was not adequate. The defining by congress of legislation tax was not sufficient that the court was wish generally has its fair part two congress would jump in with its opinion about congress. So what did the pre acquire it potentially protected before the harm of the voters. In this way preclearance proved to be a significant means of her production in the voters. This is Like Congress had repeatedly reauthorized records provision. Most recently in 2006, and mr mr. Since skinner was the chairman of the committee at that time. 39233. The house and the senate were 98 to nothing. The Supreme Court and in section five in 2013, brought down the coverage formula in section four and determine which jurisdiction would be subject to the pre clearance provision results. We have to have hearings to show the court that we have taken information that our findings are based on fact. Referred so far this year and Voting Rights. Most resilient memphis tennessee. We will further learn in todays hearing, the decision we formally cover decisions numerous discriminatory voting measures. The pastor sweeping vote suppression law that the federal Appeals Court said it was unconscious attention no. By doing it after they put it into effect, they had their desired effect which was to limit africanamerican voting. If they were on the preclearance environment, courts couldve stopped them from doing it before they did it. As mill brooks would save the video that they do so well. We also hear about recent measures to make it difficult or possible for minority voters to exercise the right to vote. These measures include poles closures and relocations. Disproportionately to target minority. All of which are designed to make it harder rather for africanamericans and other minorities to vote. Last week in memphis we learned about tennessees thirdparty registration law. That would impose penalties like the legal women voters, omissions and registrations. An effort to do so. Back in may, we learned about a similar law in texas. Other voter determinations. In the absence of an effective preclearance formula, theres almost certainly measures will undermine the minority voters in a broader democracy. While section two of the Voting Rights act which prohibits boats. By itself less effective so definitely more cumbersome and more expensive to enforcing the butter right act. You cannot put this in place till after, requiring effective lee notice. Some congress to create a new coverage formula to integrate the act most important enforcement is in. I think our witnesses and members are being here today. I look forward to a fruitful discussion and i now like to do recognize Ranking Member mr. Johnson for his opening statement. Mr. Chairman. I appreciate you all for being here is the Minority Party in this committee. Theres a couple of things that we just want to say that the offset as we begin in the hearing. Personal, must be clear about this. Weve all agree that his primary treatment and voting based on race or is a point. Is by the constitution as it should be as prohibited by federal statute as it should be. But is it too often complains of discrimination in voting have nothing to do with the discriminatory treatment. Instead, roles entirely neutral on their face are sometimes claimed to be discovered during similar because they have a impact on one group or another. This impact claims are in the forum of identity politics and they contradict for example, doctor Martin Luther king junior to focus on purchases rather than racial groups. Doctor king said famously and is i have a dream speech, when the architect of our republic wrote the magnificent words of the constitution and the declaration of independence, the resigning a promissory note to which every american was to fall heir. This note was a promise that all men, yes black men as well as women, would be guaranteed the rights of live liberty and pursuit of happiness. Doctor king said it well. That promissory note promised live liberty and pursuit of happiness, not equality of outcomes. Insofar his opponents have changes in law, based on of equal outcomes, instead of equal opportunities, we just leave genuinely they pervert the language of our fan new documents and failed to understand the importance of docking his words. This impacts are not proof of discrimination. Indeed they are statistically inevitable. As thomas soul has explained, if several criteria need to be met for any given outcome and this can apply to voting requirements as well, the small variations of any groups positive and meeting any of those criteria will produce different outcomes for the group generally. The problem with the theory is that often it is used to falsely impute discrimination. There are many reasons why this could happen that have nothing to do with discrimination. A letter to decline to clear the 2011 vote right. The department claimed that in the letter, minority registered voters were nearly 20 percent more likely to be effectively disenfranchised, by the law, but by the elected driver license. The difference between white and African American voters drivers license was only 1. 6 percent. The Justice Department use the 20 percent figure because while the state figures showed 8 percent, as compared to 10 percent of nonwhite registered voters, the number and ten is 20 percent larger than the number of 8. 4. It is true mathematically that tan is 20 percent larger. Actually is 19 percent ordered the Justice Department rented that, it clearly distorts to report differences in the drivers license race. It was used to falsely declare the law as objectionable. Lets give another example. Status show younger people cross racial groups tend to be least likely to have drivers license. Consequently, if it africanamericans have more kids in their group, they will be disproportionately have fewer licenses. This is due to demographics not demonstration. As a result of prejudice, is fundamentally unsound for the same reason social scientists are trained to correlation does not imply causation. In other words, there can be all sorts of correlations between one if it in another and that doesnt answer the question as to why the correlation exists. My. Again its not that voting discrimination has disappeared forever. We know it hasnt. I. Is only that this desperate impacts cannot be meaningfully used to prove voting discrimination. Regarding discriminatory treatment and voting come this based on race, Section Three of the Voting Rights act, which is permanent federal statutory law, remains in effect. For a couple years ago, District Court fresno records pasadena texas to be monitored by the Business Department because they had intentionally changes City Council District to decrease hispanic influence. The city was deep court ruled a long history of discrimination against minorities. Was required to have the teaching rules voting rules change for the next six years during which time the federal judge changed jurisdiction to review before enforcement any change to the election plan that was in effect on december 12013. The change to the city his election plan can be enforced that went out review. The judge only if it has been submitted to the us city journal in the department of justice has not within 60 days. Discriminatory treatment and voting, i look forward to hearing from all of our witnesses here today. I yelled back. Thank you. Gentlemen from much of new york, manhattan, when he sighed, left side, all about the town. Thank you mr. Chairman. Let me express my appreciation to you for hosting on Voting Rights in memphis last week. Since the Supreme Courts disastrous 2013 decision which effectively done the most critical provision of the civil rights Voting Rights of 1965, the clearance requirement. Youve seen a troubling trend. Localities and states in particular those of your subject to the preclearance requirement have enacted or engage in various suppression factors. Such as birds improve citizenship laws, voters, significant scale back to early voting periods, restrictions and absentee balance. Difficult to restore the Voting Rights of incarcerated vintage individuals. These kind of restrictions have negative impact of racial and language minority voters. And contrary to what we just heard, it is very much useful tool. In the most recent elections in november of 2018, voters across the country experienced various barriers to voting. The state and local laws and circumstances that made it hard or even impossible to vote. For example, we heard last week in our field hearing in memphis, that states match law, 53000 voters registrants and 70 percent of whom were africanamerican. They were placed in pending status. A risk of not being counted by the secretary of state, was also the nominee in that same election. Because of minority on registration forum. Federal court one put a stop to this practice. Parental treatment to a group of individual who are predominant minorities. This happened right just four days before the election. It led to a long period of confusion. Section five of the Voting Rights act, contains a preclearance requirement which requires certain jurisdictions with a history of discrimination to submit any proposed changes to the voting laws of practices into the department of justice for prior approval to ensure that they are not discriminatory. To understand why to preclearance requirement was so essential to enforcing the dairy, it is worth remembering why it was enacted in the first place. Before the bra, and stays localities Voter Suppression laws. Security analysis i can take many years before the laws could be successfully challenged in court if at all. As soon as one law is overturned, another would be enacted. Essentially setting up the discriminatory game. Section five clarence broke this legal and helped the discriminatory practice. Indeed the success of the voting effectively clears requirement, is apparent almost immediately after the went into effect. Francis registration africanamerican voters, both rose dramatically in the few years after enactment. That was according to section five. The successes could not happen that went out vigorous enforcement of this Voting Rights act and particularly of his preclearance provision. Shelby counted as an concision to snow, which determined which jurisdictions would be subject to the preclearance requirement. They are suspending the pre operation. It happens in the game of waccamaw has returned with a vengeance. Not surprisingly, within 24 hours of the Shelby County decision, the attorney general North Carolina, a great voter id laws. Jericho also had laws to be intentionally racially discriminatory. Intentionally. During the years between their inactive course decisions, the states and localities held many elections over discriminatory laws that remained in place and many people were denied their rights to vote. In short before the Racial Discrimination to be stopped, the damage had already been done. Other states also enacted other statewide voter laws. The vitality of the Voting Rights, critical importance. 2006, when i was Ranking Member of the subcommittee, which again exacted process to build this record. Unequivocally the need to revisions in which preclearance requirements, and the coverage formula or expired. At the time, we found that many jurisdictions are still facilitating ongoing discrimination. For instance when he states in subdivisions, continue to engage in racially selective practices, such as relocating polling places for africanamerican voters. In the case of localities, connecting student were similar to serve circumvent the africanamericans vote for elective vote office in the cities. While its true that those the bra can still be pursue afterthefact legal remedies. Even after clearance. Time and expense have proved that secular approach takes far longer and is far more expensive. And having an effective preclearance regime. Once a voter has been denied, it cannot be required cast. That is why members of the side of the aisle in both chambers of commerce, will come together and Pass Registration to restore it to its full legality. Todays hearing will provide additional opportunities to renew our understanding of the importance of the Voting Rights act. In particular of his preclearance revisions. The score efforts and offer solution. I look forward to hearing from our distinguished witnesses and to hear about their findings of ongoing discrimination by states and localities and bills. We welcome our witnesses and thank them for participating in todays hearing. Written statements will be entered into the entirety. The timing light on your table. When it turns red, you have one minute left. Reminders statements are or could result in imprisonment up to five years or both with a fine as well. But that will not likely happen. First witnesses anita. Shes the president and chief executive office of the civil and human rights. Previously she served as Principal Deputy attorney general and acting generally. During the obama administration. She received her law degree from New York University of school a lot. Undergraduate degree medical law at yale university. When he recognized for five. Chairman, and Ranking Member johnson. And members of the subcommittee. Thank you for the opportunity today. Thank you for your leadership and callings to restore the Voting Rights act. Its considered one of the most successful pieces to the civil rights legislation or history. No one ago in 2006, the sperry body reauthorized the bra which sweeping bipartisan support. But in 2013, five justices of the Supreme Court gutted the bra his most powerful section. Five. Section five enabled the government to block proposed discriminatory voting. It also ensured that changes to voting rules for public transparent and evaluated to protect voters against discrimination based on race and they wish. When i served in the Justice Department. We relied on section two in the bra to help mitigate the damage done by the county decision. We challenged as discriminatory laws passed in North Carolina and in texas in the immediate aftermath of the decision and we were successful. Horse found in intentional discrimination and a found intentional determination in at least Nine Federal Court cases since the Shelby County decision. The section to, can take years. While medication are taking place, and the voters can be effectively disenfranchised with no remedies. When there voting prisoner to laws that are later to be found to have been enacted intentional discrimination. So the reality of section two is simply no substitute for the meat to restore section five. Restoring is all that much more important, huge challenge abutting measures. Medical case has been open, including but registration to restrictive voter id restrictions. I want to focus on today. Polling place closures and consolidation can be a tactic for disenfranchising voters. Particulate voters of color and older voters and rolled voters and voters with disabilities. And since the shelby decision coming jurisdictions of opposing. Places and no alarming state. This morning leadership confronts Education Fund release democracy averted. The groundbreaking and 757 counties that had been once covered on section five. We found that many polling places were close between 2012 and 2018. The report also analyzes only place reductions in the years between th