- The Washington Times - Friday, January 26, 2001

On Aug. 6, 1965, President Lyndon Baines Johnson called himself a friend of liberal America and signed one of the most sweeping pieces of legislation ever passed by Congress. It was called the Voting Rights Act.

The supposed original intent of the Voting Rights Act, which has since been amended and is set to expire in 2007, was to secure minority rights at the polling booth against the use of literacy tests, violence and more and that more includes ballot box machinations (which, in millennium parlance, means chads and dimples) and voter intent.

In the coming months, though, the blinders will come off as federal, state and local lawmakers begin reviewing census data and discussing redistricting.

You can't have one discussion without the other and, to be sure, the liberals and the civil rights police are at the ready.

They can't wait to start drawing the battle lines. A majority-black district over here, a majority-Hispanic district over there. Before you know it, Miss Connie will have her Romper Room proteges peering at a majority-Asian group somewhere on the Left Coast.

Those discriminatory geographical distinctions, you see, will be made courtesy of the U.S. Census.

Surely, you remember the census was taken last year, when the federal leviathan, uh, federal government, sent forms collecting all kinds of information, too much information, about you and your household. Most of that was none of the government's business. The government wanted to know about your mortgage, whether an older relative lives in your household, what languages are spoken in your household even the number of toilets and more. Information, personal information, the federal government doesn't need to determine whether an underpass on the interstate should have a clearance of 11-feet or 13-feet.

But you filled out the form anyway, didn't you? You obliged because you fell for that line about more money for roads and schools. You probably were snookered by other false claims, too: Congress needs to know the racial makeup of your household so it can discuss apportionment to the U.S. House of Representatives accordingly; the U.S. Justice Department needs those same racial profiles to enforce the Voting Rights Act.

Well, my fellow Americans, I'll let you in on a little secret. The U.S. Constitution does indeed require Congress to conduct an actual "enumeration" of the U.S. population every 10 years, and the enumeration is indeed the census. But that same document also requires each American be given "equal" protection under the laws therein.

How can that occur if the determining factor is, seemingly above all else, a person's race? Or, for that matter, a person's national origin? What happened to Lady Justice's blindfold?

Look at those questions this way: Way back when, after the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor and when another Democrat known by three names was in the White House (Franklin Delano Roosevelt), the federal government rounded up Americans of Japanese descent and sent them to internment camps. How do you suppose the federal leviathan pardon me again the federal government knew they were of Japanese descent? The census identified states and communities with concentrated populations of Japanese Americans.

Now you see where I'm coming from, don't you? But what, you may ponder, does the census have to do with racial discrimination and the Voting Rights Act of 1965?

Trust me. It has everything to do with discrimination.

My fellow Americans, let us revisit the heady days prior to LBJ's sweeping gestures. Segregationists are up in arms, and the civil rights folks are demanding, and rightly so, equal access to any and all public facilities, including voting booths. In the South, the term black voter was simply an oxymoron.

Bloodshed, violence, poll taxes and literacy tests were commonplace in the South back then. That's where my maternal great-grandfather was a landowner and successful businessman in the red hills of western Georgia. He also was a God-fearing man who could handle numbers, or "digits" as my grandmother used to call them, but could not register to vote because he was illiterate.

Ol' Lyndon Baines Johnson, a rascal of the South if ever there were one, changed that with a few strokes of a pen (and a lot of quid pro quo on Capitol Hill). So now every 10 years, instead of drawing lines based solely on digits when considering apportionment, lawmakers and law-enforcers think of colored lines based on race.

LBJ. A Southerner. A Democrat. A friend of the movement. Can't you see him howling?

It seems your friend wasn't color blind in the least. He saw things very clearly in black and white.

E-mail: [email protected]

Copyright © 2019 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.

The Washington Times Comment Policy

The Washington Times welcomes your comments on Spot.im, our third-party provider. Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.


Click to Read More and View Comments

Click to Hide