That's not really meaningful, given what the actual party splits were at the time. The modern Republican party started as an allergic reaction to the Voting Rights Act, signed the year after - the Southern Strategy.
-
-
-
but that's exactly my point
-
Sure, but the coalitions of voters and/or power centers that the two parties support have shifted so much since then that they're barely recognizeable. They happen to have the same names, but...
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Kind of a strange point. Would any of those Democratic senators have passed Obamacare? Supported gay rights?
-
good point
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
To be fair many of those Republicans would be Dems today.
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
I believe the 2006 reauthorization of the Voting Rights Act passed the Senate 98-0 (and SCOTUS still struck it down 5-4)
-
Today the VRA would get zero Republican votes.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
The problem is that what the Democrats would actually propose today would be the insane 2018 version of a Civil Rights Act, so no Republican could support it. The 1964 CRA is not controversial outside of the most esoteric theoretical discussions.
-
Uh, Republicans on the Supreme Court just overturned part of the 1964 VRA.
-
The VRA is not the CRA. Requiring federal preclearance for changes in state law in the 21st century is a far cry from prohibiting discrimination in public accommodations or employment.
-
Good point, I conflated the two. However, the part they overruled was about authority to change voting laws. So the overall point about voting rights not being theoretical still stands.
-
Shelby was a tough case. I would have to give it a lot of thought. Preclearance is a severe infringement on state sovereignty. On the other hand, it was probably justified under the 15th amendment in the context of the 1960's south. Was it was justified in 2013? Maybe.
-
The obvious remedy was because the geography wasnt up to date, it should be applied everywhere, not nowhere.
-
That would have been a fun remedy, and it would have forced Congress to do something.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
No one in '64 could have imagined a Republican Party that was based almost entirely in the South. How things change.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.