2019: Fitzpatrick Voted For The Voting Rights Advancement Act That
Would Restore Preclearance Requirements Under The Voting Rights Act.
In December 2019, Fitzpatrick voted for the Voting Rights Advancement
bill that would, according to Congressional Quarterly, "effectively
restore preclearance requirements under the Voting Rights Act for any
changes to voting procedures in states and localities with a history of
voting rights violations within the previous 25 years." The vote was on
passage. The House passed the bill by a vote of 228-187. The bill was
never taken up in the Senate. [House Vote 654,
12/6/19; Congressional
Quarterly, 12/6/19;
Congressional Actions,
H.R.4]
The Voting Rights Advancement Act Restored A Provision In The
Original Voting Rights Act That Was Overturned By The Supreme Court
In Shelby County v. Holder. According to Congressional Quarterly,
the bill was "designed to restore a key provision of the Voting
Rights Act of 1965 that was invalidated by the Supreme Court
decision on Shelby County v. Holder. The court ruled in 2013
that the formula used to determine which states and jurisdictions
are required to receive preclearance for changes in voting
procedures from the Justice Department or a federal district court
in D.C., was unconstitutional because it was outdated and no longer
responded to contemporary concerns. However, the court also
ruled that the federal government could still require that certain
states and jurisdictions receive approval before implementing
changes in voting procedures to ensure the change does not harm
minority voters." [Congressional Quarterly,
10/23/19]
The New Voting Rights Bill Reconfigured The Formula Used To
Determine If State Violations Of Voting Rights Require Oversight.
According to Congressional Quarterly, "The measure would amend and
expand the 1965 law, most notably by reconfiguring the formula used
to determine if there are voting rights violations that require
oversight. The formula would cover all states and would come into
effect if there are 15 or more violations in a 25-year period, or 10
or more when at least one violation is on a statewide level. States
or local jurisdictions that are found to have repeated violations
would require preclearance before any new election law can be
implemented." [Congressional Quarterly,
10/23/19]
Republicans Opposed The Bill, Citing Concerns Of Expanding The
Justice Department's Authority To Investigate Common Voting Laws.
According to Congressional Quarterly, "Panel Republicans also
expressed concerns about expanding the Justice Department's
authority to examine common voting laws. Steve Chabot, R-Ohio, said
that the measure could allow the Justice Department to find some
common voting laws, such as voter identification laws, to be
violations." [Congressional Quarterly,
10/23/19]
Congressional Quarterly: Republicans Also Argued That The Bill Was
"Another Step Towards Federalizing Elections." According to
Congressional Quarterly, "Rules Committee ranking member Tom Cole,
R-Okla., however, referred to the measure as a 'partisan bill' and
said that it would be another step towards federalizing all
elections, a concern that was echoed by his Republican colleagues
throughout the hearing portion of the meeting." [Congressional
Quarterly,
10/23/19]