,,iv  #aacth ,,congress  #ast ,session  
,h4 ,,con4 ,,res4 #ag  ,,in ,,the       
,,house ,,of ,,representatives          
,february #ae1 #bjac ,ms4 ,fudge 7for   
herself1 ,ms4 ,chu1 and ,mr4 ,grijalva7 
submitted the following concurrent      
resolution2 which was referred to the   
,committee on ,oversight and ,government
 ,reform  ,,concurrent ,,resolution     
,expressing the sense of ,congress that 
a day should be designated as ,national 
,voting ,rights ,act ,mobilization ,day4
  ,whereas the affirmation of the       
,declaration of ,independence that 8all 
men are created equal0 too often has    
been disregarded throughout our         
,nation's history2 ,whereas voting is   
the fundamental political right because 
it is 8preservative of all rights02     
,whereas the fourteenth and fifteenth   
amendments to the ,constitution prohibit
 racial discrimination in voting by the 
,states2 ,whereas when ,congress enacted
 the ,voting ,rights ,act of #aife1     
certain ,states employed tests and      

devices that were race-neutral on their 
face but were used to prevent racial    
minorities from registering and voting2 
,whereas when ,congress enacted the     
,voting ,rights ,act of #aife1 certain  
,states and their political subdivisions
 had resorted to substituting new       
discriminatory practices for ones that  
were enjoined by the ,federal courts1   
requiring aggrieved plaintiffs to assume
 the burden of repeated litigation to   
vindicate their fourteenth and fifteenth
 amendment rights2 ,whereas ,congress   
enacted section #e of the ,voting       
,rights ,act of #aife to require certain
 ,states and political subdivisions to  
submit new or modified voting practices 
for ,federal review before they can be  
used2 ,whereas ,congress reauthorized   
section #e of the ,voting ,rights ,act  
of #aife in #aigj1 #aige1 and #aihb     
after finding a continuing pattern of   
racial discrimination in voting by the  
covered jurisdictions2 ,whereas the     
,supreme ,court repeatedly has upheld   

section #e against constitutional       
challenges1 and pointed to section #e as
 a model for the appropriate exercise of
 ,congress' enforcement authority under 
the ,reconstruction ,amendments2        
,whereas section #e has proven to be one
 of the most effective provisions of the
 ,voting ,rights ,act of #aife in       
blocking and deterring many thousands of
 discriminatory voting practices that   
would have denied or abridged the       
ability of minority citizens to         
register1 vote1 and elect candidates of 
their choice2 ,whereas ,congress in     
#bjjf reauthorized section #e by        
overwhelming margins based upon an      
extensive record of continued racial    
voting discrimination within the covered
 jurisdictions2 ,whereas section #e     
continues to require ,federal review for
 changes in all or part of #af ,states  
with histories of official              
discrimination1 where the legislative   
record showed that the bulk of racial   
voting discrimination has remained      

concentrated2 ,whereas ,states and      
political subdivisions that show a clean
 recent record of voting rights         
compliance can 8bail out0 from section  
#e coverage2 ,whereas there are ongoing 
election problems in both the covered   
and the non-covered ,states which       
urgently require the attention of       
,congress1 including voting delays1     
badly designed and executed voter       
purges1 unduly restrictive voter        
identification laws1 and deceptive and  
intimidating phone calls1 flyers1 and   
billboards1 but these problems do not   
necessarily require the non-covered     
,states to comply with the section #e   
preclearance remedy2 ,whereas section #e
 of the ,voting ,rights ,act of #aife   
remains necessary to protect the        
hard-won gains in minority electoral    
participation in the covered ,states    
since #aife against the imposition of   
new racially discriminatory voting      
practices2 ,whereas the ,supreme ,court 
is scheduled to hear oral arguments in a

 constitutional challenge to the #bjjf  
reauthorization of section #e2 and      
,whereas ,february #bg would be an      
appropriate day for the ,nation to focus
 upon the historic and continuing       
importance of the ,voting ,rights ,act  
of #aife in ensuring equality at the    
ballot box3 ,now1 therefore1 be it      
,that it is the sense of ,congress that 
a day should be designated as ,national 
,voting ,rights ,act ,mobilization ,day1
 to remind all ,americans of the        
critical role that the ,voting ,rights  
,act of #aife continues to play in      
protecting the right to vote1 and for   
them to voice their support for this    
landmark civil rights law4