District voting rests on a lie

Stop the insanity, Ms. Learnard? Accept district voting? Destined to lose? History proves this district voting is how it must be because scores of counties in Georgia have had to accept it?

What I read is that Fayette County should not stand against tyranny that travels under the banner of fairness. It will cost too much? If not Fayette, what Georgia county can afford this stand against untruth?

This is not 1965 or even 1982 (when Section 2 was amended and the slew of changes began). This is 2014, a year where all minorities are fairly represented in the state and federal houses of government and where (dare I state the obvious), an African American is in his second Presidential term.

In the 1980s, Georgia, like most states in the South, was working to overcome stereotypes and injustices that are a part of the state’s history. Nearly all of the scores of counties that changed from at-large to district voting did so because they feared the cost of litigation and the potential bad press associated with fighting it. In short most capitulated without a fight so as not to be decried as racists.

I don’t doubt that some may have even had unfair practices in their counties. However, I see that you did leave out the fact that the last two challenges using Section 2 in the 1990s were found in favor of the counties and the state, not the plaintiffs who claimed unfair practices. I’m sure that was an oversight.

In the 10 years that I have lived here, I have never heard of a single case of anyone of any color or creed being constrained from their right to vote for whomever they chose.

Never had I seen any person of color pressured to not run for office in favor of a white man (until now that district voting is in force).

I have seen no white thugs at the polling place threatening non-whites, have never seen anyone forced to pay a poll tax, never seen anyone shunned at a voting location.

Of course, nobody is suggesting such overt actions, simply that minority candidates cannot be elected in our county because the white majority will not “allow” it; in other words, we are primarily racists.

The reason that we as one of the wealthiest counties in Georgia must continue to fight this abuse of government power is that it must be obvious (especially to one as erudite as Ms. Learnard) that in fact this has nothing to do with race.

This is about a minority party that wants a seat at the table and will use any means, including the favorite card in their deck, the racial one, to gain that seat.

And of course there are the lawyers. Ms. L calls into question the motives of the lawyers fighting for the citizens of the county while ignoring that the lawyers who work on the books of the NAACP would have no income if not for such litigation.

The appearance to me is that the NAACP, once an organization with laudable ideals and goals, has degraded primarily into nothing more than a tool for the Democratic Party. All that is left is to change their name to reflect that truth: National Association for the Advancement of the Democratic Party.

Fayette County, meet the NAADP. They have come to ensure that their clients (the Democratic Party) gain a voice in your “unfair,” white conservative county.

You have been slapped and your nose bloodied. Do we follow the advice of Councilwoman Learnard and grab our towel, lower our eyes, and allow the minority party to carry the day or shall you wipe your nose, tighten your laces and step up for Round 2 with this bully?

All that really matters is if you care one way or the other what method of voting we will have in this county. Either you believe that a county is a small enough district to support a fair majority election, or you think that our small county must be further sliced and diced to ensure a coalition government.

Maybe we just allow those in one section of the county whose values more closely align with their neighboring county to secede from our county and likewise have other neighborhoods in other counties secede from their county to join Fayette. We’ll just redraw the lines, although they certainly will be convoluted.

Honestly, I don’t see any difference between this ludicrous plan and the one being enforced today.

Alan Felts
Peachtree City, Ga.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
VRA
Quote:

This is about a minority party that wants a seat at the table and will use any means, including the favorite card in their deck, the racial one, to gain that seat.

What a shame that there are people who want to keep a qualified person off a governing board in Fayette County because of his 'political party'. It certainly couldn't be because of his time as an appointed member, he has not done a job for the students, staff, and parents of Fayette County; it couldn't be because of his 'religion'. The BOE, until this issue came up, worked through some difficult issues under his leadership - and continues to serve the county well. I guess the only way a certain section of FC could elect a person of their choice was through the Section 2 of the VRA. Mr. Alan Felts - the skin color of the members of this county does not determine their values.
Mr. Presberg served all of FC well during his tenue - and will continue to do so.

G35 Dude
G35 Dude's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/15/2006
Mr Felts
Quote:

However, I see that you did leave out the fact that the last two challenges using Section 2 in the 1990s were found in favor of the counties and the state, not the plaintiffs who claimed unfair practices.

Are you also aware of Shelby County v Holder? Just last June the Supreme Court ruled that section 4 (b) of the voting rights act was unconstitutional. That is the coverage formula and without it Section 5 is invalid.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shelby_County_v._Holder