Government and Politics - Race, Gender, and Class Issues (SOCI 1306)

Government and Politics SOCI 1306 Race, Gender, and Class Issues Although recent figures have revealed more minorities voting now than ever before, this trend is still pretty new. Historically, African Americans and other minorities have been underrepresented at the polls. Black males were not allowed to vote at all until after the Civil War, and Black women received the right to vote along with other women only with the adoption of the Nineteenth Amendment in 1920. For years, African Americans who were daring enough to vote were discouraged by discriminatory laws, implemented in several southern states, which mandated poll charges and literacy tests of prospective voters. Literacy tests were not abolished until 1965, when President Lyndon Johnson signed the Voting Rights Act. The 1960s witnessed additional notable developments in U.S. voting. Shortly before the Voting Rights Act was established, the 1964 U.S. Supreme Court case Reynolds v. Sims transformed the character of elections. This significant ruling upheld the premise of “one person, one vote,” a concept asserting that all people’s ballots should be tallied equally. Before this judgement, uneven distributions of population permitted tiny groups of individuals in sparsely populated rural regions to have as much voting power as the denser populations of metropolitan areas. After Reynolds v. Sims, districts were redesigned so that they would include equal numbers of voters. Unfortunately, in June 2013 the Supreme Court invalidated key critical elements of the 1965 Voting Rights Act, saying that southern states no longer need the greater scrutiny that was originally necessary to ban racial discrimination in voting procedures in the South. Following this judgement, numerous states proceeded forward with voter identification measures that had previously been blocked by federal courts. Officials in Texas, Mississippi, and Alabama believe that new identification (ID) laws are required to minimise voting fraud. Opponents cite to the Department of Justice figures stating that just twenty-six people, out 197 million votes in federal elections, were found guilty of voting fraud between 2002 and 2005. "Contemporary voter identification laws are aiming to fix an issue that hasn’t existed in over a century” (Campbell, 2012). Opponents also stress that new voter ID laws disproportionately harm minorities and the poor, potentially banning them from exercising their right to vote. Evidence demonstrates that legal protection of voting rights does not directly convert into equal voting power. Relative to their participation in the U.S. population, women and racial/ethnic minorities are underrepresented in the U.S. Congress. White males still control both houses. And until the inauguration of Barack Obama in 2009, all U.S. presidents had been White men. Like race and ethnicity, socioeconomic class too has affected voting behaviour. Voting rates among poorer-educated, lower-paid workers are lower than for persons with better socioeconomic standing that supports a system in which people with more power and access to resources have the tools to perpetuate their influence. Several hypotheses have been presented to account for this divergence (Raymond 2010). Workers in low-paying service industries could find it tougher to get to the polls because they lack flexibility in their work hours and excellent childcare to look after children while they vote. Because a bigger number of racial and ethnic minorities is employed in such roles, social class may be connected to race and ethnicity impacting voting rates. New requirements for certain kinds of voter identification in some states are likely to aggravate these concerns, because it may take more time away from work, as well as additional child care or transportation, for voters to secure the appropriate IDs. The impact on minorities and the underprivileged may trigger a further reduction in voter participation. Attitudes have a part as well. Some persons of low socioeconomic level or minority race/ethnicity worry their vote will count or voice will be heard because they have seen little proof of their political influence in their community. Many assume that what they already have is all they can attain. As indicated previously, money may carry a lot of power in U.S. democracy. But there are other techniques to make one’s voice known. Free speech can be influential, and people can participate in the democratic system through volunteering with political advocacy groups, writing to elected officials, sharing views in a public forum such as a blog or letter to the editor, forming or joining cause-related political organizations and interest groups, participating in public demonstrations, and even running for a local office.