Understanding HR4: John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act of 2021

The John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act of 2021 is designed to protect voters from discrimination by updating and restoring parts of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. One of the main features of the bill is the reintroduction of a "preclearance" requirement. This means that certain states and local areas with a history of voting rights violations must get approval from the Department of Justice or a federal court before they can change voting rules. This could include changes like redistricting, changing voter ID laws, or moving polling places. The bill sets up a new formula to decide which areas need preclearance. If a state has had 15 or more voting rights violations in the last 25 years, or if it has had 10 violations with at least one by the state itself, it would need preclearance. Local areas with three or more violations would also be covered. This new formula uses recent data to ensure that the law is applied fairly and based on current conditions. In addition to preclearance, the bill requires public notice of any voting changes. This means that voters will be informed ahead of time about changes that might affect their ability to vote, giving them a chance to challenge these changes if necessary. The bill also strengthens the ability of the Department of Justice to enforce voting rights laws and allows for more federal observers to monitor elections.

This bill is important because it aims to protect minority voters from discrimination and ensure that everyone has equal access to the voting process. By requiring certain areas to get approval before changing voting laws, the bill seeks to prevent discriminatory practices that could make it harder for people to vote, especially in minority communities. For everyday Americans, this means that there could be fewer barriers to voting, such as long drives to polling places or strict ID requirements that some people might not be able to meet. The bill is designed to make voting more accessible and fair for everyone, regardless of race or language.

- Restores Effective Protections: Supporters argue that the bill restores important protections that prevent discriminatory voting changes before they happen. - Uses Recent Data: The new formula for preclearance is based on recent voting rights violations, ensuring that the law is applied fairly. - Increases Transparency: By requiring public notice of voting changes, the bill gives voters the opportunity to challenge potentially harmful changes. - Strengthens Legal Tools: The bill makes it easier to challenge practices that dilute minority votes, like gerrymandering. - Expands Federal Oversight: It allows for more federal observers to ensure fair elections.

- Federal Overreach: Opponents argue that the bill gives too much power to the federal government and takes away control from states. - Unequal Treatment: The formula for preclearance may unfairly target certain states, treating them differently without sufficient justification. - Costly and Burdensome: The preclearance process could be costly and time-consuming for states, delaying necessary changes. - Potential for Partisan Enforcement: There is concern that the Department of Justice could use its power to block legitimate voting reforms for political reasons. - Focus on Access Over Integrity: Critics say the bill focuses too much on access and not enough on preventing voter fraud.