Time for Georgia to get out of the penalty box

Even though it won't expire for another two years, Congress has begun hearings on the most controversial provision of the Voting Rights Act - Section 5, the requirement that certain states and jurisdictions mostly in the Deep South ask permission from the federal government before a new election law or procedure can be enacted. Congress last extended Section 5 in 1982, and now, we are being asked once again to extend it - this time all the way to 2030.

The Georgia Republican congressional delegation has pledged to one another - and to the citizens we represent back home - that we will not support any legislation that keeps Georgia in the penalty box

We are not the same state we were in 1965. African-Americans in Georgia play an integral role in our dynamic economy and political life. It is simply unfair that after 40 years Georgians remain subject to the penalties of Section 5 while other states do not.

Back in 1965, we recognize that Section 5's historically unprecedented intrusion into local prerogatives was justified. Blacks throughout Georgia and other southern states were systematically subjected to phony literacy tests which resulted in their being denied the right to register to vote. The VRA has permanently ended voter literacy tests everywhere, and that will not expire.

Why should Georgia now be released from Section 5's penalty? It's simple: Election data from our state indicates that blacks and whites have achieved parity in every important category that sparked the passage of the VRA 40 years ago.

According to a study conducted for the Project on Fair Representation at the American Enterprise Institute, blacks in Georgia have higher levels of voter registration and participation than do whites. In fact, blacks in Georgia have higher registration rates than do blacks outside of the South.

No longer will Georgians vote against a black candidate simply because he or she is black. Of the 34 statewide elected officials in Georgia, nine are black; this demonstrates that large percentages of whites will support a black candidate.

Some of my Republican and Democratic colleagues have argued that Georgia made these strides precisely because it was under federal supervision, and once that supervision ends, Georgia will backslide and begin keeping blacks from participating in the election process once again. That is utter nonsense.

This is a fairness issue as well. The AEI study compares racial voting behavior in Georgia to other states like Tennessee, Arkansas, and Wisconsin - all of which are not covered by the penalty provision of Section 5. The findings are irrefutable: African-American voter registration and election participation, and white crossover support for black candidates, is lower in these states than in Georgia. It is a fair question to ask - why shouldn't these states be subject to Section 5 if Georgia must be?

Courts throughout the South have documented that Section 5 often is responsible for the creation of all these crazy, bugsplat-looking districts that have been drawn during redistricting during the last 15 years or so - many of which have been struck down as unconstitutional racial gerrymanders.

Justice Sandra Day O'Connor was correct when she noted that racial gerrymanders "that includes in one district individuals who belong to the same race, but who are otherwise widely separated by geographical and political boundaries, and who have little in common with another but the color of their skins, bears an uncomfortable resemblance to political apartheid."

Forty years of federal bureaucratic supervision of Georgia is enough. We, like most of the other states subject to Section 5 supervision, have come a long way since the passage of the Voting Rights Act, and with each year that goes by, race plays a smaller role in our election decisions. What more does Georgia have to do to be treated the same as every other state?

U.S. Representative Lynn Westmoreland, R-Ga., represents the 8th Congressional District.