Every vote counted accurately

Essayist Terrence Heath is black, in a same-sex interracial marriage, and raising two black sons. With a giant hole now in the Voter Rights Act, the issue is personal. His right to vote "was made harder to defend and easier to assail." So he ponders some aspects of the predicament. Some of his musings are based on an article by Peter Cole in The Nation.

The big question:

Do we need the government to fight discrimination?

Yes. Not only do we need government to fight discrimination, but it is better equipped to do so than any other entity or institution, and more effective. Fighting discrimination, Cole writes, requires setting standards for individual and collective behavior, spreading those standards through education, and enforcing standard by creating consequences for violating them. Government provides essential pathways to participate in setting those standards, and defining recourse when standards are not met. Its institutions provide important leverage for social changes.

What about other players? Individuals, churches, corporations, and media outlets do contribute to change. But they may not be aware of their biases and they don't allow public participation in their decision making.

The big problem with the ruling by the Supremes is that Scalia confused majority rule with democracy. Most of the time they are the same. But there is the issue of tyranny of the majority.

With the big hole in the VRA, it is possible to overturn a bad voting law. But it comes after the vote, must wind its way through the courts (understaffed due to the GOP), and the plaintiff must prove there was intention to discriminate.

There are ideas to replace the formula the Supremes threw out. Congress could revise it to demand preclearance for recent violators of voting rights. Or it could demand all states and municipalities pre-clear all voting changes. Then it could demand a city or state document the necessity for the change, shifting the burden of proof to those changing the rules. There could also be standards for number of days for early voting, redistricting, ballot access, and voter ID. Alas, we're dealing with "the laziest Congress ever."

That we're having this discussion at all shows us a deeper problem -- the Constitution doesn't specify a right to vote. It is time to change that. Such an amendment would:

* Guarantee the right to vote.

* Empower Congress to create minimal standards.

* Provide protection against preventing people from voting.

* Make sure every vote is counted accurately.

Yeah, Congress is even less likely to pass this than changes to the VRA, but this has been around for a while and is a long-term project.