republicans and republican states are quote, jim crow 2.0. mr. president, i was on the floor last week talking in particular detail about my states laws. we are all different states here but i knowla my states laws. i know them well as it relates to voting rights. and here's one thing i said last week. in some of the most critical issues in terms of voting rights legislation, early in-person voting, automatic voter registration, and no excuse absentee voting, the republican state of alaska, the great state of alaska has voting laws that are significantly more expansive than the laws of new york, then the laws of delaware, then the laws of connecticut, then the laws of massachusetts and new hampshire. it is a long list, mr. president, a long list. and you can see why senators like me, my constituents in t particular find it more than just a little bit annoying when you have these smug arguments of republican states being jim crow 2.0. let me give you another particular one as a relates to new york, the majority leader's home state. my state has no

as i keep hearing the references to jim crow, i ask myself how many americans understand what jim crow was. i am so thankful -- thankful that we are not living in those days, but just for those who don't appreciate the jim crow that was, it was a time when my grandfather born in 1921 would experience that if he were still alive. he could tell stories of the jim crow era. an era for a black person to vote, you can -- you had to pass a literacy test. it would be a test just not on reading, it was a test, do you know who your governor was 20 years before you were getting ready to vote. it was would include the threat of being lynched, literally killed because those in power wanted to stop black folks from realizing and fully participating in the greatest nation on earth and exercising what i believe is a fundamental responsibility an right of americans the right to vote. it would include beatings and the power of intimidation, the loss of your job if you dared to show up to vote. and so when i hear my president and your president and the president of these united states a week or so ago t

as i keep hearing the references to jim crow, i ask myself how many americans understand what jim crow was. i am so thankful -- thankful that we are not living in those days, but just for those who don't appreciate the jim crow that was, it was a time when my grandfather born in 1921 would experience that if he were still alive. he could tell stories of the jim crow era. an era for a black person to vote, you can -- you had to pass a literacy test. it would be a test just not on reading, it was a test, do you know who your governor was 20 years before you were getting ready to vote. it was would include the threat of being lynched, literally killed because those in power wanted to stop black folks from realizing and fully participating in the greatest nation on earth and exercising what i believe is a fundamental responsibility an right of americans the right to vote. it would include beatings and the power of intimidation, the loss of your job if you dared to show up to vote. and so when i hear my president and your president and the president of these united states a week or so ago t

jim crow relic. miraculously became jim crow relic in 2021 briefly stopped being jim crow relic last thursday but it's now back to being a jim crow relic this week.k. to be clear, the protestant election takeover bill democrats want to rame through this week are not in any way successors of the civil rights legislation from the mid 20th century. it has been, is today and will remain illegal to discriminate against voters anywhere in america because of their race. targeting americans online speech and sending government money to political campaigns is about tilting the playing field. a widely popular id law and making it harder produce roles is not making voting easier, it's making cheesy cheating easier. attorney general can rely voting laws without having to win in court is not about promoting justice, it's about short-circuiting justice. this is about one party wanting the power unilaterally rewrite the rulebook of american elections. interestingly the biden administration's staff have gone out of

was not even a jim crow relic in 2020. just miraculously became a jim crow relic in 2021. briefly stopped being a jim crow relic last thursday, but it's now back to become a jim crow relic this week. now, to be clear, the partisan election takeover bills that democrats want to ram through this week are not, not in any way successors of the civil rights legislation from the mid 20th century. it has been, is today, and will remain illegal to discriminate against voters anywhere in america because of their race, period. that's the law. now, targeting americans' online speech and sending government money to political campaigns is not about civil rights, it's about tilting the playing field, weakening widely popular voter i.d. laws and making it harder to produce accurate voter rolls is not about making voter easier, it's about making cheating easier. changing the laws so that our partisan attorney general can rewrite voting laws without even having to win in court is not about promoting justice, it's about short-circuiting justice. this is about one party wanting the power to

jim crow created america's own system of apartheid. jim crow was really born in the south, although it would, it would go north, certainly, but in the south and would become legal and would become part of state laws local laws. in the north we became kind of part of the custom, but not necessarily part of the law. i think it's fair to say is the dixie. the so called white south has left a very deep imprint on the political culture of the united states. it was defeated militarily during the civil war, but not the beat defeated politically because it's white supremacist ideas were not defeated. and in fact, it seems as if the part of the reconciliation between dixie and the rest of the country is to give dick see a pass. ah, the south had lost nearly everything in the war, but we refused to surrender. instead, we united around a strange myth known if the last cause i grew up surrounded by it. it was always the yankees or the war of northern aggression life before the war was romanticized, as one of content, slaves and idyllic plantation,

citizens are meant to believe a return of jim crow is on the table. but this is only president biden's sixth priority after he was blocked from spending $5 trillion on windmills and welfare. democrats' own behavior refutes their false hysteria. 12 months ago the president said that politics need not be a raging fire destroying everything in its path. that was just 12 months ago. but yesterday he poured a giant can of gasoline on the fire. 12 months ago the president said every disagreement doesn't have to be a cause for total war, but yesterday he said anyone who opposes smashing the senate, smashing the senate and letting democrats rewrite election law is a domestic enemy and -- listen to this -- a trader like jefferson davis. one week ago president biden gave a january 6 lecture about not stoking political violence. one week ago. yesterday with the world's largest mega phone, he invoked the literal civil war and said we're on the doorstep of autocracy. talk about domestic enemies. rhetoric unbecoming of a president of the united states. in less than

it was not even a jim crow relic in 2020. miraculously it became a jim crow relic in 2021. briefly it stopped being a jim crow relic last thursday. now it's back to being a jim crow relic this week. now to be clear the partisan election takeover bill the democrats want to ram through this week are not in any way suggested that the civil rights legislation from the mid-20th century. it has been and it is today and will remain illegal to discriminate against voters anywhere in america because of their race period. that is the law. targeting americans on line and sending government took political campaigns is not about civil rights. weakening wildly popular voter i.d.s laws and make it harder to -- is not about making voting easier to about making cheating easier. changing laws that were attorney general can rewrite the laws without even having to win in court is not about promoting justice, it's about short-circuiting-c justice. this is about one party wanting the power to unilaterally rewrite the rule book of american elections. interestingly the biden administration have go

what's interesting, the rhetoric the democrats use on this is jim crow. you know, jim crow laws were written i elected democrats and there were designed to prevent the voters from voting democrats out of office. that's what schumer is trying to do today. this is jim crow 2.0 of democrats once again try to take away the ability of the voters to vote them out of office. it's wrong and it's an abuse of power. >> this is all really about the divide -- and how you handle it. [inaudible] the reporters are have mass, student half-mast, i know it's a personal decision. i'm curious why you all decided to get her together. [inaudible] >> well listen, i think there's been wild hypocrisy from the biden administration when it comes to call the policies, whether mask mandates where joe biden riley said we should have mandates, whether vaccine mandates were joe biden said we should never axing mandates. as far as i know everyone here has been vaccinated, then double vaccinated and boosted, and, and at some point -- look, i do know dr. fauci is been all over the map onto

i want to remind the previous speaker that we did not have jim crow before there was jim crow. and we did not have jim crow -- we had it until 1954. i used to teach this stuff called history, and i will say to my colleagues. anything that's happened before can happen again. it was the lack of the vote that had 95 years between george washington murray, who was the last african-american to represent south carolina here in this body until i came along in 1992. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. clyburn: because the right to vote was taken away. and the results were nullified. we are not going back. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from illinois is recognized. mr. davis: i'd like to reserve at this time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from north carolina is recognized. . mr. butterfield: mr. speaker, at this time i yield one minute to the distinguished gentleman from maryland, a coveted member of the house committee on administration, my friend, jamie raskin. the speaker pro tem

did they ever stop to think about what they're saying and what their words mean under jim crow schoolsrestaurants, buses were segregated it was evil, shameful, disgusting and not provided in the democrats he the specter of jim crow to advance the partisan power grab, that is evil and shameful and that is disgusting. biden, pelosi kamala harris, their reckless, racial arsonist and guilty of the exact same thing that accuses left. >> if you ask yourself why it gets even worse, what is the reason biden went to atlanta to deliver the ill judged appalling rent, would you believe that chuck todd gave us the answer this morning. >> i was told by somebody in atlanta, the activists are ignorant, he had to do this that was argument if he did not do this they were not going to have people to lick envelopes in senate races and house races. steve: licking envelopes. because they're worried about not having enough people to lick envelopes at their election campaign they rub salt in america is painful wounds that's what this whole thing is about and it shows what democrats are all about. for them it

what was jim crow 1.0? jim crow 1.0 were laws that were written almost exclusively by elected democrats. you look at the authors of jim crow, they were democrats, as were the founders, the ku klux klan. and the purpose of jim crow laws was to do one thing -- stop the voters from voting democrats out of office, because you look at the african americans who were freed from slavery, they were electing republicans. in many instances, they were electing black republicans. and the democrats didn't want that. how dare the voters select someone not from their party? and so jim crow was written to strip the right to vote from the voters who dared to vote against democrats. well, fast-forward to today. the corrupt politicians act is jim crow 2.0. it is once again written by democrats to strip the right to vote from the american people, to prevent them from voting democrats out of office. listen, a lot of democrats are really nervous right now. pretty much everyone in washington recognizes that in november we're going

and we all know those laws -- the jim-crow laws, black code that institutionalized segregation, aimed at disenfranchising minority voters, poll taxes and literacy tests and voter intimidation, rationalized by protecting our national security or voter integrity. thanks to courageous leaders, we were able to reverse those laws. by presidents such as harry truman in 1948 in integrating our military. by our courts in the landmark decision in 1954, brown v. board of education, marylanders are proud of thurgood marshall, a native son of maryland, the role that he played in arguing that case before the supreme court. and by our congress with historic action in 1964 to pass the civil rights act, in 1965 the voting rights act, 1968, the fair housing act. today we are now seeing a renewed effort for jim-crow type laws aimed at disenfranchising targeting voters. my colleagues have talked about it and i'm not going to repeat it because time is running short. aimed at minorities to prevent them from being able to cast their votes. marginal groups are targeted because those who are enacting these l

is a kind of new jim crow. that might surprise the 69% of black americans who support voter i.d. now, what are they up to? this is an especially good question given the letter that 28 democrats still in the senate signed on april 7, 2017. to the leadership around here, urging them to oppose any effort, any effort to stop the senate's tradition and custom of extended debate. some of those senators are on the floor with us at this moment. i see the junior senator fromle illinois -- from illinois and the junior senator from hawaii and the junior senator from maine. the presiding officer, for that matter. many more were down here earlier. and, mr. president, i would invite, through the chair, any of those senators, if they would like to engage in a colloquy why they have changed their position since they signed that letter on april 7, 2017. i guess i don't have any takers. i will point out -- a senator: will the senator yield? mr. cotton: i will certainly yield. the presiding officer: the senator from maine. mr. king: i signed that letter. let's talk about the letter itself. we are u

since then, the most even tie democratic laws since jim crow have taken the nation by storm. last year, 19 states passed nearly three dozen laws undermining access to the ballot box. it is as if they're trying to codify the big lie into law. in arizona, georgia and other states, they've made it harder to vote by mail. something that my colleagues have talked about, that americans have been doing for decades, and the republican g.o.t. efforts long embrace it as a way to succeed. they're also removing drop boxes in minority communities under the bogus claim they invite fraud. so when it's in reverend warnock's community or senator padilla's community, or cory booker's community, or my community, somehow that drop box invites fraud just simply because it's in our community? another lie straight from the mouth of a defeated president -- that many states are reducing early voting days. when you add up all these restrictions, what do you get? longer lines at the polls, people giving up, folks who have to get home to their kids, workers who can't afford to take a day off. to the par

before the civil war there weren't a lot but really in the 1880s and kind of in the kickoff of the jim crow era and other for other political reasons there was frequent filibustering so there is a connection between the filibuster jim crow slavery in the civil war. there's there were some filibuster's before the civil war but really the anti lynching laws were things that were constantly filibuster, but they came through congress even to the late 1930s. so have filibuster rules been codified. well when you talk about the filibuster you're talking about three or four different things people think of the filibuster. they think of the movie mr. smith goes to washington, you know, jimmy stewart dramatic scene where he passes out doing the filibuster, but there's also other delaying tactics have been part of the tradition of of congress and the senate in particular roll calls for the quorum. multiple quorum calls. there was something called the disappearing corn where people actually would leave the building so they could delay votes. so they've been a lot of dilatory tactics, but the filibuster

i know my roots and i know the challenges of jim crow and thank god we are not in a time of jim crow. the history that my friend talked to i know i know this history and i know my colleagues in the senate know this history. we're all not blind to what happened in terms of racial oppression going back to the founding of this nation. the constitution the people have been waving around, it's hard not to read that and not see that many of the compromises were based upon an acquiescence to that original sin of this nation, slavery. we know the violence of what he said and talked about. i'm frustrated that we can agree that there has been overwrought language on both sides of the political aisle around this issue, but we should be focusing in on the facts. i have a hard time listening to people that want to talk about this issue and don't talk about facts. in the united states today, it is more difficult for the average african american to vote than the average white american. that is not rhetoric. that is fact. we know that black voters on average are forced to wait in line twice as long a

slavery became jim crow which became open cursor ration. -- open incarceration.people have vastly more single-parent families. the single-family issue does not explain the overwhelming child poverty in the communities of color. white kill whites at a higher rate than blacks. black people are not more vallas he -- more violent. if slavery is a crime, then enslavers are criminals like george washington and thomas jefferson. is this book a history or commentary on history? thank you. guest: first of all, someone once said, and i agree, either we are going to deal with truth based facts, otherwise lies become normal. in our essays, we deal in facts. i hope you would look at the facts. we talk about incarceration rates. the question is, you heard me mention in the 1930's, 1940's, when we were in depression, elderly people could walk safely in our community without fear of being mugged. today, blacks in new york city, 32% of whites in new york commit about 3% of violent crimes. blacks are 21% and we commit 64% of violent crimes. incarceration rates at the turn of the c

it is not a relic of jim crow. i was struck about that becauseo from 1891 through 1965, so, we are talking over 80 years, the only thing that was block was civil right for black americans. given that, would you say it's fair for us to say that the filibuster was indeed a relic of jim crow? >> on the issue that you brought up. democrats, senators from the south. remember when the civil rights act of 1965 was passed there was a higher percentage of republicans that voted for it. the one person that made a difference was the republican leader. i'm going to have to end this -discussion with you, but i want to say one thing. why would you want to expand this president into legislation and we can bipartisanship? that is where you've got to leave it. it is a i slippery slope. it's going to go farther. >> thank you for responding to my questions. i appreciate that. rmr. president. >> senator from oregon. >> i think that i will start this by returning to the 1800s. a senator from massachusetts, rights debate which is why am

republicans agendas are now saying falsely it's a relative jim crow. i don't know how they can look them in the eyes with no signs of embarrassment. i do not understand. with the system, the media they are not roasting them for this power grab. i would now like to address the misconception on the cloture motion, the 60 vote requirement. the cloture motion requires 60 votes to bring consideration of legislation to finality just because it can be used to block legislation does not mean that the term cloture always equals a filibuster. cloture cuts off not just debate but the offering of amendments. voting for cloture also is saying that the senate has voted on enough amendments. senators who have amendments important to the state that they want to offer should be voting against cloture to preserve their right to offer amendments as desired. debate and amendments are the hallmark of this democracy, not an obstacle to be swept aside in pursuit of short-term partisan agenda. when democrats lost control of the senate with 60 votes and thereafter, amendment v

states who pledged to lower the temperature and unite america now invokes the brutal racial hatred of jim crow segregation to smear, to smear states whose new voting laws are more accessible than, for example, delaware. ten days of early voting and excuse only voting absentees in delaware is fine, but 17 days of early voting and no excuse absences in georgia is racist jim crow? senate democratic leader pretends it is a civil rights crisis that georgia has enshrined more, more early voting and more absentee balloting than his own state of new york has ever allowed. this is misinformation. it's a big lie designed to reduce faith in our democracy, justify top-down election takeover, and justify smashing the senate itself. some years back, a veteran democratic senator explained, quote, the nuclear option is ultimately an example of the arrogance of power. it would transform the senate from the so-called cooling saucer of our founding fathers talked about to a purer majoritarian body. that was then senator joe biden. he continued, at its core the filibuster is not about stopping a nominee or a bill

was not even a jim crow relic in 2020. just miraculously became a jim crow relic in 2021. briefly stopped being a jim crow relic last thursday, but it's now back to become a jim crow relic this week. now, to be clear, the partisan election takeover bills that democrats want to ram through this week are not, not in any way successors of the civil rights legislation from the mid 20th century. it has been, is today, and will remain illegal to discriminate against voters anywhere in america because of their race, period. that's the law. now, targeting americans' online speech and sending government money to political campaigns is not about civil rights, it's about tilting the playing field, weakening widely popular voter i.d. laws and making it harder to produce accurate voter rolls is not about making voter easier, it's about making cheating easier. changing the laws so that our partisan attorney general can rewrite voting laws without even having to win in court is not about promoting justice, it's about short-circuiting justice. this is about one party wanting the power to

are those states jim crow 2.0. here's an important issue. why can't the states measure up to a republican state like alaska on key voting rights issues? good afternoon. the framers and founders of the nation through the constitution new voting rights were so important that constitutionally they gave the power to administer the laws to states across the country. for the united states senate the filibuster which has a bad connotation, for a member of the united states senate to speak on behalf of his or her constituents. to advocate on their views even though they may be on the minority is what that 60 vote rule provides so it protects the minority not whether you are republican or democrat but whether you are rural or urban or have unusual ideas to pull people together before we decide to proceed on legislation it protects a member of the senate that represents a view or need of additional information before agreeing to proceed, but it does more than that. it forces us to work together. i long for the days in which republicans and democrats,

there was a concerted effort to block some of the legislation especially that was related to the jim crow era a famous example in 1890 would have been the election or force bill and that election or force bill would allowed federal troops to monitor elections to make sure black voters could vote and it was really the southern block of the senate that blocked that with some several allies and it was a very effective tactic they could essentially run the clock out. toward the end of a short-term of congress and do differentilatory tactics to the block legislation where there was a 50% there are enough people in the house. it's the senate to approve it, but they could not get past a filibuster. what are some of the arguments for and against the filibuster as it currently exists? i think when you talk about the filibuster's currently exist, you're really talking about cloture which is kind of a different. idea cloture is the requirement for 60 people 60 senators to agree to move on to a floor vote actually a motion to consider and then a floor about the filibuster is more the classic extended

you said that the filibuster is not a relic of jim crow.and i was struck about that because from 1891 through 1965 -- so we are talking over 80 years -- the only thing blocked in the u.s. senate by filibuster was civil rights for black americans. given that, wouldn't you say it's fair for us to say the filibuster in that history was, indeed, a relic of jim crow? mr. grassley: you know who controlled the senate during that period of time on the issue you brought up and it was democrat senators from the south. remember when the civil rights act of 1965 was passed, that there was a higher percentage of republicans than democrats that voted for it, and the one person that made a difference in getting the civil rights act passed was senator dirksen, the republican leader. i will have to end this discussion with you because -- but i want to say one thing. why would you want to expand this president that's sent by democrats into legislation and weaken bipartisanship. that's where we have to leave it. s is a slippery slope. you may want do it for a

is it jim crow 2.0? now, look, mr.sident, i wouldn't make that claim against those states maligning their elected officials. i'm sure they have their reasons, but again, by president biden's logic they are. let me do another area of important voting rights laws. voter registration. my state, in essence, has automatic voter registration. probably one of the most forward-leaning of any state in the country. and as i speak right here on the senate floor, there is no automatic voter registration in pennsylvania, in minnesota, in arizona, in new hampshire, in delaware. president biden's state. or wisconsin. none. none. none of these states have automatic voter registration. are these states jim crow 2.0 relative to alaska? my republican state? i wouldn't say that. but again, by president biden's logic they are. let me give you one more, mr. president, pretty important one as well. this is the issue of no-excuse absentee voting. there are many other expansive provisions in alaska's laws as it pertains to voting, but here's o

jim crow created america's own system of apartheid. jim crow was really born in the south, although it would, it would go north certainly, but in the south it would become legal. it would become part of state law local laws. in the north we became kind of part of the custom, but not necessarily part of the law. ah, i think it's fair to say that dixie, the so called white south has left a very deep imprint on the political culture of the united states. it was defeated militarily during the civil war, but not to be defeated politically because it's white supremacist ideas were not defeated. and in fact, it seems as if the part of the reconciliation between dixie and the rest of the country. it is to give dick see a pass. ah, the south had lost nearly everything in the war, but we refused to surrender. instead, we united around a strange myth known if the last cause. i grew up surrounded by it. it was always the yankees or the war of northern aggression life before the war was romanticized, as one of content, slaves and idyllic plantation

jason, when biden says this is jim crow 2.0, isn't that getting tired -- everything is jim crow 2.0. we've heard this time and time again from biden and the democrats. it doesn't seem to be getting any traction even with moderate democrats out there. just kind of rolling their eyes. this is just the rules that elected barack obama twice? >> one of the things we want to get back to, those rules that elected barack obama, so looking at things prior to 2013, prior to shelby county, you know, between 1965 and 2013, no one on the right or left necessarily said that voting was unfair. i mean, we had some instances, of course, in 2000. >> laura: there is always cheating. >> but people largely were saying that it was fair. and, you know, we want to get back to that before it was stripped down. of course, when you're calling it jim crow 2.0 you're referring to the fact that the voting rights act is being stripped down naked. so we're trying to get back to that that's what's in the john lewis voting rights act. the freedom to vote act. >> laura: the "washington post" is reporting that a group

it became a jim crow relic in 2021. briefly stopped being a jim crow relic last thursday but now back to being a jim crow relic this week. >> harris: he is following the trail of times the democrats said we like it, let's keep it and then we don't. jason. >> the hypocrisy is stunning but i probably differ than almost all of my former colleagues here. i think the house and senate should be voting more often, not less often. america shouldn't be afraid of voting on things. i'm opposed to changing the filibuster and opposed to the underlying legislation they are trying to pass but i applaud the idea we'll vote more nofn this country rather than put our finger to the wind and say the whip talked to members and they don't like it. go ahead and vote. i think it will get defeated as it should. >> harris: all right. let's check this out. liberal late night host stephen colbert mocked senator krysten sinema on her support of the filibuster. >> they hope the spend the holiday spending much needed voting rights legislation and nee

the filibuster preserved jim crow laws and stalled civil rights legislation for decades. the filibuster help block the passage of anti-lynching legislation for over 100 years. the filibuster nearly stop congress from passing the most important voting rights law in our nation's history, the voting rights act of 1965. today's filibuster does not foster bipartisanship and compromise. in fact, the exact opposite is true. the filibuster has been weaponized to intensify partisan division. the filibuster is a wicked tool used to kill legislation supported by the majority of americans of all political parties, and that's true for protecting the right to vote, gun safety legislation and immigration reform and codifying roe v. wade. the filibuster thwarts the will ofts the people. today's filibuster doesn't encourage debateen here it promotes cowardice. senators can torpedo bills without saying a single word in public. or even stepping to the floor of the united states senate. this is not how a so-called deliberative body should operate. senators should be required to talk and vote