Rodricks on Bartlett

Dan Rodricks rightfully lambastes Roscoe Bartlett's vote against the Voting Rights Act, but his reasoning is odd:

Extending the Voting Rights Act would harm someone? It might have inconvenienced certain states with a long history of discrimination, but the greatest value was in the symbolic power of its affirmation -- particularly for the GOP. With those 33 votes against -- all Republicans -- they didn't exactly restore their image as the party of Lincoln. Way to go, Roscoe!

But the Voting Rights Act isn't mere symbolism. It's not as if we would reauthorize the Emancipation Proclamation as a way to commemorate the freeing of the slaves. As the ACLU painstakingly notes, voting discrimination is still an ongoing problem, of which the Florida fiasco in 2000 and Georgia's recent voter ID law are only the most egregious examples.