FL Dem Sen Candidate Val Demings Asks What is Different From 2006 When Voting Rights Act Was Passed ‘Unanimously’

In an effort to get a so-called voting rights bill passed that will essentially extend many of the emergency orders that were put in place in 2020 due to the pandemic, Democrats are attempting to point out that in 2006, an extension to the 1965 voting rights act was passed “unanimously.”

U.S. House Rep and Senate candidate Val Demings asked in a viral tweet what the difference is between then and now with the new so-called voting rights bill.

“The Voting Rights Act passed unanimously in 2006. What is different now?” Demings wondered.

Demings also suggested in a prior tweet, “There should be nothing partisan about protecting the right to vote.”

Demings is challenging GOP Sen Marco Rubio, who is up for re-election to a third term in 2022.

Biden referenced that vote as well in his Georgia speech last week as he said, “In 2006, the Voting Rights Act passed 390 to 33 in the House of Representatives and 98 to 0 in the Senate with votes from 16 current sitting Republicans in this United States Senate. Sixteen of them voted to extend it.”

Sen John Cornyn (R-TX), who was in the Senate at that point, pushed back on the suggestion at the two bills are related at this point.

In an appearance last week on Fox News, Cornyn declared, “The truth is this is not about voting rights. This is about a partisan political power grab, and they are just trying to dress it up and sell it as something else. I just don’t think the American people are buying it.”

Cornyn’s counterpart Sen Ted Cruz (R-TX) also spoke out against the legislation at a news conference last week and said, “Democrats have decided that voter fraud benefits them politically and they’re willing to go to any length to tear down the reasonable, commonsense protections that protect the integrity of our elections.”

Demings’ opponent Rubio echoed the words of Cornyn and Cruz in a floor speech where he called the bill “An election law to make sure they never lose power, to make it easier to win elections, and therefore have power in perpetuity. “

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *