Last year the residents of Kinston, North Carolina voted to make their local elections nonpartisan, meaning candidates for positions like city council and mayor would not be officially tied to a political party.

This is the case in many cities.  For instance, right here in Phoenix our city council in technically nonpartisan.  In North Carolina, Kinston is among one of only 9 cities that have partisan local elections.

But Kinston is covered by the 1965 Voting Rights Act, which requires them to receive US Department of Justice (DOJ) approval before making any changes to their voting procedures.

The DOJ denied the change, on the basis that, and I quote:

“Removing the partisan cue in municipal elections will, in all likelihood, eliminate the single factor that allows black candidates to be elected to office.”

That’s Loretta King.  She works at the DOJ. Her argument is that without a “D” next to candidates names, black candidates can’t get elected.  There aren’t Republicans in Kinston, by the way.  Well, there are, but they haven’t won a local election any time in recent history.

Others noted the absurdity of partisan elections since Kinston is essentially a one-party city anyway; no one among more than a half-dozen city officials and local residents was able to recall a Republican winning office here.

A few more key facts, before we break it down.

• Kinston has 23,000 residents.  2/3 are black.
• There are 15,402 registered voters.  9,702 (63%) are black.

So, to boil this down, the majority of the voters in Kinston, a majority black town, voted to change the way they elect local officials.  Because of a 1965 law designed to prevent blacks from being discriminated against at the polls, they need to ask the Federal Government for permission.

The feds say no, because not labeling candidates as Democrats will deny black voters their “candidates of choice.”

More excerpts from King’s letter:

“In Kinston elections,voters base their choice more on the race of a candidate rather than his or her political affiliation, and without either the appeal to party loyalty or the ability to vote a straight ticket, the limited remaining support from white voters for a black Democratic candidate will diminish even more.”

“Many of these white crossover voters are simply using straight-ticket voting. As a result, while the racial identity of the candidate greatly diminishes the supportive effect of the partisan cue, it does not totally eliminate it. It follows, therefore, that the elimination of party affiliation on the ballot will likely reduce the ability of blacks to elect candidates of choice.”

I fail to see how this is anything but racist, and an overreach by the Federal Government.

The Voting Rights act was enacted to ensure that all Americans had an equal opportunity to vote, not to combat voter apathy, give blacks their “candidates of choice”, or allow people to vote easily for candidates that are the same race as they are.

The contention that blacks can’t get elected in Kinston without a “D” next to their name is racist and shameful.  But, unfortunately, it’s also par for the course in today’s DOJ.

I would have linked to the MSNBC, CNN, New York Times, or NPR articles on this story instead of just the Washington Times and CNS News, but the Legacy Media has decided that the Federal Government telling blacks that they are not smart enough to vote isn’t a story worth covering.