WASHINGTON — In a major civil rights action, the Justice Department on Thursday sued to overturn Georgia's requirement that a candidate for public office must win a majority in primary and general elections or face a runoff.
The practice has had "a demonstrably chilling effect on the ability of blacks to become candidates for public office," said John R. Dunne, assistant attorney general for civil rights. The state's majority-vote requirement, similar to that of eight other Southern states, is "an electoral steroid for white candidates," he added.
California, like 40 other states, has a plurality requirement for primary and general elections, in which the candidate who gathers the most votes is nominated or elected.
The government in its suit plans to cite elections in more than 20 Georgia counties where at least 35 black candidates won the most votes in their initial primaries, but then lost in runoffs as voters coalesced around a white opponent. The suit was filed in federal court in Atlanta.
Some political scientists who specialize in Southern voting patterns said that the elimination of the rule will help Republicans, because black candidates will more frequently land the Democrat Party's primary nomination, thus pushing conservative whites toward Republicans in the general election.
"I would suggest the Republican Justice Department in the name of minority rights is pursuing policies that will help Republicans," said Larry Sabato, a University of Virginia political scientist.
But Dunne said there was no consideration or discussion of possible political fallout from the suit. He said he made a \o7 pro forma\f7 mention of the suit to Atty. Gen. Dick Thornburgh and that he knew of no discussions of the action with the White House. He added that he would be surprised if there had been.
Rob McDuff, a project attorney with the Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights, praised the suit--the first statewide challenge by the Justice Department to a majority-vote requirement--as "a really good sign. It shows that the Justice Department, unlike under the (Ronald) Reagan Administration, is going to be vigorous in challenging discrimination in voting."
The suit alleges that the majority-vote requirement violates the Voting Rights Act of 1965 and the 14th and 15th amendments to the Constitution "because it was adopted and has been maintained for racially discriminatory purposes."
