文字记录：佐治亚州联邦参议员拉斐尔·沃诺克做客《与玛格丽特·布伦南面对面》节目 2026年5月3日
2026-05-03T10:25:28-0400 / 哥伦比亚广播公司新闻
以下是佐治亚州民主党联邦参议员拉斐尔·沃诺克的访谈文字记录，该访谈于2026年5月3日在《与玛格丽特·布伦南面对面》节目中播出。
玛格丽特·布伦南： 上周，最高法院以6票赞成、3票反对的裁决，推翻了2022年路易斯安那州国会选区划分方案。该选区地图为增设第二个非裔占多数的选区而存在操纵选区划分问题。三名自由派大法官持反对意见，称该裁决将“摧毁”具有里程碑意义的1965年《投票权法案》中的某一条款，而多数派保守派大法官则表示，此次裁决“更新”了相关法律框架。佐治亚州民主党联邦参议员拉斐尔·沃诺克牧师今天上午从亚特兰大来到我们的节目。欢迎再次做客。
拉斐尔·沃诺克参议员： 早上好。
玛格丽特·布伦南： 我们的哥伦比亚广播公司新闻法律分析师将此次裁决描述为缩小了《投票权法案》第2条的适用范围。实际上，这意味着现在要提起任何指控选区划分存在种族歧视的诉讼将更加困难，除非能拿出存在歧视意图的证据。你为什么称这是美国民主的一次失败？
沃诺克参议员： 玛格丽特，我们必须明确，本周发生的事情无异于一场毁灭性的重大打击，不仅打击了我们的民主，尤其打击了南方的少数族裔群体。关于歧视意图的说法本身就是错误且具有误导性的，它无视了我们的历史。在第十五条修正案通过后的100年里，从纸面上看，该修正案赋予了非裔美国人投票权，但却通过所谓的“种族中立”手段剥夺了他们的这项权利。整整100年里，投票权都被剥夺了。而在更近的历史中，正是这个保守派最高法院，在2013年的谢尔比诉霍尔德案中削弱了《投票权法案》第5条的效力。自那以后，种族投票参与率的差距越来越大，而非越来越小，在过去受第5条约束的州，这一差距扩大的速度是其他州的两倍。此次裁决将带来灾难性的影响，现在比以往任何时候都更需要我们挺身而出，为我们的民主而战。
玛格丽特·布伦南： 但正如你刚才所说，《投票权法案》已经多次被最高法院解读，包括2013年的那次。但该法案最初制定时，当时存在的一些保障措施如今已经不复存在了，对吗？当时南部各州还存在人头税。这部法律要求其中九个州在修改投票规则前，必须获得联邦政府的批准或预先核准。国会在20世纪80年代更新了这部法律。你认为这部法律应该维持1965年最初的版本，还是现在国会需要对其进行修订？
沃诺克参议员： 听着，我知道有些人已经厌倦了补救措施。但我痛恨种族主义。比起病痛，更关心治疗药物，这在我看来是一种奇怪的立场。在2013年那次削弱第5条效力的裁决中，罗伯茨大法官写道，种族投票参与率的差距已经消失了。而露丝·巴德·金斯伯格大法官则表示，在当下取消《投票权法案》的保护，就好比在暴雨中因为没被淋到而扔掉雨伞。自那以后，再说一遍，自那以后——每个人都有权拥有自己的观点，但无权拥有自己的事实。自那以后，种族投票参与率的差距进一步扩大，在过去受第5条约束的州，这一差距更是达到了两倍。玛格丽特，这是有原因的。自从取消了第5条的保护措施后，那些过去惯用伎俩的州，现在玩起了新的把戏。他们用新包装呈现出21世纪的吉姆克劳式手段：移动投票站、关闭非裔和拉丁裔社区的投票点。数据显示，非裔和拉丁裔选民排队投票的时间要长得多，还有选民被从选民名册中除名—— literally，有些选民赶到投票点却不知道自己的名字已经被从名册上删掉了。数据显示，这对非裔和拉丁裔公民造成了不成比例的影响。而现在——
玛格丽特·布伦南： 所以——
沃诺克参议员： ——由于本周的这项裁决，他们甚至可以说，即便你克服重重障碍赶到了投票站，我们已经为政客们操纵选区划分开了绿灯，即便你成功克服障碍、前往投票点——
玛格丽特·布伦南： 没错——
沃诺克参议员： ——你的声音也会被压制。
玛格丽特·布伦南： 这么说，你想要回到1965年法案的原文，想要国会再次为这些南部各州恢复预先核准程序？我刚刚听到的就是这个意思。
沃诺克参议员： 没错，这绝对——
玛格丽特·布伦南： 好的——
沃诺克参议员： ——绝对是我们的目标。
玛格丽特·布伦南： 好吧，那我想指出一点：根据皮尤研究中心的数据，本届国会在2025年拥有创纪录的66名非裔议员，其中包括5名共和党议员，这是国会历史上人数最多的一次。人们可能会据此认为，我们现在所处的国家和罗伯茨大法官之前所说的已经不一样了，正如你刚才指出的那样。如今两党都卷入了选区划分的军备竞赛，你认为这会损害非裔的代表权吗？
沃诺克参议员： 我认为，遗憾的是，最高法院为这场选区划分军备竞赛添了柴。真正的解决办法——
玛格丽特·布伦南： 明确一下，你——
沃诺克参议员： ——在我看来——
玛格丽特·布伦南： ——支持你所在政党推行的选区划分工作。
沃诺克参议员： 我确实支持，因为唐纳德·特朗普——他比我认识的任何人都擅长分裂我们——在选区划分问题上发起了一场军备竞赛。但我其实憎恶党派操纵选区划分的行为。我不喜欢选区划分舞弊，但我们不能单方面解除武装。他曾打电话给得克萨斯州，直白地说“给我多争取六个席位”。因此，加利福尼亚州和其他州不得不做出回应，弗吉尼亚州也是如此。但真正的解决办法是彻底禁止党派操纵选区划分。选区划分舞弊彻底颠覆了我们的选举，使得本该是选民选择自己的政客——
玛格丽特·布伦南： 没错——
沃诺克参议员： ——或是他们的公职人员，变成了政客选择自己的选民。
玛格丽特·布伦南： 完全正确，这也是我问你为何还会支持这种做法的原因。但我理解你是说，当下的情况是紧急状态。让我问你——
沃诺克参议员： 好吧，我有一项法案，玛格丽特，我有一项法案。
玛格丽特·布伦南： 我看过那项法案，没错。
沃诺克参议员： ——这项法案目前就能彻底消除党派操纵选区划分的行为，不过到目前为止，还没有共和党议员支持这项法案。
玛格丽特·布伦南： 好吧，正如我们刚才所说，你所在的政党也在支持加利福尼亚州和弗吉尼亚州等地的党派选区划分工作。佛罗里达州的国会议员拜伦·唐纳兹曾表示，民主党并不关心非裔的代表权，他们只关心民主党自己的代表权。以下是得克萨斯州国会议员韦斯利·亨特在被问及四名黑人共和党议员离开国会一事时的表态：
【韦斯利·亨特议员讲话片段开始】
韦斯利·亨特议员： 我代表的是一个白人占多数的选区，特朗普总统上次在该选区的得票率超过20个百分点，而我上次竞选时以25个百分点的优势胜出。评判我的标准不是我的肤色，而是我的品格。我不在乎这里有多少非裔议员，我只希望这里有最合格的人选。
【韦斯利·亨特议员讲话片段结束】
玛格丽特·布伦南： 那么你如何看待亨特议员刚才表达的观点？
沃诺克参议员： 他不懂美国历史。他在引用马丁·路德·金博士的话，但没有人比金博士更致力于建设一个包容所有人的国家。而正是金博士，以其道德力量推动了1965年《投票权法案》的通过。我们美国人民的盟约是“E pluribus unum”，即“合众为一”。因此，那种认为代表权无关紧要的观点，无视历史、无视事实，是无知的。代表权确实至关重要。当我走进参议院，每周我都会带着我作为在萨凡纳公共住房中长大的非裔男孩的故事和经历前来，同样，那位在阿巴拉契亚地区长大的白人女孩也会带着她的经历前来。她也带来了她的人生体验。因此，当我们打造一个日益单一化的群体时——我认为这正是本周这项裁决将导致的结果——我们本身就在损害民主，也更难制定出惠及所有儿童、让每个孩子都有机会的政策。
玛格丽特·布伦南： 参议员，感谢你今天上午抽出时间。我还要指出，自最高法院作出这项裁决以来，路易斯安那州、阿拉巴马州、南卡罗来纳州和田纳西州的州长都表示有意重新划分国会选区地图。
沃诺克参议员： 没错。我们现在就可以通过我的法案来终结这一切。
玛格丽特·布伦南： 好吧，参议员，今天的访谈就到这里。我们稍后回来。
Transcript: Sen. Raphael Warnock on “Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan,” May 3, 2026
2026-05-03T10:25:28-0400 / CBS News
The following is the transcript of the interview with Sen. Raphael Warnock, Democrat of Georgia, that aired on “Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan” on May 3, 2026.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Last week, in a 6-3 decision, the Supreme Court struck down a 2022 Louisiana congressional map that had been gerrymandered to create a second majority-Black district. The three liberal justices dissented, saying the ruling would quote, “eviscerate” a section of the landmark 1965 Voting Rights Act, while conservatives in the majority said the decision “updated” its legal framework. Reverend Raphael Warnock, democratic senator from the state of Georgia, joins us this morning from Atlanta. Welcome back to the program.
SEN. REV. RAPHAEL WARNOCK: Good morning.
MARGARET BRENNAN: So our CBS News legal analyst described this decision as narrowing the application of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. Effectively, it means it’s now going to be harder to bring any lawsuits claiming that gerrymandering discriminates along racial lines unless there is proof of that intent. Why do you call that a defeat for American democracy?
SEN. WARNOCK: Margaret, let’s be clear, what happened this week is nothing less than a massive and devastating blow, not only to our democracy, but particularly to people of color in the South. This question about intent is on its head, misleading, and it ignores our history. We had 100 years after the 15th Amendment was passed, which, on paper, gave Black people the right to vote, but with supposedly or putatively race neutral methods. For 100 years, the right to vote was denied. But in more recent history, the Supreme Court, this same conservative Supreme Court, hobbled Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act in 2013 with Shelby v. Holder. Since then, we’ve seen the racial turnout gap get wider and wider, not smaller, and it has grown twice as fast in the states that used to be under Section 5. We will see a devastating impact as a result of this, and now, more than ever, we’ve got to stand up and fight for our democracy.
MARGARET BRENNAN: But as you just said, the Voting Rights Act has been, you know, weighed by the court multiple times, including back in 2013 but when it was originally written, there were things in place that- that don’t exist now, right? There was, there was a poll tax in southern states. The law required nine of those states to go get federal approval or pre-clearance before they changed their own voting rules. Congress in the 80s updated this law. Are you of the opinion that the law needs to stand as it was originally written, or does Congress now need to do some work to update it?
SEN. WARNOCK: Listen, I- I know that there are those who are tired of the remedy. I’m tired of racism. I think it’s a strange position to be more concerned about the medicine than you are about the malady. In- in that recent history, Roberts wrote in 2013 when they gutted Section 5, that- that this racial turnout gap had- had gone away. And Ruth Bader Ginsburg, she said, look, getting rid of the protections of the Voting Rights law, in this moment, it’s like getting rid of your umbrella in the midst of a rainstorm because you’re not getting wet. And since then, again, since then- everybody’s entitled to their own opinions, you’re not entitled to your own facts. Since then, the racial voter turnout has grown larger and twice as larger- twice as large in the states that were under Section 5, and that- there’s a reason for that, Margaret. Since they removed the protections of Section 5, states that used to play old games, they’re playing- they’re playing new games. They’re 21st Century Jim Crow tactics in new clothes, moving voter polls, closing polls in Black and Brown communities. The data shows that black and brown people spend much longer time in longer lines, purging people- people literally showing up and not knowing that their names have been purged from the rolls. And the data shows that this disproportionately impacts black and brown citizens. And now–
MARGARET BRENNAN: –So–
SEN. WARNOCK:–as a result of the decision this week. They’re saying that even when you show up, we have- we have given the green light so that politicians can play games with the lines, so that even when you overcome those barriers and show up–
MARGARET BRENNAN: –Yeah–
SEN. WARNOCK: –your voices will be muted.
MARGARET BRENNAN: So, it sounds like you want to go back to the letter of the law from 1965, you want Congress to, once again, reinstitute preclearance for these southern states. That’s what I just heard you lay out.
SEN. WARNOCK: Yeah, that was absolutely–
MARGARET BRENNAN: Okay–
SEN. WARNOCK: –absolutely.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Alright, so when- I want to point something out to you, which is that the current Congress, statistically, in 2025 has a record high number, 66 Black members, according to Pew Research, including five Republi- Republicans, that’s the most to ever serve in Congress. People will look at that and say, we are in a different country than we were, as- as Roberts once argued, as you just pointed out. Now that we are in this redistricting arms race that both parties are playing with here, do you think that will hurt Black representation?
SEN. WARNOCK: I think that the court sadly poured fuel on this redistricting arms race. The solution to this really–
MARGARET BRENNAN: To be clear, you–
SEN. WARNOCK: –in my opinion–
MARGARET BRENNAN: –support redistricting that your party is carrying out.
SEN. WARNOCK: I- I do because Donald Trump, who is better at dividing us than anybody I know, instituted an arms race in redistricting, but I actually hate partisan gerrymandering. I- I don’t like gerrymandering, but we could not unilaterally disarm. He’s the one who called Texas and said, literally, give me six more seats. And so, California and other states had to respond, Virginia in kind. But the solution to this really is to ban partisan gerrymandering. Gerrymandering turns our elections on its head, so that rather than the people picking their politicians–
MARGARET BRENNAN: Right–
SEN. WARNOCK: –or their public servants, the politicians are picking their voters.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Right exactly, which is why I’m asking you how you could support it. But I understand you’re saying the context of the moment is an emergency. Let me ask you–
SEN. WARNOCK: Well, we could- I have a bill though, Margaret, I have a bill.
MARGARET BRENNAN: I saw that bill, yes.
SEN. WARNOCK: –right now that would get that would get rid of partisan gerrymandering, and so far, I’ve had no Republican takers.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, as we just said, your party is supporting the partisan redistricting in places like California and Virginia as well. Congressman Byron Donalds of Florida said Democrats do not care about Black representation. They only care about Democrat representation. Here’s what Congressman Wesley Hunt of Texas said when he was asked about the decision of the four Black Republicans to leave Congress
REP. WESLEY HUNT SOT STARTS
REP. WESLEY HUNT: I represent a white majority district that President Trump would have won by over 20 points, and I won by 25 points the last time I ran. I’m being judged not by the color of my skin, but by the content of my character. I don’t care how many Black people are here. I want the most qualified people that are here.
REP. WESLEY HUNT SOT ENDS
MARGARET BRENNAN: So what do you make of the argument that you just heard there from Congressman Hunt.
SEN. WARNOCK: He doesn’t understand American history. No one- he’s quoting the words of Dr King. No one was more committed to a country that embraces all of us than Dr King. But Dr King, looking at that reality, is the one who is the moral power behind the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Our covenant as an American people is E pluribus unum, out of many one. And so this notion that representation does not matter ignores history, it ignores the facts, is uninformed. Representation does matter. When I- when I go to the Senate, every week, I bring my story and my experience as a Black kid who grew up in public housing in Savannah, and so does that white kid who grew up in- in Appalachia. She brings her experience too. And so when- when we create an increasing monolith, which is what I think is going to happen as a result of these- this decision this week, we hurt the democracy itself, and we make it harder to get at a policy- policies that embrace all of our children and give every child a chance.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Senator, thank you for your time this morning. And I do want to note, since that Supreme Court decision, the governor’s Louisiana, Alabama, South Carolina and Tennessee have all indicated interest in redrawing congressional maps.
SEN. WARNOCK: Yep. And we can end this right now by passing my bill.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, Senator, we’ll leave it there. We’ll be right back.
发表回复