News: Registration requires "verification" before you are allowed to post.  Be sure to check your "spam" folder to make sure that you receive the verification link.  The e-mail should come from "Onnidan Fan Forum" with the return address -> staff@onnidan.com.

Author Topic: North Carolina's Governor Perdue vetoes Republican photo ID voter bill  (Read 1063 times)

Offline NovaSkegee

  • Assistant GM
  • *****
  • Posts: 16,707
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • Assistant Coach
    • View Profile
Friday, Jun. 24, 2011

North Carolina's Governor Perdue vetoes Republican photo ID voter bill

By Jim Morrill
The Charlotte Observer





In a move that could influence next year's presidential election in North Carolina, Democratic Gov. Bev. Perdue vetoed a bill Thursday that would have required voters to show a photo ID.

Republicans hailed the bill as a common-sense way to ensure against fraud. Critics said it would suppress voter turnout, particularly among students, African-Americans and elderly people, calling it a modern-day poll tax.

"We must always be vigilant in protecting the integrity of our elections," Perdue said in a statement. "But requiring every voter to present a government-issued photo ID is not the way to do it."

Perdue said the bill would "unfairly disenfranchise" voters.

Republicans roundly criticized the move. It's unclear whether they can override the veto.

"We shouldn't be surprised by how far the governor will go to score political points with the liberal wing of her party," Senate President Pro Tem Phil Berger of Rockingham County said in a statement. "A measure that ensures voters are who they say they are is a no-brainer, and most North Carolinians agree."

A recent Elon University poll found 75 percent of North Carolinians support voter ID requirements.

The voter ID bill was the centerpiece of an array of voting legislation considered by the recently adjourned General Assembly that also weighed measures to shorten the early voting period and eliminate straight-ticket voting.

North Carolina would have joined six other states, including South Carolina, that have passed voter ID laws since January. A similar bill is pending in one other state.

Override prospects
Senate Republicans have the numbers to override Perdue's veto. But in the House, the ID bill passed with 67 votes, five short of what's needed for an override. No Democrats voted for it.

This month, when House Republicans overrode Perdue's budget veto, they needed the help of five Eastern N.C. Democrats.

House Speaker Thom Tillis of Cornelius said he's not worried about collecting enough votes.

"If seven Democrats don't show up for a publicly announced session, that would be the easy way to override it," he said in an interview, referring to the required three-fifths needed.

It was Perdue's eighth veto since February. She has now vetoed as many bills in 10 months as her predecessor did in eight years.

But Perdue is the first governor to face a legislature led by the other party since 1996, when North Carolina became the last state to give its chief executive a veto.

A passionate debate
Few measures elicited as much passion as the voter ID bill.

Researchers said it would affect more than 500,000 N.C. voters without driver's licenses. Voters could get free picture IDs at their local elections board, but critics called that a burden. And pointing to the few documented cases of fraud, they said the measure was a solution in search of a problem.

And some Democrats, particularly minorities, evoked the old days of Jim Crow. State Sen. Dan Blue, a Raleigh Democrat, called it "a throwback to what happened in this state between 1900 and 1965."

They were joined by others who said the ID bill and other voting proposals would reduce turnout in a state that has tried to increase it.

"The measure would have placed undue burdens on law-abiding citizens, making it harder for thousands of qualified voters to cast a ballot, without making our election system any more secure," Damon Circosta, executive director of the N.C. Center for Voter Education, said in a statement.

Most of the groups that critics say would be affected by the ID requirement, particularly African-Americans, tend to vote Democratic. In a state Democrat Barack Obama won by only 14,000 votes in 2008, Democrats have a clear interest in maximizing turnout. So does Perdue, who expects a tough rematch with former Charlotte Mayor Pat McCrory.

Michael Cobb, a political scientist at N.C. State, said if it were to become law, the ID requirement would be a factor. But not the only one.

"Our best guess is we know that overall it will reduce turnout. All things being equal, it will be harder for certain kinds of voters to vote," he said. "That doesn't mean that turnout in North Carolina in 2012 will be lower than it was in 2008. That depends on how successful Obama and Perdue are in turning out voters."

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2011/06/24/2402405/perdue-vetoes-photo-id-voter-bill.html


Offline iceman4221

  • Assistant GM
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,512
  • Karma: +14/-33
    • View Profile
    • The Beast of the MidEast with 17 Football Championships and Counting...
 :clap: :clap: :clap:
Quote
NEVER Deliberate, Debate or Argue About what is Clearly Wrong and/or Unjust, and Try to Persuade Yourself or Others that it's Not...

Offline Strike79

  • Assistant GM
  • *****
  • Posts: 17,669
  • Karma: +188/-217
    • View Profile
.........yeah, agreed.   :clap: :clap: :clap:

And while there may be more than even odds she will be overturned, at least this gentle lady saw this legislation for what it is, pure and EVIL voter suppression.

And mofos are always talking about there being no further need for extensions of the Voter Rights Act.  People better WAKE UP!!!!  >:(

Offline Bro. Askia Musa Afiba

  • Assistant GM
  • *****
  • Posts: 28,321
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • "Sound Machine" Band Booster & NCCU Eagle Club
    • View Profile
    • NCCU Eagles Fan Forum
 :nod: :clap: :nod:


Offline iceman4221

  • Assistant GM
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,512
  • Karma: +14/-33
    • View Profile
    • The Beast of the MidEast with 17 Football Championships and Counting...
.........yeah, agreed.   :clap: :clap: :clap:

And while there may be more than even odds she will be overturned, at least this gentle lady saw this legislation for what it is, pure and EVIL voter suppression.

And mofos are always talking about there being no further need for extensions of the Voter Rights Act.  People better WAKE UP!!!!  >:(

Tell the truth Bruh!!!
Quote
NEVER Deliberate, Debate or Argue About what is Clearly Wrong and/or Unjust, and Try to Persuade Yourself or Others that it's Not...

Offline The Sloping Hills and Verdent Green

  • Assistant GM
  • *****
  • Posts: 15,118
  • Karma: +9/-15
  • #1 NCCU Fan
    • View Profile
Thank you Governor Perdue.    :clap:   :bow:   :clap:   :bow:   :clap:


LOOK OUT MEAC WE ARE BACK AND READY

Offline y04185

  • Assistant GM
  • *****
  • Posts: 71,752
  • Karma: +85/-1188
  • Assistant GM
    • View Profile
The General Assembly will rightfully overturn this veto.  You people wouldn't praise your soon to be indicted governor if you have been at a poll and see someone not allowed to vote because someone used their name to vote earlier in the day.  It's obvious you people want more dead people voting.
Fayetteville State by choice. Bronco by the Grace of GOD.

Offline iceman4221

  • Assistant GM
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,512
  • Karma: +14/-33
    • View Profile
    • The Beast of the MidEast with 17 Football Championships and Counting...
The General Assembly will rightfully overturn this veto.  You people wouldn't praise your soon to be indicted governor if you have been at a poll and see someone not allowed to vote because someone used their name to vote earlier in the day.  It's obvious you people want more dead people voting.

Both of the underlined are strategic republican ploys - look at "the pot calling the kettle black"...
Quote
NEVER Deliberate, Debate or Argue About what is Clearly Wrong and/or Unjust, and Try to Persuade Yourself or Others that it's Not...

Offline Wildman78

  • Assistant GM
  • *****
  • Posts: 16,870
  • Karma: +28/-82
    • View Profile
    • http://N/A
The General Assembly will rightfully overturn this veto.  You people wouldn't praise your soon to be indicted governor if you have been at a poll and see someone not allowed to vote because someone used their name to vote earlier in the day.  It's obvious you people want more dead people voting.

y04185, we've previously discussed this issue on this site. Voter impersonation cases are very rare.  The empirical evidence strongly  suggests that the purpose of this  voter I.D. bill
is to suppress democratic votes among minorities and poor people.

 Voter Fraud is Rare: So Why Require Voter ID?

David Callahan
If you want an example of the maddening illogic behind the drive in different states to require voters to show photo identification at the polls, consider the remarks of Debra Blanton, the Elections Director for Cleveland County in North Carolina. That county is home to the two state legislators, Tim Moore and Kelly Hastings, who are co-sponsoring an election "reform" bill that includes a voter ID provision and may well be passed by the North Carolina legislature.

Asked about the bill by a local paper, Blanton said that voting irregularities in Cleveland County are rare and impersonation at the polls almost never happens. There was once a case where a dog was registered to vote under its owner's name, Blanton said -- a case that made national news -- but no votes were ever cast in the dog's name.

The scant evidence of voter fraud in Cleveland County is consistent with broader national evidence that such fraud is extremely uncommon, particularly the problem of people voting under false identities. As with the dog registration, most high-profile accusations of fraud turn out to be unfounded, as Barnard professor -- and Demos Senior Fellow -- Lori Minnite documents in her recent book, The Myth of Voter Fraud.

Nevertheless, Blanton thinks the voter ID provision is a good idea: “So many other places you go, you have to show ID. Why would voting not be another one of those places? People are just used to that.”

Really?

In fact, as an election official like Debra Blanton should well know, some people don't have photo identification. These include young people -- one in five young people don't have a driver's license -- and  seniors who don't drive any longer or urban residents who don't have cars. And guess what: many of these people are non-white. Indeed, a full quarter of African-Americans and 15 percent of low-income people don't have photo identification.

Given these numbers, you don't need to be mathematician to figure out that when states demand ID at the polls, it reduces electoral participation among certain groups. A 2007 study on voter ID requirements by scholars at Brown University, for example, found that:

voter I.D. policies reduced Asians’ registration and diminished voter turnout by blacks and Hispanics, by about 14 percent and 20 percent respectively. The net reduction in minority voting in these states in 2004 was more than 400,000 votes. The suppressive effect of voter I.D. disproportionately affected not only minorities, but also persons with less than a high school education and less than $15,000 income, tenants, and recent movers. While persons with these characteristics are substantially less likely to participate in civic affairs regardless of their state of residence, they experience an additional significant reduction in participation relative to others in voter I.D. states.

One of the study's co-authors, John Logan, commented on the findings that: “It is incredibly clear how voter I.D. requirements disproportionately affect and suppress minorities. This data shows that if voter ID policies had NOT been in place in 2004, voter turnout would have increased by more than 1.6 million."

Another 2007 study on voter ID requirements by three political scientists -- Matt Barreto, Stephen Nuño, and Gabriel Sanchez -- found that "voting laws which require specific or multiple forms of identification will disproportionately impact racial and ethnic minorities, immigrant populations, and those with lower incomes." And more specifically, "voter identification laws could immediately disenfranchise many Latino, Asian and African American citizens."

That second study also found that voter ID laws had clear partisan effects:

We find compelling evidence that those less likely to have access to multiple forms of identification are disproportionately Democrat. . . . voters with more access to identification are more likely to vote Republican. . . .

Just maybe this explains why the proponents of voter ID laws are nearly always Republicans.

The authors found further that voter ID requirements tend to be pushed most aggressively in states where presidential elections are super competitive. In turn, that would help explain why voter ID laws are now on the fast track in the recurrent battleground state of Ohio -- which Obama won by only 5 points -- and in North Carolina, which Obama won by the stunningly close margin of 14,177 votes. If enacted, new voter ID laws could help tip these state back into the GOP column and perhaps decide the outcome of the 2012 election.

But back to Debra Blanton: How could an election official in a county with nearly 100,000 residents, including many low-income people from historically marginalized communities, not know the elementary fact that a voter ID law would mean lower voter participation among groups in her county that already have low rates of turnout? And why should she support such a law when she herself says that voter fraud is extremely rare?

Good questions. And here's another one: Does Debra Blanton understand that it is actually her job to help more people to vote?


http://www.policyshop.net/home/2011/3/23/voter-fraud-is-rare-so-why-require-voter-id.html


see also http://faculty.washington.edu/mbarreto/research/Voter_ID_APSA.pdf
« Last Edit: June 25, 2011, 03:40:29 PM by Wildman78 »

Offline Strike79

  • Assistant GM
  • *****
  • Posts: 17,669
  • Karma: +188/-217
    • View Profile


y04185, we've previously discussed this issue on this site. Voter impersonation cases are very rare.  The empirical evidence strongly  suggests that the purpose of this  voter I.D. bill
is to suppress democratic votes among minorities and poor people.
...........evidence, empirical and otherwise, ABOUNDS concluding what Wildman states here^^^^, that the evidence of voter fraud and/or impersonatilon is very RARE, and these voter id laws sweeping the country - sadly, including Rocky Top where I live - ALL have one thing in common.  And that is the SUPPRESSION of the Democratic vote as we approach the runup to the 2012 presidential election.

But as Wildman ALSO states, this topic has been discussed on this board THOROUGHLY, and one has to be either stupid, a liar, or both to suggest these laws are designed to "protect voter integrity."  That's a DAMN LIE, and anyone who says otherwise KNOWS he's a LIAR!!!!

And before the invitation is extended, HELL NO!, I'm not meeting you on Monument Avenue or anywhere else.  I am allergic to ignorance.  ::)

End of discussion.

Offline y04185

  • Assistant GM
  • *****
  • Posts: 71,752
  • Karma: +85/-1188
  • Assistant GM
    • View Profile
I have witnessed on several occasions, in North Carolina, where someone has gone to vote only to be told that they have already voted.  Because voter rarely happens are you people saying there should be no law requiring proof you are who you say you are when you go to the polls.  Using the logic of you people John Edwards should not be charged because what he is accused of doing rarely happens.
Fayetteville State by choice. Bronco by the Grace of GOD.

Offline Wildman78

  • Assistant GM
  • *****
  • Posts: 16,870
  • Karma: +28/-82
    • View Profile
    • http://N/A
I have witnessed on several occasions, in North Carolina, where someone has gone to vote only to be told that they have already voted.  Because voter rarely happens are you people saying there should be no law requiring proof you are who you say you are when you go to the polls.  Using the logic of you people John Edwards should not be charged because what he is accused of doing rarely happens.


1.  Your annectdotal experiences still do not change the fact voter impersonation is a rare occurence.

Quote
This is worth repeating: the only problem that a voter ID requirement could possibly fix usually doesn't exist.  Texans are struck and killed by lightning more often.  And there are far, far more reports of UFOs every year than instances of impersonation at the polls

http://www.brennancenter.org/content/resource/myth_of_voter_impersonation_fraud_at_the_polls/

2.   I could be missing something but I don't understand how requiring a voter to have an I.D. would stop that voter from trying to vote twice. It is my understanding that attempts to double vote mostly occurs when a voter sends in an absentee ballot and also shows up at the polls.How would the I.D.requirement prevent that from occuring. How would the I.D. make it easier to catch people who showed up at the polls twice?

3.    You appear to be missing or ignoring the main point being made by "us people" ----. that the true motivation for these voter I.D. laws is to suppress the vote of people likely to vote for Democrats, minorities and poor people.

4.  Your John Edwards analogy misses the mark. We are notsaying that because voter impersonation rarely occures, it should not be prosecuted. We are saying requiring people to have a government I.D. in order to vote is likely to do more harm than good.  In the Edwards case, he is being prosecuted because there is probable cause to believe he committed rare crime.  Here, we are talking about the true motivations behind enacting of a law to prevent  a crime that rarely occurs.  It makes sense to question the true motivation behind this law when there is empircal evidence that this law is likely to cause more harm than good, and will not be effective in preventing the crime that it was purportedly enacted to prevent.  It's not the same thing y04185.
« Last Edit: June 26, 2011, 08:13:32 AM by Wildman78 »

 

 

2019 Onnidan HBCU Composite Football Schedule

 

Powered by EzPortal