Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Only a few hours after VoteRid was enabled

36 posts in this topic

Posted

http://obsdailyviews.blogspot.com/2013/08/let-voter-clampdown-begin.html

 

 

That didn't take long. Hours after Gov. Pat McCrory signed legislation overhauling North Carolina's voting laws, local election boards started making changes that will make it harder for college students to participate in elections.

The Watauga County Board of Elections on Monday voted 2-1 -- two Republicans against one Democrat -- to shut down an early voting site and an Election Day precinct on the Appalachian State University campus. They also cut the number of early voting sites overall from three to one, and combined three Election Day precincts into one. That will put 9,300 Boone residents in one precinct, though the Watauga Elections Director Jane Ann Hodges said state guidelines call for a maximum of 1,500 voters in any one precinct.

The move came in front of dozens of protesters who booed and chanted "shame on you." Republican board member Luke Eggers warned the vocal crowd that they could be sent to jail for up to 30 days if they didn't "obey the lawful commands of the board of elections," the High Country Press reported.

Bob Phillips of Common Cause points out that on the same day Watauga Republicans were shutting down the ASU voting site, Gov. Pat McCrory was doing interviews assuring the public that politics wouldn't play any role in determining where polling locations would be.

"They won't be selected based on politics or political partisan positions, which is wrong," McCrory told WUNC's Frank Stasio.

It's quite obvious that the Watauga board's move will make it harder for Appalachian State students to vote. The new law doesn't change how early voting sites are selected -- they are chosen by each county's board of elections. With Republicans in power, every county board contains two Republicans and one Democrat. Democrats, we imagine, sought political advantage through voting locations as well.

Early voting's goal is to make voting convenient for all residents, regardless of their registration. Cutting the number of days and the number of locations undercuts that goal.

Meanwhile, in Pasquotank County, the Republican-controlled Board of Elections is blocking a properly registered voter from running for City Council because he is a student at Elizabeth City State University. Senior Montravias King has been registered to vote in Pasquotank since coming to college in 2009. King filed to run for City Council, but the board ruled he couldn't use his campus address to establish residency, the Associated Press reported.

Lawyer Clare Barnett, representing King, cited an N.C. Supreme Court ruling that said students can register to vote in the towns where they attend college. Pasquotank wants a system where it's OK to vote but not OK to run for office? Probably not, actually: the county's Republican chairman says he plans to challenge the voter registration of other ECSU students.

Every move in politics, of course, is designed to give one party a political advantage. But for the millions of N.C. residents whose careers don't hinge on winning elections, the primary goal should be vigorous and widespread participation in our democracy. Looks like not everyone agrees.

-- Taylor Batten

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I have no problem with voter ID, but this kind of thing is just criminal.  They should be making it easier to vote, especially with this law in place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

This IS VoterID. There are always more things added. Anyone who "supports VoterID" needs to understand that all this is part and parcel of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Thats my whole thing with voter ID.  In it's most basic form, I don't have a problem with it, but I think that it's all part and parcel to larger disenfranchisement. 

 

I actually understand why so many people support voter ID.  But why close down precincts and early voting locations?  What explanation was given? The article doesn't say, but I'd like to know.  Is it just too expensive, or what?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

This IS VoterID. There are always more things added. Anyone who "supports VoterID" needs to understand that all this is part and parcel of it.

 

 

It might be voterID as the bill itself was passed, but that's not what I'm talking about.

 

VoterID isn't all this other stuff thrown in there... it's all political garbage...

 

I realize that the republicans are using this to disenfranchise voters and they should be ashamed.  This is not what people who support voter ID want.

 

 

Hint:  I'm agreeing with you here, don't be so defensive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I'm not being defensive. What I am saying is that everyone who "agrees" with VoterID is agreeing with something that does not actually exist.

 

A politician who passes laws to fight crimes that don't happen has another agenda in mind. It's really that simple.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

who could have predicted this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

only way to ensure victory is to eliminate the opponent.... that is the present day Republican way.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

only way to ensure victory is to eliminate the opponent.... that is the present day Republican way.

 

It's not like he got sealed divorce records brought out into the open...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

It's not like he got sealed divorce records brought out into the open...

 

This is relevant!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Poor poor G5 you'll have to take a few minutes to gather your "thoughts"on how this ensures the integrity of the voting process

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites