Tuesday, August 13, 2013

Hillary Clinton and the N.C. voting law

If there were remaining slivers of doubt out there that Hillary Clinton has her eye on 2016, she tidily swept them away last night in San Francisco with the first of several promised speeches on restoring faith in government. This one was delivered to the American Bar Association convention. The topic: voting rights.

And if you have any doubt that North Carolina's legislature has branded our state as among the nation's most regressive, here's the speech in which Clinton cites North Carolina, Texas and Florida as states that are making it harder for citizens to vote. She went after the N.C. law with particular venom, saying provisions like limited voting hours, stricter ID requirements and restricted early voting put a greater burden on citizens.

N.C.'s law, she said, "reads like the greatest hits of voter suppression."

Get used to it. Just as North Carolina was in the headlines for being the first and only state to cut off unemployment benefits for tens of thousands by rejecting federal money, we're grabbing attention all over again for the thoroughness our lawmakers showed in discouraging people from voting. This one promises to have some staying power, with lawsuits already filed and the potential of the Justice Department getting involved. 

And while many North Carolinians don't care about Hillary Clinton speeches or New York Times editorials, they are heard and read by moderate Democrats and Republicans who also don't think that things like voting restrictions are a good idea. That's true in North Carolina, too. Public Policy Polling's newest North Carolina poll over the weekend showed that only 39 percent of voters in the state support the voting/elections law to 50 percent who are opposed to it.

PPP's Tom Jensen noted that while voter ID on its own is a popular concept with voters, "all the other stuff lumped into the bill along with voter ID is unpopular enough to make the overall bill a loser in voters' eyes." An example: Only 33 percent of voters in the state support reducing the early voting period by a week to 59 percent who are opposed. Independents (28/62) and Democrats (22/70) were both strongly opposed to that provision.

That might explain why Gov. Pat McCrory, in a video released Monday after he signed the voting legislation, focused only on photo ID and not the other restrictions. But no one is fooled. And people, once again, are talking about how backward we're becoming. 

Peter St. Onge








10 comments:

One Discerner said...

North Carolina has regressed in fairness and treatment of its citizens with the election of Pat McCrory and a Republican majority in the NC General Assembly. Little wonder why these folks were out of control for so long, they simply cannot be trusted.

We are in the Bible Belt, but their actions are far from showing any appreciation for core Christian values. In a very sinister manner, they have misbehaved and attempted to rig the game by passing laws intended to ensure they retain power.

What they fail to understand to that oppressed people fight much harder not to be oppressed than people who are the oppressors.

The reputation of North Carolina has been tarnished in the eyes of fair-minded people. Regaining the high ground will be very difficult, however NOT impossible. The oppressors will soon enough discover that oppressed people who refuse to hem and haw will defeat evilness.

Unknown said...

Is this the same Hillary Clinton that voted against gay marriage, ignored terroists threats against US embassies which led to US deaths, or the Hillary that disrespected civil rights icon Medgar Evers yesterday by misreading his name on the teleprompter?

Wiley Coyote said...

Yeah.... that's the same Clinton who turned a blind eye to all of Bill's affairs...

Ghoul said...

Let's post the results from a poll lead by PPP, a very liberal organization, and not post the actual questions. No bias there Pete.

Jeff Henson said...

Peter,
It must be very hard to carry water for the Democratic party when your fellow reporters don't stay in line. You write that "North Carolina's legislature has branded our state as among the nation's most regressive . . .making it harder for citizens to vote". Yet Messrs. Christensen and Morrill report today the following: (1) we are 1 of 34 states with some form of voter ID law; (2) we are 1 of 37 states that do not permit same-day registration; (3) we are among the majority of states that do not permit straight-ticket voting; and (4) despite a shorter early voting period, local county boards must provide the same amount of early voting hours as during the 2012 election. Hardly regressive, wouldn't you agree?

Get Over It said...

Peter, the Observer, NAACP, NY Times, Hillary and the Democrats should just dial back the hysterical hype about this. Voter photo ID is supported by a wide majority of Americans, and the majority of states have similar laws about same-day registration and straight-ticket voting. As far as reducing the number of days (not time) for early voting, if this is so important to the poor, elderly, minorities, etc, how in the world did we ever have fair elections prior to 5 years ago? Yes, 5 years is all we've had early voting available. It is still available, just not as many days. That is still far better than in the 200+ years before 2008. If that is such an imposition, do you support allowing voters to cast their votes six months early? Three months? Two months? When is "early" too early? 10 days, with longer hours each day, certainly seems fair to me.

Carol Justus said...

Now we really do understand the North Carolina is really in the Bible Belt for they are wearing around their waist instead of reading and doing as it teaches.
+++++++++++++++++++
And if you have any doubt that North Carolina's legislature has branded our state as among the nation's most regressive, here's the speech in which Clinton cites North Carolina, Texas and Florida as states that are making it harder for citizens to vote. She went after the N.C. law with particular venom, saying provisions like limited voting hours, stricter ID requirements and restricted early voting put a greater burden on citizens
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I cannot understand how the average citizens of North Carolina are marching on the Capital and doing all the can to preserve the democracy that our men and women have fought for now for 237 years!!!!

kantstanzya said...

So the billboard of liberalism...the NY Times.. doesn't like voter ID laws. And now the latest object of the left's cult of personality and blind idol worship, Hillary Clinton, doesn't either. Well the left hasn't liked ANYTHING they have done. The plan is still to paint conservative and moderate supporters of such reforms as out of touch fringe minorities.

The Wall Street Journal, the nations' largest newspaper and one of the few still growing in readership and revenues, terms North Carolina "the burning heart of liberal activism and indignation this summer." The left is outraged by a list of grievances including everything from Trayvon Martin, unemployment, Obamacare, school funding, tax cuts, fracking and of course Voter ID.They say however that the "core problem (for the left) is that the protesters (moral Monday)are denouncing policies like tax cuts and welfare reforms that may be unpopular with the NY Times but are very popular with mainstream North Carolinians".

The Charlotte Observer and their McClatchy siamese twin in Raleigh might continue to delude the clueless Dem voter who might still read the papers and believe the spin. And they might even succeed in deluding themselves. And they will back it up with selective polling from the Democrat Party polling arm of PPP. But this is why the left is continually surprised by things such as the Constitutional Marriage Amendment passing with 61% support.

North Carolina's voter ID law puts it squarely in the mainstream of the majority of states and even a majority of other countries around the world.The problem for the left is that minority voting has gone UP in states with voter ID. A higher percentage of blacks vote in Mississippi than in Massachusetts. When the Supreme Court upheld Indiana's Voter ID opponents could not produce a singe "victim" who was denied the vote. And in Pennsylvania where 93 year old Viviette Applewhite was the face of all the people who could not possibly get an ID to vote? Well upon passage of the law she miraculously got her ID the very next day in 10 minutes and voted. If the left can bus all their helpless and clueless voters to the polls why can't they do the same for them to get an ID?

So Hillary Clinton does not like our Voter ID laws? To that I say "At this point what difference does it make?"

MarkB said...

Isn't it interesting the NYT and Hillary Clinton are located in a state that doesn't permit early voting or no excuse absentee ballot voting? This was a good first step. Hopefully, we can address the fraud and/or potential fraud of absentee ballots next.

Jim said...

Now, Peter, I know you're not from around here but, if you were, you might be familiar with an ol' Cackolacky-ism: "your saying it's so don't make it so." That's true even when the one doing the saying is Ms. Clinton [or the Democratic pollster PPP]!