Expert: NC election laws crafted to discriminate against blacks
Published July 20, 2015
by Michael Hewlett, Winston-Salem Journal, July 20, 2015.
An expert testified Friday that state Republican legislators intentionally crafted North Carolina’s election law in a way that would disproportionately burden black and Hispanic voters, a charge that attorneys representing the state and Gov. Pat McCrory strongly deny.
The law, known as the Voter Information Verification Act, requires registered voters to have a photo ID in the 2016 election, eliminates same-day voter registration and out-of-precinct voting, reduces the days of early voting from 17 to 10, and eliminates preregistration for 16- and 17-year-olds, among other things. Several groups, including the N.C. NAACP and the U.S. Department of Justice, are suing North Carolina and McCrory, who signed the legislation into law in August 2013.
The photo ID requirement, which the N.C. General Assembly eased last month with an amendment, is not part of the trial taking place in U.S. District Court, but Allan Lichtman, a professor of history at American University in Washington, D.C., said he considered the photo ID as part of his overall analysis into whether there was intent of racial discrimination in passing the law.
House Bill 589 was initially introduced in April 2013 and was solely focused on photo ID requirements, with state Republican legislators saying publicly that they wanted a long and deliberative process with public input. That changed after June 25, 2013, when the U.S. Supreme Court issued a ruling invalidating a key section of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 that required 40 counties in North Carolina and several other states to seek federal approval for election changes.
A month later, state Republican legislators introduced an expanded House Bill 589 that made substantial changes to the photo ID requirement and added other provisions, such as eliminating same-day voter registration, that disproportionately affected black voters, Lichtman testified. State legislators passed the law two days after it was introduced.
Under cross-examination by Thomas Farr, one of the state attorneys, Lichtman acknowledged that the Republican legislators broke no procedural rules of the General Assembly in pushing the legislation through.
Lichtman testified that legislators eliminated college IDs from state schools and government employment IDs. Lichtman said that black representation at public universities is 28 percent higher than that of whites. Black representation at state government agencies is 21 percent higher than whites, he said.
On the flip side, Lichtman said, blacks are less likely to have identification issued by the N.C. Division of Motor Vehicles than whites.
Lichtman also cited timing as a critical issue in determining whether state Republican legislators had racially discriminatory intent in passing House Bill 589.
Blacks are much more likely to vote Democratic in elections, and the voting strength of black voters, as reflected in voter registration data, increased between 2004 and 2013, according to Lichtman. White voting strength declined, he said.
Race became the single most important demographic indicator in voting, more than age, sex, education or income, he said. That voting shift occurred during a time when state legislators adopted early voting, same-day voter registration and out-of-precinct provisional voting, Lichtman said.
He said the fact that state Republican legislators waited until after the U.S. Supreme Court ruling to introduce the expanded House Bill 589 indicates that there was racial intent behind the legislation. In court papers, state attorneys have argued that the expanded bill would have gotten federal approval if it had been introduced before the U.S. Supreme Court ruling.
During cross-examination, Farr pressed Lichtman to acknowledge that black turnout in the November 2014 election increased at a higher rate than whites. Farr said that was true both on Election Day and during the shortened early voting period. Specifically, Farr said, early voting among blacks increased 44 percent between 2010 and 2014. Experts who have testified for the plaintiffs argue that 2014 was unique because of the highly-competitive and expensive U.S. Senate race between Kay Hagan and Thom Tillis.
Farr also asked Lichtman a series of questions centered on reports from the N.C. Board of Elections that indicated irregularities in voter registration rolls. He also repeatedly pressed Lichtman on whether a majority of states have same-day voter registration or 17 days of early voting.
State attorneys have emphasized in court papers and during the trial that most states don’t have things such as same-day voter registration and early voting and that federal law does not require state officials to provide such things.
July 20, 2015 at 9:41 am
Norm Kelly says:
So, other than the indication that this witness is biased in the lib direction, other than this witness expressed personal opinion, nothing this witness said is backed up by FACTS! You know, those fact thingys that drive libs nuts. Those fact thingys that libs CHOOSE to ignore. Those fact thingys that libs ask the rest of us to choose to ignore also. Those fact thingys that actually make a difference in every case. Those fact thingys that usually show the lie of the lib mentality.
Blacks tend to have a DMV issued picture ID less often than whites. So?!!? The state has said that they will BUY the ID for anyone who can't afford the $2 PER YEAR that a picture ID costs!
Black students tend to have school issued IDs at a higher rate than white students. So!?! Schools will issue an ID to anyone! Just anyone who is attending the school will be issued an ID. Meaningless! A school ID only proves that you attend that school, not that you are a legal resident who should be allowed to vote in our state or local elections. School IDs should never be accepted as identification. Let's go one step further and say that NO out of state student should be allowed to vote in our state's elections. There is absolutely NOTHING to prevent that student from filing an absentee ballot in the state where they ACTUALLY LIVE as well as vote in person at the closest voting place to their school. Double voting. Should this be allowed? NEVER! Unless you are a lib and know that the majority of school kids prefer to vote for the socialist party. Once again, libs bending election laws in their favor, telling lies to citizens about why they make specific laws. When libs make laws that favor them, tilt the process in their favor, they ask that we ignore their intent. When laws are changed to make a more level playing field, libs suddenly have a fit. What a confused mixed up bunch of people. Don't expect me to join you in your land of make believe!
Early voting has been much longer in NC than just about anywhere else. Cuz it favors blacks? But is this the best use of time, money, resources? And is it now required that we cater to a specific liberal voting block just because libs want us to? Just because this was a lib idea, we are supposed to accept it without question? And just because some lib says that reducing the number of early voting days is targeting blacks, we are supposed to accept that personal opinion without question? How ridiculous do libs think the rest of us are?
Same-day registration? If that isn't prone to voter fraud, then I have a bridge in NY for sale that you might be interested in! If you can't get your butt somewhere to register before the deadline, then you shouldn't be voting. You have some responsibility. What reality show are you so interested in watching that you can't take the time to register? And if you can't take the time to register, why would you attempt to vote on election day? And why would the rest of us pander to your laziness? Ok, libs. If it ain't laziness that stops people from registering BEFORE election day, then please explain what the reason is. Your explanation won't make any sense. But it's always fun to read/hear lib blatherings. Most of the time it's also quite humorous. Usually doesn't make much sense, like the entire claim that voting law changes are racially motivated. No proof, just lib opinion. Like most things lib, no proof. Just feelings!
July 20, 2015 at 11:03 am
Richard L Bunce says:
Really?
14 States primarily in the NE US have NO early voting.
Only 11 States have same day registration.
Only 10 States have straight ticket ballots.
Do the vast majority of states, many with longtime Democratic majorities in their Legislatures also discriminate against voters with high concentrations of skin melanin?
http://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/absentee-and-early-voting.aspx
http://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/same-day-registration.aspx
http://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/straight-ticket-voting.aspx
