mykeystrokes.com

"Do or Do not. There is no try."

“A Little Help From Our Friends”: ALEC And Select Conservative Groups Responsible For Writing North Carolina’s Restrictive Laws

When North Carolina voters elected Pat McCrory as their governor in 2012, it was the first time in 28 years that North Carolinians had elected a Republican governor, and the first time in 100 years that Republicans controlled the governor’s office and the state legislature in the Tar Heel state. Since the gubernatorial election, the conservative North Carolina legislature has had the opportunity to propose and pass some extreme and restrictive pieces of legislation — and they did just that, with the help of certain special interest groups.

According to a report in The Charlotte Observer, The American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) has had just as much say in the state’s policies as any elected official.

ALEC is a self-described “nonpartisan membership association for conservative state lawmakers who shared a common belief in limited government, free markets, federalism, and individual liberty” that began as President Reagan took office in 1981. The Charlotte Observer reports that ALEC had proposed 466 bills modeled on the organization’s conservative vision for states throughout the country.

“Republican lawmakers passed 338 laws this year that will touch every North Carolinian’s pocketbook, every student’s classroom and every voter’s experience at the polls, writes The Observer. ”Their sweeping changes have drawn praise from conservatives, scorn from Democrats and punch lines on Comedy Central.”

“At one point, Raleigh’s News & Observer counted at least two dozen bills that matched ALEC priorities,” the article goes on to say. “They included voter ID, publicly financed vouchers for private schools, and prioritizing energy exploration.”

Two North Carolina lawmakers sit on ALEC’s board of directors: Former House Speaker Harold Brubaker (R), and current House Speaker Thom Tillis (R) (who is also squaring off against incumbent Senator Kay Hagan (D-NC) for her senate seat in 2014.) Tillis won ALEC’s “Legislator of the Year” award in 2011.

ALEC’s Commonsense Consumption Act, designed to combat New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg’s attempt to limit the size of soft drinks sold in the city, was approved by ALEC board members in 2004 and again on January 28, 2013. HB 683, which passed in the North Carolina legislature and was signed by Governor McCrory on July 18, 2013, included some of the exact language from the ALEC model.

ALEC also introduced the Freedom of Choice in Health Care Act, which they boasted was the model for North Carolina’s House Bill 2. As stated in an ALEC press release, “This legislation protects the rights of citizens to pay directly for medical care, and would prohibit the government from penalizing North Carolinians for failing to purchase health care.” The bill passed through North Carolina’s legislature, but was vetoed in 2011 by former Governor Beverly Perdue (D).

“ALEC is just one part of a larger picture of (lawmakers) writing legislation to benefit wealthy corporate contributors.” Justin Guillory, the research director for Progress N.C., told the Observer “I don’t want to diminish ALEC’s impact, but they’re only one part of the puzzle.”

The Observer also cites two North Carolina-based groups for their hand in controlling legislation. The Civitas Institute and the John Locke Foundation, both funded by McCrory’s budget director Art Pope, have introduced multiple proposals that have been adopted into state legislation. A book of ideas published by the John Locke Foundation was taken into consideration by Republican legislators and many proposals pertaining to the economy, taxes, and Medicaid were implemented. John Hood, president of the Locke Foundation, said, “Virtually everything we proposed in the book in 2012 was enacted in 2013.”

Grassroots North Carolina serves as another example. The pro-gun-rights group advocated for legislation that allows people to carry weapons on school campuses, bars, and restaurants with a concealed-carry permit.

Despite the best efforts of the conservative groups, however, North Carolina’s hard right turn may ultimately prove be shortlived; according to a recent PPP Poll, the North Carolina general assembly holds a bleak approval rating of only 24 percent.

 

By: Allison Brito, The National Memo, August 26, 2013

August 27, 2013 Posted by | ALEC, Voting Rights | , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

“It’s Not Good For Republicans”: This Is How Not To Defend Voter Suppression In North Carolina

Two weeks after North Carolina Gov. Pat McCrory (R) approved the most sweeping voter-suppression law seen in the United States in a generation, the political world is taking note of the disaster in growing numbers. Last week, former Secretary of State Colin Powell condemned the state’s new voting restrictions, and yesterday, pundit Cokie Roberts said, “[W]hat’s going on about voting rights is downright evil.”

But don’t worry, the Eagle Forum’s Phyllis Schlafly, a prominent leader of the religious right movement for decades, has a new defense. In a WorldNetDaily column, the right-wing activist offered an unexpected explanation of why some of North Carolina’s new restrictions are worthwhile.

The reduction in the number of days allowed for early voting is particularly important because early voting plays a major role in Obama’s ground game. The Democrats carried most states that allow many days of early voting, and Obama’s national field director admitted, shortly before last year’s election, that “early voting is giving us a solid lead in the battleground states that will decide this election.”

The Obama technocrats have developed an efficient system of identifying prospective Obama voters and then nagging them (some might say harassing them) until they actually vote. It may take several days to accomplish this, so early voting is an essential component of the Democrats’ get-out-the-vote campaign.

Have you ever heard a political figure accidentally read stage direction, unaware that it’s not supposed to be repeated out loud? This is what Schlafly’s published column reminds me of.

For North Carolina Republicans, the state’s new voter-suppression measures are ostensibly legitimate — GOP officials are simply worried about non-existent fraud. The response from Democrats and voting-rights advocates is multi-faceted, but emphasizes that some of these measures, including restrictions on early voting, have nothing whatsoever to do with fraud prevention and everything to do with a partisan agenda.

And then there’s Phyllis Schlafly, writing a piece for publication effectively saying Democrats are entirely right — North Carolina had to dramatically cut early voting because it’s not good for Republicans.

Remember, Schlafly’s piece wasn’t intended as criticism; this is her defense of voter suppression in North Carolina. Proponents of voting rights are arguing, “This is a blatantly partisan scheme intended to rig elections,” to which Schlafly is effectively responding, “I know, isn’t it great?”

 

By: Steve Benen, The Maddow Blog, August 26, 2013

August 27, 2013 Posted by | Voting Rights | , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

“Simply Breathtaking”: North Carolina Gov Pat McCrory Approves Sweeping Voter-Suppression Measures

That this outcome was inevitable doesn’t make it any less offensive.

Gov. Pat McCrory Monday signed into law a bill requiring voters to produce a photo ID when they go to the polls, a measure that was hailed by Republicans as a means for heightening ballot security but which was criticized by Democrats as a thinly disguised effort at voter suppression.

The bill was passed along partisan lines by the Republican majority in the legislature, over strong opposition of Democrats.

The Republican governor released a video this afternoon, explaining his reasoning over the course of 96 seconds, arguing that he approved the “common sense” state legislation in the interest of the “integrity of our election process.”

McCrory added that the “extreme left” has relied on “scare tactics.”

Unfortunately for North Carolinians, the governor has no idea what he’s talking about. (In fact, as of two weeks ago, he literally didn’t know — McCrory was praising the legislation despite not having read it, and couldn’t answer basic questions about proposals he’d already publicly endorsed.)

The governor kept using the phrase “common sense,” but when it comes to voting rights, I don’t think that means what he thinks it means.

As we discussed a few weeks ago, we’ve seen plenty of “war on voting” measures over the last few years, but North Carolina Republicans pushed the envelope in new and offensive directions. Barbara Arnwine, president of the Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, said during the legislative fight, “This is the single worst bill we have seen introduced since voter suppression bills began sweeping the country.”

The scope is simply breathtaking — the new state law imposes voter-ID restrictions never needed before in North Carolina, narrows the early-voting window, places new restrictions on voter-registration drives, makes it harder for students to vote, ends same-day registration during the early voting period, and makes it easier for vigilante poll-watchers to challenge eligible voters.

And why on earth would Republicans consider all of this necessary? Was there a widespread outbreak of voter fraud that necessitated the most sweeping new voter-suppression tactics seen anywhere in the nation? Of course not. For one thing, since 2000, there are exactly two incidents — not two percent, literally two individuals — involving suspected voter impersonation in North Carolina, out of several million votes cast. You’re far more likely to find someone struck by lightning in the state than find an improperly-cast ballot.

For another, many of the measures signed into law today — including narrowing the early-voting window — have nothing to do with improving the integrity of the process or preventing fraud, and everything to do with making it more difficult for people to participate in their own democracy.

These are not “scare tactics” from the “extreme left”; these are simply facts.

Up until fairly recently, there’s no way North Carolina’s new voter-suppression campaign would be approved by the Justice Department, but after five Republican-appointed justices on the Supreme Court gutted the Voting Rights Act, the DOJ did not have an opportunity to consider the proposal before it was signed into law.

Attorney General Eric Holder has already challenged new measures in Texas under the remaining elements of the VRA; we’ll know soon enough whether North Carolina is added to the mix.

 

By: Steve Benen, The Maddow Blog, August 12, 2013

August 13, 2013 Posted by | Voting Rights, Voting Rights Act | , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

“You Can’t Gerrymander A Whole State”: The North Carolina GOP’s Extremism May Cost Their Party The U.S. Senate In 2014

Since the GOP took over both North Carolina’s state house and governorship for the first time in more than a century, the state has become a flashpoint, with extremist policies being put into place one after the other, almost as if conservatives were punishing the state for voting for President Obama in 2008.

The right-wing mania seems to have peaked, with abortion laws being injected into any legislation Republicans could get their hands on and the nation’s worst, most blatant voter suppression law.

Republican governor Pat McCrory has said he will sign the new women’s health restrictions — despite a campaign promise not to — and the voting law, though he hasn’t actually read it.

North Carolinians have been gathering every week for Moral Mondays at the state capitol, hoping their protests and the hundreds of resulting arrests will draw attention to the extremism coming out of the quintessential swing state.

But if people aren’t paying attention to North Carolina politics now, they will be, as the battle for the U.S. Senate in 2014 heats up and Democratic senator Kay Hagan defends her seat.

“North Carolina is the closest thing to the tipping point state in the Senate battle,” the New York TimesNate Silver recently wrote.

Silver added, “Although North Carolina is increasingly purple in presidential election years, the coalition of African-Americans and college-aged voters that Democrats depend upon to win races in the state is less likely to turn out for midterm elections.”

And Republicans are well aware of this.

“By all accounts, there is no path to having a Republican majority leader that doesn’t lead through North Carolina,” Thom Tillis, the state House speaker and leading Republican Senate candidate, told the Washington Examiner.

While laws designed to suppress Democratic votes will certainly help Republicans, the controversies invoked by their policies are drawing the attention of the state’s growing unaffiliated voters and the nation.

Some have called North Carolina the “new Wisconsin,” which sounds promising for Republicans who were able to help Governor Scott Walker survive a recall. However, Democrats successfully took back the Senate in those recalls for a brief time, and only lost it again in 2012 due to gerrymandering.

You can’t gerrymander a whole state, and if there is a backlash against the GOP in North Carolina, it could cost Republicans the U.S. Senate.

 

By: Jason Sattler, The National Memo, July 29, 2013

July 30, 2013 Posted by | Politics | , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

“You Expect Me To Read The Bill?: NC Governor Admits He “Doesn’t Know Enough” About The Voter Suppression Bill He’s About To Sign

North Carolina Gov. Pat McCrory (R) said Friday he would sign a bill passed by the North Carolina legislature that would become the most suppressive voting law in the nation. But when asked to speak about a provision in the bill that would prohibit 17-year-olds from registering in advance of their 18th birthday, McCrory admitted he “did not know enough” and had not read that portion of the bill.

The bill, passed just weeks after the U.S. Supreme Court gutted the Voting Rights Act and paved the way for new suppressive state laws, imposes a laundry list of new restrictions on access to the ballot, including eliminating same-day registration, cutting early voting, easing campaign contribution limits, and expanding the mechanisms for alleging voter fraud. In remarks saying he would sign the bill, McCrory focused on his support for the bill’s voter ID requirement — a particularly suppressive and discriminatory policy that McCrory has long supported. But when asked by an Associated Press reporter about another provision in the bill to limit new voter registration opportunities, McCrory said, “I don’t know enough. I’m sorry. I haven’t read that portion of the bill.”

McCrory also dodged questions about two other elements of the bill that restrict early voting and end same-day registration, choosing instead to tout new campaign contribution limits, and pointing to an amendment — added by Democrats — that would expand early voting hours to make up for the limited early voting days.

When a reporter repeated the original question, McCrory said same-day registration concerns him because of the “possibility for abuse.” He added: “There’s plenty of opportunity for voter registration — online, off-line, through many methods. I thought that was a fair system before, and I think it’s a fair system now.” The Associated Press pointed out that North Carolina has no online voter registration, although voters can download a form online and print it out

In the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court’s June decision that effectively disables federal oversight of states with a history of voting discrimination, states have raced to pass new restrictive voting laws. On Thursday, Attorney General Eric Holder said he would challenge a voter ID law in Texas under another provision of the VRA not affected by the Supreme Court’s ruling. Holder hinted he would pursue similar actions against other states with restrictive laws, saying, “This is the department’s first action to protect voting rights [after the Supreme Court’s ruling]. … But it will not be our last.”

 

By: Nicole Flatow, Think Progress, July 28, 2013

July 29, 2013 Posted by | Voting Rights, Voting Rights Act | , , , , , , , | 4 Comments