This story is closed for comments. Comments on WRAL.com news stories are accepted and moderated between the hours of 8 a.m. and 8 p.m. Monday through Friday.

Oldest First
  • billsorensonnc Apr 3, 2:14 p.m.

    Funny, the headline today is voter fraud found in NC. Seems to me that only the people that would benefit from comitting fraud would want to impede the process. Voter ID is working.

  • krimson Apr 1, 1:45 p.m.

    I have no problem showing my State issued ID for any vote, or business that it is a requirement.... View More

    — Posted by sandim50

    The state "may" issue a free ID for those whom do not have one, but gathering together all the... View More

    — Posted by Pensive01

    Ease of obtaining a Free ID aside, and assuming that Voting Fraud is widepsread, I think we need to focus on the Cost (to the taxpayer) of supplying said IDs vs. the benefits of requiring Photo ID at the Voting Booth, i.e. are we will to spend XXX dollars in to prevent XXX number of fraudulent votes?

  • wraluser Apr 1, 12:38 p.m.

    "Voter ID" has nothing to do with preventing voter "fraud". It is only to keep those who typically do not vote for the GOP from voting. This is common knowledge. What we are talking about here is targeted voter suppression, period.

  • wraluser Apr 1, 12:35 p.m.

    If these email are made public all GOP "officials" will be rendered unelectable. I can't wait... :)

  • Pensive01 Apr 1, 12:01 p.m.

    I have no problem showing my State issued ID for any vote, or business that it is a requirement.... View More

    — Posted by sandim50

    The state "may" issue a free ID for those whom do not have one, but gathering together all the documentation to get that "free ID" is usually neither easy nor free. For example, there are still people living whom never had a birth certificate issued because they were delivered by a midwife at home and the only record was the date of birth being written in the Family Bible, which had pages for the sole purpose of recording the births, deaths and marriages, to name just a few items, of that particular family. People in that situation have an extremely hard time just in trying to get an official birth certificate, and that's only one of the obstacles. You might think the example is far fetched, but from the 1960's and earlier, you're likely to find more and more examples of that sort of situation occurring, especially in rural areas.

  • krimson Apr 1, 12:00 p.m.

    It always made me uneasy when in went to vote and all i was asked was may name and address. ... View More

    — Posted by casadelrichman

    You were also asked to sign an Affidavit stating that you understood that you could be convicted of a Felony if you lied about your identity...

  • jackjones2nc Apr 1, 11:54 a.m.

    First, there haven't been any convictions of so-called "voter fraud" that checking an ID would have prevented. Second, the voter suppression law goes WAY BEYOND voting requirements for ID.

  • casadelrichman Apr 1, 10:37 a.m.

    It always made me uneasy when in went to vote and all i was asked was may name and address. Voter IS is completely reasonable.

  • wilson321 Apr 1, 9:47 a.m.

    MISEEM, they're not asking to see your ballot, just prove your eligible to vote. Hey, I wonder if you have to show an ID to get a SNAP card, an Obama phone, or the rest of the welfare gimmies.

  • Countrylawyer Apr 1, 7:12 a.m.

    There is nothing wrong with determining if a voter is alive or dead. If he is dead, moved, etc., we don't need him (ghost) trying to elect our county, state, federal officials/employees.

  • miseem Mar 31, 8:19 p.m.

    I have no problem showing my State issued ID for any vote, or business that it is a requirement.... View More

    — Posted by sandim50

    So, you don't mind federal eavesdropping on your phone calls, random searches of your property, random stops while you are driving? After all, what do you have to hide?

  • sandim50 Mar 31, 5:46 p.m.

    I have no problem showing my State issued ID for any vote, or business that it is a requirement. What have I to hide. If getting a photo ID is a financial hardship the state will issue it free.

  • Ijaz Fahted Mar 31, 5:04 p.m.

    "Reform is surly needed when anyone can walk to a voting place, give only a name and address,... View More

    — Posted by bill15

    I don't know why people can't get past the ID part when that is just a small portion of these regressive changes.

  • Pensive01 Mar 31, 2:42 p.m.

    We currently have states with more registered voters than qualified Citizens of voting age. It... View More

    — Posted by veryfrustrated1

    So far the only "evidence" that is used to promote that a voter ID is needed is, to paraphrase the X Files, the fraud is out there. However based on actual cases of actual fraud that has been found to have occurred in NC, a voter ID would not have prevented a single one because none of them used fraudulent identities, or impersonations, in the process of committing those frauds. Add in the facts that most of the law has very little to do with any type of fraud at all, except for absentee ballots which the law makes it even easier to get by people who would use them to commit absentee ballot fraud, clearly demonstrates that preventing election fraud is not the main focus of the ID law.

  • krimson Mar 31, 2:40 p.m.

    When we started this country and this state, voting was not a right, but a privilege. When you... View More

    — Posted by casadelrichman

    So what do you recommend??? Restricting the Rights of some part of the populace, or better educating the populace???

  • krimson Mar 31, 2:38 p.m.

    We currently have states with more registered voters than qualified Citizens of voting age. It... View More

    — Posted by veryfrustrated1

    A person's death does not automatically remove them from the voting rolls, though perhaps it should be... Imagine though being told that you're not eligible to vote b/c the state (mistakenly) took you off the voting rolls b/c they (mistakenly) believed you are dead...

  • goldenosprey Mar 31, 2:10 p.m.

    We currently have states with more registered voters than qualified Citizens of voting age. It... View More

    — Posted by veryfrustrated1

    And yet, the existence of actual voter fraud that would be addressed by this law is virtually nonexistent. It is a mere pretext and a poor one at that.

  • miseem Mar 31, 1:19 p.m.

    When we started this country and this state, voting was not a right, but a privilege. When you... View More

    — Posted by casadelrichman

    I agree 100%. All you need to do is look at the NC General Assembly and NC Governor's office to confirm that too many voters do not know what or who they are voting for.

  • jackjones2nc Mar 31, 1:07 p.m.

    This voter suppression law goes way beyond requiring photo ID. This law needlessly changes early voting hours, polling stations, straight ticket voting, voter pre-registration, same-day registration, along with establishing vigilantes at the polls, and a tax on parents of students that vote outside the parents' district.

  • issymayake Mar 31, 12:52 p.m.

    When we started this country and this state, voting was not a right, but a privilege. When you... View More

    — Posted by casadelrichman

    Women couldn't vote either. Neither could slaves. Neither could Native Americans. Neither could poor people. Changes were made, for the better, and within reason.

    The current law is making changes, that aren't necessarily for the better, and some might argue are unreasonable.

  • goldenosprey Mar 31, 12:24 p.m.

    When we started this country and this state, voting was not a right, but a privilege. When you... View More

    — Posted by casadelrichman

    Vladimir Putin will welcome you with open arms if you don't like America or democracy. Otherwise you will have to wait for a time travel machine to go back to the good ol' days of Jim Crow, poll taxes and those silly little suffragettes.

  • Gidder Dun Mar 31, 11:52 a.m.

    When we started this country and this state, voting was not a right, but a privilege. When you... View More

    — Posted by casadelrichman

    I agree in part if you were a White Male you could vote back when this country started. If you were anything else you did not get to vote, you were property of the White Man. Fast forward to when our founding fathers created the US Constitution and it became a RIGHT not a privilege, but even then if you were not White or Male you still could not vote. Now fast forward to the year of 1920 and Women got the right to vote, at a later date people of color got the RIGHT to vote and Segregation ended.

  • Gidder Dun Mar 31, 11:47 a.m.

    Democracy depends upon an informed electorate. When voters discover that they can vote to get... View More

    — Posted by casadelrichman

    Democracy ended with SUPER PACS.... when you can buy an election is when democracy ended.

  • casadelrichman Mar 31, 11:06 a.m.

    Democracy depends upon an informed electorate. When voters discover that they can vote to get more government money, democracy ends.

  • rduwxboy Mar 31, 10:57 a.m.

    The bill goes beyond the ID. Most people on here don't realize that. It eliminates the public funding and allows private entities to anonymously give. That sure sounds like improving the integrity of the process (as Governor McCrory puts it) of the election.

  • casadelrichman Mar 31, 10:55 a.m.

    When we started this country and this state, voting was not a right, but a privilege. When you look at the masses of voters who cast ballots with zero understanding of the candidates or the issues, you have cause to consider the wisdom of the founders.

  • Plenty Coups Mar 31, 9:50 a.m.

    Clearly voter suppression is the intent else there would be actual evidence to support the need for the law. Then it goes WAAAAY beyond just voter IDs.

  • raleighdurham Mar 31, 9:36 a.m.

    "If Peake's ruling stands, voters could soon know a lot more about how outside groups influence laws."

    alleluia!

  • jgilchr Mar 31, 9:07 a.m.

    The bill goes well beyond the ID. Additionally I am still trying to figure out how the portion allowing for more anonymous money improves vote integrity. If anyone can explain that one I am all ears.

  • IBnormal Mar 31, 8:45 a.m.

    "Legislators' email communications with third parties are public records under the law," Mike Tadych of WRAL

    So, if I sent my state legislator an email it will be made public? Along with my name, email address, and, any other private or semi-private info that is in the email?

    Does the Judicial Branch have to show their emails, too? I'd like to know how Judge Peake reached her conclusion.

  • bill15 Mar 31, 8:40 a.m.

    "Reform is surly needed when anyone can walk to a voting place, give only a name and address, and be allowed to vote."

    Voter ID is just one page of the 57 pages of new rules that suppress voting. Greater and broader voter turnout isn't in the interest of the GOP, otherwise we wouldn't see these laws. I look forward to seeing the lawmaker emails. Sunlight is the best disinfectant.

  • lavenderdejectedmoon Mar 31, 8:24 a.m.

    Can't wait for these emails to go public.

  • casadelrichman Mar 31, 6:38 a.m.

    Reform is surly needed when anyone can walk to a voting place, give only a name and address, and be allowed to vote. That said, no attempt to push undo pressure should be tolerated.

  • ger Mar 29, 3:12 p.m.

    We know the reason. Suppress the vote.

  • jacamoe Mar 29, 2:14 p.m.

    Feathers sure seem to ruffle when the tables are turning the other way. What's the difference in wanting ALL emails from the IRS SCANDAL of Lois Learner. I'll tell you, the political party that wants them. Double standard in play.

  • Sally1023 Mar 29, 1:21 p.m.

    LOVE the idea. Employees for private institutions can have their computers taken to see what activity has been viewed or what emails have said because the computers are property of the institution. I think it exceedingly reasonable and smart that "LAW MAKERS" computers should be available to the public to view.

  • Tax Man Mar 29, 1:04 p.m.

    All communications by those elected at all levels of government need to be available to the public and the press at all times. They should be published immediately on their websites. There should be no "privilege" as these are OUR employees and we are entitled to know what they say, do and think when it comes to governing. Only upon a showing that grave harm would come to some innocent person by the disclosure of the information should their be any restraints. Every email, phone call, minutes of meetings, written correspondence, notes taken all need to be made public within hours of the communication taking place. As to criminal investigations, there needs to be some restrictions but these apply only to the police, law enforcement, prosecutors and the courts, not any legislators or elected officials.

  • snapjack Mar 28, 9:39 p.m.

    Good, let's see this dirty business come out into the open. Not that it will change any of the closed minded neocons around here

  • pause to consider Mar 28, 8:07 p.m.

    If this was the NATIONAL legislature that was dealing with INTERNATIONAL relations, then the general public might be excluded from some discourse. But this is STATE business and only personal vocal communications can be assumed 'private' or 'privileged'. Email is a tool and what our state law makers type is PUBLIC. Period. Open it up!

Oldest First