Commentary

New report lists actual names of hundreds disenfranchised during May primary by new NC voting laws

Voting rightsThe good people at Democracy North Carolina released a new and detailed report today that documents the negative impact that North Carolina’s new “monster voting law” has already had on voter participation. The report actually provides the names, hometowns and zip codes of 454 voters who were denied the right to vote in the May primary, but who would have been allowed to vote under the rules governing the 2012 election. This is from the report, which is entitled “Be Prepared: Hundreds of Voters Lost Their Votes in 2014 Primary Due to New Election Rules”:

We analyzed the provisional ballots cast in the 2014 primary by more than 400 voters whose votes would have counted in 2012, but who were rejected this year because of two changes in the rules: (1) these voters were unable to register during the Early Voting period because they couldn’t use the old “same-day registration” law; or (2) they were unable to cast a ballot on Election Day outside of their own polling place because they couldn’t use the old “out-of-precinct voting” law.

Voters denied a chance to have their voices heard include a veteran returning from Afghanistan whose registration was incorrectly terminated while he was away; a first-time voter who registered at the DMV, but that registration didn’t reach the local board of elections; a precinct judge assigned to a precinct other than her own who couldn’t leave to vote in her home precinct; a disabled senior who was driven to a friend’s polling place on Election Day; a nurse who temporarily registered her car in a nearby county while working at its hospital for nine months; a college student who registered during a voter drive but her application was not recorded; and a new couple in town who mailed in their registration but it did not reach the county board of elections before the registration deadline….

The voters who cast the 454 rejected provisional ballots come from every walk of life, and are of all parties, races, and age groups. But their composition is startling because it reveals that the new rules are indeed affecting African Americans and other people of color much more than white voters, and Democrats more than Republicans.

While Black voters make up 22% of all registered voters, they were 39% of those who lost their votes because of the two rule changes – the elimination of same-day registration and elimination of out-of-precinct voting on Election Day.

Democrats are 42% of the state’s registered voters, but 57% of those disenfranchised by the new rules.

These 454 voters are obviously just the tip of the iceberg of the thousands who faced the same problems when they went to vote in the primary and who simply left the polling place without taking the time to fill out the paperwork and file a provisional ballot.

Click here to read the report and see the names of the “tip-of-the-iceberg” individuals who were disenfranchised.

4 Comments


  1. John

    September 10, 2014 at 6:50 pm

    It looks like the voter suppression law is doing its job, as intended.

  2. david esmay

    September 10, 2014 at 8:22 pm

    I happened to be back in NC this week and caught Phil Berger’s voter fraud ad, how ridiculous does the right have to get when they promote a non-issue as their primary issue? Berger has proven time and again that the real fraud being perpetrated is the NC GOP’s ability to govern responsibly.

  3. caniacsteve

    September 13, 2014 at 10:00 am

    If they based their entire appeal based on and upon the 2 points listed in the article…there is NOTHING racist,hateful or unconstitutional for discontinuing same day registration/voting as it was a “convenience” grated by the then State DNC NC Legislature I am told & no where in America aside from absentee ballots submitted by overseas military members have i ever read that any state allowed.permitted and encouraged anyone and everyone to vote outside their county let alone their assigned voting polling places.so the appeal should be denied IF the court is and remains “color blind” …IF

  4. LayintheSmakDown

    September 13, 2014 at 11:47 am

    Interesting that they can be disenfranchised when the laws were not in effect at the time. I guess this post reinforces the fact truth is not a hindrance to a story on the Hysteria Watch.

Check Also

Editorial: Burr should summon the integrity to do the right thing on impeachment evidence

In case you missed it over the weekend, ...

Top Stories from NCPW

  • News
  • Commentary

Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC has filed an application with the Utilities Commission requesting authori [...]

Because DEQ limited air monitor sites to meet EPA criteria, they were too far from hog farms to accu [...]

Law "is clear" Rep. Holly Grange should have reported on businesses owned by her husband e [...]

More than two decades after a landmark state Supreme Court ruling, NC moves a step closer to assurin [...]

The post POTUS, WOTUS and North Carolina ‘wetlands’ appeared first on NC Policy Watch. [...]

If North Carolina Republicans are confounded by the notion that every last one of them disdains publ [...]

As we commemorated the 46th anniversary of the historic Supreme Court decision Roe v Wade last year, [...]

And just like that, another critical election year is upon us – maybe the most important election ye [...]