New voting laws discourage turnout

The North Carolina General Assembly has passed a new set of voting laws that will require a photo ID and will eliminate a number of "convenience" opportunities to vote. As I have stated before, I don't have a big problem with voter ID as long as the law is applied fairly and those voters without a driver's license have ample and cost-free opportunity to get an ID. I'll give the Republican legislators who are pushing the voter ID bill a free ride on this one, despite critics' claims that the bill amounts to voter suppression and is racist. The law applies equally to white, black, male, female, Democrat and Republican.

But the curtailing of early voting and the elimination of same-day registration, straight-ticket voting and other conveniences for voters is clearly intended to shrink the electorate and shrink it in a way that will benefit Republicans and reduce Democratic turnout. As the Obama organization has proven twice, turnout is everything.

Early voting applies equally to voters of both parties, but it seems clear that Democrats have taken advantage of the reduced barriers to voting. Democrats have done a better job of getting voters to the polls early and boosting their turnout. Rather than work harder to match their opponents' early turnout, the GOP legislators will simply make it harder to vote early. As for straight-ticket voting, this convenience for voters has been a thorn in the side of both parties. When they ruled the legislature, Democrats separated presidential voting from the straight ticket in an effort to blunt the popularity of Republican presidential candidates, who had won North Carolina for the previous 32 years until 2008. The separation required an extra click for voters, but it was seen as worth it to state Democrats who didn't want to be lumped with unpopular Democratic presidential candidates (Mondale, Dukakis, Gore, etc.).

I have no personal interest in this matter. I have never voted early, and I have never voted a straight ticket. I've always enjoyed going to the polls on Election Day, and I never wanted to give one party absolute control, nor did I think one party had a monopoly on talent and integrity.

The new voting laws will be challenged, but it may be hard to prove that making it less convenient to vote is an infringement on the right to vote. (Who said voting had to be convenient?) It is, nevertheless, a blatant attempt by Republicans to eliminate the votes of many citizens who lean toward the Democratic Party. If this suppression of voting prevails, Republicans could enjoy an advantage for decades. Or they could so anger Democratic voters that their turnout actually rises.

Early voters miss out on a lot

Early voting began in North Carolina Thursday, and some polling stations were reporting long lines. So much for avoiding the Election Day crowd.

I was not among the early voters and won't be. It's not because I'm undecided just 17 days before the election. I'm pretty certain how I'll vote. But with more than two weeks to go, a lot can change. A candidate you voted for could drop dead before Nov. 4. An "October Surprise" could change the whole dynamic of the election.

And perhaps most important, early voters miss out on the national day of unity, the day when civic-minded citizens across the country share in performing the fundamental exercise of democracy. When I go to vote Nov. 4, I expect to share the experience with my neighbors, some of whom will vote as I do and some who will not. Regardless of how we vote, we will be affirming our citizenship, our responsibility for this government we will elect on every level from the White House to the school house (in this county, we have no courthouse contests, just a school board election).

That feeling of shared responsibility is something worth preserving. Although modern elections are far different from what the Founding Fathers envisioned and experienced, the fundamental principles remain. We do not have to wait months for the election results, as our forebears did in 1792, but we will eagerly await results. For the past 32 years I have spent nearly every election night at the local Board of Elections, wherever I was living at the time. There, I could follow the incoming vote results and share the excitement with the reporters, politicians and hangers-on who crowded into the election office. This year, with no news or editorial responsibilities, I might sit at home and watch the national results on television.

The first election I reported on, in 1976, was not settled until well after midnight. The 2000 presidential election was not settled for weeks, thanks to legal challenges that had to be settled by the Supreme Court. This year's election might be settled earlier — or it might drag on into Nov. 5. Either way, I'll share the experience of watchful waiting with 300 million fellow Americans. All of us have a stake in this election.