Speak Out: What’s wrong with keeping the voting process pure?
by our readers
Aug 16, 2013 | 1905 views |  0 comments | 29 29 recommendations | email to a friend | print
Re “Tarheels down” (H. Brandt Ayers column, Aug. 4):

Having read just a snippet of H. Brandt Ayers’ commentary about the race to the bottom for North Carolina, I believe I can summarize his objections to the new voter-ID law just passed. It disenfranchises voters. How absurd!

You need a picture ID for practically all other governmental functions as it is now. How is it wrong to attempt to keep the voting process pure? You need a picture ID for so many other things like cashing checks, doctor visits, pharmacy pickups, etc. — you should get the drift — yet there are no complaints when using these methods to insure the integrity of those processes, so why now?

All those groups most likely mentioned by Ayers already have the ID. The only reason against it is to promote voter fraud, something those like Ayers say doesn’t exist, even though some Democrats are headed to prison, as we speak, for it. There should be no negative fallout for attempting to keep the integrity of the voting process.

The U.S. Constitution says only U.S. citizens can vote, right? If so, how can anyone find fault with trying to keep it legal? Ayers, on this issue as on the Second Amendment issue, is on the wrong side.

David Duncan
DeArmanville
Comments must be made through Facebook
No personal attacks
No name-calling
No offensive language
Comments must stay on topic
No infringement of copyrighted material


Friends to Follow



Today's Events

event calendar

post a new event

Saturday, April 19, 2014

Marketplace