A searchable audio archive from the 2013-2016 legislative sessions of the North Carolina General Assembly.

searching for


Reliance on Information Posted The information presented on or through the website is made available solely for general information purposes. We do not warrant the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of this information. Any reliance you place on such information is strictly at your own risk. We disclaim all liability and responsibility arising from any reliance placed on such materials by you or any other visitor to the Website, or by anyone who may be informed of any of its contents. Please see our Terms of Use for more information.

House | July 25, 2013 | Chamber | Session Part 3

Full MP3 Audio File

House Bill 122, the clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES]. To the press, to the Senate, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, the Conferees appointed to resolve the difference between the Senate and House of Representatives on their House Bill 122, a bill ?? to be the laws pertaining to interlocutory fields, as related to family of law, and modified the law regarding discipline for judges, the Conferees recommend the Senate and the House of Representatives adopt this report. Conferees for the Senate; Senator Goolsby, Chair, Senators Newton, Barringer, and Daniel. Conferees for the House of Representatives; Representative Glazier, Chair, Representatives Stevens, Stam, and Daughtry. [SPEAKER CHANGES]. Representative Glazier, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES]. To move an option to the conference report and speak to the motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES]. The gentleman is recognized for the motion and to debate the motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES]. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Members, this is a conference report that's unanimous. This bill passed the House 115-0 many decades ago, I believe. And it amends the rules of procedure to allow interlocutory family appeals. I know of no opposition, and urge at the option of the conference report. Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES]. Further discussion, further debate. If not, the motion before the House is to adopt the conference report for House Bill 122. All in favor vote aye. All opposed vote no. The clerk will open the vote. The clerk will let the machine record the vote, 89 having voted in the affirmative, and none in the negative. The House has adopted the conference report for House Bill 122. The Senate will be so notified. Ladies and gentlemen of the House, we're about to begin the debate on the motion for concurrence for House Bill 589. In light of other matters that we need to account time for, the Chair will provide 90 minutes of debate for the minority caucus, and 30 minutes of debate for the majority caucus, for a total of 2 hours. In the process of the debate, if any member requests to interrupt someone speaking, the time allocated to respond to that question will be allocated to the side who asked the question. Before we begin on that motion Representative Stam please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES]. To make a motion with respect to Senate Bill 182, limit Superior Court appeals. [SPEAKER CHANGES]. The gentleman may state his motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES]. The motion is, having voted on the prevailing side, I move to reconsider that vote by which it prevailed, and I'll explain. [SPEAKER CHANGES]. The gentleman is recognized to debate the motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES]. Right before the recess we adopted a conference report. The Senate has not yet adopted it. Staff found an error, and they're preparing a new conference report, so if we could, if you would vote with us on that, recall that, so we could then withdraw that conference report. Sorry. [SPEAKER CHANGES]. Ladies and gentleman, the motion is the motion to reconsider the vote on the conference report for Senate Bill 182. All in favor vote aye. All opposed vote no. The clerk will open the vote. The clerk will let the machine record the vote. Representative Cotham, the lady wishes to be recorded aye, Representative Hamilton, aye. The motion passes. [SPEAKER CHANGES]. Mr. Speaker, if I could ask that the conference report be withdrawn. [SPEAKER CHANGES]. The conference, with that objection, is withdrawn. Representative Larry Hall, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES]. Question of the Chair. [SPEAKER CHANGES]. The gentleman may state his inquiry. [SPEAKER CHANGES]. Mr. Speaker, how did we determine the time allotment for discussion on 588?

In consultation with the Senate my rules chair and other leaders we are trying to determine the amount of time we have left for the evening and there are other matters that we have to take up. We anticipate possibly one other rules meeting before we are done. We have technical corrections for the budget to take up. We have at least one or maybe two or three more conference reports and the chair is trying to manage the time in order we may get out of here. So we may be able to complete the business before the mid night hour. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Follow. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman may state his inquiry. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Well Mr. Speaker it's traditionally being l been the practice of the house that the minority leader is involved in the discussion before we put in time when we are in debate just wanna be clear that we didn't agree to any limitation on debate was not our plan to be limited on debate and so we are on the opinion this in impotent enough deal to have unlimited wait for our side. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman's pint is taken. The chair would point out that the speaker has or the chair has limited the debate to 3/4th to the minority carcass 1/4th to majority carcass as has been in the practice and number of other cases and every case in minority carcass has got the majority often times here overwhelming majority and the chair is trying to show respect at the same time manage the limited time we have between now and mid night and the gentleman is quite aware that the obligation at the outside of 6 minutes for moving the previous question goes far beyond when we are taking about 2 hours of debate. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Follow up. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman may state his inquiry. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Is it intension of the majority carcass to limit the debate if the time is what is considered is approximately 2 hours is that what we have? [SPEAKER CHANGES] That is correct. If the opinion in the chair the other matters that the chair is trying to reserve time for that time can be freed up then we would provide any additional time to the minority carcass if the time is available and if the time is needed. It's also the observation of the chair there been a couple of instances where we had the time allotment and all the time was not taken. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Follow up question. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman may state his inquiry. [SPEAKER CHANGES] If the majority carcass is wanting the time to be limited 2 hours had requested the minority carcass be given 2 full hours. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Noted. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Speaker. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Moore please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Would leave the house of the house to be committed to go past 9 o clock pm this evening for session. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Without objection. Sir Howard. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Follow up question Mr. Speaker. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman will yield without objection rule 12H suspended. The gentleman may state his inquiry. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Speaker this is a concurrence vote on this bill is it? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes it is. [SPEAKER CHANGES] We can vote this bill tomorrow as well? [SPEAKER CHANGES] That is correct. The vote will be taken tonight. House bill 589 three clerk will read. Senate committee substitute for house bill 589. A bill to be entitled. An act to restore confidence in government by establishing the voter information verification act to promote the electoral process through education and increased registration of voters and by requiring voters to provide photo identification before voting to protect the right of each registered voter to cast a secure vote with reasonable security measures that confirm voter identity as accurately as possible without restriction. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Speaker inquiry check. [SPEAKER CHANGES The gentleman may state his inquiry. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Speaker I would like to raise a motion and I would to hear what my motion is of you don't mind. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman may state his intend. [SPEAKER CHANGES] It's my intend to make the motion persuade to rule 30. I am on page 129 in rule book that this house go into the committee of the whole or the discussion on this bill I like to explain to you why the bill we send over was a super bill on voter identification

[SPEAKER CHANGES] This has come back as a fifty seven page bill including many, many, many other things that have not been vetted in conference and in order to be fair, I'm just asking that you allow my motion, that this house go into committee as a whole to vet the bill and bring it out of that committee. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Moore, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] To respond to the gentlemen's request for a motion under rule thirty. I don't know if the motion is actually proper before the house but I would rise an opposition to the motion and simply point out the redundancy. I can't think of the last time that a, that the House has met as the committee of the whole. It is, it would be pointless to do so because the committee of the whole would be the entire House setting as a committee and then later simply sitting as the House. It's a complete waste of time. And so the, it is standard under our rules for this bill to come back for a concurrence vote in the matter it is. It has gone through the proper committee hearings. It has gone through the proper hearings, both in this House, both in the Senate committees, both in the, in the Senate and its properly before us. It would be unnecessary and simply a waste of time to do so and I would encourage the body, should the gentlemen proffer the motion to reject the motion to go into the committee of the whole. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Moore, in the opinion of the chair, the gentlemen's intent is in order. It requires a simple majority vote. We will take a vote on this to, to, the gentlemen's motion is to convene as the committee of the whole. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes sir, I move that we go into committee of a whole in order to discuss the committee substitute for the House bill, five eighty nine. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Moore, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] To, to speak to, to debate the motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentlemen's recognized to debate the motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Speaker again, Mr. Speaker and members, I would urge the body to vote against the motion. It is, it is with all due respect to the gentlemen from Durham, I would submit it is simply a waste of time that the committee of the whole is the same as the full House in terms of party's who are here to hear the bill. The bill is properly before us and we should act as the House to do this. In fact I can't think of the last time the House has met as the committee of the whole. I don't even know if its met since madame clerk has been, since shes been our clerk. So its been many years since most of us were ever here. I would ask the members to vote no on the motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion, further debate on the motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Speaker on the motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentelmens recoginized to debate the motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Speaker, I know that this may be the first time in a long time that we have met as the committee of the whole but certainly we spent a lot of time and put in a lot of effort in the rules at the start of session. And our rules provide for us to go into the committee of the whole. It also provides for further discussion on this bill that has had all of these provisions added. So I'd ask that you support the motion to go into the committee of whole so all of the members can have participation on all the things that got added to the bill that we sent to the Senate that was about fourteen pages and is now well in excess three times that size. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker. [SPEAKER CHANGES] All members will yield. It is the intent of the Chair to take the vote on this motion now. The question before the House is the motion to meet as the committee of the whole. All in favor vote "Aye". All opposed vote "No". The clerk will open the vote. The clerk [???] machine will record the vote. Forty one have voted affirmative and sixty nine in the negative. The motion fails. Representative Lewis is recognized to, for a motion. Are both amendments read? Both amendments need to be properly read. The clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Stand up. By Senator Rucho moves to amend the bill on page. Rucho moves to [???] the bill on page two, lines thirty eight through forty three by rewriting those lines to read.

The clerk will read the Second Ammendment. [Speaker Changes] Senator Blue moves to ammend the bill on page 53, line 12, by deleting September 15 and substituting September 7 on that line. [Speaker Changes] The gentleman is recognized for a motion and to debate the motion. [Speaker Changes] Mr. Speaker, I move that the house do concur with the senate ammendments as read by the clerk. [Speaker Changes] The gentleman is recognized to debate the motion. [Speaker Changes] Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, the ammendments that you have before you. The first one sends forth Senator Rucho is labeled H589AST-150 version five. It moves to ammend the bill in several ways. I'll be as brief as I can. The first it expands and better defines the type and number of identifications that may be presented at the polling site to vote. It then, on line 18 makes a techincal correction, it does the same thing on line 21. Beginning on page 21, on line 23 and then continuing to the second page, it defines that the county boards of elections will maintain the same hours of early voting in the presidential years that they maintained in 2012 at a minimum, and they will maintain, at a minimum, the same number of hours for a non-presidential year that they maintained during the 2010 election cycle. The intent of that, obviously, is to make sure that the important tool of early voting is maintained and that our citizens have the opportunity to acces it. Continuing on page two of the second ammendment, you will find again on line 11, this ammendment will further contemplate that by a unanimous board. Excuse me, Mr. Speaker, by a vote, unanimously of the board of elections in the county, which would include of course, two members of the party of the governor, and one member, who is not a member of the party of the governor. A unanimous vote, of the county board, may submit a request to the state board, to reduce the number of hours that I just spoke of. We'll find at the bottom of that page, the bottom of that page is also a technical change to the bill. Mr. Speaker, I now will speak on the second ammendment, which is H589AST-153 version one, was submitted by Senator Blue. This ammendment purely is a date change, it has to do with the amount of time allowed for electioneering. With that, Mr. Speaker, I would commend to the house that this house does adopt both of these ammendments sent to us from the senate. [Speaker Changes] Ladies and gentlemen of the house, I am going to use the cue that is available to me up here to call in turn to the minority leader and others which do have recognized members out of turn, please let me know. Does the gentleman wish to be recognized first? [Speaker Changes] Yes, Mr. Speaker, I have a listing of the order for members from our side. I have these two ammendments, have been voted for the actual concurrence vote itself. [Speaker Changes] Members, just to be clear on this vote, this vote is the passage of the two senate ammendments that were read in by the clerk. After we do that, we will be debating the bill, as ammended. The question before the house is... I'm sorry, you're behind two members. [Speaker Changes] Um, why can't we see the ammendments, why does it say block vote? [Speaker Changes] The ammendments, Representative McManus, the ammendments are there are being voted together. We can have staff back there to help you.

[LONG PAUSE] Mr. Speaker. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The, Representative Brawley, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Just for a question of the Chair. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman may state his inquiry. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I have discovered that if I go to calendar and then click on the amendments individually, I can read them. I didn’t know if that was unique to me or[CROSSTALK] [SPEAKER CHANGES]?? on time for Representative McManus to get to the proper place on the dashboard. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I’ve got it, thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The question before the House is concurrence in Senate amendments 11 and 13. All in favor vote aye. All opposed vote no. The clerk will open the vote. [PAUSE] The clerk will lock the machine and record the vote. 109 having voted the affirmative, none in the negative, the House has concurred in Senate amendments 11 and 13. [PAUSE] Representative Hall, does the gentleman wish to send forth the order of the members? [PAUSE] [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Speaker. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Ray, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I was in the chamber. Can I be voted as Aye on the last [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recorded as having voted Aye on the concurrence vote. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. [LONG PAUSE] [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Warren, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] To speak to the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized to debate the conference report. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Ladies and gentlemen, the conference report before us, the first portion of that is a voter information verification act that we voted out of here this past April with a bipartisan vote of 81 [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Warren, just as a correction. The Speaker misspoke. You are speaking on the concurrence motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] That’s correct sir, thank you. We voted out of here in April on a bipartisan vote of 81-36, and it comes back to us with a few changes. You may, just for recollection, this bill was crafted, taking into consideration that every person has a right to vote, and that right to vote has to be protected. The bill was crafted in such a manner as to provide for the integrity of the voting process. And it took into consideration in the formation of this bill, the consideration of the viewpoints of people who were opposed to the concept of voter ID. But it is essential, just as essential, that every person who has the right to vote gets to vote, that that vote be protected and not negated by fraud. The Senate, working on the bill, made very few substantive changes to the VIVA act and I’d like to go over those with you. First of all, the VIVA board on the state level was deleted. The educational provisions were consolidated under just one section of the bill, and modified just to eliminate those that had significant expense associated primarily with VIVA program. There were several categories of acceptable IDs that we had listed in the House. We had a total of 13. They’ve cut that back to 7. But what we lost in that was not really substantial. One of those IDs was college IDs, and if you’ll check out actually the, some of the websites for the state college

system, you'll see like for UNC Chapel Hill and UNC Charlotte in order to get a student ID you have to have a photo ID, so we're practicing redundancy if we're having the student ID's on there. So it's not a loss in that respect. They maintained that expired ID's could be used for folks who are 70 years of ago who had a valid ID when they turned 70 and they may continue to use that ID after it's expired. A technical change was the provision on folks who have lost their ID's due to a disaster. That was clarified on how to get disaster declaration forms. That was a change that was actually requested by the local Board of Elections. Another technical change was one that allowed criminal penalty language that the House had required on the envelope to be actually printed on a separate piece of paper and again that was at the request of the BOE. One of the provisions I noticed had been changed was the recognition of Indian tribes as Representative Lewis pointed out on the first amendment offered by Senator Rucho that was taken care of. They had actually maintained recognition of the seven state Indian tribes but failed to include the provisions to validate those to bring them in compliance and they brought those in with that amendment there. Other than that I don't believe there were anything else that was possible to point out. Everything else is fine. Just for the sake of review I'll go through the different parts of the VIVA bill itself starting with voting in person which is going to require a photo ID and that list now consists of a North Carolina drivers license, North Carolina special identification card, a U.S. Passport, U.S. military ID card, a veterans identification card containing a photo and produced by the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, the Tribal Enrollment Card issued by a federally recognized tribe which in our case is the Cherokee Tribe, and then the seven state recognized tribes, and then a drivers license or special ID card issued by another state, District of Columbia, or a territory or Commonwealth of the United States but only if that voter's registration is within 90 days of the election and then as I mentioned the over 70 years of age expired cards would still be accepted too. There were exceptions. They maintained our exceptions to the photo requirement which included the religious objectors. That should be on page 1, lines 26-29, Section 2.3 of the Conference Report, curbside voting was maintained, the natural disaster affadavit was maintained and the reasonable resemblance determinations provisional balloting for those without photo ID, all those provisions in the bill that we passed on an 81 to 36 vote have been maintained in the bill. The request for absentee ballot, that process was maintained as well. The voting by mail request, where if you're voting absentee ballot you simply can go online and request an absentee ballot request form or you can stop by BOE Office to pick one up in person, so all those provisions were kept in place. They changed nothing there in the remainder of the bill. The provisions for creating a VIVA team in each county that we had in our bill is simply referred to in here as a multi-partisan team. It would still be formed by the BOE in the county and that's designed to help folks who are shut-in or have a physical need for assistance in getting an ID, that provision in the 2-year phase-in is still in place so the intent to educate and increase voter registration and education is still in the

Bill. They have assistance for voters who are patients and have actually have incorporated a study in this bill for further research on how we, further study on how we can further help folks who need assistance and special conditions. At that point, the bill goes into Part 7 of the bill which is outside of the veto, the VIVA realm and goes into a addition to the VIVA bill, or expansion of the bill, which is a study on filling vacancies in the General Assembly. This requires that a Joint Legislative Elections Oversight Committee would study and recommend a method of filling vacancies in the general assembly. Part 8 of the bill is in reference to filling vacancies in the United States Senate. And this would require that the Governor would appoint a person affiliated with the same political party if a ?? Senator had been elected as the nominee of a political party. So in other words if, in our case right now if Richard Burr was, if his position became available the Governor would be appointing a Republican in that position, in Kay, Senator Kay Hagan’s case it would be a Democrat. Part 9 of the bill is about filling vacancies in the U.S. House of Representatives and this requires, again, that the Joint Legislative Elections Oversight Committee study and recommend a method of filling vacancies in the U.S. House by special election. Part 10 of the bill incorporates a bill that we voted out of here last session. I think the vote then two years ago was 115 to 0, and we voted it out of here this year on a vote of 117 to 0 and that is a special elections bill. As you may recall, that was a bill that simply required that all special elections and referendums had to be held during a county or a municipal general election or an even year primary. And there were no changes at all that bill was just lifted and stuck right into this. Part 11 of the bill is, pertains to poll observers. This would allow the chair of each political party in the county to designate up to 10 additional at-large observers to attend any voting place in that county and allow that list to be amended between the one stop period and election day. In addition to the two observers assigned to the polling place, one of the at-large observers may also be in the building enclosure with add that the poll observers are authorized to be present and to move about the polling, voting place prior to, during and following the closing of the polls until the chief judging judges have completed all their duties. Part 11 of the bill is the elimination of preregistration. This would eliminate preregistration and make the necessary conforming changes to the law. The ?? would become effective on September 1, 2013. Voter preregistration completed and received prior to that date would be processed and registered as appropriate. Part 13 of the bill is what they referred to as a ?? ink on voter registration forms. And what that would do is modify the current requirement to provide that only those electronically captured signatures that are on electronic voter registration form offered by a state agency are considered valid. Other electronically captured signatures including those generated by computer programs of third-party groups are not valid, except those provided in the Uniform Military and Overseas Voter Act. Part 14 of the bill covers compensation for voter registration limitations, and basically in a nutshell what that says is, it provides that anyone who is compensated based on the number of forms submitted for assisting persons in registering to vote would be guilty of a Class II misdemeanor. Part 16 of the bill eliminates same day voter registration. This part of the bill would repeal general statue 163-82.6A and make conforming changes throughout the statues to remove that provision related to same day voter registration. At this point ladies and gentlemen colleagues, I’d like to ask Representative Lewis to continue covering the other provisions of the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] To what purpose does the gentlemen ?? Representative Lewis, rise [SPEAKER CHANGES] May I debate the bill Mr. Speaker? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Gentlemen has the floor.

Debate the motion of ?? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Ladies and gentlemen of the house, I’d like to continue with the explanation of the bill and then offer some remarks, if I could at the conclusion. Part 17 of the bill it deals with empowering our militaries and overseas voters. It directs stronger language to the State Board of Elections to make sure that the ballots are mailed out to our military and voters residing abroad in a timely fashion. Part 18’s appeal deals of the voter role itself, it prescribes that the State Board of Elections show updated lists using their program not less than twice, annually. Part 19 of the bill eliminates a old provision dealing with a mandated voter registration drive. Part 20 of the bill expands access to voter records. Part 21 of the bill deals with the timing of the withdrawal of a notice of candidacy. It says that if an individual has filed for an office, that individual may withdraw from that office up to three day, three business days prior to the close of filing. Part 22 of the bill lowers the threshold for candidates that wish to appear on the ballot but are not able to pay the fee. They may get on the ballot by signatures on a petition. Part 23 limits the withdrawal to appoint of a party nominee, pardon me Mr. Speaker, it limits the withdrawal of a candidate to appoint when the military and overseas ballots have been sent out. Part 24, creates another study to look at the management of extremely large precincts. Part 25 deals with increasing consistency and access to early voting, it was part of the amendment that we discussed earlier today, it reinforces the intent that early voting is an important provision for the people for the state, and that it will be maintained at levels comparable to prior election date. Part 26 another effort to make sure that people have the opportunity to utilize early voting. It would standardize satellite voting sites. Which means that there would be more uniform hours, in the way the sites operate. Part 27 is purely technical. It deletes a reference to the 2000 census. Part 28 produces the need for a second primary. It lowers the current threshold from 40% to 30%. This is a matter that has deceived, that has received considerable discussion in the house and this bill would propose to address , to have a full fledged legislative study to adjust the lowering of the second primary triggering mechanism. Part 29 is a technical change. Part 30 deals with simplifying ballot records. Part 31, this would specify that the major party candidates are listed first on the ballot, and the party of the governor would be the party that would be listed first. With note to members of the house as will probably be explained later that this is a return to prior law. Part 32 is a provision encouraging voters to vote the person and not the party. It would eliminate the straight ticket voting. Part 33 would regulate the extension of poll hours requiring the State Board to authorize the extended hours of the polls. Part 34 is a study to increase protections for persons needing assistance when they cast their vote. Part 35 is the scheduling of the Presidential Preference Primary. This would say that North Carolina would

POTUS Presidential Primary on the Tuesday immediately following the Saturday in which the state of South Carolina holds its. Part 36 allows the State Board of Elections by majority of vote, to add additional candidates to a primary ballot for President. As members know, current law, the State Chair of each respective political party is the only one that can add names to the ballot, this would allow the State Board to do that. Part 38 of the bill repeals the Political Party’s Financing Fund, it repeals the Judicial Elections Fund, the Voter Owned Elections Fund, and repeals the fifty dollar surcharge on attorneys. Part 39 deals with voter list updates, reflecting the removal of, from the roles of deceased persons. This language is taken largely from a House bill that passed 111 to 0. Part 40, Part 41 will deal with studying electronic filing of campaign finance reports. Part 42 would raise the individual campaign contribution limits from 4,000 dollars per election cycle to 5,000 dollars per election cycle with an inflationary adjustment to begin January 1, 2015. Part 43 has to do with expanding the use of the Headquarters Building Fund. As members know, it is already possible to have a Headquarters Building Fund that is funded and maintained in its own entity, but the only use of that money now can be for the payment of a mortgage. What this would do is allow the building fund money to also be used to rent a headquarters. It would allow for utilities inside the building and would allow for compensation of up to three employees not engaged in political advocacy. Part 44 would repeal the provision that requires spoken word disclaimers. Part 45 would place term limits on those serving on the state board of elections. Part 47 would specify that a lobbyist may not collect, take possession or transfer campaign contributions. Part 48 would repeal a provision requiring disclosure of candidate specific communications within a prescribed window. Part 49 would require voters to vote in their proper precinct. Part 50 would specify a date certain for electionary communication to be disclosed by a person. This was part of what was amended by Senator Blue and passed by this House moments ago. Part 51 would eliminate the instant run-off for late-term judicial vacancies and specify that a plurality wins. Part 52 would direct election officials to annotate provisional ballots for retrievability. Part 53, largely technical but important, would clarify and define the reporting periods that are required from campaigns. Part 54 is another study. Part 55 is a study. Part 56 would delete the requirement that ballot measure ads specify for or against. Part 57 would study the

elimination of the 48 hour reporting requirements, part 59 would specify that it's not a violation of criminal law for a candidate or a candidate's committee or a political committee to conduct a raffle if it is reported. Part 60 deals with the effective dates. Ladies and gentlemen of the House, the deal you have before you is a bill that seeks to ensure and promote participation, confidence, and integrity of our election system. It is a bill that will propel North Carolina forward. It will improve the confidence of the voters, that their vote, when they go to the polls and cast their vote, that is their votes cumulative that decides who wins the elections for which they are participating. It is a bill that protects the important sacred constitutional rights of participation in our election process. I respectfully ask the members of this House: vote to concur with the Senate Committee substitute for House Bill 589. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. [SPEAKER CHANGES]: Mr. Speaker? [SPEAKER CHANGES]: For what purpose does the gentleman from Gaston, representing ?? rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES]: Since this has to do with the dignity of the House I think it's a question of privilege. Did you suspend Rule 12H? [SPEAKER CHANGES]: We did. [SPEAKER CHANGES]: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. [SPEAKER CHANGES]: What purpose does the gentleman from Durham, representing ?? rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES]: To speak on the conference floor. [SPEAKER CHANGES]: The gentleman has the floor to debate the motion to concur. [SPEAKER CHANGES]: Mr. Speaker, ladies and gentlemen of the House. Probably one of the most important and one of the most pressing issues that has faced this body and has faced the country is the matter of voting. Nationwide and statewide you have seen passions flame in the matter of voting. I think the only thing next to that would be the abortion matter. You deserve an opportunity to know why passions are so enflamed as a result of our voting system, particularly in this state. One of the reasons I made to call for a motion to call for a committee of the whole was so that these matters that have been added to a bill, a simple bill that you passed out for voter identification, could be explained in much more detail than the two to three hours that we've got to do it in tonight. They call this the "VIVA bill." Some of us have now labelled VIVA as "Voter Intimidation Vilification Act." That's exactly what it is. In order to be fair with you and in order for you to understand why this situation is where it is, why it is such a pressing problem in our state and in our nation. I think you deserve to know a little bit of history behind it. For those of you who think I'm not talking on the bill, I would that this involves the bill you have before you and what the problems are and the problems it's going to create. I want to take you back. I want to take you back to just after the Civil War when the Republicans were in charge and the North won the Civil War and proceeded to free the slaves and put the Federal troops in the South to make sure that the franchise was enjoyed by all who were freed by that war. As a result of that there where many African Americans in legislature, in the Senate of the United States, and in the Congress of the United States. In fact, the only time in history when a legislature had a majority African Americans members was in South Carolina, immediately after that. That legislation led to the first free public schools in the county and to the cleanup of the hospitals and jails in South Carolina. In 1876, a Democrat, Samuel J. Tildon, governor of New

Was elected as President of the United States. He won the popular vote. But there came a problem with the electoral vote, and there were three states where that problem reigned. I believe in that one of those states was Florida, and deals were cut and deals were made, but nothing availed. Inauguration was set for March the fourth of 1877, and finally, members of the Republican party came to the anti-black Democratic party and said listen, if you put our man in the White House, we will pull the troops out of the South. That man was Rutherford B. Hayes, that deal was accepted, and as soon as he got into office, he removed all the federal troops from the South, which resulted in Jim Crow. That franchise that had been won at that time was again lost. And it remained lost. Now that, that's part of the history. That was the 19th century. Let me fast forward to 1956, when a lot of folks got sick and tired of being sick and tired of the way folks were treated, so the modern civil rights movement began about that time, and public accommodations was the first thing that came up, but lurking in the background were voting rights. We had gone through an era where terror had been committed on a population in this state by our neighbors. If you wanna know what terrorism is, we have faced as a community, we have faced terrorism like the likes of which you have not been seen. When you tried to vote, and we're in the 20th century now, when you tried to vote, you were vilified, and you were lynched. When you tried to get people to register to vote, you were vilified, you were lynched, you were run out of town. We tried, and those African Americans who served, they were completely wiped off the map until about 1928 when Oscar De Priest in Illinois won a seat in Congress. Be that as it may, once we started the campaign, we began to push for voting rights. I was one of the ones that got out there and ran in the back rows of North Carolina with John Lewis, fella named John Edwards, Ben Ruffin, and we were going around in the Eastern part of the state in the middle of the night trying to talk black folks into going out and registering to vote. And every time we did we were rebuffed because they were scared. They were frightened, because they knew if they did, they would lose whatever sustenance that they had, what little sustenance they had coming in, or that white folks would run them out of town, and go about their business. So we were run out of several places in North Carolina because we were trying to get folks to register to vote. The reason I keep telling, I'm saying this to you, is because I want you to understand why this is such, why it means so much to so many people. We have come a long way. In 1965 when the Voting Rights Act was passed, that gave us a great deal of hope. We began to come into the halls of the legislatures, city councils, and mayors races, all of these things happened. Had it not been for the '65 Voting Rights Act, you would not see some of us sitting here today. And what we had done up to that time, we had just run from disgrace to amazing grace. That's what happened. You can't avoid, you would not have us here, and you sit there on that side, looking at us, wondering how we got here. I can understand what you feel, because you don't feel what we have felt in this situation. It's sort of like the guy who cried because he didn't have any shoes, then he saw the man who didn't have any feet. So what you are doing with this bill, we have made progress, we have made great strides.

Racial tensions have lessened as a result of that voting rights act of 1965. Now 3 weeks ago, the United States Supreme Court came out and said that section 4 of the voting rights act was unconstitutional. Guess what happened? The 14 pages that we had in voter ID turned into 57 pages of things that we had fought for and had died for and had struggled for and because section 4 was found to be unconstitutional, which means that you didn't have to go and get the Justice Department to approve your voting rights changes. Now folks, early voting, now, the think is this, let me say this to you, you are sitting now, I don't know any of you who voted who had to show an ID. I don't know any of the folks who voted for you to show and ID. You took advantage of early voting. You won your race fair and square, and now you want to change the rules of the playing field because you want it under the rules that were put out for us. So you see what rules that were put out for us benefitted you more than it did us because you've got a super-majority and you could afford to advocate these things that those of us fought for and died for. If you had had an opportunity to actually put this bill in committee and study it, there are sections in this bill that you wouldn't even vote for. You wouldn't. I mean, sure you're going to vote for increased contributions, but because of early voting, they say, you know, early voting benefitted those in the Democratic party. Looks like it didn't, because you've got the super-majority. They say that straight ticket voting is out of the question, that you choose a person and not the party, they say it'd get more benefit for Democrats, but look at you. It didn't hurt you. So the passions are inflamed because we thought we were on a road to having an open, free type of election. Now you're putting back those things that many of us have fought so far for and many of us gave our lives. I knew these people who gave their lives for that. Martin Luther King, Jr was a close friend of mine. There were others. Malcolm X was a good friend. I can call any name, number of names, I have talked to those folks, I have sat in those folks company, and the one thing Martin and I used to sit and talk, and he would say to me, he said Nicky, he said you know, we need, we need economic power more desperately than any other group in American society, but the only way that we can gain that power is to sit in the seats of the halls of power, and that is by elections. Now my friends, you can take us back. I have said over and over again, we have morphed from the 19th century to the 21st century. Forget all of the gains that were made during the 20th century. That's what you're doing with this bill that you're trying to pass here tonight. I would ask you, my friends, very simply, to take this 57 page of abomination, to bind it and confine it to the streets of hell for the rest of eternity. [SPEAKER CHANGES] For what purpose does the gentleman from Pearson, Representative Wilkins, rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] To speak to the motion, Mr. Speaker. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman has the floor to debate the motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and I will restrict my comments to early voting. Senator

[Speaker changes.]..amendment, as I read it, has the effect of possibly adding early voting sites...uh...but it does not change the fact that "early voting time" in this fifty-six page bill is cut by a third. You know as well as I know, that your folks and my folks in all of these districts are quite infatuated with early voting and let me just, as an example, use the primary in District 2, which I serve. In the 2012 primary, there were just slightly more than 10,000 votes cast. Thirty-four hundred were cast in early voting, that's 34% of the total vote cast in early voting. I ask you to..uh... think long and hard before you undermine this new tradition that your folks and my folks obviously make such great use of. I'll be voting against the concurrence. [Speaker changes.] For what purpose does the gentleman from Scotland, Representative Pierce, rise? [Speaker changes.] To speak on the..report. [Speaker changes.] The gentleman has the floor to debate the motion. [Speaker changes.] Thank you, Mister Speaker. Ladies and gentlemen, just wanna thank you for this opportunity to speak. Representative Shaw did a great job and I think many of us...uh...all of us would have to recognize that but I thought about this...last coupla' days. Having the power to oppress does not give one permission to oppress and, as Chairman and President of the Legislative Black Caucus, I realize my role more than ever this session. Not only does the Legislative Black Caucus speak on behalf of minorities but we speak on behalf of poor Republicans, poor Democrats and poor Independents regardless of the color. We've got to be the conscience and I hope we did just that this year. When we think about elections and I hear alot of talk about "voter ID" but the more I look at it as "voter suppression", an attempt to stop people from exercising their right to vote that is a shame. But I was surprised, and I know the Speaker is a honorable man and I know that he would speak truth and I remember in an article that he wrote...that he was interviewed...and he was sayin' well, really, it's not about voter fraud. And that made me think about it...that...well, what is the real fraud, you know? What's really going on? And, when I think about it, the real fraud is...uh.. that the party in power has hijacked...make an attempt to hijack the ballot box. Uh...ya need take your hands out the ballot box because the folks that I represent...and many of us...???? the people vote...and I was in a press conference the other day and I was sayin' if you have a product and you have a...you're tellin' the people what your gonna do when you get here and they believe in you, they're gonna vote for you regardless...and I think we...uh, Representative Lewis talked about getting away from straight-party voting. And if that comes to pass, then people will have choice..but I think if we do the right thing when we get here and continue to do that, people will vote for us. But, ya' know, I had to ask myself, if it's about voter ID, what does prohibiting some types of paid voting registration have to do with voter ID? Taking souls to the polls, I think many of you are familiar with that. ???? Particularly in the minority community, we associate voting...our churches have been a part of that over the years...I'm trying to figure what does that have to do with voter ID? But, ya'know, when you look at this thing... Democrats, Republicans, and Independents...if we take this privilege away from the people that we represent, it's gonna come home to bite you one day. You might as well realize that because 'what goes around, comes around'. So I wanna say to us tonight, that we're dealing with a time in history...and I hear Chairman Hall talk about it, we talk about a two-hour debate. The initiative we're talking about tonight...it should be more than two hours because this is serious. This would change this state as we know it. And it amazes me that people from other states are laughing at North Carolina because of all this stuff that we're doin'...

Speaker: My daughter called me today, she is an educator, she said, “Daddy, I think I am going to have to leave this state because of all that is going on.” That is sad to hear, to get back to the bill. But if you are going to do this tonight, we really need to think about what we are doing: this is not about voter ID, this is about voter suppression. And I would ask my colleagues: Democrats, Republicans and Independents, we need to be very careful of what we are doing tonight because I do believe that it will come back to haunt us. This sounds like foreign countries that our men and women have died over seas fighting – in countries where people are not allowed to vote. Is NC coming to the place where eventually we will have armed guards and policemen at voting poles to turn people around? I think it is a possibility if we are not careful – we could be going there. So I want to courage you tonight to vote no and let the people vote. Thank you Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker: For what purpose does the lady from Gilford, Representative Adams, rise? Representative: To speak on the report. Mr. Speaker: The lady has the floor to debate the motion. Representative: Thank you Mr. Speaker and members of the house. This is a sad day for NC. It is a sad day for our citizens. It has been said that the nation has been looking at NC and I know they are frowning. For 237 years, in this state, citizens have voted without problem. Now, without verified documentation to support that there are problems, we take a 14 page bill, now 57 pages, that is full of problems for voters – full of problems. We say that the senate made two changes – really? A few changes? We are trying to convince citizens that have voted for more than two centuries without barriers, without problems, without cost, that now we need to verify who you are with a photo id, that now you cannot register and vote on the same day, and now you cannot vote for the same period of time for early vote, and you cannot even vote on Sunday, and when you get to the polls you cannot vote a straight ticket if you want to. We have even worked it out in this bill that you will have to stay all day because we have guaranteed, with what we have done here, that the lines are going to be longer. We have gone to the extreme, the unnecessary extreme, to create barriers. We have targeted young people, high school students: they cannot pre-register before they are 18th birthday – even if they will be 18 right before the election. That is not right. We should be teaching them civic responsibility. We are targeting college students: they cannot use their OID. We are targeting church folk, minorities, and women too. Viva takes our state back hundreds of years – where we do not need to be going in 2013. I will be voting no for the sake of our democracy. Mr. Speaker: For what purpose does the lady of Hartford, Representative Mobley, rise? Representative: To speak on the motion. Mr. Speaker: The lady has the floor to debate the motion. Representative: Thank you sir. Ladies and gentleman, this is difficult for not just me, but a number of us, with regard to this vote. My mother who is about 86-87 years old, had always prided herself on going to the polls to work, and even now, if we allowed her, I think she would still be going to the polls to work because she enjoyed it. She enjoyed meeting people coming in and her talking to people. In committee, when we were discussing this bill, I remember them saying that you would need to have an ID to vote. There may be nothing wrong with having an ID, but I assure…

You got a person who is in their eighties or nineties, mind, of sound mind, and able to walk or even be rolled into the post to vote, and is known in that precinct by everybody who is there, and as soon as they walk in the door they are swamped by people wanting to speak to them and talk to them, and then you ask them for an ID. Not only do senior citizens forget, because I forget, you forget, and to say that because I don't have an ID I can't vote, or I have to go back home and get it. And then some of these people who are telling you have to have an ID, they have to pay somebody to take them to the polls. So that takes away from that little check that they get. Talking about voting on Sundays? I see tractors rolling in the fields on Sundays on my way to church. And you're going to say that you are going to take away the ability to vote on Sunday? Something is wrong with that picture. Our teenagers, our sixteen and seventeen year olds, and I'm going to read you a letter before I sit down, teaching them the reason for voting, then they get old enough to be able to vote, and now you're telling them that even at 16 and 17 they can't even vote? What are we suppose to be teaching our children in high school if we don't teach them responsibility, if we don't teach them their civic duty? Something is wrong with this picture for me. The letter I want to share with you comes from a constituent in my district and it reads, " Dear Ms. Mobley, I am a registered, independent voter in your district. I would like to thank you for your service to me, my family, and my neighbors. I am opposed to the proposed voters restrictions in Senate omniscience voting bill H589 VIVA/electional form. I am especially opposed to the new restrictions for people under guardianship. My son will likely be under guardianship when he is old enough to vote. He is 14 now. Although I foresee the need for additional decision making, support for some kind of responsibility, he would likely be more than ready to vote as he chooses. I would like him to be free to vote on election day and with the person of his choice to help him. He will probably not have a drivers license yet when he is ready to vote, and I do want him, I don't want him, I do not want him to have to deal with the harass of getting a special ID. I would like him to register early if he chooses to do that, or register the same day he votes, if that is his choice. I am glad our elected representatives are so interested in helping disabled people so others don't take advantage of them. I would suggest the better use of our legislative energy might...

To obtain some complete funding for education, special education and more complete funding for home and community support through Medicaid and more access through early voting. And just so you know, my son is looking forward to voting against anyone who makes it harder for him to vote. Me too. Thank you for your attention. And this is a constituent out of Elizabeth City. In the name of this family, my mother and other mothers who are 80, 90 plus years old, let's defeat this motion as I will be voting against. Thank you. [CHANGE SPEAKER] Representative Whitmire, I understand the gentleman wishes to be recorded as having voted aye on House Bill 122. Is that correct? [CHANGE SPEAKER] Affirmative. Thank you sir. [CHANGE SPEAKER] The gentleman will be so noted as voting aye. For what purpose does the gentleman from Northampton, Representative Wray rise? [CHANGE SPEAKER] To speak on a bill. [CHANGE SPEAKER] The gentleman has the floor to debate the motion. [CHANGE SPEAKER] Thank you mister speaker and members of the house. This is a bill that will affect all across North Carolina. For this whole session, and this is one of the main bills here that will affect rural North Carolina, taking away and cutting days from when people can go vote. It's not about Republicans. It's not about Democrats. It's about independence. It's about individuals. In rural North Carolina, we have a lot of seniors that have to get people to carry them to the doctor, to vote or whatever. But I'm not going to sit here and do a twenty minute speech. But again, people have a right to vote. People fought for the freedom to vote. A lot of people have spoke before ??. I was outside the chamber but I was listening to what you were saying. But again, it's a freedom and right that we have and what we're trying to do is just trying to kill people from wanting to go vote. [CHANGE SPEAKER] Mister speaker, point of personal privilege. [CHANGE SPEAKER] Gentleman is recognized for up to three minutes to a point of personal privilege. [CHANGE SPEAKER] Thank you mister speaker. Monday, my son had open heart surgery at Duke University, the hospital. And yesterday I came because I wanted to represent the people that I represent. I wanted to vote against a budget, and I pushed a button to be recognized and I was not recognized. But that's the privilege of the speaker. I came today to do what I needed to do to serve the people of North Carolina. But I'm not going to be able to vote and stay here on a time frame that you have to vote on this bill, but I wanted to speak on it. But from the bottom of my heart, I would like to thank everybody for your prayers and thoughts for my family. Whether you're a freshman or been here a long time, God is very important to all of us, but your family is one of the most important things in life. And my son, he had open heart, he had a donor valve installed. He had his chest tubes pulled out today. I didn't want to leave until all that happened. But mister speaker, again, thank you giving me this point of privilege. Again, Ruth, thank you for reaching out. Thank you all my colleagues because we are one big family. But never forget this: everything is important but nothing is more important than your family. And so, I want to vote on this bill but I'm not going to be here to vote on it. But again never forget this, whether you're a Republican, Democrat: we all have feelings. We all love each other. We can all agree and disagree. But I wanted to come here to represent my constituents. But the most important thing to me is my family and so that's the reason I'm going to leave and not be able to vote on this bill. So, God bless each and every one of you and I wish you all a great rest of the summer because I will not be here tomorrow. So, thank you.

Representative Reives, I think I speak for all members of the House when we want you to know your son's in our prayers, and your family is, and we wish you all the best. And we wish your son a speedy recovery. Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] For what purpose does the gentleman from Cumberland, Representative Lucas rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] To speak on the motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman has the floor to debate the motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I arise on this motion with heavy heart. You know, I live in a military district. I have seen many of my neighbors and members of my own family leave to go to foreign countries to protect the right to vote. Some of them have even died, did not come back, trying to establish democracy, not in America, but over there. And then I look at my whole state, right here in North Carolina, where we are suppressing individuals right to vote. Now I have no problem with ID; I think we ought to identify everybody who votes. But please don't complicate their process to vote. That is a basic American right. We ought to be easing that process. And then when you say that you're not going to allow them to vote on Sundays. I don't know what the rationale is, maybe it's religion; I don't know. But that's an American fundamental right to vote. But if you're going to say that, why not banish all those who are coming to golf courses on Sunday? What about all those folks out on the lake, boating on Sunday? That's not the American way. That has nothing to do with voting. ?? out those folks out there who race race cars on Sunday. Has nothing to do with voting. But yet you're not going to let church going American citizens, denying them that right to cast their ballot to determine the future of their county, their city, their state, and their nation. But you let them play, you let them ride boats, you let them go see NASCAR events. I have a problem. You all have a problem. This is not right. We should not do this. Protect every citizen's right to vote. And if you can say in your heart that you're doing that, God bless you. God bless you. The God that I serve tells me that any ?? as you've done this to the least of these my brother, you've done it unto me. Don't deny, suppress, folk's right to vote, and make it inconvenient. I know you're saying that "Well, we've opened early voting sites in other, oh we're going to expand those in a comprehensive fashion, all at one time." Well if it's not convenient on Saturday at five o'clock. No matter where you at that time, it's still not convenient on Saturday at five o'clock. That's the time the number of sites is not the issue. It's the convenience of voting. Voting ought to be made available for everybody who wishes to vote. And I will not say anymore because I know it's not doing much good, but I appreciate your listening. Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] For what purpose does the gentleman from Cumberland, Representative Glazier rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] To debate the motion, Mr. Speaker. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman has the floor to debate the motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. Today,

[Speaker changes.]...the majority puts forward a smorgasbord of voter restrictions and potentially intimidating obstacles to the right to vote. What do I see in the bill? It authorizes vigilante poll observers...lots of them, with expanded range of interference. It expands the scope of who may examine registration records and challenge voters. It repeals out-of-precinct voting. It repeals mandates for high school registration drives. It exam...it eliminates flexibility in opening early vote sites. It makes it more difficult to add satellite voting for the elderly and disabled. It repeals three public financing programs and, in doing so, ends a unique North Carolina experiment in democracy where people counted more than money. It repeals disclosure requirements under candidate specific communications. It weakens disclosure requirements for electioneering communications. It ends pre-registration of sixteen and seventeen-year-olds. It eliminates same day voter registration. It slices seven days off of early voting. It eliminates straight party voting and a voter now can be challenged by anyone in the county who doesn't like 'em. Just hours after the United States Supreme Court decided Shelby County, gutting the 1965 Voting Act requirements for certain states and local governments to get pre-clearance, the majority made clear, they would pursue a far broader set of voting changes in the state, changes that include this laundry list of restrictions, the likes of which we have not seen in decades. The proposed policy solutions of this bill are directed towards problems that either haven't been substantiated by a modicum of evidence or have been manufactured to scare the public into accepting egregious limits on the most sacred constructs of democracy - the vote. And what problems do we as a legislature solve when we turn away the poor and the elderly and the disabled and the college student from polling places because they do not have an approved photo ID despite the fact that everyone at the polling place knows who they are and can vouch for them? And what problems do we solve when we effectively issue a poll tax on individuals who hafta pay $24 to obtain a copy of their birth certificate to get their photo ID? And what problem do we solve for the single-working-mother who can only find time to vote at her polling place after she gets off work on a Saturday afternoon? And what problem do we solve for the new resident of our state who shows up for same-day registration only to be told "Not here, not in North Carolina. Maybe you can vote the next time." And what service are we attempting to render to young constituents of our state, when we not only bar their use of valid student ID's for verification at the polls but we eliminate pre-registration and mandatory voting registration drives in high school...well, if these provisions don't solve problems, they will surely create them...for you are telling the next generation, in very clear terms, their voices don't matter, their participation doesn't count. The majority could have chosen a very different path...one that Republicans and Democrats have for several decades as Representative Michaux said...chosen increasing polling sites, increasing access to voter registration, reducing absentee ballot restrictions, extending times to vote...but the majority will have none of that tonight. So down one road we could've gone...more access, more opportunity, more people voting. Down the other? Less access, less opportunity, less people voting. If you didn't know who was going to vote in your mind or thought who was going to vote Republican or Democrat, which road would you have preferred? But, better yet, which road do you think the public prefers? There is more to the right to vote than the right to make a ballot proper or drop it in a ballot box or poll and check on a box in the booth. It is a right fought with blood and bravery, courage and conviction and persistence and passion and, if the majority can strip the minority of rights simply by resorting to fear, the foundations of democracy are undermined. No label. No ten-second sound bite. No "voter fraud boogeyman" can obscure the import of what the majority does here tonight. The New York Times,a number of months ago, wrote..."Discrimination at the ballot box continues and it grows...it just comes in more forms than it did half a century ago but it is no less pernicious. Instead of literacy tests, we have rigid ID requirements. Instead of poll taxes, we have...

Bans or limits on the vote and instead of open opportunity we have groups descending on minorities who vote on polls, checking registration rolls for spelling errors. So now, although we don't have what happened 50 years ago, we have second generation barriers and this bill is chock full of them. Whatever the political gains or losses, the dangers to democracy arising from voter suppression and intimidation are always greater than the dangers resulting from increased access and opportunity and freedom. For decades in North Carolina, we have been about expanding democracy. Today the Republican majority narrows it. Lyndon Johnson, when he was president and the voting rights act was coming up said the following, the vote is the most powerful instrument every devised by man for breaking down injustice and destroying the terrible walls which imprison men because they are different from other men, but nights like this reinforce the fight for equality of man still persists. We all have a stake in democracy and promises being kept. Tonight, my colleagues, you break promise with the past and present and future generations of North Carolinians. If the United States awarded medals for voter suppression, this bill would be a candidate for the gold, for regardless of its aim, the result tonight may well be to cripple the ability of minority and young voters to participate. You present the bill as a hygienic electoral reform measure, but the pathogens you seek to remove are people. African-Americans, Latinos, young voters and low income folks who simply resist voting Republican. Make no mistake tonight, for those of us who have worked very hard this session with the majority to try to cast a middle ground on so many issues, our anger tonight is palpable. Passage of this bill is a political call to arms, and I believe the majority has seriously miscalculated tonight and will rue the day this bill was ever conceived. Abraham Lincoln said it best, you may deceive all the people some of the time and some of the people all the time but you cannot deceive all of the people all of the time. Earlier this afternoon the Attorney General of the United States issued a notice that the United States government will use every other provision of the voting rights act to sue North Carolina if this bill is passed. It appears he will soon have his opportunity. Tonight the majority ambushes the people of North Carolina and instead of writing a bill protecting their interests, it simply writes one protecting it's own. [SPEAKER CHANGES] For what purpose does the gentleman from Wake, Representative Hall rise. [SPEAKER CHANGES] To speak on the caucus report. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized to debate the motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, I've had a lot of my close friends, a lot of my family members, a lot of members from your side of the aisle ask me what have been thousands and thousands of people protesting every week outside this chamber. What we're about to do in this chamber tonight is one of the reasons that more than 800 people have been willing to get arrested, to get a permanent record. This conference report eliminates the use of all law enforcement IDs, fireman IDs, EMS IDs, hospital employee IDs, municipality IDs issued by cities, by county governments, but the big one for me is the elimination of the student ID. We're in so many ways telling students we don't want them to participate. We're also eliminating pre-registration for 16 and 17 year olds, and if I thought this bill was genuinely about voter fraud I wouldn't be so upset, but every member in this chamber knows that young voters are much more likely to vote democratic, but Representative Warren pointed out that we've preserved absentee voting. Registered Republicans make up 31% of the electorate but more than half of the absentee ballots. Absentee votes, this is the most pointedly, obviously politically partisan bill I've ever seen. Voter fraud is 17 times greater in absentee ballots. This bill drastically reduces early voting, eliminates same day voting.

And it says to people whose drivers license they're valid state issued North Carolina drivers license is expired by even one day you can't vote. But one other thing it does at the same time it increases the size of contributions that people can make to their campaigns. What sense does that make? We're telling voters that we don't want you to participate as much but we want you to be able to give more money to our political campaigns. After all the changes that were made one final one on the conference report is that it eliminates all the money to educate public about all these changes. One state that a lot of the components pointed to as an example Florida. Florida spent over twenty three million dollars to let the public know about all the changes. North Carolina's bill spends nothing to do it. This is the most radical voter suppression bill in the nation. I urge you to vote no. SPEAKER CHANGES: Members the chair is happy to extend the courtesy's of the floor to former Representative Mike Harrington who is seated in the back of the Chamber. Representative Harrington glad to have you back in the House. (applause) SPEAKER CHANGES: For what purpose does the gentlemen from Mecklingbird Representative Moore rise? SPEAKER CHANGES: To speak on the conference report this week. SPEAKER CHANGES: The gentlemen has the floor to debate the motion. SPEAKER CHANGES: I think it's well documented in this chamber how I feel about this particular action here tonight. I believe that any act of voter suppression or voter intimidation is a ?? to all of us and for all of my colleagues it's not the way that we do business here in North Carolina and it's downright unAmerican. When I think of this bill and I look at the details of it and you've heard Representative Shaw so eloquently explain the history of it. You've heard Representative Glacier explain the details of this bill. But if you will indulge me for a few minutes. I want to tell you what this bill takes me back to and as you know I'm a student of history. And this bill takes me back to a time where we had marching...as we do now more on Monday, to protest oppressive policies and racist themes to deny people civil rights. Human rights and access to the ballot. This bill is shameful to me. I'm a native North Carolinian I'm a proud native North Carolinian and I stand on the shoulders of gentlemen like Representative Mishaw. He is a living legend to me I...when I got to this chamber in twenty ten it was a privilege and an honor to be in the presence of someone that I have revered for such a while. Others that I've revered for such a while, who have fought bled and died for the cause and the dignity of all Americans. Not just African Americans. But when I see this bill, I have an image of former Alabama governor George Wallace standing up using the famous words segregation now, segregation then and segregation forever. This is what I see in the spirit of this bill. In the spirit of this bill does not match up with the people that I know across this chamber. So it has to be some outside motivation for you to even present this bill. I don't know what your ...

but I've talked to you, I'm friends with most of you. This document is not what I've percieved as what's in your hearts, but we have it nonetheless. When I see this document, I'm reminded of the sacrifices of ?? Evans, who was gunned down, shot in the back for what? Simply because he wanted to register citizens of this great country to have the exercise the fundamental right to vote. Whether they were African-American or white or not. We are citizens, we have a fundamental right to exercise our most precious right to vote in this country. Without impediment. Without obstacles. I'm reminded of the sacrifice of three young men in Philadelphia, Mississipi in 1964. James Cheney, Michael Swerner, and Andrew Goodman. These men were killed by a conspiracy of people who were elected officials and were sworn to uphold the laws of the United States Constitution. And for what? For wanting to give all people the opportunity to live and to thrive in this country. So members, whether you're Republican or Democrat, I'm not only appalled but flabbergasted that we would come to this point in 2013 and roll out a bill that thumbs its nose at the progression that we've made as a people and as a state. The nation, I dare say the world, is looking at this chamber at this moment. This bill has been has been touted as the most oppressive voter ID or voter election reform or whatever you want to call it. But you know, living down in Wilmington North Carolina as a young boy I was taught to call things what they were. I'm a very straightforward person. This, my good friends, is nothing more than voter suppression. Voter intimidation at its most egregious and its most sadistic and its most deplorable state. You know in the Bible it talks about how a man can become so filled with himself that even though he does wrong, it seems right to him. And I'm looking at the faces of some of my colleagues and what you're doing seems right, but it's not. It's wrong. I ask you to turn away. Turn away from this oppressive bill, and I ask you to vote no. Let's defeat this, and let's come up with a real way to talk about voter integrity because our integrity in this chamber and in this state has been lost because of this bill. I ask you to vote no. Thank you Mr. Speaker for your time. And Mr. Speaker, if I could have a point of personal privilege? [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized for up to three minutes to a point of personal privilege. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Be very briefly. When I came into this chamber I came in with a young lady that represented my hometown, New Hanover county, Wilmington, and today is her birthday, so

I just want not to let this debate get to the point where I could not acknowledge Susan Hamilton on her birthday. So I would ask that we all give her a round of applause for her birthday. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Happy Birthday. Happy Birthday Representative Hamilton. For what purpose does the gentleman from Wake, Representative Martin rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] To debate the motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman has the floor to debate the motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mister Speaker. Members, I fear we Americans have grown fat, lazy, and complacent in our Republic. I think we have some sense that our Democratic system is like a fire and forget missile where you pull the trigger, our forefathers have a revolution, and to the end of history, we've got Democracy. I think we forget the constant sacrifice and tending that is needed to keep our democratic system on target. I'm grateful though that there are many here, on this floor, that know the truth. There are those both Republican and Democrat who have served our country at war and are well aware of the sacrifice of which I speak. And there are those that have sacrificed, and bled, and died domestically, in our nation's civil rights struggle that also know the truth. In a Republic where power derives from the people, I believe it's inherently good to enable the people to exercise that power. It's that premise that led me, over two separate terms, one in the majority, and one in the minority, to work to make it easier for our deployed warriors to cast a ballot. Now, I have some sense that the ballots that came in from that probably benefited the Republican party. I don't know. I didn't ask. It wasn't relevant. It enabled North Carolinians to vote, it helped bring power to the people. I reached across the aisle to work on that bill and found a ready hand to join with me to get that passed. It was one of the happiest moments of my time here in the House of Representatives. What a joy it would have been for me to return here in 2013, in the minority, and again, to reach across the aisle to join my brothers and sisters in the majority party and work again to bring further power to the people. Instead of moving forward, we have done an about face to 1898 with a bill that left here, a voter ID bill, that has returned a massive, voter suppression bill that cynically and selfishly cuts away at the very foundations of rule by the people. Members, I was here for Jim Black. I was here for Stephen LaRoque and I was here for Thomas Wright. I have never been ashamed to be a member of this body like I am tonight. [SPEAKER CHANGES] For what purpose does the gentleman from Dare, Representative Tine rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] To debate the motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman has the floor to debate the motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you mister Speaker. Many in this room will probably remember that I voted for the first voter ID bill that came through the House. I can tell you that my side certainly does remember that I voted for that bill. I felt like I was doing the right thing. I still do. I felt like we were attacking a perception issue that people had in my district and across the state with the integrity of the process. I felt we were trying to deal with it in a balanced way with a lot of different IDs and a lot of access and that we were trying to balance the, destroying the perception problem so that we could move on and stop pointing fingers at each other, with trying to keep obstacles at a minimum. One of the major obstacles that we dealt with, and I was very proud of this work, worked with Representative Warren, worked with Representative Lewis and we ran a floor amendment that said that if you were in a county that has less than five days a week access to the DMV, that the county itself could offer IDs and you would be reimbursed. I have two of those counties, Washington county and Hyde county.

Speaker 1: They have one or two days a month access to DMV. It’s actually lower right now because the vans are broken down. I received an email just a couple of weeks ago where they said that they cannot get out there and so folks cannot get to get ID’s now. So we are severely limiting the access of folks to be able to get ID’s so they can go vote in those two counties, and other counties, particularly in the northeast. This is another bill that has been infected by the senate, and I am disappointed because you work hard to create balance in the first bill and it was lost when it went to the Senate. I cannot, in good conscience, vote for this bill now, and I would hope, that you would send this thing back to the Senate and tell them to try again and try to bring some balance to their policy. Thank you Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker: For what purpose does the gentleman from Edgecomb, Representative Tolson, rise? Speaker 2: To speak on the motion. Mr. Speaker: The gentleman has the floor to debate the motion. Speaker 2: Thank you Mr. Speaker. Members of the House, this is a sad day, I think, in North Carolina. We have men and women in various parts of the world fighting for the rights, privileges and freedoms we enjoy and tonight, with the push of a green button, we are going to drastically take away some of those rights, privileges and freedoms. I hope you will vote red. Mr. Speaker: For what purpose does the lady from Gilford, Representative Harrison, rise? Speaker 3: I’m sorry can you move me to the back of the queue, excuse me. Mr. Speaker: Sorry? Speaker 3: Would you move me to the back of the queue? Mr. Speaker: For what purpose does the gentleman from Vance, Representative, rise? Speaker 4: To debate the motion. Mr. Speaker: The gentleman has the floor to debate the motion. Speaker 4: Thank you Mr. Speaker. Part 42 of this motion labeled Campaign Contributions, after reading the bill I think that section of the bill – that reminded me of an article in New Yorker, not too long ago, entitled “State for Sale” because this particular portion of the bill increases the maximum amount of campaign contributions to $5000 and allows that amount to increase every year after that linked to the consumer price index. Wow! I just wonder how many middle and working class votes are saying, “Gosh, $4000 is not enough for me to be able to give to these politicians. I must be able to donate $5000 to them.” This bill has nothing to do with voter integrity. It does not promote confidence in the voting process. If this right wing republican party were truly interested in preserving the integrity of our election system, they would not be making it harder for the folks to vote and easier for the wealthy to buy influence. Most Carolinians have had enough of paid to play politics. Part 56, labeled Disclosure Requirements, that loosens the disclosure requirements on campaign print ads. Now, I think that North Carolinians deserve to know who it is that is pumping big money into these campaigns. How in the world does it increase confidence in elections when special interest money can get dropped on the campaign in the dark and the voters don’t even know who is paying big money to these politicians? How does that prevent voter problem? How does that make the system more efficient? Well it is an item but like my momma told me – what you do in the dark will come to the light. All of the special interest money and all the big PAC money in the world will not overcome the power of the people. Mr. Speaker: For what purpose does the gentleman from Samson, Representative Bell, rise? Speaker 5: To speak on the bill. Mr. Speaker: The gentleman has the floor to debate the motion. Speaker 5: Thank you Mr. Speaker, Members of the House. I don’t have any eloquent speech to make tonight. We have heard some…

..of them already. But I guess when it leaves Representative Rochelle probably the next oldest person...at least on this side. So all of the things that he'd talked about he had been through it he had seen during his lifetime and so have I. So I'm gonna be very short and say that in honor of my mother and my father and all of my relatives who could not vote and who could not be here tonight to vote against this bill. I'm going to press that red button for them. SPEAKER CHANGES: For what purpose does the lady from Mecklingburg Representative Copling rise? SPEAKER CHANGES: To debate the bill. SPEAKER CHANGES: The lady has the floor to debate the motion. SPEAKER CHANGES: Thank you mister speaker and members as many of you know I was a high school social studies teacher. And I taught civics education but I became active in our Democracy at the age of ten when my fourth grade teacher told the class that women didn't always have the right to vote. And at the age of ten that's a powerful and amazing statement and of course I did not believe that it could be true. But it was true and I'm worried that today it will remain to be true. As a teacher of high school students I worked hard to encourage them to participate in our democracy. I tried very hard to talk about people like Representative Mishaw and their story and their background and their struggle. I tried very hard so that my students would understand what women like my great grandmother went through who desperately wanted to vote. Or like my grandmother who recently died never had an id. I try to encourage them to register to vote and to vote every election every time no excuses. We never talked about partisanship or that they should be of a certain party. It was about democracy and respecting the right to vote and participating in our democracy. When I came to this legislature at the age of twenty seven. I was very excited to work on many issues, of course education being one of them. But elections being the next one. I have worked very hard for years to have bills put forward to strengthen our democracy and to young people and women especially in our democracy. Last year with the help of the other youngest member Representative Justine Byrd we put forward the preregistration of high school voters in North Carolina. We were on the national spotlight so much that Fox news the national Fox News wanted to interview me on the success of the preregistration of voters. My first debut on national television was on Fox News and they realized the importance of preregistration of youth voters. And today in this chamber at the age of thirty four an educator a mother and a pregnant women standing before you we're taking away preregistration of young people for no good reason at all. We should encourage active participation in our democracy. We should not create obstacles for people to vote. I was thinking about two quotes that I used to use with my students to try to engage them in discussion and try and make them think. And here are two I will share with you, "Democracy is where the indigent and not the men of property are the rulers." and as president JFK said, "The ignorance of one voter in a democracy impairs the security of all" We should protect the right to vote we should encourage the right to vote, we should not go after students and young people. We should not go after grandma and aunt...

??. We should want them to vote and to give them the opportunity. I ask you to be on the right side of history tonight, to be a part of the right side of history and to send a strong message to students and to young people and to so many who did not have this right. Please vote no. [SPEAKER CHANGES] For what purpose does the gentleman from Robeson, Representative Graham, rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] To speak on the motion, Mr. Speaker. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman has the floor to debate the motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Speaker and members. I’ll be brief. I know it’s getting late. I do want to say I was privileged to vote with my members on the, across the aisle on this bill when it came out of the House. I’m just not going to be able to support this measure. It reminds me of some of those treaties that was made with my American Indian brothers back in the late 1800s and early 1900s. Treaties made, and treaties broken, still need to be resolved. This reminds me of something like that. I’m disappointed. I see this as a bill with an attitude. You know what you’re doing, and you made it clear this session. We got the votes. We got the power. We’ve got the control. We’ve got the mandate. We can do it, and there’s nothing you can do about it. You redrew those lines. You understand what you’ve done, and now you’re trying to keep it that way and for that reason I think it’s unfair, and I think it’s a shameful bill. And I can’t support it. Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] For what purpose does the gentleman from Columbus, Representative Waddell, rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] To speak on the motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman has the floor to debate the motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Ladies and gentleman of the House, I’m going to brief, too, because I know that we’ve been in here for an awful long time, and as most of you know, a law of my seatmate, Paul ??, and Representative Graham from Robeson, we voted for voter id bill the first time. And I was really proud of that vote because I examined the bill, looked at the bill read hard, and I thought Representative Lewis, Representative Warren did a really good job on that bill. I didn’t see anything in there that was really super suppressive, and I talked with my folks at home and they agreed for the most part. Not everybody’s going to agree, but they did agree. But this bill’s gone a little bit further than I expected. It’s got some provisions in it that I really don’t like, and I’ll give you one example and that’s on straight party ticket voting. And I’m going to tell you why. On straight party ticket voting a lot of people vote for philosophies, philosophies of parties. Just like the Democrats have philosophies, and the Republicans have philosophies. Well, where are we going to get our philosophies from now? Are we going to get them on TV? Representative Baskerville was talking about the 4,000 dollars that the middle-class person was going to spend now they felt like they weren’t spending enough. They’re going to spend 5,000 dollars, each election cycle. So it’s going to be about money. They’re going to get their information over the TV, the media and anyplace else that you can spend the most money to get the word out. They’ll say oh, I like him because he looks good, maybe remember that name right there. They’re not going to know anything about they’re philosophy whatsoever, and that’s one of the reasons I cannot support this. I really think that we’ve gone a little bit too far. I really applaud the group when they worked on this voter id bill. I was proud to support it in the House. I won’t be supporting this one. Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] For what purpose does the gentleman from Forsyth, Representative Hanes, rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Debate the motion, Mr. Speaker. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized to debate the motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Speaker, ladies and gentlemen of the gallery, friends, and the chamber. The Constitution of the state of North Carolina. We the people of the state of North Carolina grateful to all mighty God, the sovereign ruler of nations, for the preservation of the American union and the existence of our civil, political, and religious liberties and acknowledging our dependence upon him for the continuance of those blessings. To us our posterity due for certain security thereof and for better government of the state. Ordain and establish this Constitution.

Article 1, Section 1, the equality of rights. We hold it to be self evident that all persons are created equal. That they are endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights, and among those are life, liberty, the enjoyment of the fruits of their own labor, and the pursuit of happiness. All political power is vested in and derived from the people, all government of right originates from the people, is founded upon their will only, and is instituted solely for the good of the whole. Section 5, allegiance to the state. Every citizen of this State owes paramount allegiance to the Constitution and government of the United States, and no law or ordinance of the State in contravention or subversion thereof can have any binding force. Suspending laws, section 7. All power of suspending laws or the execution of laws by any authority, without the consent of the representatives of the people, is injurious to their rights and shall not be exercised. Section 9, frequent elections, for redress of grievances and for amending and strengthening the laws, elections shall be often held. Free elections, all elections shall be free. Section 11, property qualifications, as political rights and privileges are not dependent upon or modified by property, no property qualification shall affect the right to vote or hold office. Section 12, right of assembly and petition, the people have a right to assemble together to consult for their common good, to instruct their representatives, and to apply to the General Assembly for redress of grievances; but secret political societies are dangerous to the liberties of a free people and shall not be tolerated. Section 19, law of the land, equal protection. No person shall be taken, imprisoned, or disseized of his freehold, liberties, or privileges, or outlawed, or exiled, or in any manner deprived of his life, liberty, or property, but by the law of the land. Section 35, recurrence to fundamental principles. A frequent recurrence to fundamental principles is absolutely necessary to preserve the blessings of liberty. The enumeration of rights in this Article shall not be construed to impair or deny others retained by the people. Article 6, who may vote? Every person. Every person born in the United States and every person who has been naturalized, 18 years of age, and possessing the qualifications set out in this Article, shall be entitled to vote at any election by the people of the State, except as herein otherwise provided. Section 2, qualifications of the voter. Any person. Any person who has resided in the State of North Carolina for one year and in the precinct, ward, or other election district for 30 days next preceding an election, and possesses the other qualifications set out in this Article, shall be entitled to vote at any election held in this State. Section 3, registration. Every person. Every person offering to vote shall be at the time legally registered as a voter as herein prescribed and section 7, before entering upon the duties of an office, a person elected or appointed to the office shall take and subscribe the following oath: "I do solemnly swear that I will support and maintain the Constitution and laws of the United States, and the Constitution and laws of North Carolina not inconsistent therewith, and that I will faithfully discharge the duties of my office, so help me God." What is a constitution. It is the form of government delineated by the mighty hand of the people, in which certain first principles of fundamental laws are established. The constitution is certain and fixed, it contains

There amount will of the people. And if the supreme law of the land hollies the constitution of the great state of North Carolina. Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] What purpose does the gentleman from Lenoir representative Graham rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you very much Mr. Speaker. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized to debate the motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you very much Sir. First of all I would like to give thanks to those who have the opportunity to come before me let creating an opportunity to have the pleasure of standing in this very important assembly hall. People such as WE tubers Martin Luther king and ?? true fan Nicki Mitchell. So there true fan book a tea in Washington in darn blue mega lovers. People who taught and showed us the way. I could tell you that I am the son of a tenant farmer share cropper and I can tell you what life is being in rural America and I can tell about the opportunities that have been created for children all across North Carolina and then I can tell you about man marching down main street in Kingston with others to go to the movie show marching demonstrating singing we shall overcome to go into a movie house. I can tell you about our going into the drug store trying to buy a hot dog which you know we had to go the side of the door to Car carry out. We can take you through all of those but we don't need to go there. Then I am as a freshman have the opportunity to observe diosmose body. And how we put things into law. And I tell you I have seen this deal will turn in development. I have seen this deal with wait in schools. I have seen this deal with charlotte and airport. I have seen this deal with Guilford and voting. I wonder why we need local elected officials if we fix everything here at this level. I just wanna say to you this evening that voter education, voter registration and voter participation is a basic Right. We always try to a poll these privileges. Vote no. Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] What purpose does the gentleman from Wake representative Jackson rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Speak on the conference floor. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman has the floor to debate the motion. Thank you Mr. Speaker. Ladies and gentleman. I didn't get enough time so didn't really write down too much but I won't use the words I just used today to describe the process on this bill good friend sitting up in the gallery has called me off called me out of my language and apologies to chamber for that. Last month you introduced then I wasn't here and I won't tell nowhere I was there. I was in Philadelphia. I somewhat will take you back a little bit farther then 1800 and 1700 and I had the enjoy and privilege to visit independence hall. And I got to sit in the same room where the decoration of independence and US constitution were debated and adopted over period of months and I got to see the chair George Washington sat in and got to see the first house first Senate. And I two you today ladies and gentleman of this house process doors matter. And you heard from the speaker little earlier we don't have to vote on this bill tonight. Not voting on this bill tonight will not kill this bill because we got to be here tomorrow any way and this is the concurrence. My friend representative Tine talked about how we need to stand up to the Senate and that's what I am gonna ask you to do I am gonna ask you to stand up for the house I am ask you stand up for the people who came here before you. I can't believe that we can't take one day

Debate the 40 additional pages to this bill, a bill of this importance. I'm going to ask you, didn't you hear the emotion in Representative Michaux and Representative Bell's voices. This isn't a stage act. We're not putting on a show for the cameras. Did you not hear for yourself? Could you not see the pain in Representative Moore's? He almost went ballistic when he didn't think he was going to get a chance to speak. Because it's so important to him. I can't believe we can't give Representative Michaux, Representative Bell and the others who came forth a day to have a committee meeting. He asked the body to have a committee meeting so we can discuss the 40 pages that they sent back over here. A lot of you know I have a son who often gets bulled in school and I've talked in the past and those of you who know me know why he gets bullied and what I always tell him is until you stand up to the bully they're gonna keep bullying you. All I'm asking you, I'm not asking you to go back on a campaign promise, you made a campaign promise ?? voter ID, you had the chance to still do voter ID. I'm not asking you to go back on your promise. I'm asking you to send this other 40 pages of B.S. back to the Senate. I'm asking you not to concur. [SPEAKER CHANGES] For what purpose does gentleman from Richmond, Representative Goodman rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] To debate the motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman has the floor to debate the motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mister Speaker, ladies and gentlemen of the House I along with Representative Tine and Representative Waddell and Representative Graham voted for the first voter ID bill and we talked about it alot and we were all reluctant to do it but I believe that the people that brought the bill forward in the House were people of good will who were really trying to craft a bill that would what in their minds would solve what in their minds was a problem while at the same time would be the least restrictive bill that they could have. When I stood up in Caucus and said I was going to vote for it I thought people like Representative Michaux would get mad at me but he just laughed at me. He said you think we got a good bill you wait til you see it when it comes back from the Senate. Well he is a wise man because that is exactly what's happened and this bill from the Senate is just blatantly cynical in it's intent and I just can't vote for it. I feel like by voting no tonight I'm rectifying my earlier vote because it just turned out to be the way a wise man like Representative Michaux said it would be. So I'm going to vote no and I ask you to do the same. Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] For what purpose does the lady from Franklin, Representative Richardson rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mister Speaker I rise to speak on the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The lady is recognized to debate the motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] When I listened to Representative Michaux bring us down to the 1965 I thought about it. I said he should just stop there. I lived in Durham 30 years prior to moving back to Franklin County in 1998 and I took it upon myself to run for the school board and as I went around the state campaigning for that position and I would approach individual voters I was really shocked at how many African-Americans who told me I cannot vote for you because I'm afraid that my landlord will put me out, I'm afraid that my employer will fire me, I really think you are a great candidate but I cannot vote for because I still live with the tenant farmer that I lived with in 1965. So although I left Durham which was a very rich political environment when I got to Franklin County that was not the case but since I have been in Franklin County over the last from 98 to now, 15 years, I am amazed at how many people have began to get pride in voting, registering, coming to political meetings, being involved because they finally were convinced that they were not going to lose their job because they voted. They were not going to be put out of their home because they voted for an African-American person. So when I read the bill and I see that we have put in poll observers and we've put in people who can challenge any vote

I see the people in Franklin County again going back into their fear mode, being afraid to participate in a democracy that their constitution says that they have a right to do. I plead with you not to put the fear into our fellow citizens. We stand in here and we pray every day that God will let us do what's right by our fellow man. And I pray tonight that we have not prayed those prayers in vain. Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Ladies and gentlemen of the house, in assessing the work that we think we need to do before the end of the evening, it's the judgement of the chair that we will, the time is two minutes from expiring for the minority caucus. The debate will be extended another thirty minutes. At that time we will have to end the debate, but we are adding thirty minutes to it. Representative Harrison, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] To debate the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The lady is recognized the debate the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you mister speaker. It's difficult to follow up Representative ?? and others about what they've had to go through for protecting voting rights and I'm not even going to try. But we are getting ready to enact the most restrictive vote ID law in the country. We said it was going to be modeled on Georgia and Indiana but at least they allow for college ID's and we've taken that out in this conference report. We're going to be limited access in early voting and we have this record turnout at two and a half million voters I think in 2012 and that's just wrong. We've got some really troubling campaign finance provisions in here that hadn't gotten much attention tonight that I think will allow a lot more dark money to come into North Carolina elections. We are killing the state's public financing for the judicial elections and that's been a real problem: the perception problem when you're having to ask for money for the lawyers that are appearing before you in court. I think that's wrong. We are raising contribution limits. As Nathan Baskerville noted, we're raising them in in the four thousand to five thousand. Also raising the limits on the thousand dollar limit on judicial races, which is very troubling. We are telling the state's pioneering stand by your ad provision that turned into national legislation. We are reducing disclosure. We are allowing for the increase in outsider spending. I think this is a terrible trend. It's a terrible bill and I urge you to vote no. Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] For what purpose does the lady from Chatham, Representative McMannus rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] To debate the motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The lady has the floor to debate the motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. In 1926, Congress passed the Indian Citizenship Act. My grandfather was 18. In 1928, they specifically granted citizenship to the Eastern Cherokee because the state continued to deny their citizenship. My grandfather was 20. In 1930, Henry Owl was denied the right to register because North Carolina said he wasn't a citizen. My grandfather was 22. So, Congress passed another act reaffirming Eastern Cherokee citizenship. But the local newspapers protested Congressional interference and county registrars continued to deny Cherokees the right to register to vote in North Carolina. In 1946 as Easter Cherokee war veterans returned home, they were still denied the right to register to vote. My grandfather was 38 and had 5 children at that time. From the distance of 70 years, we can look back and see how shameful this was. I don't think it'll take that long for this, the most restrictive election law in the country, to be seen that way. Let's send it back to the Senate and get it fixed. Thank you. I'll be voting against it. [SPEAKER CHANGES] For what purpose does the lady from Wilson, Representative Farmer-Butterfield rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] To speak on the conference report. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The lady is recognized to debate the motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Ladies and gentlemen, we as Americans have had to overcome the inability of African American men to vote, 15th Amendment. The right of women to vote, Women's Suffrage, 19th Amendment. Literacy tests, poll taxes, 24th Amendment and the 1965 Voting Right Act. Tonight, I am reminded

of my 91 year old mother who actually spent many hours at her dining room table teaching people to read the preamble to the constitution of North Carolina so they could indeed vote. Tonight I am hoping that she is listening to this discussion. I was told that she would because I’m going to take a brave stance like she did many years ago and I’m going to vote no to concurrence of House Bill 589. I’m doing it because the senior citizens across the state who are indeed watching what we are doing, people with disabilities, citizens with guardians, young people, students, with and without disabilities, women and minorities. I stand proud to follow in my mother’s footsteps and many who came before me to make it possible to not be strict and limit people’s right to vote. Join me in voting no. Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] For what purpose does the gentleman from Haywood, Representative Queen, rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] To speak on the concurrence motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized to debate the motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. To my colleagues who have spoken before me, I just want to say, amen. Amen. Amen. And amen again. This bill is all about re-regulating the constitutional right to vote for the partisan advantage of the majority party. But at the expense of every citizen in this state. It’s simply makes it more inconvenient. Especially for students. For young first time voters, for seniors and working citizens. The real result will be to suppress voter participation and consequently, to disenfranchise voters. This is not government and the service of citizens, this bill. It does not pass the smell test, for regulatory reform. In the name of voter ID, the need of which was never justified by this General Assembly, by a shred of evidence. It’s come up with a sweeping 56 page rewrite of election laws reducing transparency and disclosure for candidate communications, partisan electioneering, independent expenditures. And at the same time, it’s raising contribution limits to $5000, as brother Baskerville so eloquently explained the consequences. It eliminates the public financing in judicial races which injects special interest money in the judicial process. Elections with more money and less disclosure. How’s that protecting voters’ rights? It abandons this state’s proud history. Proud tradition of civic education. In my first term in the Senate, I was the civic education legislator of the year. I really appreciated Representative Cotham’s comments on civic education. We used to take pride in encouraging our young people to become voters and become active, conscious citizens of this great state. Eliminates high school registration drives, eliminates pre-registration for our young people when they go get their drivers license connecting their will to be free and drive with their will to vote and be citizens, young citizens that look forward to that. No more paid registration drives in this state. It eliminates same-day registration which is so convenient, so appreciated in same-day voting all across my district. It empowers partisan vigilante groups to intimidate voters. This looks like third world elections we see on...

national/international news. All of this is clearly a strategy, a misplaced strategy I might add, for partisan advantage. Not for the good of the whole. I encourage you to vote no on this confidence report. We can do better. The great state of North Carolina deserves better. [SPEAKER CHANGES] For what purpose does the lady from Buckham, Repersentative Fischer, rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] To debate the motion, Mister Speaker. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Lady has the floor to debate the motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mister Speaker. Ladies and gentlemen you've heard a lot this evening and I will not take long, but I did want to call to your attention a couple of numbers that we may have overlooked during the debate. There was a report that was issued in April by the North Carolina State Board of Elections that estimated that 176,091 registered democrats are without the state issued photo ID card that most will have to pay $20 to $32 for before they can vote under this law. Plus 73,787 unaffiliated, and 1,126 libertarian voters. Among registered republican voters 67,639 have no photo identity cards, and over two thirds of these are women. I came to the general assembly directly from a job at director of a non-profit called Kids Voting North Carolina and at that job I helped to use a curriculum that was approved by the North Carolina school board to teach children the importance of civic participation and about the importance of voting. And before that I tell people I have an undergraduate degree from the University of Maryland, but I got my maters degree from being president for the League of Women Voters for two years, because it's that kind of a job and you learn so much from being around those women who struggled mighty for the right to vote. And so in honor of those women, in honor of minority persons, in honor of the elderly, the disabled, high school students, the college students at Warren Wilson College in my district and UNC Ashville in my district. In honor of the democrats, independents, and yes, even the republicans who will become disenfranchised with the passage of this legislation I ask you to vote no. I ask you to make this a better bill. This is not the bill that left the house. Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] For what purpose does the gentleman from Guilford, Representative Berger, rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] To debate the motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman has the floor to debate the motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I, again, don't know where to begin with this bill, and I really have a problem, not only with the bill, but with what we do in here. Because when I grew up I looked at our elected officials and our government. I always wanted to be here. And I always wanted to come and make a difference and represent folks and represent people. And since I've gotten here I see that sometimes in this body we make a very big effort not to represent people, but to simply divide people. And I just don't understand where that comes from and why we always have to continue to go down that road. Why we choose to have thousands of people standing outside this chamber on Mondays yelling and screaming at us. Why do we choose to have people in the galleries protesting at us. It's a choice. It's all a choice. The other thing that Tricia Kaufman said that she was a civics teacher and it was someone like her that told me the process about how government works, and It's amazing to me how we... I don't know maybe Tricia Kaufman told

For the children, not, different things that were in the book, but I was always told that you had a House, and you had a Senate, and we all know how a bill moves. And we actually have to, according to the law, according to what I learned when I was a kid, we have to concur. And if you don't feel like that you should concur why would you ever, ever vote for it? What kind of history are you giving your children and our grandchildren? Well, it's what we do. Well, it's just kind of how the game's played. We didn't, we don't have that in the history book. We don't have that in our civics book. There's a specific way that we do that and it's called principle. And if you can't stand up for principle, then why are you even here? Why would you let their principles overcome your principles and what you know is right and what you know is wrong? You're gonna let that happen? You wanna go home and tell your kids that? You wanna write that into the civic book? Good luck with that. But I, we do want to say is that we all know what this is about, and I really hate that this is where we are, but the very mere fact that you have an absentee voting provision in this bill makes every single argument that you make on the other side absolutely null and void. Absolutely null and void. There is not an argument after that, after you let free voting go on with absolutely no ID, no check, no nothing. I open it up to every kind of fraud that you can have, and you make it more accessible? Every argument that you make is absolutely null and void at that point. So now we have to figure out why, and I think we know why. If we have a session where we were able to disenfranchise nurses, doctors, lawyers, hospitals, non-profits, African Americans, Native Americans, the LGBT community, the poor community, the working class people, middle class people, rural folks, urban folks, we did all that and did not create a job, I understand the purpose of this bill. Thank you. I will be voting no. [SPEAKER CHANGES] For what purpose does the lady from Mecklenburg, Representative Carney arise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] To speak on the conference report. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The lady has the floor to debate the motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Ladies and gentlemen of the House, there's not a whole lot more you can add. We've had members going in and out. Some I applaud, I've been looking, some have stayed through the whole thing, and I really applaud you, because you're willing to sit here and listen to what some have said. But I hope you've heard from some of our members that this goes deep, deep in their heart, and in their roots. And they're honored and proud to be serving here at this point and time in their life. People like Representative Michaux, Representative Bell, our senior members of the African American community. Deep. You can't begin to relate what this bill is doing to that population in this state. And I remind you, when you look at the demographics from the census, that population is growing. There are many people in this state that are listening tonight. There are many people that are reading this bill page by page. How many of us in here? I have. How many of you have read it line for line since it came back, changed? For years the leaders in this state have incrementally made the right to vote easier and more accessible, and within today, with the Senate giving it a full day of debate over there, their bill that they dressed up, our bill they took and dressed up, I might correct myself, sent over here and we're gonna have to now to the speaker two and a half hours of a despicable bill. Where we are in the 21st century, you punch that green button as you all will cause I know our votes aren't changing a single one of you, although I hope our words have touched your heart. But with that one point, in the 21st century, we should be doing everything we can with the internet access, everything we can to make it easier and more accessible for our citizens to exercise their right to vote, not make it harder. I don't understand why, why do you have to be against straight party ticket voting and I can go on and on but others have touched that. But I will end with this because I truly do believe this. I've watched the

Monday nights, grow, outside of my window. I believe there is a spirit moving in this state that no money can be bought--votes cannot be bought, in the next elections that are coming up across this state. It is the spirit of the people paying attention, rising up, saying we are the government, not you, we are the people of this state, not you 120 in the House, not those 50 in the Senate. And what the majority is doing to us, we are listening. Can't you see it? Don't you hear it? I end with a text that was sent to me from a lady. I do not know her. But she has my phone number, it's printed. Oh dear Lord, the reality of what the Republicans have done is inexpressible, worse than anyone ever thought. How can you vote green and do this to the people of North Carolina? I ask you, rethink your green vote. [SPEAKER CHANGES] For what purpose does the lady from Mecklenburg, Representative Cunningham, rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] To speak briefly on the motion, Mr. Speaker. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The lady has the floor to debate the motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] This is so hard. As I've listened to everybody in the chamber talk, especially Representative Michaux, it brought back the memories of the last time I took Pete to vote. It was a month right before he passed away. The last election. And when he walked in, of course everybody knew who he was, even though he had aged quite a bit. And his picture, his photo on his license had changed quite a bit by the time we had gotten there. But everybody in there knew who he was. They knew who he was. He was able to go in and vote with no problem, and we was well on our way to the next activity of the day. He used to tell me something all the time, and now I can see it in this chamber. He said a lesson will not be learned that God will allow you to repeat it. He will allow you to repeat the lesson until it's learned. So it looks like we haven't learned our lesson. And we got to relearn again. In honor of my former spouse, Representative William Pete Cunningham, that was in the trenches of the civil rights movement in 1950s through the 60s, I will cast a no vote for the citizens of the state of North Carolina against this bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] For what purpose does the lady from New Hanover, Representative Hamilton, rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] To briefly debate the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The lady is recognized to debate the motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. Speaker. It's really impossible for me to add anything more to what's been said this evening. I will say, however, that just when you think you've reached the bottom, sometimes things just keep getting worse. I'm truly shocked at the magnitude of this bill. It left the House as a 14-page bill, came back as 57 pages. This is not about voter I.D. This is not about identification at the polls. This is about harassment at the polls, vigilante behavior at the polls. It's about voter suppression. It's about regression. Regression in North Carolina. I'm going to repeat what one of our esteemed members said earlier tonight and then I'm going to sit down. Because I think this pretty much sums it up. We've not really addressed at length some of us have mentioned that this bill increases the amount of money that we can receive in terms of campaign contributions, from $4,000 from individuals or political action committees to $5,000. It also lessens disclosure laws. So in the words of my friend and fellow representative Sam Queen, more money

[0:00:00.0] Less disclosure how can that be construed as a voter protection, I’m gonna say it again, more money less disclosure, how can that be construed as a voter protection, thank you very much. [SPEAKER CHANGES] What purpose does the lady from Wake Representative Holley arise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. Speaker to speak to the motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The lady has the floor to debate the motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] First of all I wanna thank you Mr. Speaker for allow an extended time I was getting little restless because one of the things that we have not really had an opportunity individually is to be heard and sometimes just to be heard means so much to people, Miki God bless you, Miki gave us a history that he is lived and for Miki’s generation and prior to his generation things have passed on and is pass down. I think African-American who has struggled and fought for the right to vote, for the right to go school, for the right to come in here and be a member of this legislator is on the backs of so many more that came before me that I’m on it to serve them. I have a neighbor aunt Pauline, aunt Pauline is 102 years old and for a lot of this all people can tell us what their little stories were and then recently we sat down we said, “Aunt Pauline you are so excited about going for Obama, tells us about first time you voted.” And she talked about fear as Representative Richardson___[01:51] was talking about. The fear that they had to go and vote which she did but I won’t, she said, “We went to Miami and in another room in their back and I don’t believe it, ___[02:02] vote but I voted.” And she talked about the pride that she took to be able to her feet to go and vote for an African-American President and what that meant to her. And she is the 102 years old and her driver’s license I’m sure it has expired, I don’t think she can even find it but I will do everything in my power to make sure this bill passes that she has what she needs to be to able to go and vote. Now, I want to talk a little bit about what this really is all about, and it’s about fear, it’s not about my fear because as African-Americans having dogs ___[02:46] and going to school not knowing what kind of environment you are gonna go into when you walked in you have learned not to be afraid, if we learn and we taught our kids so much how not to be afraid ___[03:04] and went to the man who is following him and say, “What's up with this?” You get afraid when our black kids say and look like they have no fear. Well, this is about a bigger fear this is about a fear to do loose power, that’s what it is about. The senate is afraid, “I understand is a little voter ID but we got back here is something that is senate is afraid of, they are afraid to loose power.” I ask you to join me, to join us and not be afraid unless don’t know on this bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Luke please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] To speak on the motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized to debate the motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] And Representative Luke just to say a point of information the gentleman has about four minutes by commitment with the minority leader, we are allocating four minutes for him as well. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. Speaker I don’t think that I will need four minutes. I wanna to say first that it’s been said many times here by speakers on this side of eye that this is a Voter Suppression Act and it certainly is but I think one of the unintended consequences of the bill that majority is going to support is that it’s actually gonna support, suppress some voters who otherwise would be voting republican, it’s going to have that affect that main parts of this bill indeed are voter suppression, another part of the bill that is add to me in terms of the way it’s been put together and that is the complete abolition of the public funded elections that were getting money out of politics at the same time as we… [0:04:59.8] [End of file…]

Money out of elections were allowing contribution level to go up and not just go up but make sure is attached to consumer price index So we can be sure to have more private money in elections. And it just says to be that there is something wrong with the priorities where we want money where the bills suggest that money should play a larger role in our elections, not a smaller role. And I think one say also that the bill in one way called Longer lines the longer lines on election day bill. I think everyone in this room remembers what things were like before early voting. You waited two hours to vote typically. They talk about the mess that was in Florida last year because people were waiting exactly 2 hours to vote and many people were discouraged from voting at all because Florida had passed a law similar to ours. Similar to what’s before us tonight. So when you cut early voting from 17 days to 10 when you say on that last Saturday when people are trying to get to polls that the county board of elections can’t keep the polls open until 5 but must close them at 1. What you are doing is saying number 1 there will be longer lines that will hurt both political parties and you would be saying that a lot of people will not be voting, will not be exercising their rights who would have otherwise done so had we not been not so determined to cut back on early voting, a program that is most popular that is extremely popular with independents, republicans and the democrats. It’s a sad day that we have got this before us. I am going to Vote no and wish all of you could as well. Thank you [Speaker Changes] Representative Hall, Please state your purpose [Speaker Changes] to speak on the motion [Speaker Changes] The gentleman is recognized to debate the motion [Speaker Changes] Thanks you Mr Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the house and may be more importantly, the citizens of North Carolina. It is come to this and this is what every one has waited forward to see what we has one time leaders of this nation would do. Once a great state taken on this grand experiment over the last 6 months of this session. And yes you have won control but also the responsibility that comes with it for the future of the state of North Carolina. Now we shifted the tax burden from the rich to the poor, but voting allowed you the power to do that. We decided to defund the education that would provide the future of our children in the state. But voting allowed you to have the power to do that. And although we in this bill spared Sunday voting, we have taken away the rights of the early voters., cut it back, which will mean longer lines and deny the popular will of the 2.5 millions North Carolinians who vote early and helped you to get to power that you now use to deny them of their rights. It won’t save money. We know that. It’s an unfunded mandate. We know that. But voting gives you that right. And now the question is, do you believe in what you have done. Because the ultimate test as you pass t last time when voting gave you the power to do this would be submitting yourself to the same rule to the citizens of the state of North Carolina in asking that question, have we really made a difference. Have we really made North Carolina better. And what you have decided to do about this bill is to say we won’t take the tips. we won’t submit yourself to a referendum of the people. We will demand them the right today what we have really done. We don’t really believe in this idea that the market will dictate and the market will function and take the decision. You decided to cook the books and demand people their rights. Voter Information

Intimidation act. What you have done in this bill that again is not your bill and we have already heard about whether you would stand up for your principles or balance in mid to the senate’s principles . voter intimidation verification act and what this has done is it we are going to intimidate you and expand the right of people from in a word of counting that don’t even know you have no clue who you might be to come to your polling place and challenge your right to vote voter intimidation verification act making it harder for you to vote and almost making you a shame and intimated to even try. voter intimidation and verification act i had know that we could do better for north Carolina I had known from my grand children that we can do better for north Carolina I had known from my 89 year old mother we could do better for north Carolina. voting allowed you to have the power to do what you don’t .and so i challenge you to do the best you can for future generations of north Carolina and vote against this motion to concur and do what’s in your mind and not what’s in the senate’s mind [SPEAKER CHANGES] I represent the ?? The gentlemen is recognised to debate the motion for a period not to exceed 7 minutes Thank you Mr Speaker thank you ladies and gentlemen in the house. [speaker changes] It has been a very tyrant night and a very interesting and emotional night and i wanna thank the members who stood up and shared their personal stories all the struggles that they have gone through to win their right their god given right their constitutional right to vote and i wanna comment on what my friend from ?? said may be just speak to the people from north Carolina for a while because i do believe there are probably are some very scared because they are scared because they have been told things that simply aren’t true they have been told several times on this floor that this biil limits or forbid sending ?? it does not they have been told that this bail cuts back the hours that people can vote early that over half the people of this state use and it does not. They have been told that there is a provision in this bill dealing with guardianship that somehow we would restrict the disabled from being able to vote and it does not do that. they have been told that this bill somehow would neither revive the vote because they don’t have an ID and they don’t have 24 hours to buy when plainly it is said that the ID will be provided at no charge They have been told to support tax even the supreme court has told us it is not I would say they are .They are perhaps scared they are perhaps scared because some of the misinformation that is being spread about this bill even said about this bill on the floor tonight. I want you all to know that i take my commitment in my oath very seriously. I have told you from the day 1 that i want every person in this state entitled and eligible to vote to have the opportunity to go to the polls and vote and those vote cumulatively combined would decide who wins the election and not votes that are believed are folks that vote when they shouldn’t and by god not folks that are turned away from the polls for not having the right ID to vote that’s why this appeal goes to search great wins to make sure the people are educated or what is required of a responsible citizen to continue to complicate this republic . We hear about absentee. We heard when this bill first went through. Oh you gonna don’t have a ID vote absentee would now got a ?? on new word that we are trying to spread over here . for the 5 days we listened and we heard there was concern with how absentees is used to this

[0:00:00.0] It does strengthen the requirements that it takes to vote absentee. Ladies and gentlemen I respect each and everyone of you and I know that you are doing what you believe in your heart to be the right thing and I respect that we have different opinions on what the right thing is from time-to-time but I want you to know I have never questioned your motives and I have never doubted your sincerity. I’m going to close by telling me this bill that you have before you is a step towards improving the integrity of the process of this state and I don’t have the time to go by point-by-point, you wanna talk about doing a way with straight party voting, North Carolina is one of only 15 states that has it anyway and we are the only state that divides the vote for President from the rest of the ticket, you wanna talk about these changes been based on some kind of ___[01:09], partisan let’s talk about that, let’s talk about the fact that of this bill 60 parts, 9 parts do with voter ID, 8 parts contain studies to learn more about how to help people vote and give them the resources they do, 5 parts are blank and 26 parts are election law changes that have been adopted by democratic legislature since 2001. So, if these attempts as you are accusing tonight, if this bill is to rollback in a partisan fashion rules then the rules that passed the 26th since 2001 must have been pass with a partisan motive too that’s a logical assumption, right. It’s time to move on, it’s time to stand proudly and say, “We did what we needed to do to ensure the integrity to make sure that every person’s vote is counted everybody has the right to participate is empowered to do so and we are going to continue to stand on the principles and the belief that the people of this state are smart enough to know who they wanna vote for, they are smart enough to get whatever it is they need the idea whatever it is and they care enough to get to the polls and vote.” The difference my friends’ is that the proponents of this bill believe in the people, believe that the people are smart enough to continue to elect their representatives and govern their state, thank you Mr. Speaker. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The question before the house is the motion to concurrent the Senate Committee Substitute for House Bill 589. All in favor vote aye, all oppose vote no, the clerk will open the vote. The clerk will lock the machine and record the vote, 73 having voted in affirmative, 41 in the negative, the house has concurred and the Senate Committee Substitute for House Bill 589. The bill will be enrolled and sent to the Governor. Representative Stam is recognized to send forward the conference report, the clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] To the President of Senate, the speaker of the House of Representatives, conferees appointed to resolve the differences between the Senate and the *House of Representatives on Senate Bill 182: An act to eliminate appeals for infractions, to modify appeals to the superior court in probation revocations in which the defendant has waived a hearing. The conferees recommend that the Senate and the House of Representatives adopt this report. Conferees for the Senate: Brunstetter, Chair; Senators Brown and Goolsby. Conferees for the House of Representatives: Representative Stam, Chair; Representatives McGrady and Glazier. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Without objection for today’s calendar, Representative Torbett is recognized to send forward the conference report, the clerk will read. [0:04:59.9] [End of file…]

To the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House conferees appointed to resolve the differences between the Senate and the House of Representatives on Senate Bill 571, a bill to be entitled to act to authorize the Division of Motor Vehicles to issue various special registration plates and to amend provisions for various special registration plates. The conferees recommend that the Senate and the House of Representatives adopt this report. Conferees for the Senate: Senator Brock, chair; Senators Rabon and Harrington. Conferees for the House of Representatives: Representatives Warren, Iler, and Torbett. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Without objection to be added to today's calendar. Representative Hardister is recognized to send forth conference report. Clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] To the President of the Senate and Speaker of the House of Representatives, conferees appointed to resolve the differences between the Senate and the House of Representatives on Senate Bill 317, a bill to be entitled in act to reduce the size of the Guilford County Board of Education from eleven to nine members to establish revised districts for the Guilford County Board of Education and subject a referendum provide for partisan elections for that board, and to district the Stanly County Board of Commissioners and the Stanly County Board of Education. The conferees recommend the Senate and the House of Representatives adopt this report. Conferees for the Senate: Senator Wade, chair; Senators Rucho and Tillman. Conferees for the House of Representatives: Representative Hardister, chair; Representatives Blust, Faircloth, and Burr. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Without objection to be added to today's calendar. Representative Blust is recognized to send forth conference report. Clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] To the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House conferees appointed to resolve the differences between the Senate and the House of Representatives on Senate Bill 287, a bill to be entitled to act to require internet website publications of legal notices. The conferees recommend the Senate and the House of Representatives adopt this report. Conferees for the Senate: Senator Wade, chair; Senators Rucho and Tucker. Conferees for the House of Representatives: Representative Blust, chair; Representatives Hardister and McGrady. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Calendar. Special messages from the Senate. Clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senate committee substitute number two for House Bill 92, a bill entitled to act to make technical corrections to the General Statutes and Session Laws is recommended by the General Statutes Commission and to make additional technical and other changes to the General Statutes and Session Laws. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Without objection to be added to today's calendar. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Special message from the Senate. Mr. Speaker has ordered that a ?? be sent to the House of Representatives for the information that Senator Jay Davis has been removed as conferee and Senator Tucker has been added as the conferee on Senate Bill 287 a bill to be entitled to act to allow governing boards of certain counties all municipally located wholly in those counties and certain municipalities to give electronic notice, respectfully, ?? principle Clerk. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Noted. Senate Bill 571. The Clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] To the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House conferees appointed to resolve the differences between the Senate and the House of Representatives on Senate Bill 571, a bill to be entitled to act to authorize the Division of Motor Vehicles to issue various special registration plates and to amend provisions for various special registration plates. The conferees recommend that the Senate and the House of Representatives adopt this report. Conferees for the Senate: Senator Brock, chair; Senators Rabon and Harrington. Conferees for the House of Representatives: Representatives Warren, Iler, and Torbett. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Torbett, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Rise for a motion, Mr. Speaker. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized for a motion and to debate the motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] That motion would be to concur and also to speak on the motion, Mr. Speaker. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized to debate the motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you very much. I'd like to give credit where credit is due. I'm speaking here for the absence of Representative Stevens who asked me to carry this since he was a conference chair. And I'll do this off the top of my head given an idea the members of the House changes are as follows. There was some debate about the continuing allowance of a full-color plate for those groups that would want to have that for their group or entity and supporters. The Senate concurred that we would leave that available....[AUDIO ENDS]

However for any group applying for one after July 1 to associated with costs are going to be 200 dollars more so that’d be 500 dollars. No, excuse me, there’s got to be 200 more people so it’d be 500 requests before they could do a new cover plate. The ones that currently have full color plates, of course, remains the same with 300. The white box with the dark black contrast letters in the white box remains on the license plate. There was one new addition to the license plate with the full color plates and others is that the words North Carolina will be in a highly reflective type so it’ll make it easier for law enforcement to see in night hours simply because you could quickly identify it as a North Carolina plate simply because of the reflection of lights on it. Also, I’m happy to announce that we did add some plates. There was debate back and forth about adding some free access. I’m going to tell you the ones that we added. For the members of the Service we added those that have a distinguished flying cross. A new addition, those that have the Coast Guard cross. Those that had attained a silver star, a bronze star, combat valor recipient, a bronze star, and of course the ones that have the waiver of a 10 dollar fee. We added Pearl Harbor survivor. We did a merit partially-disabled veteran, combat veteran, military veteran, military war-time veteran, World War II, World War II veteran, Korean Conflict veteran, Vietnam veteran, Desert Storm veteran, Operation during Freedom veteran, Iraq veteran, Operation Iraq veteran, Persian Gulf War on Terror veteran, and Afghanistan veteran. And I believe that’s the accumulation of the additions, Mr. Speaker, and as a reminder, I move that the house concur. Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Baskerville, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I’m sorry, Mr. Speaker, no purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion, further debate on the motion. If not the question before the House is the adoption of the motion of Senate Bill 571. All in favor vote aye. All opposed vote no. The clerk will open the vote. The clerk will allot the machine record the vote. 112 having voted in the affirmative, none in the negative. The conference report has been adopted for Senate Bill 571. The Senate will be so notified. Representative or, actually, Senate Bill 182, the clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] To the ?? speak thou Representatives, conference report to resolve the difference between Senate and House Representatives on Senate Bill 182, a bill’s that been titled an act to eliminate appeals and infractions and modify appeals in ?? Court and probation revocations. The conferees recommend that the Senate and House Representatives adopt this report. Conferees for the Senate, Senator Brunstetter, Chair, Senator Brown and Golsby. Conferees for the House of Representatives, Representative Stam, Chair, Representative McGrady and Glazier. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Stam, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] To move adoption of the conference report. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized for a motion and to debate the motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. I move the adoption of conference report. This is virtually identical to one we passed unanimously three or four hours ago, but staff found a technical error. We withdrew it, reconsidered. It’s before you again so I’m not going to explain it again. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion, further debate. If not the question before the House is the motion to adopt the conference report for Senate Bill 182. All in favor vote aye. All opposed vote no. The clerk will open the vote. All members please record. Representative Hardister. The clerk will allot the machine record the vote. 108 having voted in the affirmative and 3 in the negative. The conference report for Senate Bill 182 has been adopted.

…then we’ll be so notified. House Bill 92, the clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senate Committee substitute number two for House Bill 92, a bill entitled, “An Act to make Technical Corrections to the General Statutes and Session Laws as recommended by the General Statutes Commission, and to make additional technical and other changes to the General Statutes and Session Laws.” [SPEAKER CHANGES] Ladies and gentlemen, the chair moved to quickly to read that in and we anticipate four amendments and some discussion, so we will temporarily displace. At this time we are going to have to take a recess for a Rules meeting and then we will back minimally to debate the third reading on Senate Bill 515. It is the intent of the chair to take a vote on that before midnight. And then after that we will have at least discussion and debate on Senate Bill 380. We are not aware of anything else that we cannot wait and dispose of when we come back in the morning at nine o’clock. Notices and announcements for Representative Moore, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] For an announcement. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Speaker, Members of the House, the Rules Committee will meet in room 1228 immediately after we go into recess. I would ask members to please be there promptly. It is the chair’s intent that we are able to return within about 10 to 15 minutes so that we can resume session. We simply have two bills, 438 and it’s on the notice, I forgot the other bill number, it’s getting late. We have two bills that we’re going through. I do not believe they’re controversial but I guess that remains to be seen. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Subject to the ratification of bills and resolutions, receipt of messages from the Senate, receipt of committee reports, conference reports, re-referral bills and resolutions, an appointment of conferees and modifications to the calendar, the House is in recess until 10:10…Yeah, 11:10, the House is in recess.