Wednesday, July 25, 2012
Pitt County (NC) stands ground against Obama "vote-stealing machine".
Submitted by Major Dave July 25, 2012
Verne:
I
thought you might find this interesting since it is but the first
county to face off against the Obama vote-stealing machine. Here is a
report of yesterday's meeting of the Pitt County Board of Elections
acting on a request for Sunday voting during Early Voting by Organizing
for America (ACORN) and the NACCP, written by Diane Rufino, an attorney
from the Kinston area who attended and spoke at that meeting. I hope the
NC GOP will get out in front of this effort since it is very likely to
happen in other counties as well.
**** PLEASE COPY AND PASTE WIDELY, TO ALL NC TEA AND GOP GROUPS:
The Pitt County Board of Elections Gives the Green Light to ACORN
by Diane Rufino, July 24, 2012
This morning at the Pitt County Board of Elections, "Organizing for America" (ACORN) succeeded in pushing its brand of "community organizing" in Pitt County for this November's election by convincing the board to approve Sunday voting. And not just your garden-variety "Sunday" voting, but a full-throttle, balls-to-the-walls effort that would surely make Barack Obama and Eric Holder extremely proud. During early voting, which will begin on Thursday, Oct. 18th, Pitt County will allow voting on two Sundays - Oct. 21 & 28th.
The Pitt County Board of Elections voted 2-to-1 to approve Sunday voting. Because the vote was not unanimous, the decision will go to the NC State Board of Elections and a 5-member panel of attorneys will render that in the coming month or so. But being that the panel was appointed by Governor Perdue, a liberal Democrat who vetoed the Voter ID law, we can almost predict what their decision will be.
Voters were notified of the hearing this morning when word just happened to spread by email. And it's a good thing the word got out. Many concerned voters showed up to voice their opposition to Sunday voting, just as they had done in 2008 and 2010. This year, opponents filled the room so completely that people were left standing and many lined the hallway. "Organizing for America" was present, as well as the NAACP. Betsy Leech, chairwoman of the Pitt County Democratic Party, sent a representative. Members of the Pitt County GOP, including its chairwoman Ginny Cooper, Republican Women for Pitt County, including its president Kitty Staskelunas, and the Eastern NC Tea Party were there. Several pastors were in attendance. But the overwhelming number of people who showed up were just concerned citizens and taxpayers. All waited patiently to have their concerns voiced and recorded.
One of the first persons to speak from the crowd was a black woman who said she moved to NC from NJ. Her name was Ms. Carney. I mention her race only because of the message she delivered. She began by saying that "her people" have been treated terribly and then accused people of trying to continue to deny them rights. She used the "N" word and accused people in the room of snickering at her because of her color. Mr. Nelson, a member of the board, took great offense to her comments and fired back at her. (He later apologized for raising his voice but said he will not tolerate anyone accusing him of trying to disenfranchise anyone's voting rights).
Several black persons in the room spoke up in favor of Sunday voting. They said that they need every opportunity possible to make it out to the polls, including two Sundays when they can be bused to the polls after church service. They said that without Sunday voting, they would be disenfranchised, even though there wasn't even an early voting period at all in Pitt County prior to 2000. There was simply one-day voting - on Election day (although there has been an absentee ballot provision).
The pastors in the room went on record to oppose Sunday voting. They asked the board recognize the Sabbath and to recognize the Christian traditions on which our country was based. They suggested that if churches wanted to do the good stewardship thing, they would find ways to help their church members to get to the polls on Monday thru Friday and on the two Saturdays that are provided. Many others spoke to the same theme, including Ms. Coral Whichard who gave an eloquent review of the Constitution, the role that God's law has played in our country, and how our early presidents and government representatives used Sunday to worship (in fact, government buildings themselves were used for services). Several people, including Ms. Pat Terry and Diane Rufino, spoke against Sunday voting for personal reasons. They said that they are poll workers and having to work on Sunday offends their right of religious conscience. One black lady made a suggestion to the board that they come up with a policy of replacing any poll worker who has a religious issue with another worker for Sunday voting. Many found that response offensive because it did not address those people who volunteer at the polls. For those people who feel deeply compelled to volunteer and serve at the polls to disseminate truthful information and promote candidates, they will be forced to miss church service, miss Sunday time with family, and offend God's law by not observing the Sabbath. In other words, Sunday voting forces people to choose between two fundamental rights and privileges - the rights of religious conscience and the right to participate in the political and election process. The government is not supposed to do such things.
Ginny Cooper, as the chairwoman of the Pitt County GOP and a woman motivated by faith, chose her comments very carefully. She said she didn't want to make Sunday voting a political issue. And that's why she made the point that the early voting period, together with the absentee ballot option, is more than adequate and more than fair for everyone - regardless of race or politics.
A former ECU professor got up to say that in all the years (27 years, if I remember correctly) that she has worked, she has never heard a single person complain that they could not find the opportunity to vote, even when voting was held on only one day. Others offered similar testimony, noting that they themselves, working over 40 hours and even working far distances, never missed an opportunity to vote.
After many comments were made touching on the issue of religion and the issue of the intentional disenfranchisement of black voters, a sharply-dressed young man took the discussion in a different direction. He stated that: "Sunday voting is not a religious issue or a racial issue. It is a taxpayer issue." He said that there is ample opportunity for everyone to vote in the early-voting period and that adding two Sundays will cost the taxpayers money. The board noted that the money had already been set aside, to which the man shot back: "It doesn't mean you have to spend it. Save it for something more important." When Ms. Lisa Taylor, a member of the board, commented flippantly that it only amounted to about $1000 dollars extra, the man retorted: "I don't care if it is only $1. It isn't your money to spend. It's the people's. As public servants, you are supposed to be good stewards of the peoples' money." Another man raised his hand and told the board that he is a small business owner and hasn't had a job in over a year. He said: "I'm sorry that $1,000 doesn't sound like a lot to you. But it does to me and I could sure use it."
But the real meat of the discussion came when Mr. Lawrence Watts asked the board to state, for the record, the options open to ALL voters during the early-voting period. Mr. Davis, the director of the Pitt County Board of Elections, explained that all voters can vote at one-stop voting locations for 2 1/2 weeks prior to Election Day, with hours that certainly accommodate persons who work full time. Locations are open at 8:00 in the morning and while some may close down at 5:00 pm, there are locations that remain open until 7:00 pm. In addition, those who can't physically travel to a polling location have 60 days to submit an absentee ballot to the Board of Elections. The enormity of early voting really hit home to the crowd of people. People who want to vote have 2 full months to do so. They have options to do so in person or by mail. There are no racial or religious barriers. As Mr. Watts emphasized: "Clearly, anyone who really wants to vote has ample opportunity to do so."
Just when it seemed that the hearing was coming to some type of conclusion and comments were concluding, John Born and Patsy Duke asked the board why they were considering Sunday voting. Was the change something the board itself initiated or was an outside request made? Two members of the board - David Conradt and Lisa Taylor - refused to divulge who made the request, but Patrick Nelson was willing to give the information. It wasn't until the crowd became frustrated and restless that the director, Mr. David Davis, stepped up and in effect told the board "if you aren't willing to tell them, I'll do it." He then proceeded to read the requests directly from the record. It was Organizing for America (ACORN) , the NAACP, and Betsy Leech who had made the request. The request for the change in early voting came not from concerned citizens but from political machines with a political agenda. The request came not from individuals themselves who had real issues of voter disenfranchisement but from political organizations who want to make it more effective to get voters out for Barack Obama.
The NAACP representative who was present said his organization supports Sunday voting because, as he put it, Sunday is the only opportunity that many blacks have to vote. When asked about why they can't take advantage of the absentee ballot option, he said "well, maybe I don't have enough money for a stamp." Of course, that opens a whole 'nother can of worms... maybe the government's decision to raise the price of stamps is racially discriminatory. Someone, get on that please !!
Diane Rufino made one of the last comments of the morning. She noted that for most of her life as a voter, voting has been limited to one day - Election Day. Before she moved to North Carolina and except for the last several years in Greenville, she had never even heard of early-voting. At that point, Mr. Nelson offered a quick history of early-voting in Pitt County. He said that prior to 2000, individuals were allowed by law to vote early if they fell into 3 exceptions (that is, if they had a legally "recognizable" excuse to vote early). In 2000, the state Board of Elections decided to provide an early-voting period as an alternative to everyone.
Diane then finished her comment by asking how long do we intend to allow people the opportunity to vote. It's 60 days now. Do we intend to extend it to 6 months? If we provide Sunday voting for black voters, where do we draw the line? We can find ways to make voting easier and more convenient for every single voter, but where do we draw the line. What about those people who travel for a living? If blacks can't find it possible to submit absentee ballots within a 60-day window if they don't have an opportunity to physically travel to the polling location, how can it be expected that a businessman who travels for a living can find such opportunity. What accommodation should be made for someone like him? What about the person who works long days and wants to sleep on Saturday and go to church on Sunday? Where's his accommodation?
I want to emphasize the reason I've taken note of race in this discussion. It is because the issue of Sunday voting is clearly a racial issue. It is completely a "black v. white" issue. As Organizing for America and the NAACP made abundantly clear, they wasn't concerned about the ability of voters in general to get out; they were only concerned in getting out the votes of blacks. What most people still don't understand is why black people still accuse everyone of trying to deny them "equal rights" when they always want different rules. It always seems that they can't get by with the same rules that every single other group has no problem with. Everyone got by with the same set of rules prior to 2000.... If you wanted to vote, you did so on the one day set aside for Americans to exercise their political voice.
When a political organization suggests all of a sudden that blacks need new and separate accommodations to exercise their voice, and especially when that organization is ACORN ("Organizing for America") which has been found guilty of many counts of widespread and systemic voter fraud, there is reasonable cause for suspicion and concern.
When the discussion period concluded, the board took a 10-minute break before it deliberated its decision. When it returned, each member offered some comments before the vote was taken. Mr. Nelson gave a very passionate explanation of his prior votes (against Sunday voting in 2008 and again in 2010) and said he continues to take a position against Sunday voting because the early voting period gives an ample opportunity for ALL votes. He also said: "Make no mistake, Sunday voting was politically motivated. It was not a voter initiative but was requested for a political purpose." Mr. Conradt said he will continue to support Sunday voting because "it works!" He said that 630 people voted on Sunday in 2008 and 330 in 2010. He called that a "huge success." But of course, he was exceedingly misleading in his facts and mistaken in his conclusion. Those who voted on Sunday didn't do so because they absolutely couldn't on the other days but simply because it happened to be more convenient to do so.
The board then proceeded to address the early-voting plans (Plan A - no Sunday voting and Plan F - two Sundays). Mr. Nelson made an extraordinary offer to Ms. Taylor and Mr. Conradt. He said in the interest of having the Pitt County Board come up with a unanimous decision so that the State Board wouldn't have to make the decision, he would agree to only one Sunday. He extended quite an olive branch. But the other two refused to compromise. And so, the vote was 2-to-1 in favor of Sunday voting and it will be appealed to the State Board of Elections. Despite the overwhelming commentary and preference by residents and voters of Pitt County for Plan A, the board nonetheless chose to endorse and support the plan urged by ACORN.
The bottom line is that the early-voting period, which provides extended hours at convenient locations for 2 1/2 weeks and allows 60 days for anyone to submit an absentee ballot, is an inclusive, neutral accommodation for ALL voters. It is more than enough of an opportunity to get out and vote. It is more than accommodating. Anyone who can make it to church on Sunday can also come up with a way, whether through church stewardship or by neighborly kindness, to make it to the polls to vote any day Monday thru Saturday. Anyone who is truly committed to exercising their right to vote will do so and will find the time and opportunity. If it important enough, individuals will make it a priority to vote.
**** PLEASE COPY AND PASTE WIDELY, TO ALL NC TEA AND GOP GROUPS:
The Pitt County Board of Elections Gives the Green Light to ACORN
by Diane Rufino, July 24, 2012
This morning at the Pitt County Board of Elections, "Organizing for America" (ACORN) succeeded in pushing its brand of "community organizing" in Pitt County for this November's election by convincing the board to approve Sunday voting. And not just your garden-variety "Sunday" voting, but a full-throttle, balls-to-the-walls effort that would surely make Barack Obama and Eric Holder extremely proud. During early voting, which will begin on Thursday, Oct. 18th, Pitt County will allow voting on two Sundays - Oct. 21 & 28th.
The Pitt County Board of Elections voted 2-to-1 to approve Sunday voting. Because the vote was not unanimous, the decision will go to the NC State Board of Elections and a 5-member panel of attorneys will render that in the coming month or so. But being that the panel was appointed by Governor Perdue, a liberal Democrat who vetoed the Voter ID law, we can almost predict what their decision will be.
Voters were notified of the hearing this morning when word just happened to spread by email. And it's a good thing the word got out. Many concerned voters showed up to voice their opposition to Sunday voting, just as they had done in 2008 and 2010. This year, opponents filled the room so completely that people were left standing and many lined the hallway. "Organizing for America" was present, as well as the NAACP. Betsy Leech, chairwoman of the Pitt County Democratic Party, sent a representative. Members of the Pitt County GOP, including its chairwoman Ginny Cooper, Republican Women for Pitt County, including its president Kitty Staskelunas, and the Eastern NC Tea Party were there. Several pastors were in attendance. But the overwhelming number of people who showed up were just concerned citizens and taxpayers. All waited patiently to have their concerns voiced and recorded.
One of the first persons to speak from the crowd was a black woman who said she moved to NC from NJ. Her name was Ms. Carney. I mention her race only because of the message she delivered. She began by saying that "her people" have been treated terribly and then accused people of trying to continue to deny them rights. She used the "N" word and accused people in the room of snickering at her because of her color. Mr. Nelson, a member of the board, took great offense to her comments and fired back at her. (He later apologized for raising his voice but said he will not tolerate anyone accusing him of trying to disenfranchise anyone's voting rights).
Several black persons in the room spoke up in favor of Sunday voting. They said that they need every opportunity possible to make it out to the polls, including two Sundays when they can be bused to the polls after church service. They said that without Sunday voting, they would be disenfranchised, even though there wasn't even an early voting period at all in Pitt County prior to 2000. There was simply one-day voting - on Election day (although there has been an absentee ballot provision).
The pastors in the room went on record to oppose Sunday voting. They asked the board recognize the Sabbath and to recognize the Christian traditions on which our country was based. They suggested that if churches wanted to do the good stewardship thing, they would find ways to help their church members to get to the polls on Monday thru Friday and on the two Saturdays that are provided. Many others spoke to the same theme, including Ms. Coral Whichard who gave an eloquent review of the Constitution, the role that God's law has played in our country, and how our early presidents and government representatives used Sunday to worship (in fact, government buildings themselves were used for services). Several people, including Ms. Pat Terry and Diane Rufino, spoke against Sunday voting for personal reasons. They said that they are poll workers and having to work on Sunday offends their right of religious conscience. One black lady made a suggestion to the board that they come up with a policy of replacing any poll worker who has a religious issue with another worker for Sunday voting. Many found that response offensive because it did not address those people who volunteer at the polls. For those people who feel deeply compelled to volunteer and serve at the polls to disseminate truthful information and promote candidates, they will be forced to miss church service, miss Sunday time with family, and offend God's law by not observing the Sabbath. In other words, Sunday voting forces people to choose between two fundamental rights and privileges - the rights of religious conscience and the right to participate in the political and election process. The government is not supposed to do such things.
Ginny Cooper, as the chairwoman of the Pitt County GOP and a woman motivated by faith, chose her comments very carefully. She said she didn't want to make Sunday voting a political issue. And that's why she made the point that the early voting period, together with the absentee ballot option, is more than adequate and more than fair for everyone - regardless of race or politics.
A former ECU professor got up to say that in all the years (27 years, if I remember correctly) that she has worked, she has never heard a single person complain that they could not find the opportunity to vote, even when voting was held on only one day. Others offered similar testimony, noting that they themselves, working over 40 hours and even working far distances, never missed an opportunity to vote.
After many comments were made touching on the issue of religion and the issue of the intentional disenfranchisement of black voters, a sharply-dressed young man took the discussion in a different direction. He stated that: "Sunday voting is not a religious issue or a racial issue. It is a taxpayer issue." He said that there is ample opportunity for everyone to vote in the early-voting period and that adding two Sundays will cost the taxpayers money. The board noted that the money had already been set aside, to which the man shot back: "It doesn't mean you have to spend it. Save it for something more important." When Ms. Lisa Taylor, a member of the board, commented flippantly that it only amounted to about $1000 dollars extra, the man retorted: "I don't care if it is only $1. It isn't your money to spend. It's the people's. As public servants, you are supposed to be good stewards of the peoples' money." Another man raised his hand and told the board that he is a small business owner and hasn't had a job in over a year. He said: "I'm sorry that $1,000 doesn't sound like a lot to you. But it does to me and I could sure use it."
But the real meat of the discussion came when Mr. Lawrence Watts asked the board to state, for the record, the options open to ALL voters during the early-voting period. Mr. Davis, the director of the Pitt County Board of Elections, explained that all voters can vote at one-stop voting locations for 2 1/2 weeks prior to Election Day, with hours that certainly accommodate persons who work full time. Locations are open at 8:00 in the morning and while some may close down at 5:00 pm, there are locations that remain open until 7:00 pm. In addition, those who can't physically travel to a polling location have 60 days to submit an absentee ballot to the Board of Elections. The enormity of early voting really hit home to the crowd of people. People who want to vote have 2 full months to do so. They have options to do so in person or by mail. There are no racial or religious barriers. As Mr. Watts emphasized: "Clearly, anyone who really wants to vote has ample opportunity to do so."
Just when it seemed that the hearing was coming to some type of conclusion and comments were concluding, John Born and Patsy Duke asked the board why they were considering Sunday voting. Was the change something the board itself initiated or was an outside request made? Two members of the board - David Conradt and Lisa Taylor - refused to divulge who made the request, but Patrick Nelson was willing to give the information. It wasn't until the crowd became frustrated and restless that the director, Mr. David Davis, stepped up and in effect told the board "if you aren't willing to tell them, I'll do it." He then proceeded to read the requests directly from the record. It was Organizing for America (ACORN) , the NAACP, and Betsy Leech who had made the request. The request for the change in early voting came not from concerned citizens but from political machines with a political agenda. The request came not from individuals themselves who had real issues of voter disenfranchisement but from political organizations who want to make it more effective to get voters out for Barack Obama.
The NAACP representative who was present said his organization supports Sunday voting because, as he put it, Sunday is the only opportunity that many blacks have to vote. When asked about why they can't take advantage of the absentee ballot option, he said "well, maybe I don't have enough money for a stamp." Of course, that opens a whole 'nother can of worms... maybe the government's decision to raise the price of stamps is racially discriminatory. Someone, get on that please !!
Diane Rufino made one of the last comments of the morning. She noted that for most of her life as a voter, voting has been limited to one day - Election Day. Before she moved to North Carolina and except for the last several years in Greenville, she had never even heard of early-voting. At that point, Mr. Nelson offered a quick history of early-voting in Pitt County. He said that prior to 2000, individuals were allowed by law to vote early if they fell into 3 exceptions (that is, if they had a legally "recognizable" excuse to vote early). In 2000, the state Board of Elections decided to provide an early-voting period as an alternative to everyone.
Diane then finished her comment by asking how long do we intend to allow people the opportunity to vote. It's 60 days now. Do we intend to extend it to 6 months? If we provide Sunday voting for black voters, where do we draw the line? We can find ways to make voting easier and more convenient for every single voter, but where do we draw the line. What about those people who travel for a living? If blacks can't find it possible to submit absentee ballots within a 60-day window if they don't have an opportunity to physically travel to the polling location, how can it be expected that a businessman who travels for a living can find such opportunity. What accommodation should be made for someone like him? What about the person who works long days and wants to sleep on Saturday and go to church on Sunday? Where's his accommodation?
I want to emphasize the reason I've taken note of race in this discussion. It is because the issue of Sunday voting is clearly a racial issue. It is completely a "black v. white" issue. As Organizing for America and the NAACP made abundantly clear, they wasn't concerned about the ability of voters in general to get out; they were only concerned in getting out the votes of blacks. What most people still don't understand is why black people still accuse everyone of trying to deny them "equal rights" when they always want different rules. It always seems that they can't get by with the same rules that every single other group has no problem with. Everyone got by with the same set of rules prior to 2000.... If you wanted to vote, you did so on the one day set aside for Americans to exercise their political voice.
When a political organization suggests all of a sudden that blacks need new and separate accommodations to exercise their voice, and especially when that organization is ACORN ("Organizing for America") which has been found guilty of many counts of widespread and systemic voter fraud, there is reasonable cause for suspicion and concern.
When the discussion period concluded, the board took a 10-minute break before it deliberated its decision. When it returned, each member offered some comments before the vote was taken. Mr. Nelson gave a very passionate explanation of his prior votes (against Sunday voting in 2008 and again in 2010) and said he continues to take a position against Sunday voting because the early voting period gives an ample opportunity for ALL votes. He also said: "Make no mistake, Sunday voting was politically motivated. It was not a voter initiative but was requested for a political purpose." Mr. Conradt said he will continue to support Sunday voting because "it works!" He said that 630 people voted on Sunday in 2008 and 330 in 2010. He called that a "huge success." But of course, he was exceedingly misleading in his facts and mistaken in his conclusion. Those who voted on Sunday didn't do so because they absolutely couldn't on the other days but simply because it happened to be more convenient to do so.
The board then proceeded to address the early-voting plans (Plan A - no Sunday voting and Plan F - two Sundays). Mr. Nelson made an extraordinary offer to Ms. Taylor and Mr. Conradt. He said in the interest of having the Pitt County Board come up with a unanimous decision so that the State Board wouldn't have to make the decision, he would agree to only one Sunday. He extended quite an olive branch. But the other two refused to compromise. And so, the vote was 2-to-1 in favor of Sunday voting and it will be appealed to the State Board of Elections. Despite the overwhelming commentary and preference by residents and voters of Pitt County for Plan A, the board nonetheless chose to endorse and support the plan urged by ACORN.
The bottom line is that the early-voting period, which provides extended hours at convenient locations for 2 1/2 weeks and allows 60 days for anyone to submit an absentee ballot, is an inclusive, neutral accommodation for ALL voters. It is more than enough of an opportunity to get out and vote. It is more than accommodating. Anyone who can make it to church on Sunday can also come up with a way, whether through church stewardship or by neighborly kindness, to make it to the polls to vote any day Monday thru Saturday. Anyone who is truly committed to exercising their right to vote will do so and will find the time and opportunity. If it important enough, individuals will make it a priority to vote.
Chat Conversation End
Pitt County (NC) stands ground against Obama "vote-stealing machine".
Submitted by Major Dave July 25, 2012
Verne:
I
thought you might find this interesting since it is but the first
county to face off against the Obama vote-stealing machine. Here is a
report of yesterday's meeting of the Pitt County Board of Elections
acting on a request for Sunday voting during Early Voting by Organizing
for America (ACORN) and the NACCP, written by Diane Rufino, an attorney
from the Kinston area who attended and spoke at that meeting. I hope the
NC GOP will get out in front of this effort since it is very likely to
happen in other counties as well.
**** PLEASE COPY AND PASTE WIDELY, TO ALL NC TEA AND GOP GROUPS:
The Pitt County Board of Elections Gives the Green Light to ACORN
by Diane Rufino, July 24, 2012
This morning at the Pitt County Board of Elections, "Organizing for America" (ACORN) succeeded in pushing its brand of "community organizing" in Pitt County for this November's election by convincing the board to approve Sunday voting. And not just your garden-variety "Sunday" voting, but a full-throttle, balls-to-the-walls effort that would surely make Barack Obama and Eric Holder extremely proud. During early voting, which will begin on Thursday, Oct. 18th, Pitt County will allow voting on two Sundays - Oct. 21 & 28th.
The Pitt County Board of Elections voted 2-to-1 to approve Sunday voting. Because the vote was not unanimous, the decision will go to the NC State Board of Elections and a 5-member panel of attorneys will render that in the coming month or so. But being that the panel was appointed by Governor Perdue, a liberal Democrat who vetoed the Voter ID law, we can almost predict what their decision will be.
Voters were notified of the hearing this morning when word just happened to spread by email. And it's a good thing the word got out. Many concerned voters showed up to voice their opposition to Sunday voting, just as they had done in 2008 and 2010. This year, opponents filled the room so completely that people were left standing and many lined the hallway. "Organizing for America" was present, as well as the NAACP. Betsy Leech, chairwoman of the Pitt County Democratic Party, sent a representative. Members of the Pitt County GOP, including its chairwoman Ginny Cooper, Republican Women for Pitt County, including its president Kitty Staskelunas, and the Eastern NC Tea Party were there. Several pastors were in attendance. But the overwhelming number of people who showed up were just concerned citizens and taxpayers. All waited patiently to have their concerns voiced and recorded.
One of the first persons to speak from the crowd was a black woman who said she moved to NC from NJ. Her name was Ms. Carney. I mention her race only because of the message she delivered. She began by saying that "her people" have been treated terribly and then accused people of trying to continue to deny them rights. She used the "N" word and accused people in the room of snickering at her because of her color. Mr. Nelson, a member of the board, took great offense to her comments and fired back at her. (He later apologized for raising his voice but said he will not tolerate anyone accusing him of trying to disenfranchise anyone's voting rights).
Several black persons in the room spoke up in favor of Sunday voting. They said that they need every opportunity possible to make it out to the polls, including two Sundays when they can be bused to the polls after church service. They said that without Sunday voting, they would be disenfranchised, even though there wasn't even an early voting period at all in Pitt County prior to 2000. There was simply one-day voting - on Election day (although there has been an absentee ballot provision).
The pastors in the room went on record to oppose Sunday voting. They asked the board recognize the Sabbath and to recognize the Christian traditions on which our country was based. They suggested that if churches wanted to do the good stewardship thing, they would find ways to help their church members to get to the polls on Monday thru Friday and on the two Saturdays that are provided. Many others spoke to the same theme, including Ms. Coral Whichard who gave an eloquent review of the Constitution, the role that God's law has played in our country, and how our early presidents and government representatives used Sunday to worship (in fact, government buildings themselves were used for services). Several people, including Ms. Pat Terry and Diane Rufino, spoke against Sunday voting for personal reasons. They said that they are poll workers and having to work on Sunday offends their right of religious conscience. One black lady made a suggestion to the board that they come up with a policy of replacing any poll worker who has a religious issue with another worker for Sunday voting. Many found that response offensive because it did not address those people who volunteer at the polls. For those people who feel deeply compelled to volunteer and serve at the polls to disseminate truthful information and promote candidates, they will be forced to miss church service, miss Sunday time with family, and offend God's law by not observing the Sabbath. In other words, Sunday voting forces people to choose between two fundamental rights and privileges - the rights of religious conscience and the right to participate in the political and election process. The government is not supposed to do such things.
Ginny Cooper, as the chairwoman of the Pitt County GOP and a woman motivated by faith, chose her comments very carefully. She said she didn't want to make Sunday voting a political issue. And that's why she made the point that the early voting period, together with the absentee ballot option, is more than adequate and more than fair for everyone - regardless of race or politics.
A former ECU professor got up to say that in all the years (27 years, if I remember correctly) that she has worked, she has never heard a single person complain that they could not find the opportunity to vote, even when voting was held on only one day. Others offered similar testimony, noting that they themselves, working over 40 hours and even working far distances, never missed an opportunity to vote.
After many comments were made touching on the issue of religion and the issue of the intentional disenfranchisement of black voters, a sharply-dressed young man took the discussion in a different direction. He stated that: "Sunday voting is not a religious issue or a racial issue. It is a taxpayer issue." He said that there is ample opportunity for everyone to vote in the early-voting period and that adding two Sundays will cost the taxpayers money. The board noted that the money had already been set aside, to which the man shot back: "It doesn't mean you have to spend it. Save it for something more important." When Ms. Lisa Taylor, a member of the board, commented flippantly that it only amounted to about $1000 dollars extra, the man retorted: "I don't care if it is only $1. It isn't your money to spend. It's the people's. As public servants, you are supposed to be good stewards of the peoples' money." Another man raised his hand and told the board that he is a small business owner and hasn't had a job in over a year. He said: "I'm sorry that $1,000 doesn't sound like a lot to you. But it does to me and I could sure use it."
But the real meat of the discussion came when Mr. Lawrence Watts asked the board to state, for the record, the options open to ALL voters during the early-voting period. Mr. Davis, the director of the Pitt County Board of Elections, explained that all voters can vote at one-stop voting locations for 2 1/2 weeks prior to Election Day, with hours that certainly accommodate persons who work full time. Locations are open at 8:00 in the morning and while some may close down at 5:00 pm, there are locations that remain open until 7:00 pm. In addition, those who can't physically travel to a polling location have 60 days to submit an absentee ballot to the Board of Elections. The enormity of early voting really hit home to the crowd of people. People who want to vote have 2 full months to do so. They have options to do so in person or by mail. There are no racial or religious barriers. As Mr. Watts emphasized: "Clearly, anyone who really wants to vote has ample opportunity to do so."
Just when it seemed that the hearing was coming to some type of conclusion and comments were concluding, John Born and Patsy Duke asked the board why they were considering Sunday voting. Was the change something the board itself initiated or was an outside request made? Two members of the board - David Conradt and Lisa Taylor - refused to divulge who made the request, but Patrick Nelson was willing to give the information. It wasn't until the crowd became frustrated and restless that the director, Mr. David Davis, stepped up and in effect told the board "if you aren't willing to tell them, I'll do it." He then proceeded to read the requests directly from the record. It was Organizing for America (ACORN) , the NAACP, and Betsy Leech who had made the request. The request for the change in early voting came not from concerned citizens but from political machines with a political agenda. The request came not from individuals themselves who had real issues of voter disenfranchisement but from political organizations who want to make it more effective to get voters out for Barack Obama.
The NAACP representative who was present said his organization supports Sunday voting because, as he put it, Sunday is the only opportunity that many blacks have to vote. When asked about why they can't take advantage of the absentee ballot option, he said "well, maybe I don't have enough money for a stamp." Of course, that opens a whole 'nother can of worms... maybe the government's decision to raise the price of stamps is racially discriminatory. Someone, get on that please !!
Diane Rufino made one of the last comments of the morning. She noted that for most of her life as a voter, voting has been limited to one day - Election Day. Before she moved to North Carolina and except for the last several years in Greenville, she had never even heard of early-voting. At that point, Mr. Nelson offered a quick history of early-voting in Pitt County. He said that prior to 2000, individuals were allowed by law to vote early if they fell into 3 exceptions (that is, if they had a legally "recognizable" excuse to vote early). In 2000, the state Board of Elections decided to provide an early-voting period as an alternative to everyone.
Diane then finished her comment by asking how long do we intend to allow people the opportunity to vote. It's 60 days now. Do we intend to extend it to 6 months? If we provide Sunday voting for black voters, where do we draw the line? We can find ways to make voting easier and more convenient for every single voter, but where do we draw the line. What about those people who travel for a living? If blacks can't find it possible to submit absentee ballots within a 60-day window if they don't have an opportunity to physically travel to the polling location, how can it be expected that a businessman who travels for a living can find such opportunity. What accommodation should be made for someone like him? What about the person who works long days and wants to sleep on Saturday and go to church on Sunday? Where's his accommodation?
I want to emphasize the reason I've taken note of race in this discussion. It is because the issue of Sunday voting is clearly a racial issue. It is completely a "black v. white" issue. As Organizing for America and the NAACP made abundantly clear, they wasn't concerned about the ability of voters in general to get out; they were only concerned in getting out the votes of blacks. What most people still don't understand is why black people still accuse everyone of trying to deny them "equal rights" when they always want different rules. It always seems that they can't get by with the same rules that every single other group has no problem with. Everyone got by with the same set of rules prior to 2000.... If you wanted to vote, you did so on the one day set aside for Americans to exercise their political voice.
When a political organization suggests all of a sudden that blacks need new and separate accommodations to exercise their voice, and especially when that organization is ACORN ("Organizing for America") which has been found guilty of many counts of widespread and systemic voter fraud, there is reasonable cause for suspicion and concern.
When the discussion period concluded, the board took a 10-minute break before it deliberated its decision. When it returned, each member offered some comments before the vote was taken. Mr. Nelson gave a very passionate explanation of his prior votes (against Sunday voting in 2008 and again in 2010) and said he continues to take a position against Sunday voting because the early voting period gives an ample opportunity for ALL votes. He also said: "Make no mistake, Sunday voting was politically motivated. It was not a voter initiative but was requested for a political purpose." Mr. Conradt said he will continue to support Sunday voting because "it works!" He said that 630 people voted on Sunday in 2008 and 330 in 2010. He called that a "huge success." But of course, he was exceedingly misleading in his facts and mistaken in his conclusion. Those who voted on Sunday didn't do so because they absolutely couldn't on the other days but simply because it happened to be more convenient to do so.
The board then proceeded to address the early-voting plans (Plan A - no Sunday voting and Plan F - two Sundays). Mr. Nelson made an extraordinary offer to Ms. Taylor and Mr. Conradt. He said in the interest of having the Pitt County Board come up with a unanimous decision so that the State Board wouldn't have to make the decision, he would agree to only one Sunday. He extended quite an olive branch. But the other two refused to compromise. And so, the vote was 2-to-1 in favor of Sunday voting and it will be appealed to the State Board of Elections. Despite the overwhelming commentary and preference by residents and voters of Pitt County for Plan A, the board nonetheless chose to endorse and support the plan urged by ACORN.
The bottom line is that the early-voting period, which provides extended hours at convenient locations for 2 1/2 weeks and allows 60 days for anyone to submit an absentee ballot, is an inclusive, neutral accommodation for ALL voters. It is more than enough of an opportunity to get out and vote. It is more than accommodating. Anyone who can make it to church on Sunday can also come up with a way, whether through church stewardship or by neighborly kindness, to make it to the polls to vote any day Monday thru Saturday. Anyone who is truly committed to exercising their right to vote will do so and will find the time and opportunity. If it important enough, individuals will make it a priority to vote.
**** PLEASE COPY AND PASTE WIDELY, TO ALL NC TEA AND GOP GROUPS:
The Pitt County Board of Elections Gives the Green Light to ACORN
by Diane Rufino, July 24, 2012
This morning at the Pitt County Board of Elections, "Organizing for America" (ACORN) succeeded in pushing its brand of "community organizing" in Pitt County for this November's election by convincing the board to approve Sunday voting. And not just your garden-variety "Sunday" voting, but a full-throttle, balls-to-the-walls effort that would surely make Barack Obama and Eric Holder extremely proud. During early voting, which will begin on Thursday, Oct. 18th, Pitt County will allow voting on two Sundays - Oct. 21 & 28th.
The Pitt County Board of Elections voted 2-to-1 to approve Sunday voting. Because the vote was not unanimous, the decision will go to the NC State Board of Elections and a 5-member panel of attorneys will render that in the coming month or so. But being that the panel was appointed by Governor Perdue, a liberal Democrat who vetoed the Voter ID law, we can almost predict what their decision will be.
Voters were notified of the hearing this morning when word just happened to spread by email. And it's a good thing the word got out. Many concerned voters showed up to voice their opposition to Sunday voting, just as they had done in 2008 and 2010. This year, opponents filled the room so completely that people were left standing and many lined the hallway. "Organizing for America" was present, as well as the NAACP. Betsy Leech, chairwoman of the Pitt County Democratic Party, sent a representative. Members of the Pitt County GOP, including its chairwoman Ginny Cooper, Republican Women for Pitt County, including its president Kitty Staskelunas, and the Eastern NC Tea Party were there. Several pastors were in attendance. But the overwhelming number of people who showed up were just concerned citizens and taxpayers. All waited patiently to have their concerns voiced and recorded.
One of the first persons to speak from the crowd was a black woman who said she moved to NC from NJ. Her name was Ms. Carney. I mention her race only because of the message she delivered. She began by saying that "her people" have been treated terribly and then accused people of trying to continue to deny them rights. She used the "N" word and accused people in the room of snickering at her because of her color. Mr. Nelson, a member of the board, took great offense to her comments and fired back at her. (He later apologized for raising his voice but said he will not tolerate anyone accusing him of trying to disenfranchise anyone's voting rights).
Several black persons in the room spoke up in favor of Sunday voting. They said that they need every opportunity possible to make it out to the polls, including two Sundays when they can be bused to the polls after church service. They said that without Sunday voting, they would be disenfranchised, even though there wasn't even an early voting period at all in Pitt County prior to 2000. There was simply one-day voting - on Election day (although there has been an absentee ballot provision).
The pastors in the room went on record to oppose Sunday voting. They asked the board recognize the Sabbath and to recognize the Christian traditions on which our country was based. They suggested that if churches wanted to do the good stewardship thing, they would find ways to help their church members to get to the polls on Monday thru Friday and on the two Saturdays that are provided. Many others spoke to the same theme, including Ms. Coral Whichard who gave an eloquent review of the Constitution, the role that God's law has played in our country, and how our early presidents and government representatives used Sunday to worship (in fact, government buildings themselves were used for services). Several people, including Ms. Pat Terry and Diane Rufino, spoke against Sunday voting for personal reasons. They said that they are poll workers and having to work on Sunday offends their right of religious conscience. One black lady made a suggestion to the board that they come up with a policy of replacing any poll worker who has a religious issue with another worker for Sunday voting. Many found that response offensive because it did not address those people who volunteer at the polls. For those people who feel deeply compelled to volunteer and serve at the polls to disseminate truthful information and promote candidates, they will be forced to miss church service, miss Sunday time with family, and offend God's law by not observing the Sabbath. In other words, Sunday voting forces people to choose between two fundamental rights and privileges - the rights of religious conscience and the right to participate in the political and election process. The government is not supposed to do such things.
Ginny Cooper, as the chairwoman of the Pitt County GOP and a woman motivated by faith, chose her comments very carefully. She said she didn't want to make Sunday voting a political issue. And that's why she made the point that the early voting period, together with the absentee ballot option, is more than adequate and more than fair for everyone - regardless of race or politics.
A former ECU professor got up to say that in all the years (27 years, if I remember correctly) that she has worked, she has never heard a single person complain that they could not find the opportunity to vote, even when voting was held on only one day. Others offered similar testimony, noting that they themselves, working over 40 hours and even working far distances, never missed an opportunity to vote.
After many comments were made touching on the issue of religion and the issue of the intentional disenfranchisement of black voters, a sharply-dressed young man took the discussion in a different direction. He stated that: "Sunday voting is not a religious issue or a racial issue. It is a taxpayer issue." He said that there is ample opportunity for everyone to vote in the early-voting period and that adding two Sundays will cost the taxpayers money. The board noted that the money had already been set aside, to which the man shot back: "It doesn't mean you have to spend it. Save it for something more important." When Ms. Lisa Taylor, a member of the board, commented flippantly that it only amounted to about $1000 dollars extra, the man retorted: "I don't care if it is only $1. It isn't your money to spend. It's the people's. As public servants, you are supposed to be good stewards of the peoples' money." Another man raised his hand and told the board that he is a small business owner and hasn't had a job in over a year. He said: "I'm sorry that $1,000 doesn't sound like a lot to you. But it does to me and I could sure use it."
But the real meat of the discussion came when Mr. Lawrence Watts asked the board to state, for the record, the options open to ALL voters during the early-voting period. Mr. Davis, the director of the Pitt County Board of Elections, explained that all voters can vote at one-stop voting locations for 2 1/2 weeks prior to Election Day, with hours that certainly accommodate persons who work full time. Locations are open at 8:00 in the morning and while some may close down at 5:00 pm, there are locations that remain open until 7:00 pm. In addition, those who can't physically travel to a polling location have 60 days to submit an absentee ballot to the Board of Elections. The enormity of early voting really hit home to the crowd of people. People who want to vote have 2 full months to do so. They have options to do so in person or by mail. There are no racial or religious barriers. As Mr. Watts emphasized: "Clearly, anyone who really wants to vote has ample opportunity to do so."
Just when it seemed that the hearing was coming to some type of conclusion and comments were concluding, John Born and Patsy Duke asked the board why they were considering Sunday voting. Was the change something the board itself initiated or was an outside request made? Two members of the board - David Conradt and Lisa Taylor - refused to divulge who made the request, but Patrick Nelson was willing to give the information. It wasn't until the crowd became frustrated and restless that the director, Mr. David Davis, stepped up and in effect told the board "if you aren't willing to tell them, I'll do it." He then proceeded to read the requests directly from the record. It was Organizing for America (ACORN) , the NAACP, and Betsy Leech who had made the request. The request for the change in early voting came not from concerned citizens but from political machines with a political agenda. The request came not from individuals themselves who had real issues of voter disenfranchisement but from political organizations who want to make it more effective to get voters out for Barack Obama.
The NAACP representative who was present said his organization supports Sunday voting because, as he put it, Sunday is the only opportunity that many blacks have to vote. When asked about why they can't take advantage of the absentee ballot option, he said "well, maybe I don't have enough money for a stamp." Of course, that opens a whole 'nother can of worms... maybe the government's decision to raise the price of stamps is racially discriminatory. Someone, get on that please !!
Diane Rufino made one of the last comments of the morning. She noted that for most of her life as a voter, voting has been limited to one day - Election Day. Before she moved to North Carolina and except for the last several years in Greenville, she had never even heard of early-voting. At that point, Mr. Nelson offered a quick history of early-voting in Pitt County. He said that prior to 2000, individuals were allowed by law to vote early if they fell into 3 exceptions (that is, if they had a legally "recognizable" excuse to vote early). In 2000, the state Board of Elections decided to provide an early-voting period as an alternative to everyone.
Diane then finished her comment by asking how long do we intend to allow people the opportunity to vote. It's 60 days now. Do we intend to extend it to 6 months? If we provide Sunday voting for black voters, where do we draw the line? We can find ways to make voting easier and more convenient for every single voter, but where do we draw the line. What about those people who travel for a living? If blacks can't find it possible to submit absentee ballots within a 60-day window if they don't have an opportunity to physically travel to the polling location, how can it be expected that a businessman who travels for a living can find such opportunity. What accommodation should be made for someone like him? What about the person who works long days and wants to sleep on Saturday and go to church on Sunday? Where's his accommodation?
I want to emphasize the reason I've taken note of race in this discussion. It is because the issue of Sunday voting is clearly a racial issue. It is completely a "black v. white" issue. As Organizing for America and the NAACP made abundantly clear, they wasn't concerned about the ability of voters in general to get out; they were only concerned in getting out the votes of blacks. What most people still don't understand is why black people still accuse everyone of trying to deny them "equal rights" when they always want different rules. It always seems that they can't get by with the same rules that every single other group has no problem with. Everyone got by with the same set of rules prior to 2000.... If you wanted to vote, you did so on the one day set aside for Americans to exercise their political voice.
When a political organization suggests all of a sudden that blacks need new and separate accommodations to exercise their voice, and especially when that organization is ACORN ("Organizing for America") which has been found guilty of many counts of widespread and systemic voter fraud, there is reasonable cause for suspicion and concern.
When the discussion period concluded, the board took a 10-minute break before it deliberated its decision. When it returned, each member offered some comments before the vote was taken. Mr. Nelson gave a very passionate explanation of his prior votes (against Sunday voting in 2008 and again in 2010) and said he continues to take a position against Sunday voting because the early voting period gives an ample opportunity for ALL votes. He also said: "Make no mistake, Sunday voting was politically motivated. It was not a voter initiative but was requested for a political purpose." Mr. Conradt said he will continue to support Sunday voting because "it works!" He said that 630 people voted on Sunday in 2008 and 330 in 2010. He called that a "huge success." But of course, he was exceedingly misleading in his facts and mistaken in his conclusion. Those who voted on Sunday didn't do so because they absolutely couldn't on the other days but simply because it happened to be more convenient to do so.
The board then proceeded to address the early-voting plans (Plan A - no Sunday voting and Plan F - two Sundays). Mr. Nelson made an extraordinary offer to Ms. Taylor and Mr. Conradt. He said in the interest of having the Pitt County Board come up with a unanimous decision so that the State Board wouldn't have to make the decision, he would agree to only one Sunday. He extended quite an olive branch. But the other two refused to compromise. And so, the vote was 2-to-1 in favor of Sunday voting and it will be appealed to the State Board of Elections. Despite the overwhelming commentary and preference by residents and voters of Pitt County for Plan A, the board nonetheless chose to endorse and support the plan urged by ACORN.
The bottom line is that the early-voting period, which provides extended hours at convenient locations for 2 1/2 weeks and allows 60 days for anyone to submit an absentee ballot, is an inclusive, neutral accommodation for ALL voters. It is more than enough of an opportunity to get out and vote. It is more than accommodating. Anyone who can make it to church on Sunday can also come up with a way, whether through church stewardship or by neighborly kindness, to make it to the polls to vote any day Monday thru Saturday. Anyone who is truly committed to exercising their right to vote will do so and will find the time and opportunity. If it important enough, individuals will make it a priority to vote.
Chat Conversation End
Ronald Reagan in First Inaugural Address shows the spirit and vision that made him our Greatest President!
Verne Strickland / Blogmaster / July 25, 2012
This is an excerpt taken from Ronald Reagan's First Inaugural Address, January 20, 1981. A visionary, he knew what he wanted for America, and always phrased his thoughts and objectives in a way that inspired through the years. Many of his comments here seem timeless. He charted a course that conservatives to this day are fighting to achieve. President Reagan knew the strength and resolve of true Americans. We will always be indebted to him for showing the way.
RONALD REAGAN JANUARY 20, 1981
In this present crisis (inflation) government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem.
From time to time we’ve been tempted to believe that society has become too complex to be
managed by self-rule, that government by an elite group is superior to
government for, by, and of the people. But if no one among us is capable of governing himself, then who among us has the
capacity to govern someone else?
All of us
together -- in and out of government -- must bear the burden. The
solutions we seek must be equitable with no one group singled out to pay
a higher price.
We hear much of special interest groups. Well our concern must be
for a special interest group that has been too long neglected.
It knows no sectional boundaries, or ethnic and racial divisions,
and it crosses political party lines. It is made up of men and women who
raise our food, patrol our
streets, man our mines and factories, teach our children, keep our
homes, and heal us when we’re sick
-- professionals, industrialists, shopkeepers, clerks, cabbies, and
truck drivers. They are, in short, “We the
People.” This breed called Americans.
Well, this Administration’s
objective will be a healthy, vigorous, growing economy that provides
equal opportunities for all Americans with no barriers born of bigotry
or
discrimination. Putting America back to work means putting all
Americans back to work. Ending inflation means freeing all Americans
from the terror of runaway living costs.
All must share in the productive work of this “new beginning,” and all must share in the bounty of a revived economy.
With the idealism and fair play which are the core of our system and our strength, we can have a strong
and prosperous America at peace with itself and the world.
So as we begin, let us take inventory.
We are a nation that has a
government -- not the other way around. And this makes us special
among the nations of the earth.
Our Government has no power except that granted it by the people.
It is time to check and reverse the growth of government which shows
signs of having grown beyond
the consent of the governed.
It is my intention to curb the size and
influence of the Federal establishment and to demand recognition of the
distinction between the powers granted to the Federal
Government and those reserved to the states or to the people.
All of
us -- all of us need to be reminded that the Federal Government
did not create the states; the states created the Federal Government.
Now, so there will be no
misunderstanding, it’s not my intention to do away with government.
It is rather to make it work -- work with us, not over us; to
stand by our side, not ride on our back.
Government can and must provide opportunity, not smother it;
foster
productivity, not stifle it. If we look to the answer as to why
for so many years we achieved so much, prospered as no other
people on earth, it was because here in this land we unleashed the
energy and individual genius of man to a greater extent than has
ever been done before.
Freedom and the dignity of the
individual have been more available and assured here than in any other
place on earth. The price for this freedom at times has been high,
but we have never been unwilling to pay that price.
It is no coincidence that our present
troubles parallel and are proportionate to the intervention and
intrusion in our lives that result from unnecessary and excessive growth
of Government.
It
is time for us to realize that we are too great a nation to limit
ourselves to small dreams. We're not, as some would have us believe,
doomed to an inevitable decline. I
do not believe in a fate that will fall on us no matter what we
do. I do believe in a fate that will fall on us if we do nothing.
So with all the creative energy at our
command, let us begin an era of national renewal. Let us renew our
determination, our courage, and our strength. And let us renew
our faith and our hope. We have every right to dream heroic
dreams.
Those who say that we’re in a time when
there are no
heroes -- they just don’t know where to look. You can see heroes
every day going in and out of factory gates.
Others, a handful in number, produce enough food to feed all of us
and then the world
beyond. You meet heroes across a counter -- and they’re on both
sides of that counter. There are entrepreneurs with faith in themselves
and faith in an idea who create new jobs,
new wealth and opportunity.
There are individuals and families whose
taxes support the Government and whose voluntary gifts
support church, charity, culture, art, and education. Their
patriotism is quiet but deep. Their values sustain our national life.
Now I have used the words “they” and
“their” in speaking of these heroes. I could say “you” and
“your” because I’m addressing the heroes of whom I speak -- you,
the
citizens of this blessed land. Your dreams, your hopes, your goals
are going to be the dreams, the hopes, and the goals of this
Administration, so help me God.
One in 10 U.S. employers to drop health coverage. Oh, what a tangled web we weave!
Verne Strickland Blogmaster / July 25, 2011
Daily Policy Digest
Health Issues
July 25, 2012One in 10 U.S. Employers to Drop Health Coverage
Around one in 10 employers in the United States plans to drop health coverage for workers in the next few years as the bulk of the federal health care law begins, and more indicated they may do so over time, according to a study by consulting company Deloitte, says the Wall Street Journal.- Deloitte's findings differ from estimates by rival firm McKinsey & Co. last year that found 30 percent of employers say they would "definitely or probably" stop offering health insurance after 2014, as well as calculations by the Congressional Budget Office that estimated around 7 percent of workers could lose coverage under the law by 2019.
- In all, 9 percent of companies in the Deloitte study said they expected to stop offering insurance in the next one to three years.
- Around 81 percent were planning to continue providing benefits, and 10 percent weren't sure.
- Around one in three respondents said they could decide to stop offering health coverage if they find that the law requires them to provide more generous benefits than they do at the moment; if a tax on high-cost plans takes effect in 2018 as scheduled; or if they conclude that the cost of penalties for not providing insurance could be less expensive than paying for benefits.
- Only 16 percent of respondents said that they would be likely to stop offering health benefits if their competitors did.
The Deloitte study found that many of those actions were already taking place. Around three quarters of respondents said they had increased the amount that employees contributed to their plans, and a similar proportion said they would do so in coming years.
Source: Louise Radnofsky, "Deloitte: One in 10 U.S. Employers to Drop Health Coverage," Wall Street Journal, July 24, 2012. "2012 Deloitte Survey of U.S. Employers," Deloitte, July 24, 2012.
For text:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390443437504577545770682810842.html
For study:
http://www.deloitte.com/view/en_US/us/Insights/centers/center-for-health-solutions/21c1f310fb8b8310VgnVCM3000001c56f00aRCRD.htm
For more on Health Issues:
http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_Category=16
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)