Subject: RE: NC Voter ID Law
From: "Paustenbach, Mark" <[email-masked]>
To: Pratt Wiley <[email-masked]>, "Walker, Eric" <[email-masked]>, "Jefferson, Deshundra" <[email-masked]>, Kate Houghton <[email-masked]>, "Miranda, Luis" <[email-masked]>, "Walsh, Tom" <[email-masked]>, Ryan Banfill <[email-masked]>, Lindsay Langholz <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2016 09:28:08 -0700

Is everyone okay with this version?

Can now send to RR2 (research and others) for review and then on to DWS?

Mark Paustenbach
National Press Secretary &
Deputy Communications Director
Democratic National Committee
W: 202.863.8148
[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>

From: Pratt Wiley
Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2016 12:24 PM
To: Walker, Eric; Jefferson, Deshundra; Kate Houghton; Paustenbach, Mark; Miranda, Luis; Walsh, Tom; Ryan Banfill; Lindsay Langholz
Subject: RE: NC Voter ID Law

One other small edit highlighted in blue

From: Walker, Eric
Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2016 12:08 PM
To: Pratt Wiley; Jefferson, Deshundra; Kate Houghton; Paustenbach, Mark; Miranda, Luis; Walsh, Tom; Ryan Banfill; Lindsay Langholz
Subject: RE: NC Voter ID Law

Great – one small add in red

From: Pratt Wiley
Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2016 11:21 AM
To: Jefferson, Deshundra; Walker, Eric; Kate Houghton; Paustenbach, Mark; Miranda, Luis; Walsh, Tom; Ryan Banfill; Lindsay Langholz
Subject: RE: NC Voter ID Law

+Lindsay

From: Jefferson, Deshundra
Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2016 11:11 AM
To: Walker, Eric; Kate Houghton; Paustenbach, Mark; Miranda, Luis; Walsh, Tom; Ryan Banfill
Cc: Pratt Wiley
Subject: RE: NC Voter ID Law

Below is the draft statement:

We are disappointed in the U.S. District Court upholding North Carolina H.B. 589, an overly restrictive [we should be either “overly burdensome” or “restrictive” but not overly restrictive] law that disproportionately impacts women, voters of color, young adults, and the elderly. North Carolina had one of the strongest rates of voter participation in the nation before H.B. 589 was signed into law. The law rolled back early voting period, eliminated same-day registration, and imposed restrictive photo ID requirements.

Sadly, North Carolina is joined by several other states making it harder to cast a vote. Make no mistake, this is part of a consistent and concerted effort by Republicans to silence voters who do not agree with the Republicans’ extreme agenda.

As students at a Marquette University polling station faced two hour wait times to vote earlier this month, a Wisconsin Congressman told reporters that the state’s restrictive photo ID law would help the GOP defeat Democrats in the fall. That may explain why Republican Senator Ted Cruz recently filed an amicus brief supporting Texas’ restrictive Photo ID law.

This is nothing new from Republicans.  We all remember just four years ago when the Pennsylvania Republican House Leader announced that the state’s restrictive photo ID law was “gonna allow Governor Romney to win the State of Pennsylvania.”
There is ample evidence to suggest that these GOP-backed laws are meant to silence the voices of certain segments of our society. While Democrats have gone to court in Arizona to reverse the culture of discrimination and disenfranchisement, Republicans are going to court to defend laws designed to decrease voter turnout – because that is their only path to victory.

The DNC is confident that the courts and the American people will see these laws for what they are – a cynical political ploy to make it harder for women, people of color, students, the elderly and working families to cast a ballot.  These groups of voters represent the Democratic core constituency – and also represent the majority of Americans.

We are fully confident that these laws, like the one passed in Pennsylvania, will ultimately be declared unconstitutional.  But our work is never finished. The DNC and Democrats across the nation will not waver in defending the right to vote – the most fundamental of all of our rights.

From: Walker, Eric
Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2016 10:38 AM
To: Jefferson, Deshundra; Kate Houghton; Paustenbach, Mark; Miranda, Luis
Cc: Ryan Banfill; Walsh, Tom; Pratt Wiley
Subject: RE: NC Voter ID Law

Great - thanks

From: Jefferson, Deshundra
Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2016 10:37 AM
To: Walker, Eric; Kate Houghton; Paustenbach, Mark; Miranda, Luis
Cc: Ryan Banfill; Walsh, Tom; Pratt Wiley
Subject: RE: NC Voter ID Law

Pratt and I have already started drafting a statement. He’s in the senior staff meeting, and will have revisions after it is over.

I am trying to gauge the NC Congressional delegation’s availability for a press call tomorrow.

From: Walker, Eric
Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2016 10:36 AM
To: Kate Houghton; Paustenbach, Mark; Miranda, Luis
Cc: Ryan Banfill; Walsh, Tom; Jefferson, Deshundra; Pratt Wiley
Subject: RE: NC Voter ID Law

Ugh this got stuck in my outbox this morning.

Adding Deshundra, Pratt, and Tom in case no one is working on this already.
If everyone’s busy I can take a stab at this quickly…. Let me know. thanks

From: Kate Houghton
Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2016 7:33 AM
To: Walker, Eric; Paustenbach, Mark; Miranda, Luis
Cc: Ryan Banfill
Subject: NC Voter ID Law

DWS wants to do a statement.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/26/us/politics/federal-judge-upholds-north-carolina-voter-id-law.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=first-column-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0