A Detailed Look at Voter ID Legislation

On November 6, an amendment to the North Carolina constitution requiring voters to present a photo identification for voting in person (the “Voter ID” amendment) passed with 55 percent support. In all its prior elections, North Carolina voters were not obligated to show any form of identification at all when they showed up to vote, which seems impossible given the many instances of voter irregularity, the numbers that don’t make sense, the highly questionable votes that continue to roll in even after the election, the persistent appearance of impropriety in several of the counties in NC, the many instances of reported voter fraud by poll workers and other eyewitnesses, the instances of actual verified voter fraud uncovered by the NC Voter Integrity Project, the refusal of the state Board of Elections to prosecute the instances of fraud, and the inconsistencies (pointing to a scheme of voter fraud) unearthed by Major Dave Goetze when he analyzed all the numbers of voters versus recorded votes,

The adoption of a photo ID requirement to vote finally brings North Carolina into alignment with the great majority of other states who have voter identification requirements. Thirty-four states already require some sort of identification for voting in person. Of those, 17 states require a photo ID.

A voter ID must be viewed as a common sense requirement because many Western democracies, in fact, require voter ID in some form.

take our poll - story continues below

What is your top alternative to Facebook? - FIXED(2)

  • What is your top alternative to Facebook?  

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to First In Freedom Daily updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Trending: FIRE THEM: UNC faculty threaten to NOT TEACH over ‘Silent Sam’ Plans

North Carolina recognized the need for a photo ID to vote, to address the claims and the opportunity for voter fraud and to address the general lack of trust and confidence in the integrity of its elections, and had already passed a valid Voter ID law back in 2013 (HB 589, which was the initial bill that originated in the NC House; it was amended in the Senate and then enacted as SL 2013-381).. It was to take effect in 2016, in time for the presidential election. But African-American activist groups, like the NC chapter of the NAACP, protested strongly against it and challenged it in court, alleging the law to be a “blatant attempt to disenfranchise voters of color.” The Federal District Court for the Middle District of NC found no discriminatory intent, but on appeal to the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals, the 3-judge panel agreed with the petitioners (challengers) and on July 29, 2016, it struct down NC’s Voter ID law. [The opinion can be accessed at: http://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/Opinions/Published/161468.P.pdf ] The NC state legislature appealed to the US Supreme Court the following May, but the high court refused to grant review. It denied review, not on the merits, and not on the valid issue at hand, but based on a procedural inconsistency. Pat McCrory filed the petition for review but lost his Governor’s seat in 2016 to Roy Cooper, thus making the challenge by the legislature invalid. In the Court’s response to the NC legislature, Chief Justice John Roberts wrote: “Given the blizzard of filings over who is and who is not authorized to seek review in this Court under North Carolina law, it is important to recall our frequent admonition that ‘the denial of a writ of certiorari imports no expression of opinion upon the merits of the case.’” Again, in denying to hear the case, the Supreme Court was not ruling on whether the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals’ three-judge panel was correct or not in its assessment of the North Carolina law.

After the crushing blow by the activist 4th Circuit, the NC legislature was left to figure out another way to deliver to the NC citizens a Photo ID voter law, a law which was top on their list of demands in sending a Republican majority to Raleigh. A constitutional amendment was the likely solution. It was not a legislature-driven initiative but rather one voted upon by the people themselves. It would be their direct voice.

And they made it known at the ballot box. Again, 55% of North Carolinians voted in favor of the amendment.

The language of the Photo ID amendment, per House Bill 1092 (H.B. 1092), states: “Every person offering to vote in person shall present photo identification before voting in the manner prescribed by law.”

And that is where the amendment stands right now – waiting for the statute outlining North Carolina’s voting laws to be amended to include new language giving life to the amendment and setting forth the specifics regarding the photo ID requirement to vote. Yesterday, a legislative committee in charge of the draft legislation held an open hearing, to hear from interested persons and parties regarding the strictness of the photo requirement.

The intent of the amendment would suggest that voters want a strict photo ID voter law. Why do I say this? Considering the intense fight by Democrats and groups representing blacks to oppose and challenge a common-sense Voter ID law (it wasn’t even a strict one) and the intense media opposition campaign by the liberal-controlled media and by the Democrats (with George Soros providing much of the funding) to the Voter ID amendment, it seems obvious that the reason they were (and have been) so intently opposed to any type of voter ID is because they don’t want honest elections. Only a strict photo ID requirement can effectively thwart any of their plans to engage in voter manipulation or fraud.

NC Representatives Michele Presnell (R-Yancey) and John Sauls (R-Lee), both primary sponsors of H.B. 1092, believe the amendment is vital to block election fraud. As Rep. Presnell explained: “Citizens are increasingly concerned about attempts to subvert our elections process and it is incumbent upon government officials to safeguard public perception of our democracy as well as the actual ballots cast.” And Rep. Sauls added: “Confidence in the American democracy is essential to its longevity. Our state must not tolerate anyone’s vote being threatened because lawmakers failed to prevent fraud.”

Republicans have a narrow window between now and January to pass legislation under their veto-proof majority. Although Republicans were able to maintain control of both chambers of the state legislature, they failed to preserve the three-fifths supermajority requirement in the North Carolina House and Senate. This is especially critical since the sitting governor, Roy Cooper, is a Democrat.

Last week, Republican leaders in the NC General Assembly drafted a strict Voter ID bill that describes what forms of photo ID would be allowed. That bill would require persons to show one of the following forms of photo identification when they show up to vote: A North Carolina driver’s license; a U.S. passport; a military ID and veteran ID; tribal IDs; other forms of photo ID issued by the North Carolina Department of Transportation; and a voter ID card issued by each county’s board of elections office. But an issue came up as to whether student ID cards should be included as an acceptable form of identification. Legislators were inclined to include student identification cards issued by the public university system, but not by private colleges and universities. And so a revised bill was submitted, by Rep. David Lewis (R-Harnett), which included two additional forms of acceptable identification – new voter photo ID cards issued for free by county boards and student IDs issued by the University of North Carolina system’s 17 schools. It is this latest draft bill (v. 09) that was the focus of attention at yesterday’s public hearing.

That draft bill is a strict Photo ID type of Voter ID bill. That is, it is restrictive in terms of what forms of ID would be allowed.

Specifically, the draft bill (v. 09) provides:

PART I: IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL REQUIREMENT REQUIRING PHOTOGRAPHIC IDENTIFICATION TO VOTE
SECTION 1.1(a) Article 17 of Chapter 163A of the General Statutes is amended by adding a new section to read:
Ҥ 163A-869.1. Voter photo identification cards.
(a) The county board of elections shall, in accordance with this section, issue without charge voter photo identification cards upon request to registered voters. The voter photo identification cards shall contain a photograph of the voter and the registration number for that voter. The voter photo identification card shall be used for voting purposes only, and shall expire eight years from the date of issuance.
(b) The State Board shall make available to county board of elections the equipment necessary to print voter photo identification cards. The county board of elections shall operate and maintain the equipment necessary to print voter photo identification cards.
(c) The State Board shall adopt rules to ensure at a minimum, but not limited to, the following:
(1) A registered voter seeking to obtain a voter photo identification card shall provide the voter’s date of birth and the last four digits of the voter’s social security number.
(2) Voter photo identification cards shall be issued at any time, except during the time period between the end of the voter registration deadline for a primary or election as provided in G.S. 163A-865 and election day for each primary and election.
(3) If the registered voter loses or defaces the voter’s photo identification card, the voter may obtain a duplicate card without charge from his or her county board of registration upon request in person, or by telephone, or mail.”

Ҥ 163A-1145.1. Requirement for photo identification to vote in person.
(a). Photo Identification Required to Vote. – When a voter presents to vote in person, the voter shall produce any of the following forms of identification that contain a photograph of the voter:
(1) Any of the following that is valid and unexpired:
a. A North Carolina drivers license.
b. A special identification card for nonoperators issued under G.S. 20-37.7 or other form of non-temporary identification issued by the Division of Motor Vehicles of the Department of Transportation.
c. A United States passport.
d. A North Carolina voter photo identification card of the voter issued pursuant to G.S. 163A-869.1.
e. A valid and current tribal enrollment card issued by a federally recognized tribe.
f. A valid and current tribal enrollment card issued by a tribe recognized by this State under Chapter 71A of the General Statutes, provided that card meets all of the following criteria:
(i). Is issued in accordance with a process approved by the State Board that requires an application and proof of identity equivalent to the requirements for issuance of a special identification card by the Division of Motor Vehicles of the Department of Transportation.
(ii). Is signed by an elected official of the tribe.
g. A student identification card issued by a constituent institution of the University of North Carolina in accordance with a process approved by the State Board that requires an application and proof of identity equivalent to the requirements for issuance of a special identification card by the Division of Motor Vehicles of the Department of Transportation.
h. A drivers license or special identification card for nonoperators issued by another state, the District of Columbia, or a territory or commonwealth of the United States, but only if the voter’s voter registration was within 90 days of the election.

(2) Any of the following, regardless of whether the identification contains a printed expiration or issuance date:
a. A military identification card issued by the United States government.
b. A Veterans Identification Card issued by the United States Department of Veterans Affairs for use at Veterans Administration medical facilities.

(3) Any expired form of identification allowed in this subsection presented by a voter having attained the age of 70 years at the time of presentation at the voting place, provided that the identification was unexpired on the voter’s 70th birthday.

(b). Verification of Photo Identification. – After presentation of the required identification described in subsection (a) of this section, the precinct officials assigned to check registration shall compare the photograph contained on the required identification with the person presenting to vote. The precinct official shall verify that the photograph is that of the person seeking to vote. If the precinct official disputes that the photograph contained on the required identification is the person presenting to vote, a challenge shall be conducted in accordance with the procedures of G.S. 163A-914.

(c) Provisional Ballot Required Without Photo Identification. – If the registered voter cannot produce the identification as required in subsection (a) of this section, the voter may cast a provisional ballot that is counted only if the voter brings a valid and current photo identification to the county board of elections no later than the end of business on the business day prior to the canvass by the county board of elections as provided in G.S. 163A-1172.

(d) Exceptions. – The following exceptions are provided for a voter who does not produce a valid and current photograph identification as required above:
(1) Religious Objection. – If a voter does not produce a valid and current photograph identification due to a religious objection to being photographed, the voter may complete an affidavit under penalty of perjury at the voting place and affirm that the voter: (i) is the same individual who personally appears at the voting place; (ii) will cast the provisional ballot while voting in person; and (iii) has a religious objection to being photographed. Upon completion of the affidavit, the voter may cast a provisional ballot.
(2) Reasonable Impediment. – If a voter does not produce a valid and current photograph identification because the voter suffers from a reasonable impediment that prevents the voter from obtaining photograph identification, the voter may complete an affidavit under the penalty of perjury at the polling place and affirm that the voter: (i) is the same individual who personally appears at the polling place; (ii) will cast the provisional ballot while voting in person; and (iii) suffers from a reasonable impediment that prevents the voter from obtaining photograph identification. The voter also shall list the impediment, unless otherwise prohibited by state or federal law. Upon completion of the affidavit, the voter may cast a provisional ballot.

(e) County Board Review of Exceptions. – If the county board of elections determines that the voter voted a provisional ballot only due to the inability to provide proof of identification and the required affidavit required in subsection (d) of this section is submitted, the county board of elections shall find that the provisional ballot is valid unless the county board has grounds to believe the affidavit is false.

(f) Purpose. The purpose of the identification required is to confirm the person presenting to vote is the voter on the voter registration records. Any address listed on the identification is not determinative of a voter’s residence for the purpose of voting.

The draft bill (v. 09) can be accessed here: https://www.ncleg.net/documentsites/committees/JLElectionsOC/2017-2018/11-26-2018/Voter%20ID%20Draft.pdf

A group – THE group – which has done most to uncover instances of verified voter fraud, as well as to investigate and identify schemes and potential for voter fraud and election fraud, the NC Voter Integrity Project, led by founder Jay Delancy, has been following the plight for a North Carolina Voter ID law for a long time now. Regarding the draft bill, Jay says while it isn’t perfect and isn’t a perfect fix to prevent voter fraud, there are many great things in the bill which conservatives should be happy about. In his review of the bill, Jay wrote:

First, NC’s upcoming voter ID law will easily survive federal judicial review.

Second, the highly partisan NC Justice system will fail at derailing this law on constitutional grounds, now that voters approved the voter ID amendment to the state constitution.

Third, our version of the law is still being drafted and debated; and with only take a small amount of tweaking North Carolina’s voter ID law can show other states how they can tighten up their laws in such a way that cuts out voter impersonation fraud “with surgical precision,” while not harming law-abiding voters. [“The Voter Integrity Project (VIP) Issues Response to Draft NC Voter ID Bill (v 0.9),” https://voterintegrityproject.com/draft-voter-id/?fbclid=IwAR1SAo_s5tVW-QV5oEFO9Frf5AAXU6FhgZz7Z4N3pSRWCitLXXVyxfhtKGM ]

The NC Voter Integrity Project has a few criticisms and suggestions for the legislative committee charged with passing an appropriate voter-photo ID law. It suggests 6 additions to the draft bill: (the additions are, for the most part, copied and pasted directly from Jay’s post above, “VIP Issues Response to Draft NC Voter ID Bill”)

(1)  Safeguards Against Abuse (Require Non-ID Voters’ Fingerprint !!!):

Explanation: According to the Voter Integrity Project, the law should require a biometric from any voter who refuses to produce a valid ID card. The Federal Grand Jury Report of the massive vote fraud conspiracy trials of 1982 recommended fingerprints. And the VIP agrees! Accordingly, it strongly recommends that the current law (draft bill, v. 09) should be edited as such: (added language is highlighted and underlined)

163A-1145.1. (d) Exceptions. – The following exceptions are provided for a voter who does not produce a valid and current photograph identification as required in subsection (a): (1) Religious Objection. – If a voter does not produce a valid and current photograph identification due to a religious objection to being photographed, the voter may complete an affidavit under penalty of perjury at the voting place, provide, either by ink or by electronic scan, a print of the right forefinger, and affirm that the voter: (i) is the same individual who personally appears at the voting place; (ii) will cast the provisional ballot while voting in person; and (iii) has a religious objection to being photographed. Upon completion of the affidavit, the voter may cast a provisional ballot. (2) Reasonable Impediment. – If a voter does not produce a valid and current photograph identification because the voter suffers from a reasonable impediment that prevents the voter from obtaining photograph identification, the voter may complete an affidavit under the penalty of perjury at the polling place, provide, either by ink or by electronic scan, a print of the right forefinger, and affirm that the voter: (i) is the same individual who personally appears at the polling place; (ii) will cast the provisional ballot while voting in person; and (iii) suffers from a reasonable impediment that prevents the voter from obtaining photograph identification. The voter also shall list the impediment, unless otherwise prohibited by state or federal law. Upon completion of the affidavit, the voter may cast a provisional ballot.

Rationale: The rationale for this additional requirement is twofold: (1) Again, the Federal Grand Jury Report which investigated and addressed massive voter fraud in 1982 strongly recommended fingerprints, and (2) Think about this — How would you feel about your candidate losing by 100 votes and later learning that 1,000 voters managed to vote without producing a photo ID? A simple fingerprint would discourage any voter attempting to “game” the system to steal extra votes without disenfranchising the unicorns who truly lacked the proper ID.

(2)  Issue Only Temporary Board of Election (BOE) Voter ID Cards

Explanation: The state already assists any voter who is unable to obtain a fully legal state-issued ID card, and according to the Voter Integrity Project, these bogus “voter ID cards” should only be viewed as a stop-gap measure that also identifies people who need the help. (Added language is highlighted and underlined)

163A-869.1. (a) The county board of elections shall, in accordance with this section, issue without charge temporary voter photo identification cards upon request to registered voters who sign an affidavit, testifying to their inability to obtain an identification card issued by the Division of Motor Vehicles. Receipt of this card and the image of each recipient shall be public information that shall be retained in the voter registration file. The voter photo identification cards shall contain a photograph of the voter, a scanned print of the right forefinger, and the registration number for that voter. The voter photo identification card shall be used for voting purposes only, and shall expire at the end of the calendar year in which it was issued. (DELETE “eight years from the date of issuance”).

Rationale:  The Voter Integrity Project explains the reality of the situation with regard to the inability of people to get photo ID cards. “Very few people actually lack the other types of ID required under law. State Board of Elections Director Kim Strach testified that the original 254,391 voters listed without a DVM record translated to less than 2,000 actual persons who needed help getting an ID. And out of those, 620 were never found. Strach concluded that those 620 likely “either died or moved away,” which essentially means that the BOE has no clue. Another likely possibility is that they never even existed in the first place. These “free” ID cards are not needed by 99.9% of the population since they can ONLY be used for voting. Think about that for a second. They’re not reliable enough for conducting any other type of lawful transaction. Why is that? Because no birth certificates are required to obtain one. (Note, it was unelected Federal Judges who are responsible for this provision in the law). It will, literally, take an act of Congress to unscrew this fraud-friendly clause in every state’s voter ID law.”

(3)  End Curbside Voter ID Exception

Explanation: This is a loophole around the intent of the law and it needs to go. NC Senator Jerry Tillman introduced a bill to kill it in the 2015 session, but court pressure forced leadership to table it. NC Senator Jerry Tillman introduced a bill to kill it in the 2015 session, but court pressure forced leadership to table it. (Added language is highlighted and underlined)

SECTION 1.5(b) The State Board is directed to create a list containing all registered voters of North Carolina who are otherwise qualified to vote but do not have a North Carolina drivers license or other form of identification containing a photograph issued by the Division of Motor Vehicles of the Department of Transportation, as of April (DELETE “September”) 1, 2019. Every month thereafter, an updated and current version of the list must be made available at no cost to the public. (DELETE “to any registered voter upon request. The State Board may charge a reasonable fee for the provision of the list in order to recover associated costs of producing the list”). The Division of Motor Vehicles must provide the list of persons with a North Carolina drivers license or other form of identification containing a photograph issued by the Division of Motor Vehicles at no cost to the State Board.

(4)  Double Verification of Voters’ Identity at Polls

Explanation: Under current law, a single poll worker can collude with a voter impersonator who presents an ID. Whether the voter is actually the stated person is in the hands of one poll worker, who may or may not be a partisan activist. With 2,700 precincts in NC, the Voter Integrity Project believes the best solution to address that potential for voter fraud is two-person (two-party) verification. (Added language is highlighted and underlined)

163A-1145.1. (b) Verification of Photo Identification. – After presentation of the required identification described in subsection (a) of this section, the precinct officials assigned to check registration and to issue ballots shall compare the photograph contained on the required identification with the person presenting to vote. The two precinct officials, not of the same political party, shall verify that the photograph is that of the person seeking to vote. If (DELETE: “the”) any precinct official disputes that the photograph contained on the required identification is the person presenting to vote, a challenge shall be conducted in accordance with the procedures of G.S. 163A-914.

Rationale: Current law only requires one person to verify the voter’s face matches their ID card, while denial currently requires triple verification. Any photo-voter ID law is greatly weakened if only one person is allowed to confirm a voter’s identity at the polls. This critical step should be a bipartisan, two-person process: once at check-in and once at the ballot station. In 2016, the Voter Integrity Project already proved that some election workers were illegally disenfranchising certain voters in the 2016 primaries, so two-person acceptance is just as important as three-person denial of voters. (For a report on an eyewitness account of the fraud, go to – https://voterintegrityproject.com/wake-boe-dis-three/ )

(5)  Repeal the Student ID Exception

Explanation: The Voter Integrity Project has had concerns regarding student ID’s for some time now, believing it is a source for potential voter fraud. High school students must present valid ID in order to take the SAT and ACT for college applications. Students entering college even need a valid ID in order to be issued a college One Card or college ID. (Source: https://onecard.unc.edu/services/get-a-unc-one-card/ ). Allowing college ID cards to serve as a voter ID card is simply redundant. If they were required to show a valid ID to get the college ID card in the first place, then it makes sense to require college students to show that same valid ID when they vote. Allowing a separate card, a college ID (again, it being a redundant requirement) simply invites rampant fraud or abuse in a multitude of ways.

63A-1145.1. (a) (1) (DELETE Subsection (g): “g. A student identification card issued by a constituent institution of the University of North Carolina in accordance with a process approved by the State Board that requires an application and proof of identity equivalent to the requirements for issuance of a special identification card by the Division of Motor Vehicles of the Department of Transportation”).

Rationale:  The Left strongly advocates for accepting student IDs at the polls. That alone should set off some red flags. The Voter Integrity Project strongly opposes student ID cards and for several good reasons – student IDs fail to provide needed information, some are issued without the student even providing the needed information, university students may or may not be permanent residents of North Carolina, and they may or may not even be U.S. citizens. Jay believes, and for good reason, that to allow student IDs as an acceptable form of ID to vote opens the door for non-residents or non-citizens to vote in North Carolina elections.

Furthermore, it is no secret that Democrat activists and party reps spend time on college campuses (and we have also learned that they go to high schools as well) where they give students incorrect information such as “as long as you live here, you can vote here.” According to one first-hand account, a student told the person attempting to register voters for the Democratic Party that he was illegal and was under the impression he was not allowed to vote. The response was: “That’s wrong. You live here, right? Then you can vote.” Just so everyone knows – it is a felony for non-citizens to vote, and in fact, their voting may permanently jeopardize their path to citizenship. As Jay says: “We do not need to make life harder for non-US citizens who are trying to follow the rules.”

(6)  Increase Voter Transparency

Explanation: It is vital for election integrity and public confidence that anybody who votes in NC becomes a resident of the state. One of the key features to residency is their having a legal DMV-issued driver license or ID card. Candidates and parties need to know how many voters within their district do not have legal residency. This type of critical information cannot be hidden from the public if we are to rebuild public confidence in the democratic process. The Voter Integrity Project recommends that Section 1.5 (b), which is a section that addresses voter education, be amended as follows:

SECTION 1.5(b) The State Board is directed to create a list containing all registered voters of North Carolina who are otherwise qualified to vote but do not have a North Carolina drivers license or other form of identification containing a photograph issued by the Division of Motor Vehicles of the Department of Transportation, as of April (DELETE: “September”) 1, 2019. Every month thereafter, an updated and current version of the list must be made available at no cost to the public. (DELETE: “to any registered voter upon request. The State Board may charge a reasonable fee for the provision of the list in order to recover associated costs of producing the list”). The Division of Motor Vehicles must provide the list of persons with a North Carolina drivers license or other form of identification containing a photograph issued by the Division of Motor Vehicles at no cost to the State Board.

Rationale: The Voter Integrity Project believes this information should be made public, on the State Board of Election (SBOE) site, at no cost.

[Source: “The Voter Integrity Project (VIP) Issues Response to Draft NC Voter ID Bill (v 0.9),” https://voterintegrityproject.com/draft-voter-id/?fbclid=IwAR1SAo_s5tVW-QV5oEFO9Frf5AAXU6FhgZz7Z4N3pSRWCitLXXVyxfhtKGM ]

The NC General Assembly reconvened today for an expected two-week session, to continue work on the new Voter ID law. In fact, the law is expected to be its top priority. I am encouraging everyone to contact their representative to make sure the photo-voter ID law proceeds as the voters intended (establishing a strict system of identification in order to vote) and to support the recommendations made by Jay Delancy and the NC Voter Integrity Project.

The NC Voter Integrity Project has been a tireless advocate for a strong, common-sense Voter ID law here in North Carolina and for years, it has been investigating, uncovering, and prosecuting verified instances of actual voter fraud, highlighting the reality that voter fraud in NC is very real and a very real problem thus providing the basis for such a law. Jay has been a guest on FOX News, the Rachel Maddow Show, and other shows to address the reality of voter fraud and to educate the American people who otherwise continue to be told by the main stream media that voter fraud is a myth. Jay Delancy and the NC Voter Integrity Project have our backs here in North Carolina and always have. We owe them so much.

As mentioned earlier, state House and Senate Republican leaders want to pass the implementing law before the end of the year – before they lose their supermajority. Once the next session begins, Republicans will no longer have enough votes to override any veto issued by Democratic Gov. Roy Cooper, a longtime photo ID opponent. And so, time is of the essence!

Have a hot tip for First In Freedom Daily?

Got a hot news tip for us? Photos or video of a breaking story? Send your tips, photos and videos to tips@firstinfreedomdaily.com. All hot tips are immediately forwarded to FIFD Staff.

Have something to say? Send your own guest column or original reporting to submissions@firstinfreedomdaily.com.

 

Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.