UPDATED: SC, Attorney General Alan Wilson Plead Voter ID Case
South Carolina makes the case for its Voter ID law before a panel in Washington, D.C., this week.
UPDATED (8 p.m. Aug. 27, 2012): After a day spent in federal court, Attorney General Alan Wilson held a conference call with the media.
Wilson was joined in Washington, D.C. by Lt. Governor Glenn McConnell, House Speaker Bobby Harrell, Sen. Chip Campson (R – Charleston) and Rep. Alan Clemmons (R – Horry). Campson and Clemmons took the stand and Clemmons will continue his testimony on Tuesday.
Wilson immediately defended the Voter ID law against charges that it would suppress the vote of the poor and minorities, groups that tend to vote Democratic.
“The bill does not change the requirements for registering to vote. Citizens can get an ID free of charge at their nearest election office,” Wilson said.
Wilson also noted that even if voters show up at a polling station on Election Day without an ID, they can vote if they fill out an impediment affidavit which grants an immediate waiver to the voter ID criteria. “That is the ultimate safety net in my opinion,” Wilson said.
Wilson also responded to critics who think the bill will limit turnout in general. “There is no evidence of (voter suppression),” Wilson said. “In fact it’s quite the contrary, voter turnout has actually increased in areas where voter ID laws have passed.
What there is also little evidence of is actual voter fraud. A recent report found just 10 examples of fraud across the entire country since 2000. View the report here.
The level of fraud in the report would affect one out of every 15 million voters.
South Carolina has approximately 2.7 million voters. Assuming that there was 100 percent turnout (it rarely exceeds 60 percent) the voter ID law would prevent voter fraud once every five years.
As a result of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, South Carolina is one of the states that must get approval from the Department of Justice before passing any election laws.
ORIGINAL STORY (8 a.m. Aug. 27, 2012): South Carolina's 2011 Voter ID law, struck down last year by the Department of Justice, gets its chance in court this week.
Attorney General Alan Wilson, who filed suit against the DOJ and U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, will plead the state's case to a three-judge panel in Washington, D.C.
The DOJ struck down the law, which requires photo identification cards for anyone who tries to vote, on the grounds that it does not adequately protect voters from discrimination.
However, South Carolina and Wilson have argued that several states' laws already enacted are very similar, and the cards can be obtained for free from the S.C. Department of Motor Vehicles.
The state’s Voter I.D. law was passed in 2011, and requires voters to show photo identification. The identification can be obtained free of charge from the S.C. Department of Motor Vehicles.
“South Carolina’s photo identification law does not bar anyone from voting, but merely imposes on voters a responsibility to obtain an approved photo identification card and to bring it to the polls,” claims the South Carolina suit.
W. T. Walkup
3:24 pm on Monday, August 27, 2012
How many cases of Voter Fraud have been heard by the South Carolina courts ? How many people have been covicted ?
Randy Jones
4:52 pm on Monday, August 27, 2012
The problem is that there is no way to know how many cases of voter fraud have occured, as there has never been any attempt to verify the identity of those voting, or even check to see if the name appearing on the registration is that of a living person. The voting records are not cross referenced against any database to verify any information whatsoever.
stanley seigler
7:01 pm on Monday, August 27, 2012
@Randy Jones: '...The problem is that there is no way to know how many cases of voter fraud have occurred...The voting records are not cross referenced against any database to verify any information whatsoever.
AROUND THE DUMB-A BUSH AD NAUSEAM..and so unnecessary
re: no way to know many cases of voter fraud have occurred...[RJ]
agree...ie, there is NO WAY to know how many cases of a non existing occurrence there is...similar to determining the number of angels dancing on a pin head...
if elections officials do their job...there is absolutely NO WAY, NO WAY there can be voter fraud at the ballot box under current laws...if anyone believes differently please say HOW!...this question asked each time around the bush and 'the silence is deafening'...
re: The voting records are not cross referenced against any database to verify any information whatsoever. [RJ]
this [x-reference] is the election official's job...and in today's computer world it is a piece of cake (well relatively easy) to cross reference, social security number, vital (death)records, registered voter list; and purge the registered voter list of all dead folks...
the time and energy spent on the utterly unnecessary, legislation is unbelievable and STUPID.
people have to be deaf, dumb and blind NOT to see this is voter depression devised by the kochbro-etal to increase the wealth of the 1%...ie, the greedy bastards...buffett, gates, soros, etal, excluded.
Jonathan Edwards
4:53 pm on Monday, August 27, 2012
Right, but you have to show a birth certificate to get the free I.D.. To obtain a copy of your birth certificate guess what you need?? A government issued photo I.D. A ton of minorities will be affected by this.
Sammy
7:32 pm on Tuesday, November 13, 2012
Check out this site, from the SC DMV, it tells exactly what you need to get an ID card!
http://www.scdmvonline.com/DMVNew/forms/MV-93.pdf
Tom Utley
7:14 am on Wednesday, November 14, 2012
Don't you think it is kind of racist to assume minorities aren't competent enough to acquire a photo ID?
Shawn Drury
5:18 pm on Monday, August 27, 2012
With voter turnout getting lower and lower -- it was in the teens during the primaries in June -- shouldn't we be finding ways to make it easier to vote than harder?
Hal Millard
6:02 pm on Monday, August 27, 2012
Provisional ballots notwithstanding, under this law, my white, lower-middle-class grandmother would be unable to vote were she still alive. No DL, no picture ID of any kind, and she would likely have to jump through many hoops just to get a copy of her birth certificate (she was born in NC in the early 20th century). Her only crime, it would seem, is that as an elderly widow on a fixed income she tended to vote for Democrats, whom she counted on to protect Medicare and SS. Until someone comes up with a truly compelling argument for it, the law seems to be a solution in search of a problem, suppressing the right to vote rather than protecting it. Equating a photo ID requirement for voting with ID requirements for purchasing Sudafed or boarding a plane strikes me as more than an apples/oranges comparison — it's more like an oranges-to-orangutans comparison.
Shawn Drury
7:04 pm on Monday, August 27, 2012
Stanley, you would save yourself a lot of time if you did not quote every person to whom you were responding and made your point.
stanley seigler
8:04 pm on Monday, August 27, 2012
takes a nanosec and helps me respond...but if what you say is, it's not PATCH appropriate will cease the practice...
Shawn Drury
8:10 pm on Monday, August 27, 2012
Nope, as long as you're maintaining our Terms of Use, you're fine. Just trying to save you some time.
Robert Kelly
6:31 am on Tuesday, August 28, 2012
Let Stanley quote! There are sometimes really active topics and without those quotes it is more difficult to put the response in context... I wouldn't say more difficult to figure out what he is talking about because that might seem disparaging.
ReadIt
11:52 pm on Monday, August 27, 2012
Honestly, if you register to vote, then you should be required to vote - even if that means adding an option that says "none of the above". If you want to vote, the voting application/approval should cover all of the voter ID concerns. If you've registered, then you show a commitment to the betterment of the country.
I think Voter ID laws are a back door way to get the less affluent, less mobile, less represented (minorities) and less advantaged to stay home and not vote.
It's pitiful we've come to this point in politics where congressional representatives explicitly state that passing Voter ID laws will "allow Gov. Romney to win the state" [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EuOT1bRYdK8&noredirect=1], and state representatives neglect to admit the facts and studies proving this law would disenfranchise a portion of the voting population.
Let's find something that makes voting easier and more accessible to the voices of the ENTIRE voting population, not something that adds yet another layer of government red tape. Republicans want less government? Then get the government out of the voting process and let the people speak.
Robert Kelly
6:38 am on Tuesday, August 28, 2012
Two things...I think you have hit the topic right on the head with the "less mobile" description! If you don't have a picture ID, getting one, and the documentation, is no simple matter. Where do you get a birth certificate? Older, poorer, people who do not live near DHEC, or who were born out of state, have a real problem getting a birth certificate without Internet or a car (assuming no DL means no car).
Second...your mention of "none of the above". Yes! Let's add that choice. If that choice wins, it means a rerun with new candidates. I will be stuck with Joe Wilson because he has no Dem opposition...but maybe "none of the above" could save the day.
Terri Unknown
11:25 am on Tuesday, August 28, 2012
I don't see what all the talk is about. Every time I go to the doctor I have to show an ID. To pick up prescriptions, I have to show ID. To cash a check at the bank-even on my own account- I have to show ID. It's just a part of the daily life. If you don't drive, then the state will give you one. It's not a big deal !! I don't understand the waste of time and money on this topic. We need so many other things to be taken care of in our political system. We need to focus on what is important. Old, poor people will have to show their ID when going to a doctor or getting medicine. Photo ids should be required. Birth certificates have been given out in SC since 1915 and most voters should have one. If you're born before 1915 then you don't need a birth certificate...good rule change there. Read a post where someone said they couldn't get to DHEC to get a birth certificate, well, they can mail one to you via US Postal Service. That's how I got mine.
stanley seigler
1:37 pm on Tuesday, August 28, 2012
@Terri Unknown:
all the talk is about BO/dem voter suppression...there are continued comments like yours...can you explain why voterID is necessary...ie, how voter fraud could exist under the current law...question asked many times...no answer to date...perhaps you can enlighten us...
is there any doubt in your mind voterID laws are a tactic to throw elections to the GOPs...oh/and;
if you have a scintilla of evidence there has been voter fraud at the ballot box you should provide it to the SC AG...he found NONE ! NONE!
your comments are based on the premise a voterIDs are needed to prevent commitment of a non existence crime and that current laws are not adequate...it is a wrong premise and it begs the question.
Shawn Drury
11:42 am on Tuesday, August 28, 2012
Terri, I don't think anyone would disagree that making elections as fair and legitimate as possible is a good idea. But as Hal and others have pointed out, voter fraud is not a serious problem. It would seem that our Attorney General and state political leaders would have bigger fish to fry.
And when elected officials prioritize an issue that is rather low on the to-do list, one can't help but think that the issue is being addressed solely for political purposes.
stanley seigler
8:59 am on Wednesday, November 14, 2012
@Tom Utley: 'Don't you think it is kind of racist to assume minorities aren't competent enough to acquire a photo ID?'
you beg the issue w/ another straw man...the issue is voter suppression. NOT the ease (or lack of) to obtain a voterID.
minorities are very competent. they recognized the tactic of kockbro-ilkies and their GOP sheep...to suppress the minority vote (mostly DEMs).
they recognized it and were P-ed off at the utter disdain the kockbro-ilkies (the 1%, 47%, whatever) had for them...so they turned out and voted for BO...well 70% latino's and asians and 99% Blacks.
the minorities are very competent. no one (well the koch-ilks) is suggesting otherwise...and more competent than the voterID supporters and those who stupidly suggest SC again fire on fort sumter...secede.
difficult to decide which (secede/voterID) is the dumbest, time wasting, idea...'idea' used very loosely.
Tom Utley
9:17 am on Wednesday, November 14, 2012
I agree that minorities are very competent (moreso than the government gives them credit for) but I really don't understand any of your post.
I personally am not a fan of Democracy at all, and I don't think anybody who gets a paycheck from the government should be able to vote. They basically are voting for their own salary, by stealing from other people. This includes everyone associated with the government, from the President on down, and the military, teachers, IRS agents, Defense Contractors, welfare recipients, medicaid, social security, heck even people who own stock in companies that receive corporate welfare.
I don't see how requiring proof of identification to vote is "voter suppression." It's pretty clearly not. It is "unregistered voter suppression" and "inelegible voter suppression." So all this talk about hurting the elderly and minorities is just nonsense.
Robert Kelly
9:39 am on Wednesday, November 14, 2012
Tom,, would that include people who receive any kind of tax deduction as well, since in a sense they are receiving money from the government by not paying taxes on their income? I have to admit, your vision would make elections a whole lot faster and eliminate the lines. There would be hardly anyone at all allowed to vote! You have a a great point, all those sneaky government workers putting in 40 hours a week delivering services (fighting fires, arresting bad guys, forecasting the weather, teaching kids how to read and do arithmetic, are really just thieves in the night. Why should we be paying them at all, and since we are, why should they have any say in how the country is managed! I appreciate your honesty about not being a fan of democracy, but I think you were outvoted on that for this country.
Tom Utley
9:53 am on Wednesday, November 14, 2012
No. Tax deductions are simply a means for you to have less of your life stolen from you. Because after all, you earn money by spending time doing something productive, and that time is time out of your life that you could have been doing something else.
Also, I don't hold anything against people who get a paycheck from the government, I just don't think they should be able to vote. It is a conflict of interests. I mean I have no choice in how much of my money is stolen to fund their jobs, as opposed to the voluntary sector where if a company does something I disagree with, I simply don't spend my money with them.
But I do understand why people work for the government. The government holds a coercive monopoly over many areas of our society, so people have limited career options as a result.
I think people see voting as a "right" and that is just wrong. Voting is a privilege that our masters give us. It is a "subject's suggestion box."
stanley seigler
1:18 pm on Wednesday, November 14, 2012
@Tom Utley
re: I really don't understand any of your post.
we're even...i dont understand most of posts...weel hear what you say...but dont begin to know where you are coming from...very few if any of yo opines bare any resemblance to reality or basis in fact.
re: I don't see how requiring proof of identification to vote is "voter suppression." ...all this talk about hurting the elderly and minorities is just nonsense.
yo comments here are a prime example of: your opine bares little, if any, semblance to reality...
'none so blind as those who will not see.'
help me to better communicate...eg, just what is it you dont understand about you not addressing the issue of voter suppression...instead address the ease of obtaining an voterID...
to argue it is NOT voter suppression:
first
show there is voter fraud at the ballot box...you should share any proof you have with SC AG...he found none...why? cause there is NONE.
second
if you have no proof; then show how one would commit fraud at the ballot box under current law, if election officials do their job fraud is impossible...if you have a way, please share.
your comment re ease of obtaining is a straw man...begs the issue...does NOT provide evidence of fraud or how one would commit fraud under current law...
Robert Kelly
9:31 am on Wednesday, November 14, 2012
Stanley is right on when he argues that the arguments in favor of tighter voter restrictions are diversions. And this is an enormous waste of taxpayer money to fight for something intended to solve a problem that doesn't exist. Regardless, the straw man argument is still disingenuous. People with a driver's license claim it is the normal state of being, and therefore everyone should have one, and what's the big deal! Well, you don't have to have a driver's license if you don't want one, and if you are an adult without one, getting this picture voter ID is not the piece of cake they are suggesting. DMV is a tough agency. You want an ID from them...you better have your social security card (why?), you better have your birth certificate or passport, you better have a utility bill clearly stating your name and address. And if you printed it off your computer/printer because you do your banking and utility-paying online (like everyone wants you to in order to reduce costs and save paper), it is not acceptable. What if the utilities are in someone else's name (a roommate, or even a spouse)? You could be out of luck. What if you lost the social security card you received so many decades ago (or your parents lost it)? What if ... ? None of which should deny you the right to vote! How many hoops can you make people, generally people who don't have a SC driver's license, jump through? Of course, without that license it is a lot harder to round up the other stuff. Voting RIGHTS!