The problem is that some citizens, legally allowed to vote, don't have driver's licenses. It is those people, people who don't drive, that this law would require to find their way to their county voter registration office during the hours of 8:30-5:00 on a Monday thru Friday where there is NO public transportation.
From my home, the drive is 45 minutes each way in my car. There is NO public transportation to the county voter registration office.
It is the difficulty of getting to the place to get the photo ID that is the problem in the SC law. Couldn't the photo ID go to the people who don't have it. Yes, it could and the State Elections Commission, realizing the problem, plans to arrange for ONE BUS -- ONE BUS FOR THE ENTIRE STATE of SC -- to go to areas where citizens don't have driver's licenses to provide the photo IDs.
If you think the SC law is really about identifying fraudulent voters, think again. If the intent was to provide photo ID for legitimate voters, ACCESS to photo ID equipment would have been provided in the bill.
The SC Photo ID is not intended to be an ID.
Did any of you defending this law actually read the law? Once you get a photo ID -- say at age 18 -- you use the same photo FOREVER. As much as you'd like to look like you did at 18 when you reach 40 and gained 50 lbs., you will not. Same for when you reach 80!
If this law was really about identifying voters, you would need a new photo every 5 to 10 years, but you don't. The photo ID is permanent. Obvious conclusion: If you want a photo ID that can actually be used to identify someone, this law will not do it.
If the photo ID is not an ID, why did the Legislature pass the law? Could it have anything to do with keeping people from voting?
I agree that Ben is an awesome individual and this was a great story to highlight one of the many ways people can make a positive impact in the community. And while the pizzas are super delicious, I am sadly unable to eat them any more until they offer a gluten-free crust (hint hint).
Benny D is a great man. I worked with him a long time ago, and was always jealous of his cool, level-headed attitude toward everything. Glad to see he's putting it to great use. Plus, his pizzas rival any other in town.
I can't help but notice that no one is really arguing about the serious problems in vote counting in this state. Now, of course we have Will to blame for that... when you bait the argument with marinated steak then the dogs will fight over the bait and not the trap. Voter ID is juicy and extremely partisan, so we like to argue about it. Not to say that points haven't been made, but the argument is about Voter ID.
Yeah, it makes sense that you'd have to show ID until you learn what all the requirements are for getting an ID if you don't have one are... specifically for poor blacks born in rural, segregated backwaters in the Jim Crow era. That's why there's a valid civil rights argument against it; our heritage (not hate, right?) towards those black folks and keeping them out of the voter rolls. Young people, on the other hand? Get with the program... life requires ID.
With the election machine problem: it seems that the political supermajority has no interest in either (A) disturbing the status quo that has put them in power or (B) exposing the human reasons behind the inaccurate computer results... which kinda points back to (A) as well. Democrats or GOP, it is the GOB Network that is usually at the root of the problem in the South. This is just another notch on their bedpost of poor governance.
If I had a dollar for every time someone posted here that I should have a column, I'd have three bucks right now....
/thanks for the kind words
//sometimes I'm a foul mouth, though
ps: you could start a petitiononline.com petition (heh)
Will some PLEASE give mat catastrophe (if that's his real name) his own column. He writes better than Chris Haire and actually reads history and philosophy. (Sorry Chris, I'm sure you are a hard working, kinda nice guy. But you are an editor for cripes sake.)Chris writes foul-mouthed little squibs that are not really worth reading most of the time because he is too busy putting out a newspaper.
We don't really have a valid, secure national identification system. We don't really have a complete, valid list of American citizens. We have 50 uncoordinated systems created to regulate automobile use that do IDs as a sideline. They can't be matched reliably to birth certificates in many cases. Name changes due to marriage, divorce or legal decree often don't get properly recorded. We have a passport system which is fairly secure, but that only covers about one third of the adult population. Any time someone proposes a secure national identification and registration system, which every country in Europe has, people here go nuts. In Europe, you get your secure ID, you register when you change your residence and that's it. People aren't running around with IDs from different states and different drivers, citizenship and birth records.
Years ago, a DMV employee in Cottageville was banging out state IDs for money on the nights and weekends, hundreds, perhaps thousands of them. He finally got busted when a trooper driving by wondered why the DMV parking lot was full on Sunday night. Those IDs were as real as yours, same material, equipment and everything else. Hopefully they're all expired now, but who is to say someone didn't build an entire identity with one?
We have an identification system which doesn't work and voting machines nobody checks. If someone cared about valid elections and citizenship, it wouldn't be this way. They just want to be sure they get reelected.
Why do you think the GOPers don't want the machines to work properly? Is it a question of not wanting to spend money, or do they not work in Dem precincts?
Will, thank you for this writing but it's time to make a few corrections: Sue EDWARD has no "s" .... Sue Edward represents many groups including www.charlestonpeace.net www.scwcf.bbnow.org and www.lowcountryhumanists.org and since then www.electSueEdward.com 843-763-7304 I'll be voting for her VOTE GREEN JULY 17 www.hireLarryFireBobby.com 843-926-1750 oust theocrat Speaker Harrell @VoteLarryDis114
I wasn't banging my head for you.
And the polls are wonderful, but they are also meaningless unless the questions are phrased properly and people know what they are supporting. Remember, support for "welfare" drops until the word welfare is replaced with "medicare" or "unemployment assistance" or "food assistance for children".
If you asked the average American if they supported a system of Voter ID that disenfranchised their 90 year old grandmother, they'd probably say "no".
And you'd support a National ID card? Well, I guess that would make checking into the FEMA death camps a hell of a lot easier.
Thanks for the well thought out response. I really do appreciate your input.
I suppose my posts will just keep causing you to bang your head against a wall because i just can't see the light. :)
Public opinion polls have shown strong support for voter ID laws amongst voters in the United States. A 2011 Rasmussen poll found that 75% of likely voters “believe voters should be required to show photo identification, such as a driver’s license, before being allowed to vote.
A 2012 Fox News poll showed 70% of voters supported requiring an ID to vote, and 26% were opposed. Voter ID laws were supported by 52% of Democrats, 72% of independents and 87% of Republicans
The statuses as of March 2012 of the 50 states regarding the required showing of ID at the polling place are as follows:
Strict photo ID (voter must show photo ID at polling place): Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Mississippi, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Wisconsin. In addition, South Carolina and Texas have strict photo ID laws that must receive, but have not received, approval from the federal Justice Department; pending such approval, they require non-photo ID.
Photo ID or alternative (voters at polling place must either show photo ID or meet another state-specific requirement, such as answering personal questions correctly or being vouched for by another voter who has voter ID): Alabama, Florida, Hawaii, Idaho, Louisiana, Michigan and South Dakota.
Non-photo ID (state-specific list of acceptable forms of polling place ID, including a non-photo form): Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Kentucky, Missouri, Montana, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Rhode Island, Utah, Virginia, Washington.
The most amazing is the last :
No ID required at polling place: all other (19) states.
Its is currently left up to each state, but personally i'm not opposed to opening the debate for a constitutional amendment and or a national photo id.
Imagined offenses are difficult to disprove. Please explain why "minorities, the elderly, and college students" are not able to get a picture ID like everybody else, including all the other "minorities, the elderly, and college students" who have picture IDs.
"Please someone show some proof of people voting illegally in South Carolina."
They can't, because there isn't any.
"The only reason to oppose voter ID is that you want to make it easier for people to cast fraudulent votes. If you say otherwise you are lying to yourself."
The only reason to support voter ID is that you want to make it harder for people to cast votes for candidates you don't like. If you say otherwise you are lying to yourself.
OK. So the argument is that people who expect someone to have identification to vote hate poor people. Well, the folks on the other side must want to keep them poor. No ID means no job. Means no access to medical care. Means no access to social services. Means they can't pick up their Kenny Chesney tickets at willcall. The only reason to oppose voter ID is that you want to make it easier for people to cast fraudulent votes. If you say otherwise you are lying to yourself.
Here is an actual documented case of election fraud in South Carolina that occurred in November 2011 in Horry county and that person, a former GOP leader, was recently arrested for the crime.
I wonder if people who think people are going to vote illegally actually vote in their precinct? Do you ever see shady people you do not know sneaking in and voting? Wouldn't someone take out their iphone and film them and their car license plates and then that person would go to jail?
Do we actually think thousands of illegal voters are going to risk going to jail for election fraud for voting for Obama or Romney?
We have proof of machines malfunctioning, votes not being counted, too many votes counted, and tens of thousands of missing ballots.
Please someone show some proof of people voting illegally in South Carolina.
"Many times in the past, in many posts, i have requested any info anyone has at all. I'm open to as much info as possible. Cut and paste, provide links. It makes no difference to me. Knowledge is power."
But what's the point? We've spent years here going back and forth with the useless information wars and bitching and moaning about sources and no one's ever said, "Oh, wow. What good information. I might have to change my mind on this issue or, at least, consider it differently from now on."
No, we're all a bunch of close-minded assholes. And we always will be. The amount of force it takes to combat the inertia of our own brain wiring on certain issues is almost completely impossible to muster.
"Again with the personal attack on the poster."
"Lets deal with the issue at hand."
I already pointed out you weren't doing that. Only Garfield22 has. Debs to a lesser degree. Moredock's column this week is about the disconnect between the right wing screaming about election fraud in the form of (imagined) voter fraud and the ignoring of actual problems with the electoral system in the form of electronic voting machines.
Would you like to actually debate the data on how electronic voting is probably a greater threat to democracy than a horde of dead people voting in Chicago? No, of course not, because it doesn't fit the narrative or the talking points issued by ALEC, FreedomWorks, and Fox News.
"its fairly simple and Cid95 hit it right on the head. No one is trying to keep anyone from the voting booth."
Yes, they are. This has been going on for the better part of a decade. When they got called out for doing it in a sketchy manner, they turned to codifying it.
So, if no one's trying to disenfranchise voters, how do you explain to the 200,000 of your fellow South Carolinians who are no longer eligible to vote why they suddenly can't vote? If the legislation is aimed at stopping fraud and not disenfranchisement, then why can't these people vote?
"A photo id makes perfect sense."
Sure. No problem there. The problem is in how high the bar is set for someone to prove who they are in order to acquire that photo ID and/or challenging their residency based on status as a student.
Here's an idea: Why not a national voter database? That would pretty much end the problem of voter fraud from coast to coast, wouldn't it? Oh, except that for decades conservatives have railed against a national ID system, haven't they? Suddenly, though, the narrative has shifted from "personal freedom" to "keeping the poor and the minorities" from voting, so we're totally OK with photo ID in civic matters, right?
"As no faith pointed out, I have to have a photo id to rent bowling shoes but not when i vote. Thats insanity."
No, that's the difference between a private company being stupid about their bowling shoes and someone exercising a civil right. You don't have a civil right to bowling shoes.
"As far as Senator Byrd or even Strom Thurmond for that matter, I personally have no time for any racists no matter the party or when it happened. I don't have to accept their apologies or believe them. Thats my personal right. The racist will probaly have to answer for their trangressions at some point. thats between themselves and their creator (whoever, whatever that might be)"
You're fine to believe any and all of that, as long as you apply it equally to all people. Unfortunately, since the vast majority of the bigoted, racist assholes still slithering through the public halls of government aren't even honest about their despicable bullshit, I suppose you can't hold them to that standard.
"My idea of horribly stupid conversations and your idea are obviously opposed.
I'm open to everyone's freedom of speech.
You would obviously be happy if there were no opposing viewpoints and only those that agree with each other on this site can go on patting each other on the back."
This isn't about free speech, even in the contorted manner in which most people think they know what that concept even means.
I'm not against opposing viewpoints. What I am against is the notion that we still need to debate certain points. In my view, most of what passes for "conservative" ideas at this point in time is very much akin to throwing virgins into the volcano as a sacrifice. Outdated and draconian, deprecated and discredited. Why should we bother debating ideas and concepts that are long-dead and pointless? What purpose does it serve?
The problem with the Conservative mindset today is that it absolutely refuses to see that the world is changing and it is hellbent on doing whatever it can to prevent the change from happening. Any discussions about what we're doing in the present and what we should do in the future shouldn't depend on what a bunch of frightened white people think we should do to push things back to the way they were in the 1950s.
You're certainly entitled to your freedom to hold these ideas and beliefs, but I'm not required to take them seriously. The problem is that too many people do take them seriously, including the people who are currently making policy at the local, state, and national level.
You want to know what's really going to destroy the American system of democracy? The insane desire to make sure it never escapes the 19th century.
The "legally eligible" part is the clever bit, where you simply make people you don't like no longer "legally eligible" and then stand back and say, "well, that's how the system works".
Does it help assuage any of the guilt of being a racist?
Many times in the past, in many posts, i have requested any info anyone has at all. I'm open to as much info as possible. Cut and paste, provide links. It makes no difference to me. Knowledge is power.
Again with the personal attack on the poster. Lets deal with the issue at hand.
its fairly simple and Cid95 hit it right on the head. No one is trying to keep anyone from the voting booth. A photo id makes perfect sense. As no faith pointed out, I have to have a photo id to rent bowling shoes but not when i vote. Thats insanity.
As far as Senator Byrd or even Strom Thurmond for that matter, I personally have no time for any racists no matter the party or when it happened. I don't have to accept their apologies or believe them. Thats my personal right. The racist will probaly have to answer for their trangressions at some point. thats between themselves and their creator (whoever, whatever that might be)
My idea of horribly stupid conversations and your idea are obviously opposed.
I'm open to everyone's freedom of speech.
You would obviously be happy if there were no opposing viewpoints and only those that agree with each other on this site can go on patting each other on the back.
Powered by Foundation
© Copyright 2013,
Charleston City Paper