(Photo courtesy of The State)The South Carolina Legislative Black Caucus got it right when they walked out on the bill requiring voters to show a photo ID at polling places.
The GOPher-controlled state house passed the bill, 65-14, that requires a valid S.C. driver's license, military ID or state-issued photo ID approved by the Department of Motor Vehicles be presented in order to vote.
"About 30 members of the Legislative Black Caucus and other House Democrats staged the walkout as debate moved into its fourth hour and it became clear the bill would pass."
How did the GOPhers respond? Let's look at a statement by House Speaker Bobby Harrell:
“A picture ID is required to do just about anything in our society, except to vote.”
What a ridiculous comment to make. I am not required to show a photo ID when I buy groceries or purchase gasoline. I don't have to show a photo ID to walk in a state park. I am not fumbling into my wallet looking for a photo ID to allow my children visit a playground.
How about GOPher state rep. Mike Pitts:
“Then I wouldn’t get so many uneducated questions about what we’re doing down here. I see (the bill) as security, to be able to identify that the person is who they say they are.”
GOPher state Rep. Alan Clemmons said just about the same thing. If this a strong worry, then let's recall all of our elections because fraud could have played a part then. So, why allow them to stand if there is suspicion? It has nothing to do with fraud because there was none in the 2008 election. It has something to do with keeping voter turnout down and not seeing any better than the general election.
"Republicans struck down 23 amendments Democrats offered, including ones to allow recent utility bills and work ID cards as identification, and another to exempt the elderly and disabled from the ID requirement."
It really looks like to me these GOPhers are hurt by the general election and can't live with the fact President Barack Obama was elected by a big majority, winning the popular vote as well.
Are we doomed to the past again? Does that saying about the past repeating itself look realistic?
I say yes. Including the actions of GOPher Gov. Mark Sanford, it looks like the Confederacy of anew.
If not, then why would the GOPhers allow this...
"The bill, scheduled to receive final House approval today before heading to the Senate, would cost the state Transportation Department nearly $1 million. Waiving the fee could cost the Transportation Department’s highway fund more than $700,000 a year. That fund pays to resurface state roads."
Democratic state Rep. Bakari Sellers says, "In these times, they’re taking away money from an economic development fund. It doesn't make sense.”
I agree 100 percent. They talk about saving money and not taking away from needs, but actions speak louder than words. Do I hold faith that this state will see this?
No.
3 comments:
Funny, Clemmons sits on the i-73 board and can't get that road built - but he can put up roadblocks to voting
Good one.
I find the idea of prohibiting identification of voters rather interesting. I am a conservative living outside Boston, Massachussetts. If I (and all the other 14 Massachussetts conservatives) drove to Columbia and walked into a voting place and claimed to be Jamie and his neighbors, would that be OK with you? Our voting procedure here (in MA) is to go to the polling location and give them a name (any name) and address. They look the name up on a list, cross it off and hand you a ballot. (Note I said nothing about making sure you are Jamie or Mac) Be honest, what would your reaction be if after work, you stopped in to vote and they said, "Sorry, you already voted, and I can prove it because your name is crossed off the list." My bet is you would be ripped. Suppose a hot button issue was on the ballot that you cared about and you knew that it was going to be a close vote. Would you just say "OK" and drive home? There are many, many cases around the country of more people registering and voting in towns
than were actually alive and living in town. The comeback that you don't have to show an ID to take a walk is a pandering comment. You do have to show your ID to cash a check, buy liquor (if you look young), buy a car, rent a car, sell a car, go on an airplane, (not even to go on the airplane - just go to meet some one at the airport) and many more REAL things. Try refusing to identify yourself to a police officer sometime and see what happens. Voting is one of the most important things we can do in this country, and is at the heart of our system of government. What is wrong with you demonstrating that you are who you say you are, and are a part of the community that you are voting in? Virtually everyone has some sort of "identification". It is next to impossible to live without something. The days of poll taxes and some sort of reading tests are long gone (personally I wouldnt' mind a test that insures you know your name, and what day of the week it is), and are not something we have to be afraid of any more. If we are, then showing an ID to vote is a minor issue.
Mac Sterling
Dedham, MA.
Post a Comment