Author Of South Carolina Voter ID Law Acknowledges Racist Emails

[SunsetDreams]

State Rep. Alan Clemmons (R-SC)

During Tuesday night’s Republican Convention, Gov. Nikki Haley (R-SC) complained that the “hardest part” of her job is “this president” opposing South Carolina’s voter ID law, which would require a photo identification as a prerequisite for voting. But just hours before Haley took the stage, opponents of the measure uncovered new emails revealing that the legislation may have been racially motivated.

...

During Tuesday’s trial, critics who charge that voter ID is designed to disenfranchise minority voters appeared to have scored an important victory when they presented the law’s author state Rep. Alan Clemmons (R), with racist emails he received while drafting the legislation:

One, from a man named Ed Koziol, used racially charged rhetoric to denounce the idea that poor, black voters might lack transportation or other resources necessary to obtain photo ID. If the legislature offered a reward for identification cards, “it would be like a swarm of bees going after a watermelon,” Koziol wrote.

Beeney asked Clemmons how he had replied to this email. Clemmons hesitated a moment before answering, “It was a poorly considered response when I said, ‘Amen, Ed, thank you for your support.’”

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2012/08/29/765061/author-of-south-carolina-voter-id-acknowledges-racist-emails/

The Justice Department blocked the 2011 voter ID law, which would force South Carolina residents to show one of five forms of photo identification in order to vote: a driver's license, a DMV-issued photo ID, a passport, military ID, or a voter registration card with photo issued by the local elections office. The Voting Rights Act requires federal review of all election laws passed in states with a history of discriminating against black voters.

The Justice Department has asserted that South Carolina’s law would disproportionately burden African-Americans, who it says are less likely than whites to have or be able to get the types of ID the law requires. In response, South Carolina is suing Attorney General Eric Holder. Lawyers for groups including the NAACP and the American Civil Liberties Union have joined the trial to rebut South Carolina’s claims that its law is colorblind.

Garrard Beeney, who represented the civil rights groups, presented emails sent to and from Clemmons’ personal account between 2009 and 2011, when he was working on the law. One, from a man named Ed Koziol, used racially charged rhetoric to denounce the idea that poor, black voters might lack transportation or other resources necessary to obtain photo ID. If the legislature offered a reward for identification cards, “it would be like a swarm of bees going after a watermelon,” Koziol wrote.

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2012/08/28/163886/sc-lawmaker-admits-positive-response.html



I'm so surprised! NOT!

[WCGreen]

1. Its a fucking poll tax for those living hand to mouth...

Why doesn't the media point that out.

So if you are down on your luck or don't drive or can't afford a photo ID, you're just shit out of luck, my friend..

[myrna minx]

2. How much more proof does the Justice Department need?

[SouthernLiberal]

3. And the governor ignores the most likely form of voting fraud with a smile

We have electronic voting machines here in SC. I'm sure you all know about this kind of machine. The kind with no paper trail, and no way of verifying that votes were reported as cast. As of last year, they were still the same kind of machines they were using in 1999 when I first voted here. So they have none of any recent improvements that may have been created to prevent hacking.

People frequently complain that the machines make it difficult to confirm your vote before it is officially cast. I don't know for sure it is legal, but I have been told at the polls that there is a 2 minute maximum time to complete your vote. They enforce this even when there are many questions on the ballot. The questions may be tax proposals from the county, or amendments to the state constitution. What they all do have in common is that the first time you get to see the actual text of the question is right there in the voting booth.

I am a computer programmer, so while all the difficulties and weaknesses of these machines are obvious to me, I am not intimidated by them. And so, I know for a fact that some years ago, I voted 'no' on a question. The reported results showed that every single person in my district voted 'yes'.

So, is Voter ID going to make me any more assured that voter fraud has been prevented? No way!