Garnet & Black Magazine

On February 2, 2010, the South Carolina State Senate passed the Voter I.D. Bill which will require residents to present government issued photo identification in order to vote. Though we are brothers and agree on many things, like how curling is the best Winter Olympic sport and that our Mom makes the world’s best meatloaf, this issue has divided us. Here’s what we think:

Robert:

This bill is just another item in the ever lengthening list of South Carolina’s embarrassments. I’ve yet to hear from any sponsor of the bill what its purpose is. They claim that it will help with voter fraud, yet the South Carolina Elections Commission stated there have been ZERO cases of voter fraud in the last few years. It seems to me that this bill is designed to disenfranchise 170,000 people; that’s 7 percent of registered voters. The U.S. Justice Department has already stated it will not support the bill if it passes. The bill will additionally cut the absentee ballot voting period from 30 days to 16. Why does this period need to be shorter? What other reason could there be than State Republicans wanting less people to vote? Finally, my most important point: The DMV is a pit of bureaucratic frustration designed to piss people off. No one should be forced there unnecessarily.

Will:
I believe that the South Carolina Voter I.D. Bill can be viewed as nothing other than a legitimate effort to prevent fraudulent voting. Opponents of the Voter I.D. Bill use the lack of voter fraud cases as a reason to not pass the bill. In my opinion, this argument is not valid. The ability to vote in a fair election is a quintessential right shared by all citizens of the United States and this right should be vigorously defended, as this bill seeks to do. Opponents of the bill challenge this claim by asserting that the bill will disenfranchise the state’s registered voters who do not currently have a photo I.D.; especially the elderly, handicapped and minorities. This does not seem to be a legitimate argument considering the bill will require the DMV to provide free identification cards upon request. In order to better defend my position, I will defer to the U.S. Supreme Court. In a 2008 decision, the court ruled that an Indiana state law which would require residents to show photo I.D. in order to vote was not unconstitutional. Furthermore, Associate Justice Steven’s ruling stated that, “For most voters who need them, the inconvenience of making a trip to the BMV (Bureau of Motor Vehicles), gathering the required documents, and posing for a photograph surely does not qualify as a substantial burden on the right to vote, or even represent a significant increase over the usual burdens of voting.”

Bros & Cons updates every Monday.
For older posts, click Garnet & Blog > Current Events > Bros & Cons.