South Carolina: Two Spartanburg County lawmakers to push bill to close primaries | GoUpstate.com

Two Spartanburg County legislators plan to pick up the fight for closed primaries when they reconvene with their colleagues in January. Rep. Bill Chumley, R-Woodruff, and Sen. Lee Bright, R-Roebuck, said they plan to pre-file legislation that would close the primaries. South Carolina voters would have to register by party and vote only in their own party’s primary. “I think Republican-minded people should choose our candidate and not have it part of a partisan strategy of who the other party would like to run against,” Chumley said. Such legislation has died in the Legislature before, but the lawmakers said they are undeterred and are optimistic this year could be different. “It’s something the party’s been pushing for a while,” Bright said. “I’m starting to hear it from people outside the establishment.”

South Carolina: Strong Mayor Vote Bumped to December | Free-Times.com

After more than three hours of debate and public comment at a special meeting Wednesday night, Columbia City Council voted 4-3 not to put a strong mayor referendum on the November ballot. Instead, they’ll hold a special election Dec. 3 — but only if and when they receive a certified petition from the Richland County Election Commission. Petition gatherers presented a petition calling for a referendum to the election commission last Tuesday, but the commission hasn’t yet certified it. Councilman Sam Davis was the swing vote last week to give initial approval to a November vote, but said he’d only give it final approval if the petition was certified.

South Carolina: Judge: Merger of Richland County election offices unconstitutional | The State

A SC circuit court judge issued a blunt ruling that the 2011 merger of Richland County’s elections and voter registration offices violates the state constitution. “The General Assembly has returned to its unconstitutional practice of enacting special and single county legislation,” Judge Thomas Cooper wrote in an order made public Thursday. “The Supreme Court has repeatedly found such actions of the General Assembly unconstitutional.” Observers said his ruling voids the 2011 law that reorganized separate county offices and ramped up spending in the year leading up to the November 2012 election, a presidential vote that turned out to be one of the biggest disasters in state history.

South Carolina: Richland County Elections Director Concerned About Voting Machine Storage | wltx.com

The new director of elections in Richland County has yet to case a vote, but says his storage space for voting machines could hurt his ability to do so. “The county has done a good job of repairing the warehouse, however, it still leaks. There’s still insulation hanging from the roof,” said Howard Jackson.  “So, it’s not very good working conditions.” Jackson spoke about the conditions during an elections board meeting Tuesday.  He said members of county council and the County Administrator have toured the warehouse recently. The board didn’t advertise the location of the warehouse, saying security there is cause for concern.

South Carolina: Four Pinocchios: The case of ‘zombie’ voters in South Carolina | The Washington Post

“We just recently learned that there are over 900 individuals who had died before the election (and had voted) and at least 600 of those individuals had died way outside the window that an absentee ballot could have been sent, so we know for a fact that there are deceased people whose identities are being used in elections in South Carolina.”— South Carolina Attorney General Alan Wilson (R), on Fox News, Jan. 21, 2012

“We found out that there were over 900 people who died and then subsequently voted. That number could be even higher than that.” — Wilson, on Fox News, Jan. 12, 2012

“Without Photo ID, let’s be clear, I don’t want dead people voting in the state of South Carolina.” — South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley (R), in an interview that aired on Fox News, April 21, 2012

We don’t normally delve into statements so long after they were made, but this is an unusual case, brought to our attention by a reader. Take a look at the rather definitive statements made by South Carolina Attorney General Alan Wilson, such as “we know for a fact that there are deceased people whose identities are being used in elections in South Carolina.” This was a rather shocking claim, which stemmed from allegations made by Kevin Schwedo, executive director of the South Carolina Department of Motor Vehicles. (“Well over 900 individuals appear to have voted after they died.”) One state lawmaker famously declared: “We must have certainty in South Carolina that zombies aren’t voting.”

South Carolina: Nikki Haley Takes Heat After Report Blows Up ‘Bogus’ Voter Fraud Claims | Huffington Post

For years, South Carolina Republicans have complained about the names of dead voters being used to cast ballots in a broad voter fraud scheme. Now that a recent report by the State Law Enforcement Division has blown up those claims, unable to find a single example of a “zombie voter” committing fraud, one Democrat is demanding that Gov. Nikki Haley (R) apologize for her party’s “bogus” crusade. In a statement released Monday, House Democratic Leader Todd Rutherford accused Haley and other Republicans of deliberately and deceptively pushing false claims for political gain. “Now we have the proof that shows that the accusations of voter fraud were completely without merit,” said Rutherford. “And once again, South Carolina’s taxpayers have to foot the bill for the millions of dollars unnecessarily spent as a result of Governor Haley and her colleagues’ incompetence and blind-ideology.”

South Carolina: No widespread voter fraud found in South Carolina elections | The Augusta Chronicle

No one intentionally cast a ballot in South Carolina using the names of dead people in recent elections, despite allegations to the contrary, according to a State Law Enforce­ment Division report. Attorney General Alan Wil­son asked the agency to investigate last year after the Department of Motor Vehi­cles determined in early 2012 that more than 900 people listed as deceased had voted in recent years. Wilson called the number “alarming” and said it “clearly necessitates an investigation into criminal activity.” State Election Commis­sion Director Marci Andino had her staff look at questionable votes from the Novem­ber 2010 general election, or about 200 of the more than 900 votes total – information that was also ultimately analyzed by SLED. Nearly half of the issues could be attributed to clerical errors, while several dozen resulted from DMV officials running Social Secur­ity numbers of voters against dead people but not seeing whether the names matched.

South Carolina: Richland County Council agrees to pay $100K in election-related lawyers’ fees | The State

RICHLAND COUNTY, SC — Richland County Council finally agreed Tuesday to pay more than $100,000 in bills for the lawyers who cleaned up the county’s November election mess. But not until after some unusual procedural moves, a change of heart by two members and the chairman’s threat to enforce a time limit for Councilman Bill Malinowski as he questioned charges for travel and telephone conversations. The council, which had put off the decision twice before, agreed to pay $72,423.10 for lawyer Steve Hamm to investigate Election Day problems and recommend how to fix them; $9,348.75 for lawyer John Nichols, who represented demoted elections director Lillian McBride; and $17,924.20 for Helen McFadden, who kept the election results from being overturned in court. “Who didn’t have a lawyer?” Councilman Greg Pearce muttered at one point.

South Carolina: Eight Months Later, Richland County Election Mess Explained – Kind of | Free Times

The man who taxpayers are paying more than $70,000 to investigate what caused Richland County’s election meltdown eight months ago explained his final findings to a nearly empty room last week. Attorney Steve Hamm presented his completed report to the county board of elections June 26. There were hardly any bombshells, nor members of the public there to hear them had they dropped. Perhaps the biggest news was that Hamm confirmed he’d alerted law enforcement to the actions of a male part-time elections agency employee he said had “sabotaged” the number of voting machines deployed to precincts, causing long lines and some voters to leave before casting ballots. The Nov. 6 county election was plagued by snarled lines, broken machines — too few of them — and ballots that were never even counted. Much of that can be attributed to the actions of one unnamed person, Hamm said, although he wagged a finger at the elections board and agency management for not catching the problems early. That one elections worker, Hamm found in his investigation, had coaxed another employee into writing down wrong numbers on a spreadsheet, drastically reducing the number of voting machines that would be allocated to Election Day precincts. Hamm said he doesn’t know why the unnamed man might have wanted to choke off the number of voting machines on Election Day. He said he wondered if law enforcement might be able to find out.

South Carolina: Voting laws no longer require federal approval | The Island Packet

South Carolina and other areas with histories of discriminatory voting practices no longer need federal approval to change their voting laws — at least for now. That oversight ended Tuesday as the U.S. Supreme Court struck down as unconstitutional part of the 1965 Voting Rights Act, ruling in the case of an Alabama county that sued the U.S. attorney general in 2010, arguing voting laws meant to prevent discrimination are outdated. In its 5-4 decision, the court struck down a formula that determined whether states or other jurisdictions should be required to get federal approval before making changes to their voting laws — based, in part, on their discrimination in the 1960s and ’70s.

South Carolina: Governor Haley signs ballot access measure | WCIV

On the heels of the 2012 election, a team of Republican state senators joined former Attorney General Henry McMaster at Gov. Nikki Haley’s signing of the Equal Access to the Ballot Act. The Senate bill aimed to correct issues that prevented more than 200 candidates from being booted off ballots across the state. Last year, elections officials said the candidates did not properly file paperwork to join the races. “When you run for office, it’s a true sacrifice, it’s an individual sacrifice, it’s a family sacrifice, and you have to fight,” said Gov. Nikki Haley. “What we saw last election was one of the most painful things you can ever see in an election – you had 200 people wanting to fight, wanting to serve and they were denied access to the ballot. With this bill we are saying that no party or individual will ever get in the way of someone running for office. We are fighters in South Carolina and we want more fighters.”

South Carolina: American Party tries to grab hold in South Carolina | Live5News

South Carolina voters may have another option on the ballot in 2014 as the American Party tries to grab hold in the state. A Democrat and Republican are backing the same party. “It’s not just another party,” says Dr. James Rex, co-founder of the American Party. “It’s a much different approach to politics, and I think it’s the approach that more and more Americans are saying they want to see. We want to be the problem-solving party,” says Dr. Oscar Lovelace, also a co-founder of the American Party. “We want to engage people in public policy.” Rex and Lovelace know public policy and politics well. Rex, a Democrat, was elected superintendent of education for the state in 2006 and Lovelace, a Republican, is a physician who sought his party’s nomination for governor in 2006 as well.

South Carolina: Election law paperwork compromise advances | The State

Candidates for public office would not be disqualified for improperly filing paperwork, according to a compromise approved by a legislative committee Tuesday. The proposal, S.2, comes after a state Supreme Court decision last year that led to the removal of more than 200 candidates from ballots statewide because they did not file a hard copy of their statements of economic interest, as the law requires. The fiasco ended up costing the state and political parties thousands of dollars in lawsuits. Because the court decision did not impact incumbents, it aborted tough re-election contests that had been expected for some moderate Republicans. The decision also sowed seeds of distrust among voters, prompting some candidates to run on a platform of reforming the state’s ethics laws.

South Carolina: Charleston County considering a switch to paper ballots | Charleston City Paper

Before the start of last Wednesday’s sparsely attended Charleston County Board of Elections and Voter Registration meeting, Frank Heindel turned around in his seat to ask a question of the woman sitting behind him: “You don’t think I’m crazy, do you?” Heindel, a Mt. Pleasant resident, has almost single-handedly taken up the crusade of reforming South Carolina’s electronic voting system, and the idea he presented to the BEVR last week might sound crazy to the uninitiated: He wants the county to go back to using paper ballots. “I believe every citizen in Charleston County deserves an election process that is transparent, conforms to existing laws, and can produce an audit paper trail,” Heindel said. The board heard him out, and it voted to have its executive director look into new options for the November 2013 general elections — including new electronic machines and old-school paper ballots read by optical scanners. Heindel’s full proposal was that the county conduct some, if not all, local elections this November without using its iVotronic touchscreen voting machines, which the election-integrity hellraiser says are flawed due to problems like vulnerability to virus attacks and a lack of hard-copy verification. Heindel also asked the board to require a post-election audit be conducted.

South Carolina: Richland Council balks at paying ‘election mess’ legal fees | The State

Richland County should refuse to pay for the hours charged by a lawyer who helped negotiate a new county job for demoted elections director Lillian McBride, some on County Council said Wednesday. Others said Richland County has no obligation to cover any of the legal bills — more than $153,000 — for investigating what went wrong during Nov. 6 balloting and defending the election results in court. Councilman Seth Rose objected to the legal department’s request for the money, saying he’s frustrated the county had to boost funding for the elections office last year even though county officials have no hand in supervising its performance. That job goes to local legislators, who also set the funding. Ultimately, council members deferred action.

South Carolina: Justice Department to monitor South Carolina congressional election | Reuters

The Justice Department will monitor voting in Charleston County, South Carolina, in Tuesday’s special election to fill a House of Representatives seat, the department said on Monday. Former South Carolina Republican Governor Mark Sanford is facing Democratic newcomer Elizabeth Colbert Busch, sister of television political satirist Stephen Colbert, in the First District House race. The Justice Department said in a statement it was monitoring the election under provisions of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. The law bars election discrimination on the basis of race, color or membership in a minority language group.

South Carolina: Botched Richland election cost taxpayers nearly $153,000 in legal fees | The State

Richland County taxpayers are footing the bill for nearly $153,000 in legal fees to investigate what went so wrong in the Nov. 6 election and to fend off protests that threatened to unravel the results. The expenses, detailed in a 46-page packet obtained by The State newspaper under South Carolina’s open-records law, include:

• $72,423.10 for lawyer Steve Hamm, hired at the request of the Richland County Board of Elections & Voter Registration, to uncover the web of mistakes that resulted in waits of up to seven hours for voters and a cache of misplaced ballots.

• $9,461.25 for a lawyer to represent the interests of elections director Lillian McBride, viewed as incompetent by her critics and as a scapegoat by her defenders. She since has been demoted to a deputy director.

South Carolina: “I Voted?” Documentary Examines South Carolina’s Voting System | wltx.com

A Los Angeles filmmaker’s documentary isn’t giving South Carolina’s voting system rave reviews. “It really is incumbent upon us, ‘We the people,’ to own our elections,” Filmmaker Jason Smith said. Jason Smith wasn’t a big fan of politics until 2010. “I didn’t know anything about election integrity prior to what happened with this Alvin Greene story,” he said. After Greene won the state’s Democratic primary for a U.S. Senate seat in 2010 without much of a campaign, Smith took a hard look at voting integrity.

South Carolina: House throws its vote behind limited voting | Times and Democrat

South Carolinians on both sides of the voter-identification battle claimed victory in a federal court ruling in 2012. The statute requiring voters to present state-approved photo identification in order to cast ballots in elections and primaries was upheld by a panel of three federal judges. Enforcement was delayed until after the 2012 election. Republicans were happy because the GOP-dominated Legislature had its efforts vindicated, with the judges finding no discriminatory intent behind the law. Democrats were happy because the law challenged by the U.S. Justice Department as discriminatory to minorities and the elderly did not impact Election Day 2012. Important now is how the new law is being applied in the state. No one is screaming because the court diluted the ID requirement. In virtually any instance, a voter is able to cast a ballot. Judges made clear that ensuring just that was integral to their decision.

South Carolina: Early-voting bill advances in House despite Democratic opposition | Anderson Independent Mail

The GOP-controlled South Carolina House of Representatives on Thursday approved an early-voting bill that Democrats say would give people less time to cast their ballots before an election. The measure, sponsored by Republican Rep. Alan Clemmons of Myrtle Beach, calls for opening early-voting centers in each South Carolina county during a nine-day window before elections. Democrats complained that the legislation would eliminate the existing one-month period before elections when voters can complete absentee ballots in person. “We should not do anything to deny free and ready access to the vote,” said Rep. Joe Neal, a Democrat from Hopkins. “Let me be clear: This is designed to suppress the vote in South Carolina.”

South Carolina: Stephen Colbert endorses sister Elizabeth Colbert Busch: Do campaign finance laws apply? | Slate Magazine

As the faux-conservative Colbert Report host, Stephen Colbert has lampooned campaign finance laws and the U.S. electoral system by starting his own super PAC and announcing bids for the presidency and “the president of the United States of South Carolina.” But another Colbert—this one with a hard t at the end—is also vying for the political spotlight: Elizabeth Colbert Busch, Stephen’s older sister, who’s facing off against avid Appalachian Trail hiker and former South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford in a May 7 special election for South Carolina’s 1st Congressional District. Colbert has twice devoted show segments to his sister’s campaign, including one endorsing her candidacy, and has mocked Sanford on countless occasions. With the show’s nightly viewership of 1.5 million and the documented “Colbert bump” in a politician’s support after an appearance, is Colbert violating election laws by blending his hosting role with his sister’s campaign?

South Carolina: Primary process splits GOP | The Greenville News

South Carolina Republicans who want to block Democrats from voting in GOP primaries have been unable to persuade state lawmakers to change election law, and they’re stalled in federal court. Now they’re turning to party rules, trying to line up enough delegates to make a big switch in GOP practice: Picking nominees through a vote of activists at a state convention in 2014 instead of through the current open primary in which anyone can vote. Favoring the change, which would have to be approved by 75 percent of delegates at a state convention, are some activists who have long complained that the current system facilitates the nomination of so-called RINOS – or Republicans in Name Only. These activists argue that non-Republicans must be kept from voting in GOP primaries if the party is going to put forward nominees who reflect the conservative values of its rank and file. But longtime Republicans who helped build the state party over the years say the current system has served the GOP well.

South Carolina: Report: Updating electronic voting machines would cost $17.3 million | The State

South Carolina’s electronic voting machines do not produce hard copies of votes, and it would cost taxpayers $17.3 million to add that capability to the state’s existing machines, according to a report by the Legislative Audit Council. “The audit process in South Carolina is limited by the absence of a voter verifiable paper audit trail,” the report said. The report notes that “without paper ballots, the reconstruction of the votes cast is not possible.” But the report does not give a recommendation on whether the state should update its electronic voting machines to produce a hard copy of votes. The report notes the paper ballots “undermines the voting access of people with disabilities” and that hand counting ballots always introduces the possibility of “human error.”

South Carolina: Review: South Carolina voting machines not certified by federal EAC | MidlandsConnect.com

A review released by the South Carolina General Assembly Legislative Audit Council says voting machines used in South Carolina are not certified by a federal Election Assistance Commission (EAC). The 62-page report breaks down where the state stands with current voting machines, evaluates training requirements and looks at alternatives to the current voting machines. The review, which was requested by the former President Pro Tempore of the South Carolina Senate, Glenn McConnell, goes on to say the machines South Carolina uses are not certified by the EAC and do not produce paper audit trails. However, South Carolina’s requirements meet the minimum requirements in the Help America Vote Act. The EAC was established in 2002 after Congress passed the Help America Vote Act. According to the review, the EAC is without its four commissioners and has not revised the 2005 Voluntary Voting System Guidelines. The report also says an EAC official claims the lack of commissioners does not affect the testing and certification of voting systems except in accrediting new test laboratories or if a voting system manufactureer wants to appeal a decertification deicision.

South Carolina: Grooms concedes, but recount set in GOP House race | Rock Hill Herald

Former Gov. Mark Sanford will likely face former Charleston County councilman Curtis Bostic in a GOP runoff for an open congressional seat, after state Sen. Larry Grooms conceded second place Wednesday to Bostic. Grooms conceded in the crowded GOP primary in South Carolina’s 1st Congressional District even though a recount of the votes, required by state law, will be held later this week. In unofficial returns Tuesday, Bostic edged out Grooms for second place by 493 votes. Sanford was the top vote-getter among Republicans. “The margin is too big to recover from, but state law will still govern the mandatory recount,” Grooms said Wednesday. “It’s highly, highly unlikely that any errors could overturn a 400-vote margin.”

South Carolina: Senators stall proof of citizenship requirement to vote | The State

A bill that would require people to provide proof of citizenship before registering to vote was delayed Wednesday in the Senate. Three groups opposed the bill, but a ticking clock and the U.S. Supreme Court were more responsible for the hold up. The Supreme Court heard arguments this week on a similar law in Arizona, and Sen. Chip Campsen, a Charleston Republican who sponsored the S.C. bill, said he would prefer to wait on the high court’s decision before moving ahead. He also continued the bill’s consideration because the subcommittee ran out of time before finishing its discussion.

South Carolina: State Officials Divided on Challenge to Voting Rights Act | wltx.com

Aggressive enforcement of the 1965 Voting Rights Act transformed American politics, especially in the South, by making sure minorities had a clear path to the ballot box and an equal shot at public service. Forty-eight years later, after the re-election of an African-American president, the heart of that law is on trial. The Supreme Court will hear oral arguments Feb. 27 in a case that is sure to ignite a national debate over how far the country has progressed on racial issues and whether minority voters still need extra protection. State officials in South Carolina, where one of the first challenges to the Voting Right Act originated in the 1960s, are split in how they see the most recent case. The case began when Shelby County, Ala., opposed by the Justice Department and civil rights groups, asked courts to declare two key sections of the Voting Rights Act unconstitutional.

South Carolina: Tug-of-War at State House Stopping Early Voting | wltx.com

Lawmakers says a tug-of-war between bills in the Senate is standing in the way of early voting. Senators on of both sides of the aisle have called for changes to make true early voting a reality in South Carolina, but the senate bill could face some setbacks if nothing happens soon. If early voting does not pass Tuesday, another piece of legislation will take the front seat, pushing the bill back on the calendar. “I thought we had it very close to being resolved, every close, but it just fell apart,” said Senate President John Courson. The last few days in session senators have struggled to advance the bill that would allow South Carolinians to head to the polls and cast their ballots early, but failed deals have stalled that process.

South Carolina: Election bill details unclear, but generally well-received | Aiken Standard

Reaction generally was positive Tuesday to legislation that would put Aiken County’s Elections Office under the day-to-day supervision of the County Council. However, many of the people who would be affected by the bill said they weren’t aware of it until recently, so they still were trying to learn about all its provisions and understand how they would work. “I didn’t know the details of the legislation until (Tuesday) morning,” said County Administrator Clay Killian. “I think it could be a good thing because you would have more direct daily supervision of the office. The delegation members are obviously going to be in Columbia three days a week during the legislative session, and that creates logistical issues for them. But if (elections office employees) do work for the County Council, the way the bill is written now, there is somebody here they can go to for assistance on a regular basis as opposed to having to wait until somebody is available.” The legislative delegation discussed the bill during its meeting Monday evening.

South Carolina: Early-voting bill advances in South Carolina Senate committee | Anderson Independent Mail

Legislation creating a one-week early-voting period in South Carolina sailed through a key state Senate committee Tuesday. “People are used to convenience in their lives,” said Sen. Bradley Hutto of Orangeburg, who is one of 18 Senate Democrats sponsoring the early-voting bill that was considered Tuesday by the Senate Judiciary Committee. “That is why banks have drive-through lanes.” The measure that members of the GOP-controlled panel approved by an 18-2 vote would allow South Carolina voters to start casting ballots 10 days before an election. The early-voting period would end three days before an election. According to the bill’s provisions, each county would open at least one and as many as five early-voting polling places.