Category Archives: Network News/Events

Town halls expand Network’s voter ID campaign

Posted on by

The SC Progressive Network is holding a series of community forums titled “Voter ID and the new Jim Crow.” Network Director Brett Bursey will moderate. Each event will include a Q&A session and instructions for activists to work the issue in their community.

The forums will address the moving target of DOJ pre-clearance, and where we should put our efforts to try and stop it. The meeting will recognize photo ID as a symptom of larger problems, and will focus discussion on sharpening a strategy to address The Big Picture.

The Network is planning a statewide summit on Oct. 29 in Columbia to sharpen our focus and efforts. Details and agenda to be posted as they become available.

Call  803-808-3384 or email network@scpronet.com for details or to schedule a meeting in your area.

•  •  •

Sept. 12, Florence: 7pm at Poyner Auditorium, 319 South Dargan St.

Sept. 15, Beaufort: 6:30pm at Golden Corral, 122 Robert Smalls Pkwy. or Hwy. 170. Come early if you want to have dinner.

Sept. 20, Charleston: 7pm at ILA Hall, 1142 Morrison Dr.

Sept. 22, Greenville: 7pm at Furman University, Younts Conference Center.

Home is where your heart is

Posted on by

By Christine Johnson
SC Equality

I was frankly a little scared when I returned to South Carolina for employment in 2010. Raised in Charleston 30 years ago and recalling the discrimination my African-American friends endured, I suspected that as an open lesbian, I might face similar discrimination and lack of understanding. I knew some people would think I “chose” to be lesbian and that I was both unpatriotic and godless. I knew many would not understand the way I value family and treasure authenticity or my profound respect for the Constitution.

When I came home, however, I remembered that I was also proud of the richness of diversity, culture and tradition that makes South Carolina my true home. We celebrate arguably the best cooking in the country and the most gracious hospitality, and we know the value of simple kindness. We are diverse in race, ethnicity and faith, and when it really comes down to it, we respect one another as fellow South Carolinians.

Make no mistake, I’ve found my fair share of unkind folk. I’ve been the target of disrespectful gestures, called tasteless names and heard jokes at my expense, but mostly found that “bless your heart” is the common response to sharing my sexual orientation and work in lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender advocacy. In addition, I’ve found a LGBT community that, although challenged and discriminated against, thrives in my home state. And you know why? Because like you, South Carolina is their home too, and we share a similar adoration of this beautiful place.

People both in and out of South Carolina are surprised to learn that in 2008, the Williams Institute at UCLA Law School estimated there were 117, 500 lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered people living here. And according to the 2010 Census, there are 11, 532 same-sex couples in our state.

But the numbers shouldn’t surprise us, because there is no difference in the per capita number of homosexuals born in South Carolina than in California or New York — and apparently, home is where your heart is.

Last summer, S.C. Equality conducted a survey of more than 1,000 lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender South Carolinians, from 44 of 46 counties. More than half had lived in South Carolina for more than 20 years, 86 percent were raised Protestant, 64 percent attend church, and nearly 10 percent had served in the armed forces. So there it is: We are growing in number and love our state, are patriotic and God-fearing, and I suspect that when all is said and done, there is no constitutional or justifiable reason to treat fellow South Carolinians as less than equal under the law.

Yes, there are those who perceive homosexuality a choice and a sin according to their beliefs, and I can respect that. But we cannot grant rights, protections and entitlement to only some people based upon our religious beliefs. Our federal Constitution grants equal protections, and creating classes of people based upon discrimination is unconstitutional. There’s simply no way around it.

So, we can agree to disagree, each with individual opinions and beliefs, voting our consciences, but at the end of the day, we are all South Carolinians with hopes and dreams for our families and our futures. Although there is much that makes us different, there is so much more that makes us one. Different isn’t bad, diversity is a blessing, and for me, home absolutely is where my heart is.

Johnson is a former two-term member of the Utah House of Representatives, and is executive director of S.C. Equality, a longtime member of the SC Progressive Network.

Disenfranchising voters is not American

Posted on by

By Jaime R. Harrison
SCDP 1st Vice Chairman

My first political memory is sitting on the floor in front of the television watching the results of the 1984 Presidential election with my grandfather. I asked him hundreds of questions about the candidates, the White House, and past Presidents, and in his loving way, my grandfather attempted to answer each question to the best of his abilities.

Society would have classified my grandfather as a simple but hard-working man, a product of the segregated south. He didn’t have much money, he didn’t have much education, and he didn’t have a fancy job. But what he had and cherished was his dignity, his family, and his right to vote. It was a right that he didn’t always have — and sometimes didn’t even exercise. Nonetheless he felt it was a right that could not and would not be taken away from him.

The South Carolina Voter ID bill that was passed with GOP support and signed into law by Governor Haley, disenfranchised more than 180,000 South Carolina citizens, and if my grandfather was still alive it would have disenfranchised him as well (after having his leg amputated he no longer had a government issued Driver’s license).

Thanks to the efforts of the Democratic members of the Senate and House, the SC Progressive Network and others to oppose the bill on the grounds that it discriminates against minorities and seniors, the Department of Justice is asking for more information about the legislation.

As Americans – not as Democrats, nor as Republicans, but as Americans – we must keep the pressure on the DOJ, in the 60-day window we have to make sure the SC Voter ID bill is finally struck down. This bill not only affects our state but others across this nation, who are facing the same efforts to suppress voter participation.

As Americans, members of our armed forces have given their lives to help other nations realize the blessings of liberty and democracy. Politicians on both sides of the aisle applauded when Iraqi citizens were able to exercise the right to vote for the very first time. In Iraq, one woman stated that voting for the first time was “as if I’ve just been born” and another stated that it was “the best thing I have actually ever done in my life.”

How as a nation can we sacrifice the lives of our children so that others may enjoy the fruits and practice of democracy, but find every possible way to disenfranchise citizens on our very own soil? Our leaders should make it easier for citizens to be a part of our thriving democracy.

My grandfather passed away in 2004, and one of the last things that we did together was that I took him to cast his last vote for President. I got into politics and became a lawyer because I wanted to make a difference and prove that the American dream could work for everyone – rich or poor, black or white. Disenfranchising voters is not American, and the SC Voter ID bill is more of an American nightmare rather than the fulfillment of the American dream.

Folks like my grandfather are counting on all of us to do everything within our means to make sure that this law and others like it are not enacted. Contact the Department of Justice Civil Rights Division (vot1973c@usdoj.gov) and share your thoughts on this unjust legislation.

Feds find SC’s photo ID law inadequate

Posted on by



As state works to satisfy DOJ’s questions, SC Progressive Network will continue to educate and mobilize SC voters

By Becci Robbins
SC Progressive Network Communication Director

The US Dept. of Justice denied approval of South Carolina’s new voter ID law on Aug. 29, giving the state another 60 days to make its case. As required by the Civil Rights Act, DOJ has been reviewing the law to ensure that it does not abridge the rights of minority voters.

In its ruling, DOJ asked the state eight questions about procedures on obtaining photo voter registration cards, funding for voter education and poll worker training, and the process for casting provisional ballots when a voter has no photo ID.

The SC Progressive Network filed voter affidavits and comments with DOJ, highlighting the burdens posed on rural, poor and minority voters, and the likelihood of the law’s unequal enforcement.

DOJ raised many of the concerns the Network has about how the state will work around the burden posed by voters needing a birth certificate to get the required DMV ID card. The final version of the bill included a provision that a registered voter could obtain a photo voter registration card – pending funding – that would serve as acceptable ID without mandating a birth certificate. One camera for each county office has been funded for this purpose. The cards will be made in Columbia and mailed to voters.

In an Aug. 25 submission to DOJ, the state filed draft procedures for issuing photo voter registration cards. The plan entails issuing paper voter registration cards that a voter cannot vote with unless they have the DMV photo ID. If they don’t have the required photo ID, they must go to their county voter registration office and trade in their paper registration card for a “temporary voter registration card with a photo” that is good for 30 days. Permanent photo voter registration cards with photos will be printed by the state election office and mailed to voters.

Not only is the process burdensome to voters and election workers, it is inadequately funded. In June, $1.4 million was appropriated to cover everything from buying the cameras to mailing notices to the estimated 200,000 registered SC voters with no photo ID, to educating the public and poll workers on the new law.

As confusion and costs over the ID law mount, we should remember that no one has ever been caught impersonating another voter at the polls in SC, the sort of fraud this law was designed to prevent. Rather than protecting the sanctity of the vote, as proponents claim, the new requirement does nothing but make it harder to vote in South Carolina. For some voters, the burden will be too high.

While the state digs itself deeper into a hole of its own making, the Progressive Network will continue to educate voters and expand an organized coalition of citizens to fight this and other laws compromising voting rights in South Carolina.

Network to show documentary of civil rights icon Modjeska Simkins at Jubilee Festival

Posted on by

During Historic Columbia Foundation’s annual Jubilee Festival of Heritage on Saturday, Aug. 27, the SC Progressive Network will screen an hour-long SC ETV documentary about the life of Modjeska Simkins, the state’s leading civil rights activist in South Carolina until her passing in 1991. The three shows are free and open to the public.

“Making a Way Out of No Way”

Show times @ 1:30, 2:30 & 3:30

at the historic Modjeska Simkins House, 2025 Marion St. (at Elmwood)

The Network will also have a table at the Jubilee Festival, which runs from 11am-5pm outside the Mann-Simons Cottage, 1403 Richland St. Stop by and say hello.

AG opinion compounds voter photo ID confusion; does not delay implementation of SC law

Posted on by

By Becci Robbins
SC Progressive Network Communications Director

Contrary to a headline published widely Aug. 16, implementation of South Carolina’s new photo ID law will not be delayed.

The Associated Press reported that a recent Attorney General’s opinion on what constitutes a “reasonable impediment” to obtaining the required photo ID meant the new law would be put on hold. The AG was responding to a request by state Election Commission Director Marci Andino, who asked for clarification on “the meaning of reasonable impediment” and whether the clause would apply to voters in this year’s municipal elections.

“We can’t spend any money on the new photo voter registration cards until, and unless, the US Department of Justice preclears the law,” Andino said. She asked the AG whether the “reasonable impediment” clause would apply to all voters if the new system was not in place.

The AG’s opinion is that the new law allows voters with a “valid reason” to vote without the photo ID, and that a failure to implement the new system would indeed be a valid reason. Such voters will be required to fill out an affidavit stating the reason, and then vote a provisional ballot.

“There is nothing in the Attorney General’s opinion that delays any aspect of the new voter ID law,” said SC Progressive Network Director Brett Bursey. The opinion states that “any valid reason, beyond the voter’s control” is a “reasonable impediment.”

The confusion portends trouble in upcoming elections.

“This law was ill-conceived, poorly written, under-funded and hastily implemented,” Bursey said. “Rather than ensuring the integrity of the vote, as proponents of the new law claim, it ensures that voting will be more difficult. The AG’s opinion substantiates our concerns.”

To obtain a state-issued photo ID requires a birth certificate in the voter’s current name, or a paper trail showing legal name changes. The new law contains a provision for county election boards to provide photo voter registration cards to those already registered, waiving the requirement of a birth certificate.

“While it is good that the state is trying to work around the requirement of a birth certificate to vote,” Bursey said, “the old system worked fine, and there is no reason to subject voters to the burdens and expense of this law.”


Delores Freelon is one of 178,000 registered SC voters without a photo ID. She’s had serious problems meeting the new requirements.

Making the 178,000 currently registered voters without a photo ID cast a provisional paper ballot will mean longer lines for voters and headaches for poll workers. Each voter will have to fill out an affidavit, and then the 46 politically appointed county boards of elections will have to examine each ballot and decide if the vote should be counted.

The SC Progressive Network has been gathering comments from voters around the state having trouble meeting the new ID requirements and submitting them to the US Department of Justice. DOJ has until Aug. 29 to decide whether the law violates the Voting Rights Act. Because of South Carolina’s history of racial discrimination, all changes to voting laws must be pre-cleared by DOJ.

For background on the photo ID law and information on commenting to DOJ, see scpronet.com or call 803-808-3384.

Movie Night to feature “The Shock Doctrine”

Posted on by

Progressive Network Movie Night
Aug. 23, 7pm
Conundrum Music Hall, 626 Meeting St. West Columbia
Free and open to the public

Directed by award-winning filmmakers Michael Winterbottom and Mat Whitecross (co-directors of THE ROAD TO GUANTANAMO), THE SHOCK DOCTRINE is a feature (94 min.) documentary based on Naomi Klein’s bestselling book of the same name. THE SHOCK DOCTRINE is a gripping and incisive deconstruction of how free market policies have come to dominate the world through the exploitation of disaster-shocked people and countries. THE SHOCK DOCTRINE radically challenges the myth that the global free market triumphed on the wings of democracy.

Both the film and the book argue that both big business and governments overexploit natural disasters, economic crises and wars with the very aim of pushing through radical free market policies. Naomi Klein calls this “disaster capitalism.” The film traces the doctrine’s beginnings in the radical theories of Milton Friedman at the University of Chicago, and its subsequent implementation over the past 40 years in countries as disparate as Augusto Pinochet’s Chile, Boris Yeltsin’s Russia, Margaret Thatcher’s Great Britain, and most recently through the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq.

Save SC embarrassment, money: eliminate lieutenant governor

Posted on by

By John Crangle
SC Common Cause

The time is long past when the do-nothing job of lieutenant governor should be abolished. The taxpayers of South Carolina waste $1 million per year to have a part-time employee wear a purple robe and carry a wooden mallet three days a week from January to June and wait, usually in vain, for the governor to die, resign or get impeached.

Once in great while he votes to break a tie in the Senate. Of course, there is no reason a tie must be broken; a tie means the motion fails.

To keep hyperactive Andre Bauer busy, the Office of Aging was shifted to the lieutenant governor’s office. Of course, there is no reason a state agency could not do the job.

Otherwise, too often the lieutenant governor gets in trouble.

The current and previous lieutenant governors have been an embarrassment to the state. Ken Ard is the worst of the lot. His predecessor, Andre Bauer, was more the victim of low impulse control; Andre’s wild driving in a state car was more like a teenage kid on a Saturday night than a crooked politician.

There was a time (perhaps when the South Carolina Constitution was written in 1895) when the lieutenant governor might do something. Governors did die — life expectancy in the 1800s was only 40. And from 1900 to 1970, eight lieutenant governors were later elected as governors, but it has not happened since then; and only one lieutenant governor in the past half century has replaced a governor, when Gov. Donald Russell resigned in 1965.

The job has no future, as Adam Bean in a recent article clearly explained: Seven of the past eight lieutenant governors all tried and failed in their runs for governor; and the eighth failed in her run for Congress. Except for Earle Morris, it was the end of their political careers; and Morris ended his career in prison.

In the future, candidates for lieutenant governor will probably all be like Ken Ard — obscure figures with a thin resume. As the influence of newspapers and local television news fades, the monopolistic power of television political advertising has become blinding. This means that the candidate with little or no public record has a greater advantage than before. Whereas experienced state legislators have had to make many difficult votes on hard tax-and-spending issues, both Ard and Nikki Haley showed that doing nothing in public office is really an asset, allowing the candidate to create a Captain America persona of imaginary powers without showing the scar tissue of decades of political combat.

With enough campaign money, a candidate can buy himself a fake political identity just like he can buy a fake ID card. Big money buys political consultants, scripted TV ads and lots of air time. Even if the candidate is too homely to be fixed by the make-up lady, he can be computer enhanced and programmed on TV; the voters don’t have X-ray vision to see inside an empty head.

There will be no need for a lieutenant governor in the future as there is no need now. If the governor goes, the Constitution provides a line of succession to the president pro tem of the Senate and the speaker of the House. The latter two officers are well-equipped to take over. They have served many years in the General Assembly, and they have been selected by their colleagues, who have confidence in their ability and leadership. Such people (currently Sen. Glenn McConnell and Rep. Bobby Harrell) are much better equipped to be governor than Ken Ard, whose only prior office was as Florence County councilman. We can be assured that the president pro tem and the speaker will be able to work constructively with other legislators.

Eliminating the position of lieutenant governor will require a constitutional amendment. Both the Senate and House must vote by two-thirds super majorities to amend. At the next general election, the voters in referendum must approve the proposed amendment by majority vote; finally, both houses must vote by simple majority to ratify the amendment. This done, the useless office of lieutenant governor is thrown on the trash heap of history, and the taxpayers will save $1 million per year and whatever embarrassment and cheap laughs the future might otherwise hold.

John Crangle is a Columbia attorney and chair of Common Cause South Carolina, a longtime member of the SC Progressive Network.

Robin Hood in reverse in the US: seven examples

Posted on by

by Bill Quigley
Truthout

The rich have been getting richer and the poor and the middle class have been getting poorer in the US recently. Here are seven examples.

  1. Between 1948 and 1979, the richest 10 percent of families in the US claimed 33 percent of average income growth. Between 2000 and 2007, the richest 10 percent claimed a full 100 percent of average income growth in the US, according to the Economic Policy Institute.
  2. Business taxes were cut from 46 to 34 percent 25 years ago, according to ProPublica. But today, 115 of the big 500 companies listed on Standard and Poor’s stock index paid federal and other taxes of less than 20 percent over the last five years, according to David Leonhardt of The New York Times.
  3. General Electric’s tax rate for last year was seven percent, according to ProPublica.
  4. The top five percent of US households claim 63 percent of the entire country’s wealth. The bottom 80 percent hold just 13 percent of the growth, according to the Economic Policy Institute.
  5. Last year, John Paulson, a hedge fund manager “earned” $4.9 billion, according to The New York Times. Ten years ago, it took 25 such managers to collectively earn that much. Last year, the top 25 hedge fund managers pocketed (a much better word) a total of $22 billion. It would take over 440,000 people each earning $50,000 a year to match that amount.
  6. A federal development program intended to help poor communities, the New Market Tax Credit, instead funnels up to ten billion taxpayer dollars to big corporations like JPMorgan Chase & Co, Goldman Sachs and Prudential to build luxury hotels, office buildings and a car museum. Bloomberg Markets Magazine pointed to the Blackstone Hotel in Chicago, which was renovated for $116 million. Prudential got $15.6 million in tax credit from the US Treasury for helping fund the project because the hotel was in a census zone that included two colleges that housed a lot of lower income students.
  7. According to the Financial Times, there are now more people living in poverty in the US than at any time in the last 50 years. Foreclosure filings were nearly four million in 2010, up 23 percent since 2008, according to RealtyTrac.

Now’s your chance to weigh in with US Justice Dept. on SC’s new voter photo ID law

Posted on by

If you, or someone you know has a hard time getting a state issued photo ID, download a Dept. of Justice Comment Form. Fill it out online and print it out (this form can not be saved and must be printed). Sign it and follow the mailing instructions at the end of the form.

Anyone can comment directly to the Department of Justice through email to: vot1973c@usdoj.gov. Put in subject line: “2011-2495: Comment”. Or comments can be mailed to:
Chief, Voting Section, Civil Rights Division
Room 7254 – NWB, Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W., Washington, DC 20530
(Include the submission # 2011-2495 at the top of your letter.)
Or fax comments to the Dept. of Justice at 202-616-9514 with the same heading.

Got questions? Call the SC Progressive Network at 803-808-3384.