By Becci Robbins
SC Progressive Network Communications Director

Gov. Nikki Haley today signed into law a bill that will mandate people have a photo ID to vote.

The SC Progressive Network and other voting rights advocates have been fighting this unnecessary law for four years, arguing that it is a solution in search of a problem.

“This law will prevent thousands of South Carolinians from voting,” said Network Director Brett Bursey. “There is no evidence of anyone ever having pretended to be someone else at the polls. The clear intent of this law — passed by a Republican party-line vote — is to suppress the vote of poor people and minorities, who historically vote Democrat.”

“The people here celebrating the signing of this bill – Gov. Haley, Rep. Clemmons, Sen. Peeler – none of them have ever experienced the racial discrimination that kept many people in Orangeburg from voting,” said Rep. Bakari Sellers (D-Orangeburg). “Racial discrimination is not something from the distant past, and this bill insures it will happen in the immediate future.” Sellers’ father was shot during a protest against segregation in Orangeburg in 1968.

Members of the SC Legislative Black Caucus speak against the bill. More photos here.

The SC Election Commission found that 178,175 citizens have voter registration cards that do not have a state- issued photo ID. The top 15 counties, by percentage of voters without photo ID, all have a majority of minority population that historically vote Democrat. In Richland County alone, 18,865 voters do not have state-issued photo ID.

The Progressive Network will be gathering affidavits documenting the difficulties and expenses of those attempting to get photo IDs. These affidavits will be submitted to the US Justice Department as it considers whether the law disenfranchises minority voters. There is a 60-day window to present comments. Due to a history of racial discrimination, South Carolina must have all laws that affect voting rights “pre-cleared” by the US Justice Department.

While three other pre-clearance states (AZ, GA, LA) have gotten Justice Department approval for their photo ID laws, the laws in these states are not as restrictive as South Carolina’s. The other states allow voters to obtain photo IDs with documents ranging from tax forms to payment stubs.

“We are calling on people who don’t have photo IDs to begin the process of getting one now,” said Network Co-chair Virginia Sanders. “We need to document the difficulties and expenses within the next 60 days, so don’t wait until the next election time comes around.”

The Dept of Motor Vehicles requires a birth certificate, or other government-issued ID, in order to obtain a state-issued ID card. DHEC requires a state- or federal-issued photo ID to get a birth certificate.

“We are working with a group in Sumter County that has already found eight registered voters having serious difficulty getting a photo ID,” Sanders said. “Some don’t have a birth certificate and weren’t born in a hospital. Others are being told they will have to go to court to get their names changed if it was misspelled on their birth certificate. The legal hoops they have to jump through are expensive. This is, in effect, a poll tax.”

DHEC advises citizens they can go online to “VitalCheck” to get a copy of their birth certificate. To use this service, one has to have a computer, email address, phone number and one of four major credit cards. The average cost for this service is $30.

Anyone having difficulty in obtaining a photo ID should contact the SC Progressive Network at 803-808-3384 or network@scpronet.com.

By Hoyt Wheeler, West Columbia

Unions are in the news. Protesters by the thousands contest the repeal of public employee bargaining rights in Wisconsin and Ohio. Legislators in South Carolina continue to propose new ways to prevent the growth of union rights in our state. But is this good public policy?

Since the 1880s, South Carolina has pursued a strategy of industrial development that has emphasized offering cheap, docile labor to employers.

The paternalism of the textile companies was benevolent, but only if the workers avoided acting together in opposition to management. That was met by strenuous and often brutal repression. This is the historic legacy of industrialism in South Carolina.

Today S.C. employers have suppressed the efforts of most employees to gather together to collectively assert their rights and interests through labor unions. Those who dare to express disagreement with anti-union practices and laws are subjected to pressure and, if possible, punishment. Our governor declares herself committed to opposing unions. Yet the right to bargain collectively is internationally recognized as a fundamental human right, giving workers dignity at the workplace and the prospect of a decent income. It is the polar opposite of the old practice of human slavery that has long poisoned South Carolina’s society and culture.

A symptom of the great power of our union-averse corporate community is the spate of anti-union legislation making its way through our Legislature. Last year we had a state constitutional amendment that provided that all matters of employee representation would be decided by secret ballot, despite the fact that the federal authority takes precedence in labor matters. A bill currently making its way through the Legislature would exempt S.C. employers from complying with a proposed federal requirement that they post a notice informing their employees of their legal rights regarding unions. I believe such laws violate the U.S. Constitution.

But what would be the consequence if these attempts to stave off unionization were to fail? Well, to begin with, union workers make more money than non-union workers, and are much more likely to have good health insurance and a solid pension. This would be good for the unionized workers, which in turn would create a demand for more products and services in the state. Instead of benefits trickling down from the wealthy, the prosperity of the many would percolate up to benefit all of us. Perhaps more importantly, collective bargaining agreements guarantee just treatment to employees. Without a union contract, an employee can be fired unless she can prove discrimination on the basis of race, sex or other prohibited grounds. A unionized worker can be terminated only for proven just cause, or laid off if there is no work available.

With the possible exception of an odd case such as Boeing, which may be in violation of federal labor laws, I would argue that stronger unions would not inhibit industrial development, the holy grail of S.C. politics. South Carolina can no longer compete on cheap wages, because even S.C. workers will not work for the wages that are paid in India or China.

My experience in a half-century of working, teaching and researching in this field convinces me that competent managers can work quite effectively with a union. Managers, quite understandably, do not like to share power with their workers’ representative, but no one has a stronger interest in the welfare of a business than the rank-and-file workers who are tied to their community and their job. Union officers hold office by the consent of the workers or their elected officials, and must reflect the views of the members. The bugaboo of dreaded union “work rules” are, in fact, negotiated conditions of work jointly arrived at between employers and unions.

South Carolina is a beautiful state with a wonderful climate and kind, generous and hard-working people. Our economy would profit greatly by the increased pay, benefits and security that unions can offer. Unions have the potential to help transform our state into a leader in the positive aspects of an economy and society instead of being a leader in negative statistics and a laggard in positive ones.

Hoyt Wheeler, a retired attorney and professor living in West Columbia, serves on the executive committee of the SC Progressive Network. Among his writings are The Future of the American Labor Movement and Workplace Justice Without Unions.