The League of Women Voters of South Carolina agrees with The Post and Courier’s Aug. 27 editorial, "SC officials want to change state constitution, but they won’t say how." Voters across South Carolina will be asked in November to decide on a ballot issue that proposes to change the language in our constitution related to voter qualifications. This proposal is at best confusing, and at worst misleading. We urge voters to vote against it.

The proposed change is to section 4, Article II, which asks “Must Section 4, Article II of the Constitution of this State, relating to voter qualifications, be amended so as to provide that only a citizen of the United States and of this State of the age of eighteen and upwards who is properly registered is entitled to vote as provided by law?” The word in question is "only." It is a change from the current wording that says "every" citizen of the Unites States and of this State, 18 years and older, is entitled to vote.

You may ask why the change? Good question. We are struggling to imagine a reason why the Legislature has gone through the effort to make this one-word change in our Constitution. Is there any difference between only and every? If not, why go through the bother, the time, the money to change one word?

If yes, the reason has not been clearly stated. If the Legislature is concerned about non-citizens voting, which has not been a problem in South Carolina, changing "every" to "only" doesn’t move the issue forward. The current wording says what it means. Every is inclusive. Only is restrictive. Non-citizen voting is not a problem. Nor is voting by citizens under the age of 18. This proposed change is a solution to a problem that does not exist in South Carolina.

Finally, this change conflicts with the language used in Section 3 of Article II which states “Every citizen possessing the qualifications required by this Constitution and not laboring under the disabilities named in or authorized by it shall be an elector.”

We believe this change in Section 4, Article II, is unnecessary, plays into anti-immigration feelings, and leaves open the possibility for future restrictions on voting in South Carolina. We urge voters to vote "no" on this ballot issue.

~Joan Zaleski is vice president for voter services with the League of Women Voters of South Carolina.