After 2020, SC Statehouse has a pile of election reform bills from Republicans and Democrats

COLUMBIA — There are more than two dozen bills to change South Carolina election laws filed by Statehouse Republicans and Democrats waiting to be acted upon this session.

The list includes a pair of Republican-backed efforts to audit the results of the 2020 presidential election, even though Donald Trump won South Carolina by a nearly 300,000-vote landslide.

On the Republican side, their 16 bills include provisions impacting everything from voter access to absentee ballots, placing control of elections in the hands of the secretary of state, allowing municipalities to “pool” polling places in high-population precincts, and implementing more stringent witness requirements.

On the Democratic side, their 16 pieces would expand early voting periods, adopt methods making it easier for the recently incarcerated to vote, allow for same-day voter registration and establish Election Day as a state holiday.

Republicans see many of the bills as common-sense reforms to standardize elections across the state at the county level and reduce the potential for fraud, including provisions to verify voters’ identity and to conduct regular audits.

Democrats see it much differently, pointing to South Carolina’s election systems already ranked among the most secure in the nation — and zero voter fraud convictions in the state since 2008, according to a database compiled by the right-leaning Heritage Foundation.

They question Republicans’ motives for bringing the legislation, including under Trump’s unproven “big lie” theory.

“All of these laws, and all of these proposed laws, are being pushed for the most part, based on this lie that an election was rigged and stolen,” said Rep. Gilda Cobb-Hunter, D-Orangeburg.

Currently, state legislatures in 41 states — South Carolina included — have introduced a combined 262 pieces of legislation to alter how their states administer elections, according to a December report compiled by the left-leaning States United Democracy Center.

Changes coming

South Carolina has already gotten the ball rolling. A sweeping bill sponsored by House Speaker Jay Lucas has passed both chambers and awaits a final OK before heading to Gov. Henry McMaster’s desk.

The legislation would empower the S.C. Election Commission to investigate breaks in compliance at the county level and increase the General Assembly’s oversight over the agency. Members would be appointed by the governor, who would then write a list of election protocols for counties to follow. 

McMaster has penned a letter in support of the bill’s passage, noting that while no fraud was found in the 2020 election, “millions” of Americans held “legitimate concerns” about its integrity

 The governor has also suggested $3 million in recurring funding under his proposed budget for the Election Commission’s Election Integrity and Compliance Audit Program, which his office says will support new auditor positions and improve compliance.

Republicans see other opportunities for reform. Groups like the right-leaning Palmetto Promise Institute have expressed support for 20 separate reforms to the state’s elections systems, many of which are included in bills proposed by the Republican side.

The S.C. Republican Party has also passed a resolution supportive of many of the measures as well, including random audits, tighter qualifications to vote absentee, and regular purges of the state’s voter rolls every few years. Republicans, meanwhile, believe themselves to have a mandate to enact some sort of reform following the 2020 election.

The question is what kind.

“There’s this balance between these two ideas: the sanctity of the vote and the spirit of the vote,” Rep. Jay Jordan, R-Florence, told The Post and Courier. “And that’s where I think that election integrity sort of springs. We’ve been looking at and listening to how we can make voting as readily accessible as possible, but also as secure as possible.”

Voting rights organizations like the League of Women Voters support some tenets of the Republican-backed legislation, including provisions to increase transparency within county election offices and expand oversight of the Election Commission. However, the League’s main lobbyist in Columbia, Lynn Teague, says much of the language in bills to purge the voter rolls or enact restrictions on absentee balloting could potentially disenfranchise voters.

McMaster has already expressed concerns with the security of absentee ballots, telling reporters in early 2021 that while he liked South Carolina’s policies, he was concerned with the expansion of absentee ballots outlined in upcoming voter rights legislation from Congress, calling it an “invitation to fraud.”

In 2020, his administration also brought a case to the U.S. Supreme Court successfully challenging a ruling from a lower court preventing election judges from requiring a witness signature on absentee ballots.

“We want fast, fair convenient voting,” he said at the time. “But there must be integrity.”

Reforms from elsewhere wanted here

Reforms that could potentially be weighed by lawmakers include signature verification requirements, voter identification, and limitations on how ballots can be delivered by third parties, a measure Republicans say could help prevent efforts at “ballot harvesting.”

Teague said additional restrictions on absentee balloting could potentially prevent some from being able to vote, while measures like ballot purges could cause valid ballots to be disqualified from being counted. A recent study by the left-leaning Brennan Center for Justice found some counties in South Carolina already have purge rates of more than 10 percent between 2016 and 2018.

“The only potential problem we have with our voter rolls is that they may be too stringently pruned,” Teague said. “Not inadequately.”

State lawmakers say Democrats and Republicans have found some common ground in the early dialogue around election reform. Provisions like expanding the early voting period have allies on both sides, though differences remain on the conditions under which individuals can actually cast a ballot.

A reform bill backed by House Majority Whip Brandon Newton, R-Lancaster, includes a proposal creating a 14-day period where in-person absentee voting is permitted without being required to assert, state, offer, or provide an excuse, justification, or reason, and would establish at least one in-person absentee voting location for every 50,000 registered voters. 

Other legislation, like a bill sponsored by Rep. Ivory Torrey Thigpen, D-Columbia, would establish a formal early voting period, allowing voters to cast ballots up to a week before Election Day in any election around the state without requiring an absentee ballot to do so. Early voting is currently not allowed under South Carolina law. 

“I think there’s a lot more common ground on this issue than people realize,” Newton said. “I was surprised myself, because I’ve always been in favor of in-person early voting. I think that’s something no one should really have an issue with. If you’re Republican, you like it because you have to show a photo ID — something we worked hard to pass for years — and Democrats have always wanted early voting. So to me, it’s good common ground.”

But others remain skeptical of the aims of other Republican-led reform efforts, particularly as Congress races to enact its own changes to federal election law. While South Carolina’s proposals are more restrained than reforms led in states like Georgia or Arizona, several experts in state and federal election law say the potential motivations for those changes could set the stage for a single political party to consolidate power in state and local elections and, potentially, have sway over the final result.