Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

South Carolina to pick up postage tab for absentee voters

South Carolina voting

Voters in West Columbia, above on primary day June, won't have to pay if they vote by mail this fall.

Sean Rayford/Getty Images

South Carolina has agreed to pay the postage on all mail-in ballots in the November election.

Wednesday's decision, which looks to cost the state between $750,000 and $1.2 million, partly settles one of the three-dozen lawsuits the Democrats are pursuing across the country to make voting for president easy no matter how bad the coronavirus pandemic this fall.

Many of the suits are similarly pressing states to provide postage-paid return envelopes along with all absentee ballots. Making voters affix their own stamps, the Democrats maintain, will unfairly suppress turnout and amounts to an unconstitutional poll tax.


But state law requires local election officials to provide return postage for mailed ballots in only 16 states — eight of them reliably blue and four of them solidly red, plus the 2020 potential battlegrounds Iowa, Arizona, Minnesota and Wisconsin.

South Carolina election officials say the postage expense will be covered by their share of the $400 million in federal election aid included in the pandemic economic rescue package enacted in March.

The rest of the Democratic suit to loosen the rules in South Carolina, filed 10 weeks ago, remains before a federal judge.

The state allows people older than 65 to vote absentee for any reason while making everyone else provide a specific excuse, which has resulted in only 5 percent of votes being cast that way in recent years. The suit alleges that amounts to illegal age discrimination.

It also challenges the requirement for a witness signature on absentee ballots and the rule that envelopes will only be tallied if they arrive at election offices before the polls close.

President Trump is highly likely to secure the state's nine electoral votes, but enhanced turnout could boost the Democrats' chances of holding on to a competitive House seat and propelling their former state party chairman, Jaime Harrison, to upsetting Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham.


Read More

​Teal shoes are displayed outside Naval Medical Center Portsmouth

Teal shoes are displayed outside Naval Medical Center Portsmouth in April 2018 as part of Sexual Assault Awareness and Prevention Month.

Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Kris R. Lindstrom/U.S. Navy

Military Sexual Trauma Survivors Can’t Sue the Government. A New Bill Could Change That.

When Mayra Diaz opened the door of her Army barracks room in 2022, she didn’t realize it was the beginning of the end of her military career.

She had never met the soldier standing in front of her, Sgt. Greville Clarke. She didn’t know he had sexually assaulted three other women on base over the past 15 months, including one he threatened at knifepoint.

Keep ReadingShow less
​Horizontal photo of a DEMOCRATIC PARTY FLAG

Horizontal photo of a DEMOCRATIC PARTY FLAG with a stylized DONKEY with 3 white stars on blue top of donkey and two red feet. Flag is laying on top of a red, white, and blue American Flag.

Getty Images

How to Define the Democratic Party - Left or Centrist?

Labels can be misleading and misused. The label "Centrist" is empowering because it signifies you are mainstream, not extreme, a place where all people can come together. To be labeled "Left" is to place you outside the mainstream, extreme; left connotes a kind of kookiness as well as—horror of horrors—Socialism.

But are the labels accurate? For most of the 20th century, the Democratic Party was, without question, the party that championed the working man, the average person—the people. But they were nevertheless firm capitalists—they were not Socialists.

Keep ReadingShow less
US $1 dollar bill in mid air melting, red gradated background

From $215B to $7.14T: how outbound investment, falling labor share, and rising corporate profits reveal trickle-down economics' core flaw.

PM Images/Getty Images

Trickle-Down-Economics was Doomed from Day-One; yet Defended to Present-Day

By 1972, U.S. direct investments abroad amounted to $94.0 billion. This was two years prior to the development of the Laffer Curve in 1974 by American economist Arthur Laffer, famously sketched on a restaurant napkin during a dinner meeting in Washington, D.C. Therefore, the writing was on the wall regarding the vulnerability of Trickle-down economics, years prior to Reagan’s Economic Recovery Tax Act (ERTA) of 1981.

Trickle-down economics fails primarily because outbound foreign direct investment (FDI) allows corporations and wealthy individuals to invest tax-cut windfall profits globally rather than domestically. The theory of Trickle-down economics predicted that lowering taxes on businesses and high earners will stimulate local capital accumulation, leading to domestic business expansion, job creation, and wage growth for everyone. However, in a highly globalized economy, capital is hyper-mobile. Instead of filtering downward into the domestic economy, these untaxed or low-tax profits frequently exit the country entirely.

Keep ReadingShow less