Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more ➡
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Add note
Save to My Library
Sync to mobile
Look up keyword
Like this
1Activity
×
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Transcript of SC-Beeney/Andino

Transcript of SC-Beeney/Andino

Ratings: (0)|Views: 758|Likes:
Published by mchughb

More info:

Published by: mchughb on Aug 29, 2012
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See More
See less

08/29/2012

pdf

text

original

 
1 of 59 sheetsPage 163 to 166 of 32508/28/2012 10:15:12 PM
163UNITEDSTATESDISTRICTCOURTFORTHEDISTRICTOFCOLUMBIASTATEOFSOUTHCAROLINA,CANo.12-203Plaintiff, Washington,DCAugust28,2012vs. 1:38p.m.UNITEDSTATESOFAMERICA,ETAL., DAY2-PMSESSIONDefendants. Pages163thru325_________________________________TRANSCRIPTOFTRIALBEFOREDISTRICTJUDGECOLLEENKOLLAR-KOTELLYCIRCUITJUDGEBRETTM.KAVANAUGHDISTRICTCOURTJUDGEJOHND.BATESAPPEARANCES:ForthePlaintiffs:ALSOPRESENT:H.CHRISTOPHERBARTOLOMUCCI,ESQ.BRYANJ.FIELD,ESQUIREMICHAELMcGINLEY,ESQUIRESTEPHENPOTENZA,ESQUIRE
Bancroft, PLLC
1919MStreet,NWWashington,DC20036(202)416-0257H.CHRISTOPHERCOATES,ESQUIRE934CompassPointCharleston,SC29412(843)609-7080ALANM.WILSONAttorneyGeneralSouthCarolinaBRYANSTIRLINGDeputyAttorneyGeneralSouthCarolinaKARLS.BOWERS,ESQ.
164
For the Defendants:BRADLEY E. HEARD, ESQUIRERICHARD ALAN DELLHEIM, ESQUIREBRYAN L. SELLS, ESQUIREANNA M. BALDWIN, ESQUIRECATHERINE MEZA, ESQUIREERIN MARIE VELANDY, ESQUIREDANIEL J. FREEMAN, ESQUIREANGELA MILLER, ESQUIRE
U.S. Department of Justice
Civil Rights DivisionVoting Section950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NWWashington, DC 20530(202) 353-8743For Defendant Intervenors:GARRARD R. BEENEY, ESQUIREMICHAEL COOPER, ESQUIRETHEODORE A.B. McCOMBS, ESQUIRETALY DVORKIS, ESQUIRESEAN A. CAMONI, ESQUIREALICIA AMDUR, ESQUIRE
Sullivan & Cromwell, LLP
125 Broad StreetNew York, NY 10004(212) 558-1863NANCY ABUDU, ESQUIRE
American Civil Liberties UnionFoundation, Inc.
230 Peachtree Street, NWSuite 1440Atlanta, GA 30303(404) 523-2721SUSAN K. DUNN, ESQUIRE
American Civil Liberties UnionFoundation of South Carolina
40 Calhoun StreetSuite 210Charleston, SC 29401(843) 720-1428
165
ARTHUR B. SPITZER, ESQUIRE
American Civil Liberties Unionof the Nation's Capital
4301 Connecticut Avenue, NWSuite 434Washington, DC 20008(202) 457-0800 x113J. GERALD HEBERT, ESQUIRE
The Campaign Legal Center
215 E Street, NEWashington, DC 20002(202) 736-2200MIMI MARZIANI, ESQUIRE
Brennan Center for Justice
161 Avenue of the Americas12th FloorNew York, NY 10013(646) 292-8327MARK A. POSNER, ESQUIRE
Lawyers' Committee for CivilRights
1401 New York Avenue, NWSuite 400Washington, DC 20005(202) 662-8389Court Reporter:Bryan A. Wayne, RPR, CRROfficial Court ReporterU.S. Courthouse, Room 4704-A333 Constitution Avenue, NWWashington, DC 20001(202) 354-3186Proceedings recorded by mechanical stenography; transcriptproduced by computer-aided transcription.
166
P R O C E E D I N G S
1
HON. COLLEEN KOLLAR-KOTELLY: Good afternoon,
2
everyone. All right. We'll resume the testimony of Lieutenant
3
Governor Glenn McConnell with Mr. Potenza.
4
(The witness resumes the stand.)
01:38PM
5
EXAMINATION CONTINUED
6
BY MR. POTENZA:
7
Good afternoon, Lieutenant Governor.
8 Q.
Good afternoon.
9 A.
Lieutenant Governor, when you were considering voter
01:38PM
10 Q.
identification legislation during the 2009 through 2011 time
11
frame, did you consider the impact on racial minorities of a
12
photo identification requirement?
13
I have to speak for myself personally as I approached it.
14 A.
For me it was just an issue of the reliability, the confidence
01:38PM
15
in the ballot. So I'm assuming the question's based on my
16
having supported the bill or being a cosponsor or whatever.
17
Those issues or allegations would come up in debate, but I felt
18
like the Senate addressed them with our compromise amendment.
19
How in your view did the Senate address them with your
01:39PM
20 Q.
compromise amendment?
21
Well, the proof is that most everybody was for it. So with
22 A.
everybody for it, including those who had raised issues -- but
23
we included outreach, we included education, we included
24
creating a list of those who didn't have the ID, the ability to
01:39PM
25
 
08/28/2012 10:15:12 PMPage 167 to 170 of 3252 of 59 sheets
167
get them without cost. My recollection of the bill, of course
1
it was several years ago, was to transition in.
2
So nothing's perfect, but I felt like we weren't leaving
3
anyone behind. And then we also went in and created, where
4
there's a challenged ballot, they could vote a provisional
01:39PM
5
ballot, and there was the affidavit on the reasonable
6
impediment. So I felt like everybody seemed comfortable with
7
all of that; that was what was in the compromise amendment.
8
Were those provisions that you just described, were those
9
Q.
also in the act that was presented to the governor for
01:40PM
10
signature?
11
They were in there. Whether they were in the exact words
12
A.
or not, I can't say. But yes, we put the outreach, the
13
education, the provisional ballot, the reasonable impediment.
14
All of that was in there along with we had refined the
01:40PM
15
severability clauses and things like that.
16
Was that Act R54 that was presented to the governor for
17
Q.
signature?
18
Yes.
19
A.
And Lieutenant Governor, did you support or vote for Act
01:40PM
20
Q.
R54 or any predecessor legislation with any purpose to
21
discriminate against minority voters?
22
No. There was no intent to discriminate.
23
A.
Do you have any reason to believe that any of your
24
Q.
colleagues in the Senate supported or voted for Act R54 or any
01:41PM
25
168
predecessor legislation with any purpose to discriminate against
1
minority voters?
2
I don't recollect any conversations or debate that
3
A.
reflected that kind of intent.
4
And Act R54 was presented to the governor for signature;
01:41PM
5
Q.
isn't that right?
6
That is correct.
7
A.
Do you have any reason to believe that the governor signed
8
Q.
Act R54 with any purpose to discriminate against minority
9
voters?
01:41PM
10
Well, I have no reason to believe that. I guess the
11
A.
ultimate answer would be from her.
12
MR. POTENZA: Thank you very much. No further
13
questions at this time.
14
HON. COLLEEN KOLLAR-KOTELLY: All right. Department
01:41PM
15
of Justice or Mr. Beeney? Go ahead.
16
EXAMINATION
17
BY MR. BEENEY:
18
Good afternoon, Lieutenant Governor.
19
Q.
Good afternoon, sir.
01:42PM
20
A.
Good to see you again. Welcome to Washington.
21
Q.
Thank you.
22
A.
Lieutenant Governor, you told us that photo ID was
23
Q.
contentious, correct?
24
That is correct. It got very contentious.
01:42PM
25
A.
169
And I think you mentioned -- I'm sorry, Lieutenant
1
Q.
Governor, Ms. Amdur is passing you a copy of your deposition in
2
case we get to it.
3
I think you told us that you played a critical role, and if 
4
I may be permitted to add the word commendable role in trying to
01:42PM
5
bring both sides together and to come up with a compromise bill?
6
There was an institutional role that the president pro tem
7
A.
would do to try to bring the sides together.
8
In this amendment that you talked about that the Senate
9
Q.
unanimously adopted with African American members voting in
01:43PM
10
favor of it and Democrats voting in favor of it, it had a
11
broader list of acceptable photo IDs than R54 does; is that
12
right?
13
It did.
14
A.
What it allowed people to do to vote with a photo ID was to
01:43PM
15
Q.
show any state or federal employee, including IDs issued by
16
political subdivisions. Is that right?
17
That was the best -- the political subdivisions became a
18
A.
source of debate. I don't know -- it was in and it was back
19
out, but I do know the state IDs, the county and municipality I
01:43PM
20
can solidly testify to. We had some shifting back and forth
21
about public service districts and whether they would produce a
22
reliable one or not.
23
Let me show you Defendant-Intervenor's Exhibit 55, which I
24
Q.
believe is the compromise amendment, if we can call it that. On
01:44PM
25
170
page 867, I think we can actually take a look over here,
1
Lieutenant Governor, that here's the provision I was just
2
talking about. That it would have permitted people to vote by
3
showing "an employee identification card containing a photograph
4
of the voter which is issued by the federal government, this
01:44PM
5
state or a political subdivision of this state."
6
Does that refresh your recollection?
7
Yes. Once I see that document, that would be an accurate
8
A.
reflection of it, yes, sir. I knew it was in and out; it
9
 just -- some of the stuff starts to run together.
01:44PM
10
And it also permitted early voting so that folks would have
11
Q.
a chance to get to the polls and rectify problems if they had
12
them?
13
Well, we wanted it for convenience. We were trying -- my
14
A.
recollection is we were trying to get two Saturdays in there for
01:45PM
15
early voting, and trying to come up with the wording on that,
16
but early voting, we wanted it because one thing it would do --
17
we got some early voting now with absentee voting, but we're
18
not -- people might, to avoid the lines, kind of meet the
19
criteria. So we felt like if early voting is a convenience to
01:45PM
20
the voters and would increase participation, why not?
21
And in addition to this broader list of IDs and early
22
Q.
voting, you also gave people time to get the IDs that they would
23
need before you required them to vote in this compromise
24
amendment, right?
01:45PM
25
 
3 of 59 sheetsPage 171 to 174 of 32508/28/2012 10:15:12 PM
171
That is correct. We were trying to make sure that we gave
1
A.
people time. One of my concerns is transition in, not leave
2
people behind, give them a reasonable opportunity.
3
And that was the reason, because if you gave people -- and
4
Q.
I think in the amendment you didn't require photo IDs for two
01:46PM
5
years, and you said to the State Election Commission, issue the
6
photo IDs for a year before we require them. I think that was
7
in the amendment. Does that ring a bell?
8
Because we were back in, what was it, 2010 then, and
9
A.
looking toward to 2012. We were trying to transition in.
01:46PM
10
That's where we were headed in the Senate.
11
And the reason you were trying to transition in is because
12
Q.
you didn't want to leave people behind and not allow them to
13
vote?
14
I recall -- again let me preface it by saying that as
01:46PM
15
A.
president pro tem I have people in my ear and I'm in and out,
16
but I recall concern about those who didn't have the IDs, and
17
ultimately we crafted the language we thought allowed the
18
transition.
19
And the purpose of the transition was so that people
01:46PM
20
Q.
weren't left out of the process and could vote and get the IDs
21
they needed.
22
Yes, sir. The concerns were expressed to make sure that --
23
A.
we weren't trying to disenfranchise anybody.
24
All the provisions we just talked about, the broader list
01:47PM
25
Q.
172
of IDs, the early voting, the two years before you had to show
1
the ID, the one year that you could take to get the ID, all that
2
was cut out by the House.
3
In the last version of it, yeah, yes, sir. They did not go
4
A.
along. It was details like that that we started getting hung up
01:47PM
5
between the two chambers.
6
And none of that's in R54.
7
Q.
In R54 we put in the language about the education, the
8
A.
outreach, but a conference committee is confined to the House
9
version and to the Senate version and nothing in between. You
01:47PM
10
have to take from one of the two bills.
11
What I mean is that in R54, none of these measures we've
12
Q.
 just talked about that were in the compromise amendment ended up
13
in the ultimate law. I mean, there's no early voting, there's
14
no employee ID, there's no transition period, there's no year to
01:48PM
15
get your photo ID card. None of that's in R54, is it?
16
Not like it was in the previous one, in my opinion. We
17
A.
left the language in about the outreach, the list, those sorts
18
of things. But my memory is when I looked at that previous
19
document that the next year we dropped political subdivisions in
01:48PM
20
our version of the bill and went with just state and local
21
governments, which would be municipalities and counties. So
22
that, I think we tweaked that in the Senate.
23
When you got to conference committee about the final bill,
24
Q.
the conference committee over 3003 and what led to R54, you
01:49PM
25
173
tried to convince Representative Clemmons and the House members
1
about all these issues, but they just wouldn't budge. Is that
2
right?
3
We did. There were three of us, Senator Campsen, Senator
4
A.
Scott and myself, and we tried to sell them.
01:49PM
5
And no matter what sense you talked to them, the response
6
Q.
was, clean bill, clean bill, clean bill?
7
Every time, in my opinion, that I pinned them down or that
8
A.
Senator Scott or Senator Campsen pinned them down, we just want
9
a clean voter ID bill.
01:49PM
10
I think you already told us you never thought it was a
11
Q.
clean bill in the first place?
12
No, I did not think it was. And I said that very strongly
13
A.
on the Senate floor.
14
Senator Scott is a friend of yours?
01:49PM
15
Q.
Yes. I consider him a friend.
16
A.
And Senator Scott felt passionately about voter ID?
17
Q.
He did.
18
A.
And he spoke on the Senate floor about the long fight for
19
Q.
minorities to get the vote. Do you recall that?
01:50PM
20
Repeat that? I'm sorry.
21
A.
Do you recall Senator Scott talking on the Senate floor
22
Q.
about voter ID and the big fight that minorities had to get the
23
vote in South Carolina?
24
I remember him talking on the floor raising concerns and
01:50PM
25
A.
174
everything. If it was that specific thing. But I know he was
1
talking about his concern about voting rights.
2
And do you remember when you got to the conference
3
Q.
committee where you just couldn't get any of this out of the
4
House, that Senator Scott asked you to hold out?
01:50PM
5
He told me he would not sign a report without early voting,
6
A.
and early voting wasn't in the cards. But he did. He asked me
7
to hold out and just not sign the report.
8
But you really couldn't hold out because even if you wanted
9
Q.
to, it just wasn't a political option, was it?
01:50PM
10
A majority of the Senate wanted the bill, and ultimately we
11
A.
have to represent the majority of the body. And the political
12
heat was on. I was crippled going into conference by the
13
divided vote on concurrence, instead of having a united front.
14
The House knew that we had a divided house on the Senate side,
01:51PM
15
and it was not ultimately a political option either. And time
16
was running out. If I had held out, it would have pushed it
17
behind the budget, and then anybody could have killed it, and
18
the rest of the Senate would have never had a chance to vote on
19
it.
01:51PM
20
You mentioned the concur vote, and I kind of want to go
21
Q.
back to the concur vote before you got to the conference. As I
22
understand it, in the final bill, the 3003, before it went to
23
conference, you basically had a choice in the Senate: Either
24
concur in the House version, which had stripped out all these
01:52PM
25

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->