Your Elections Are Not Transparent in South Carolina

and State Attorneys Are Wasting Your Tax Dollars

The SC State Election Commission is currently trying to punish a group of South Carolina citizens for asking for records of the 2020 election. Regardless of your position on what happened in 2020, the following should be very concerning to anyone who values transparency of government. For background on the lawsuit referred to in this article, click here.

This lawsuit, which was essentially a SC Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) challenge, was dismissed earlier this year along with the defendants’ (several counties’ and the State Election Commission’s (SEC’s)) counterclaim. However, upon dismissal of the suit, the SC State Election Commission filed a motion to reconsider the counterclaim against the SC Safe Elections group and its associates to bar us from ever being able to request any records via the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) from the state of SC or its counties regarding the 2020 election and to pay their legal fees!!!! On August 5^th, SC Circuit Judge Coble, will hear their motion for reconsideration for this counterclaim.

To add insult to injury, this lawsuit, which was initially filed in August of 2022, was the subject of lawfare by our state and county Governments. After drawing out the case, which should have been heard (based on FOIA law) in 6 months for over 2 years, the judge ultimately dismissed our case and their counterclaim. This is despite the fact that the very first judge assigned to the case decided that not only was there enough information for us to proceed, but that it warranted an injunction which required the counties to preserve the data until the conclusion of the lawsuit, otherwise we and the citizens of South Carolina could potentially suffer irreparable harm. The second judge also decided that there was enough evidence to proceed.

While we disagreed with the third judge’s decision (Judge Coble) to dismiss our case, and after spending in excess of $80,000 which we crowdfunded, we certainly don’t believe that the defendants, the SC State Election Commission (SEC), should come after us for simply trying to get vital information for the 2020 election. Furthermore, it is ironic that while we accepted the judge’s decision, the SEC is asking the judge to reconsider, thus forcing us to spend more money in legal fees, yet they are complaining that we need to reimburse them? Their actions amount to pure harassment and we have faith that Judge Coble will rule in our favor. We do ask for your continued prayers.

One of the main reasons we brought this case to the court system was that the SEC denied our FOIA requests for Cast Vote Records and the Attorney General’s office refused to correct what we believe was a misguided opinion. We even had multiple expert witnesses who could support this, along with precedent in the majority of other states that release this exact information to the public. The AG’s office thus recommended that the only way for us to settle this matter was through the court system. Unfortunately, we were unable to get our day in court despite the mountain of evidence and expert witnesses on our side, but one must ponder the question, “why is the SC Election Commission trying so hard to keep the 2020 data from being analyzed?” It is not just Cast Vote Records (CVRs). 

Citizens are unable to obtain ballot review files, audit logs, penetration or hash testing results (or evidence that these tests were performed). Voter rolls are priced excessively high at over $2,500 and they are threatening to raise the price even higher. Poll observers are often limited to areas where they are unable to see the machines or election process. In addition, citizens who wish to view the absentee ballot review process and post-election hand count audits are told to sit where they can’t even view the information on the ballot. How can we observe the count of our vote, which by our SC State Constitution is supposed to be public, when our view of the ballots is prohibited? Note that the election commission itself agreed that there was no Personally Identifiable Information (PII) on the ballots.

Trust must be earned and FOIA law, which encourages transparency of government agencies who spend our tax dollars, is an important avenue for citizens to ensure their government is acting in their best interest. Note that a recent Rasmussen poll found that 62% of likely voters believe that there will be cheating in the 2024 election. We are not in the minority.

We are told to trust the machines which are “not connected to the internet,” but we know that machines can be infiltrated regardless, even if they are air-gapped.  We are told to trust our election officials but one county election director who also happened to be the President of the SC Association of Registration and Election Officials (SCARE) was just indicted for Social Security fraud. In fact, that very director’s office was named as a defendant in our lawsuit and her answers could be described as evasive as best. Furthermore, the state of SC Legislative Audit Council’s report of the SC Election Commission that was issued in January of 2024 showed massive issues of concern, particularly regarding cyber and physical security of the machines.  A summary of the issue and the full report are included here. How can we fully trust this system which is overly complex by design and in which our own state auditors found egregious issues?

To summarize, we are told to just trust the entire ecosystem while being denied access to key election records available to citizens in other states like OH, GA and TX, while being harassed and punished for asking questions. This has to stop. Our goal at SC Safe Elections is to enhance the confidence our citizens have in their elections, at a time when this is at an all-time low in our country. In order to do that we need a transparent system and election officials willing to work with us to enhance and improve that system through robust standard operating procedures and processes. Our expertise is wide and deep regarding election laws and best practices. We shouldn’t be punished for trying to improve our government practices. 

The US Supreme Court’s ruling on the Chevron doctrine in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo (Loper), will profoundly impact companies and industries regulated by federal agencies that have grown accustomed to being the ultimate arbiter of ambiguous language in the laws, rules and regulations. This ruling sends a strong statement to these agencies regarding their ability to make and interpret laws outside of the legislature. This needs to also apply to the state level. Unconstitutional rules and regulations shouldn’t be promulgated by unelected officials, gaining a rubber stamp by legislators who ofttimes are not versed in those regulations, nor is the process transparent, accessible to, or accepting of citizens who might be. This sort of power can breed corruption and unintended consequences.  Our government officials are servants. They work for the people. They should remember that and act accordingly. We have a government for the people by the people. Transparency of government agencies is crucial to maintaining power by the people. It will help us keep our children safe from indoctrination in our schools, allow us to maintain our property rights and ability to make our own medical decisions, it will allow us to have safer communities free from crime and corporate control.

If you are interested in helping us improve elections and the transparency of our government, contact us at scsafeelections@zohomail.com.