Voters on Scarborough list speak out
State lawmakers to decide whether to overturn election
The 328 people who former state Rep. Wallace Scarborough alleges improperly voted in the House District 115 race have very varied stories about what they did on election day.
Rep. Wallace Scarborough
But state lawmakers won't get to hear any of them Jan. 14, when they begin to consider whether to overturn the Nov. 4 election in which Democrat Anne Peterson Hutto defeated Scarborough by 211 votes.
That's because the state House won't consider any new evidence as it reviews Scarborough's appeal. It will consider only what was presented before the State Election Commission last month, and neither side called witnesses at that time.
Scarborough's team compared voter registration lists with other address lists, such as those in the county tax system and the state Department of Motor Vehicles, but there hasn't been any testimony from those whose votes are in dispute.
Here are some of their stories.
Buddy Milligan lives on Little Oak Island but has his mail sent to his North Charleston office. Milligan is amused that his vote is among 278 being questioned because their voter registration address and driver's license address aren't the same.
Anne Peterson Hutto
"Protesting my vote is kind of ridiculous because I voted for him," Milligan said. "I am a died-in-the-wool, right-of-Attila-the-Hun Republican."
Kit Trash also has her Broad Street office address listed on her driver's license but lives on James Island. She isn't happy to see her vote being questioned.
"I thought it was pretty arrogant on his part just to make some sort of assumption," she said. "I understand he's grasping at any opportunity of any chance of making an appeal."
But John L. Clair Jr. said he did vote in District 115 — where he lived for eight years — even though he moved a year ago to West Ashley.
Clair said he was unaware that if he returned to his old precinct that he was supposed to ask for a fail-safe ballot — a special ballot that doesn't include state House and certain other local races.
Clair said he still does a lot of work installing car stereos on James Island, where his family owns a business, but added, "I guess my vote should not have counted for that (race)."
Previous story
Hutto sworn in to House seat; Scarborough has appealed election outcome, published 12/31/08
Scarborough's lawyers also are questioning the votes cast by Nancy and Patrick Diehl, who sold their James Island home and moved to Hong Kong to teach.
"As U.S. citizens, we feel strongly that it is both our right and responsibility to vote," Ms. Diehl said via e-mail. "It is disturbing to have heard from several different people that our names were on this list being questioned by Mr. Scarborough. However, prior to leaving, we checked with Charleston County to ensure that we followed proper procedures."
Chris Fulks updated his voter registration address and his driver's license to his new James Island address, but the public record shows his car tax bill went to his former residence in downtown Charleston, where he lived until September. Scarborough's appeal lists him and 39 others whose voting address and car tax bill addresses don't match.
Fulks said he is confident he voted in the right place, adding, "There are people moving around constantly," he said. "I don't think anybody did anything illegal."
Hutto's camp easily identified Fulks as someone whose vote was questioned but was valid: Fulks currently rents a Fort Johnson Road home that backs up to Hutto's. Her family is his landlord.
Asked if Scarborough alleges these voters committed fraud, his attorney Butch Bowers said, "I would put the responsibility more on the County Election Commission for allowing these people to vote."
Hutto's attorney Truett Nettles said the House will be reviewing the case only for errors of law that the State Election Commission might have made.
"The House is saying they're going to hear this case and handle it the same way the South Carolina Supreme Court would handle an appeal. I think that's the proper way to do it," he said. "If this comes down to a vote in the House along partisan lines, I'm afraid it would look very political and very suspect."
Reach Robert Behre at 937-5771 or at rbehre@postandcourier.com.
E-mail this story
Printer-friendly version
Comments
charlestonscman (anonymous) says...
Give it up Scarborough. It makes you look very pathetic to keep hanging on like this. The Folly Christmas Parade was your end.
You of all people shouldn't question addresses.
And this is coming from a Republican.
January 12, 2009 at 8:09 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Reader (anonymous) says...
This story was also the subject of a very interesting column in the City Paper about two weeks ago. That columnist took Scarborough to task for handing over a list of every example of a voter whose mailing address is outside of the district, suggesting that they were all fraudulent voters.
In fact, the columnist pointed out, there were many reasons that someone might have his or her mail delivered somewhere else. The best part of the story, omitted by the P&C, was that there was one numbered line on the spreadsheet which had been hidden from view. Who was that one person? Scarborough himself! Apparently, Scarborough himself lives in the district but gets his mail delivered at a business office outside of the district, so his name showed up on the list of supposed fraudulent voters!
Scarborough should play fair. He lost the election, and that is that. He knew perfectly well that not everyone who gets his mail delivered elsewhere is a fraud since he does too. At the very least, he should have brought in at least one or two of these people to testify if he felt otherwise.
January 12, 2009 at 8:17 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
TinaR (anonymous) says...
Let them take a closer look at the list is what I say. Why? Because from what I have heard even HE does not list his home address on his voter's registration, but his office. Does that mean that HIS vote should not count either. What an idiot!
January 12, 2009 at 8:34 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
jeg111 (anonymous) says...
Give it up!! You lost!!! The more you go on with this, the more unstable we realize you are. The last thing we need is another unstable politician in office!!!
January 12, 2009 at 8:39 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
eyfigueroa (anonymous) says...
Interesting. My mailing address is in Ladson. I use the Post Office there as my official mailing address. My actual physical address is elsewhere.
Sounds like Mr. Scarborough is desperate to regain his seat.
I can appreciate ANYONE wanting to check for discrepancies, but he seems to be grasping at straws. Especially since the legislature will NOT consider any new evidence during the appeal.
I mean come on.
January 12, 2009 at 9:49 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
BillytheKid (anonymous) says...
I think it was the gun deal with the SCE&G guys, you must have been watching too much "Deadwood" on showtime.
January 12, 2009 at 10:35 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
zoomru (anonymous) says...
Tisk...tisk !
Wallace....you should have been at the DEBATE at JI High School !!!!! I highly suggest you watch the movie..."PATTON" and learn how to WIN !!!!!! You have a chance in this article of INK to call OUT ...Hutto.. on a number of relevant issues but YOU do ....WHAT ???? I mean ...come on??!! Has she called out ANYONE other than YOU..???!?! What does she agree with SANFORD on.....ANYTHING ??? What does she agree with Mrs. Gilda Cobb-Hunter on......ANYTHING??? How about Robert-o Ford-asa...?? How is she holding his hands on the issues presently on the docket ?!?! Come on WALLACE......are YOU not going to use Glenn's CANNON at all...!!!!!????
Geez ????? I highly suggest you go fishing up along the Great PEE DEE river before Santee "SANDANISTA" Cooper gets through with spewing COAL til kingdom come !!!!!
January 12, 2009 at 12:12 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
blah_blah_blah (anonymous) says...
"I am a died-in-the-wool, right-of-Attila-the-Hun Republican."
i've heard of "died-in-the-wool" used before, but could someone enlighten me as to the "right-of-Atilla-the-Hun Republican."
also, i understand what he's saying, i just want to know the origin of that saying.
January 12, 2009 at 12:24 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
blah_blah_blah (anonymous) says...
P&C,
isn't it:
DYED in the wool?
January 12, 2009 at 12:48 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
summerville_guy (anonymous) says...
Is it just me, or does Hutto look pretty hot in her picture? ;-)
January 12, 2009 at 3:12 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
GermanyXO (anonymous) says...
At this point, WALLACE no longer deserves any honorable distinction as being someone who once represented the interests of Charleston voters. His name is simply WALLACE and until he wins the next election (which I highly doubt based on his adolescent "my rich lawyer friends will help me out of this" behavior demonstrated now), he needs to move on and apologize to his high-dollar paying constituent/supporters for making promises his election loss can't cash.
Loser!
January 12, 2009 at 3:17 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
blah_blah_blah (anonymous) says...
dude,
anne is very pretty!
January 12, 2009 at 3:32 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
mkris (anonymous) says...
"right of Atilla the Hun" refers to his and the barbarian Hun's sack of Rome in the 4th century. Atilla and the Huns, unlike other barbarians didn't just want to settle land occupied by Roman citizens and become civilized Roman landholders, he wanted to go to Rome and destroy the whole of the Roman Empire, its laws and culture. Therefore, when referring to someone as 'right' of Atilla, it refers to someone who would destroy for destruction's sake, law, culture and civilization.
January 12, 2009 at 4:04 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Postandcourier.com is pleased to offer readers the enhanced ability to comment on stories. We expect our readers to engage in lively, yet civil discourse. Postandcourier.com does not edit user submitted statements and we cannot promise that readers will not occasionally find offensive or inaccurate comments posted in the comments area. Responsibility for the statements posted lies with the person submitting the comment, not postandcourier.com. If you find a comment that is objectionable, please click "report abuse" and we will review it for possible removal. Please be reminded, however, that in accordance with our Terms of Use and federal law, we are under no obligation to remove any third party comments posted on our website.
Users can now build user-to-user connections, follow friends' recent posts, add an avatar that fits their personality, and more. If you have posted here before you'll need to sign up again, or if you've never posted before, start now by signing up!
Full terms and conditions can be read here.