COLUMBIA (WACH) -- South Carolina voters wanting to cast a ballot in upcoming elections will now have to show a photo ID at the polls.
Gov. Nikki Haley signed the bill into law in May.
The NAACP is hoping to share the message knowledge is power with as many people as possible.
The organization opposes the law which requires all voters to present a picture ID, like a valid S.C. driver TMs license, passport or military identification card.
On Tuesday, the NAACP hosted a town hall-style forum to inform the public about the changes while hoping to gain support at the same time with those who also may find the legislation discriminatory.
We will use any and every means that we have at our disposable to ensure the people in this state that will potentially be disenfranchised will have a voice, says S.C. NAACP President Dr. Lonnie Randolph, Jr.
Around 178,000 voters in South Carolina do not have photo IDs required to cast a ballot, according to 2010 Election Commission data.
I am afraid that is going to impact our next election, adds concerned voter Luretha O TMConner of Aiken.
Supporters of the bill believe it will not stop people from voting, but will prevent voter fraud.
Rep. Nathan Ballentine, R-Richland, releasing this statement to WACH Fox News:
In a state that is unfortunately known for ~rough and tumble TM politics, protecting the integrity of our citizens' votes at the ballot box is vital to ensure everyone knows their vote makes a difference. We've seen elections decided by one vote and many times by less than a hundred votes. I expect the Voter-ID bill, like others in the country, to receive pre-clearance and ultimately be upheld in any court. In fact, the U.S. Supreme Court has already stated that similar legislation does not place an undue burden on voters.
The NAACP meeting Tuesday was the last one in a statewide series; however, officials say their efforts to bring progressive election reform to voters will continue as needed.
Leave us your thoughts. What do you think about the Voter-ID bill? Is it fair or discriminatory?