- BIG STORY: Key lawmakers to push new way for S.C. to pick judges
- MORE NEWS: S.C. justices to decide fate of legislative pay hike
- LOWCOUNTRY, Ariail: Run for your lives!
- BRACK: Norman may be in catbird seat in governor’s race
- MYSTERY PHOTO: Lots of Spanish moss
- FEEDBACK: Send us your thoughts
Key lawmakers to push new way for S.C. to pick judges
By Jack O’Toole, Capitol bureau | State lawmakers who saw last year’s judicial reform bill as only a small first step toward fixing a fundamentally broken system will return to Columbia in January with sweeping new legislation and a deep-pocketed businessman’s political operation backing their efforts.
The new bill, which is expected to be prefiled by December in both chambers by a group of powerful sponsors including S.C. House Speaker Murrell Smith, R-Sumter, and Sen. Wes Climer, R-York, was outlined in a press release this week by DOGESC, a conservative political action committee founded by Lowcountry entrepreneur Rom Reddy.
Reddy, who’s best-known for his bitter and long-running legal battle with state environmental regulators over a seawall behind his Isle of Palms home, pledged to “partner openly with legislators, stakeholders, and citizens to co-sponsor and push the bill through both houses during the upcoming legislative session.” Just days after the DOGESC announcement, , in the latest turn of his ongoing court fight, a judge ruled that Reddy must remove the contested sea wall, but quashed a $289,000 civil fine imposed by the S.C. Department of Environmental Services.
Part of a larger project
Supporters say the judicial reform effort is part of a larger project to address a structural deficiency in the state’s 1895 constitution, which granted the legislature virtually unchecked power over the judicial and executive branches. In the case of the judiciary, they argue, that has led to a judicial selection process in which the legislature effectively hires and fires state judges without any of the checks and balances that exist in other states and at the federal level.
To address that issue without running afoul of the state constitution, the new legislation would give authority to the governor to appoint all 12 members of the Judicial Merit Selection Commission (JMSC), the body that nominates judicial candidates for election by a majority vote of both chambers. Under last year’s reform bill, the commission was expanded from eight to 12 members, with the governor appointing the four new commissioners while lawmakers retained control of two-thirds of the seats.
More controversially, the new proposal would also prohibit sitting legislators or their immediate family members from serving on the commission — a move supporters say is necessary to end what they call the corrupt custom of lawyer-legislators practicing in front of judges whose appointments and reappointments they effectively control.
“If you go to court and you’re on the other side of a lawyer-legislator, you don’t have a prayer,” Reddy said in an Oct. 23 interview. “I’m not saying the judges or the legislators are bad, but if you put people in a broken system, you get broken results.”
S.C. House Freedom Caucus Chairman Jordan Pace, a Goose Creek Republican whose decision to co-sponsor the new legislation with a House speaker he’s publicly feuded with on more than one occasion, is seen as a measure of its broad support. He echoed Reddy’s concerns in an Oct. 24 interview.
“Anybody can see the conflict of interest,” Pace told Statehouse Report. “If Clemson or USC gets to pick the referees, the other side is going to say this isn’t fair, because it’s not.”
What’s the big problem?
But at least one lawyer-legislator, House Minority Leader Todd Rutherford, D-Richland, calls those concerns overblown, noting that not a single judge selected through the legislatively dominated JMSC process has been convicted of public corruption.
“I’m still trying to understand the evil this bill is supposed to fix,” Rutherford said on Oct. 24. “I read articles from other states about all the judges being indicted, charged, convicted, but I don’t see that in South Carolina.”
What’s more, he argued, giving a governor more power over the process would lead to a whole raft of unintended consequences, including the nomination of political cronies and high-dollar donors.
“We have the best of all bad systems,” Rutherford said. “Do we want someone picked because they gave money to the governor or because they support or oppose abortion? Is that really what we want?”
Charleston Republican Sen. Chip Campsen a lawyer-legislator who introduced legislation in 2023 that would have allowed the governor to directly nominate judges with vetting by the JMSC and a majority vote of the legislature, argues that the underlying balance of powers issue must be addressed to protect citizens against legislative overreach.
“It’s like putting three crabs in a bucket,” he said. “When one crab starts climbing out of the bucket, what happens? The other two grab him and hold him down. That’s the brilliance of the founders, and it’s what makes our system work.”
That’s an argument incumbent Gov. Henry McMaster has made throughout his two terms and developed at length in a signing statement accompanying last year’s modest reforms.
“Entrusting a single branch of government with effective control over the screening and selection of candidates and exclusive control over their election,” McMaster wrote, “is not only inconsistent with the
separation-of-powers principles enshrined in our constitution, but it has also created at least the public perception that the process elevates a candidate’s influence and connections over merit and objective qualifications.”
In an Oct. 24 email exchange with Statehouse Report, McMaster spokesman Brandon Charochak said the governor’s position on the issue remains unchanged.
“Governor McMaster has been advocating for this for years, and he is pleased to see others are joining him,” Charochak said.
- Have a comment? Send to: feedback@statehousereport.com
S.C. justices to decide fate of legislative pay hike
By Jack O’Toole, Capitol bureau | The fate of a controversial $18,000 annual pay raise state lawmakers voted to give themselves in this year’s budget appears to hinge on how a majority of the five justices on the state Supreme Court interpret the term “per diem.”
That was the takeaway following oral arguments this week in a case brought by York County Republican Sen. Wes Climer. He argues that the $1,500 increase in monthly “in-district compensation” payments violated the state constitution’s ban on legislative pay raises without an election between enactment of the increase and the time it takes effect.
Prior to the new budget, that compensation was set at $1,000 per month — though lawmakers haven’t seen even those payments since the justices froze legislators’ pay while Climer’s case works its way through the system. If upheld, lawmakers’ total annual compensation would climb from $22,400 to $40,400 — though their $10,400 base salary would remain unchanged.
The question the court will decide is whether the phrase “per diem” — the term the 1895 South Carolina constitution uses to describe lawmakers’ pay, which at the time was calculated on a daily basis — covers the in-district compensation checks, which are ostensibly intended to reimburse lawmakers for out-of-pocket costs that inevitably accrue back home.
Lawyers for the legislature argue that in this context, “per diem” should be understood to refer only to the unchanged base pay, which attorneys for Climer say that interpretation would open the door to backdoor pay raises that violate the clear intent of the constitution.
The court is expected to decide the issue before lawmakers return in January.
In other recent news
ELECTIONS: Weaver announces bid for reelection. Republican State Superintendent Ellen Weaver has launched her bid to keep her office next year.
- Trump to hold fundraiser for Graham next month
- Bright appears to be headed back to the S.C. Senate
- 2 Republicans headed to runoff in election to replace disgraced former S.C. Rep. R.J. May
- Election chairman signed off on $32 million budget request
Upstate measles outbreak rises to 20 confirmed cases. State health officials continued to urge parents to vaccinate their children as four new cases of the once-eradicated disease were diagnosed in the Upstate, bringing the total to 20 in the current outbreak.
Federal shutdown threatens food assistance for almost 600,000 S.C. residents. The U.S. Department of Agriculture has warned states that it will be unable to fund the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, program after Nov. 1 if Republicans and Democrats in Congress can’t reach an agreement to reopen the federal government.
Deal to bring abandoned nuclear site online looks to be nearing completion. At a Tuesday meeting, Santee Cooper board members suggested that the state-owned utility has found a buyer for two unfinished nuclear reactors at the V.C. Summer site, which were abandoned in 2017 at a cost of $9 billion to ratepayers.
S.C. jail suicides expose deadly mental health crisis. Lowcountry jail administrators say more than half of those sitting in South Carolina jails right now are suffering from mental illness, but most facilities lack the resources to help them.
- Have a comment? Send to: feedback@statehousereport.com
Run for your lives!
Award-winning cartoonist Robert Ariail has a special knack for poking a little fun in just the right way. This week, he offers a humorous take on the clam and oyster season.
- Love this week’s cartoon or hate it? Did he go too far, or not far enough? Send your thoughts to feedback@statehousereport.com.
Norman may be in catbird seat in governor’s race
By Andy Brack | You wouldn’t be alone if you felt South Carolina’s C teams are running for governor.
For years, Democrats controlled stuff throughout the Palmetto State, but they started fizzling in the mid-1980s when challenged with good leadership, new ideas and strongarm politics by the late Republican Gov. Carroll Campbell. By the time Republicans hogtied Democrats in a 1990s redistricting battle, the S.C. House changed to GOP, followed by the Senate a few years later.
What’s happened since is that the enthusiasm and dynamism of the 2000s-era GOP in South Carolina faded as early leaders aged out, the culture wars took on new significance and Trumpism transformed the party from seeming to care about governance to making sure people had enough red hats.
So now comes the 2026 gubernatorial race. At least five prominent Republicans – none possessing the caliber of a Campbell or the acumen of a Nikki Haley – are in the hunt for the mansion. On the Democratic side, there’s one declared candidate and another expected to announce soon. No one really stands out. There’s a lot of milquetoasts.
Republican candidates include:
S.C. Attorney General Alan Wilson, who seems to hit headlines mostly when joining others to sue to fuel the culture wars.
U.S. Rep. Nancy Mace, the aggressive Lowcountry congresswoman obsessed with finding television cameras so she can comment on anything.
U.S. Rep. Ralph Norman, the Rock Hill area congressman who touts how conservatively he’s voted for eight years in Congress, even though he was a stumbling block for some efforts pushed by Trump.
Lt. Gov. Pamela Evette, the Greenville businesswoman who is still introducing herself to GOP voters after seven years in office.
State Sen. Josh Kimbrell, R-Spartanburg, who is facing a civil lawsuit from a former business partner over company money.
If you believe the polls, Wilson and Evette appear to have a slight lead over the other candidates, despite lackluster campaigns so far. Evette is trying hard and burning through money early, but it’s not clear it’s really working. Meanwhile Mace, who blasted out of the starting blocks with lots of media presence, seems to have cooled – perhaps a sign that her negatives are starting to rise because of an obsession to talk about transexuals and other culture war issues.
With Kimbrell’s business problems hampering his serious consideration, that leaves Norman, who may be in the catbird seat for next year’s primary. He emphasizes he’s got the most money on hand and is building enthusiasm across the state.
“What I’m going to do as a businessman with a background is I’m going to fix the roads and the bridges,” Norman said this week. “It is unacceptable to have infrastructure in pieces in South Carolina.”
He’s got a pretty good bunch of lines, such as talking about getting rid of corruption and implementing term limits. But they don’t exactly sync with reality when you consider most of the people he would want to limit would be fellow Republicans, who have been in control for 25 years. And if there is corruption, whose watch would it be under?
Meanwhile on the Democratic side, the only candidate to date is Charleston lawyer Mullins McLeod, who is self-funding his race. But he’s facing calls to drop out by Democrats over a disorderly conduct arrest earlier this year. State Rep. Jermaine Johnson, R-Richland, is expected to announce soon.
So far, no candidates impress. What South Carolina needs is a moderate populist who would put a chicken in every pot and fight for the people on pocketbook things like growing jobs, boosting education, improving health care access and protecting the state’s special places
Hmm, a good government populist. Remember former Gov. David Beasley? He could do it.
Andy Brack is editor and publisher of Statehouse Report and the Charleston City Paper. Have a comment? Send to: feedback@statehousereport.com.
Lots of Spanish moss
There’s lots of Spanish moss hanging in front of this mystery building. What and where is it? Bonus points: Why might it be significant now? Send your best guess – plus hometown and name – to: feedback@statehousereport.com.
Last week’s mystery, “Location, location, location,” showed a huge Virgin cruise shop docked in downtown Charleston along Concord Street. The Holy City doesn’t get big ships much any longer as a 100-per-year ship deal with Carnival expired last year.
Hats off to the few who identified the ship: Thomas White of Mount Pleasant; Michael Webb of Hartsville, Allan Peel of San Antonio, Texas; Will Bradley of Las Vegas, Nevada; and George Graf of Palmyra, Va.
- SHARE: If you have a Mystery Photo to share, please send it to us – and make sure you tell us what it is!
Send us your thoughts
Please send us your thoughts about politics and policy in South Carolina, but make sure to leave phone numbers and hometowns to help us verify them for publication. We publish non-defamatory comments, but unless you provide your contact information – name and hometown, plus a phone number used only by us for verification – we can’t publish your views.
- Have a comment? Send your letters or comments to: feedback@statehousereport.com. Make sure to provide your contact details (name, hometown and phone number for verification. Letters are limited to 150 words.
Statehouse Report, founded in 2001 as a weekly legislative forecast that informs readers about what is going to happen in South Carolina politics and policy, is provided by email to you at no charge every Friday.
- Editor and publisher: Andy Brack, 843.670.3996
- Statehouse bureau chief: Jack O’Toole
Donate today
We’re proud to offer Statehouse Report for free. For more than a dozen years, we’ve been the go-to place for insightful independent policy and political news and views in the Palmetto State. And we love it as much as you do.
But now, we can use your help. If you’ve been thinking of contributing to Statehouse Report over the years, now would be a great time to contribute as we deal with the crisis. In advance, thank you.
More
- Mailing address: Send inquiries by mail to: P.O. Box 21942, Charleston, SC 29413
- Subscriptions are free. If you want to subscribe, send us an email: feedback@statehousereport.com with the word “subscribe” in the subject. We hope you’ll keep receiving the great news and information from Statehouse Report, but if you need to unsubscribe, go to the bottom of the weekly email issue and follow the instructions.
- Read our sister publication: Charleston City Paper (every Friday in print; Every day online)
- © 2025, Statehouse Report, a publication of City Paper Publishing, LLC. All rights reserved.
Help keep the City Paper free.
No paywalls.
No subscription cost.
Free delivery at 800 locations.
Help support independent journalism by donating today.