- BIG STORY: Democrats tout full slate of candidates in 2026 elections
- ROUNDUP: Controversial immigration bill passes S.C. House
- ISSUE TRACKER: S.C. Senate overrides McMaster NIL veto
- LOWCOUNTRY, Ariail: ‘Tis the season
- BRACK: Verify, then trust: How to get more out of your news diet
- ANOTHER VIEW: Lawmakers owe victims a vote on hate crimes
Democrats tout full slate of candidates in 2026 elections
By Jack O’Toole, Statehouse bureau | If elections had opening bells, South Carolina’s would have rung at noon on March 30, as the filing period for state, federal and local races officially closed — meaning that June’s 9th’s 2026 Republican and Democratic primary slates are set.
And for the first time in a generation, Democrats will be contesting every race on the ballot, including all 124 S.C. House seats.
“After years of failed Republican leadership that has driven up costs and limited opportunity, we are stepping up with candidates who are ready to fight for South Carolinians and deliver real results in Columbia,” House Democratic Leader Rep. Todd Rutherford said in a release. “I am proud of our caucus and the South Carolina Democratic Party for building a slate that reflects our state and is ready to lead.”
But Republicans were quick to note that they currently enjoy supermajority status in the S.C. House for a reason — and that their already swollen ranks actually grew on filing day, when Marion County Democratic Rep. Lucas Atkinson switched parties and filed for reelection as a Republican.
In a March 30 release, S.C. GOP spokesperson Leighton Gray Smith called the party’s 2026 candidate slate “an overwhelming show of Republican strength, enthusiasm, and grassroots momentum.”
“The growing number of Republican candidates reflects a broader movement across South Carolina, as voters and community leaders increasingly align with the Party’s commitment to conservative principles, economic growth, and individual liberty,” Smith said.
Winthrop political science professor Scott Huffmon told Statehouse Report the full slate of Democratic candidates represents progress for a party that hasn’t won a statewide election since the early 2000s.
“One of the things we’ve seen over this period has been a weakening of the Democratic bench,” Huffmon said, referring to the party’s potential pool of candidates. “So being able to say, ‘Hey, we’re running candidates in every race’ is definitely a big deal, even if they don’t have an incredible showing on election day.”
Major state and federal contests on this year’s ballot
High-profile state and federal 2026 races include a hotly contested gubernatorial race to replace the term-limited Gov. Henry McMaster, a large Republican primary field challenging incumbent U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham, and an even larger group of 18 Democrats and Republicans running in the U.S. 1st Congressional District — including former GOP Gov. and Congressman Mark Sanford.
In the governor’s race, most polling to date has shown incumbent Lt. Gov. Pamela Evette, S.C. Attorney General Alan Wilson and retiring U.S. 1st District Rep. Nancy Mace locked in a tight three-way race on the GOP side, though most political observers say a large undecided vote means the contest is still wide open. Other GOP candidates include Spartanburg Sen. Josh Kimbrell, 5th District U.S. Rep. Ralph Norman, businessman Rom Reddy and Hartsville businesswoman Jacqueline Hicks DuBose.
For the Democrats, Richland County Rep. Jermaine Johnson, Upstate businessman and former Clinton administration official Billy Webster, and Lowcountry attorney Mullins McLeod are vying for the party’s gubernatorial nod.
In the U.S. Senate race, Graham will face six GOP opponents, including former Trump administration official Paul Dans. And on the Democratic side, former 1st Congressional District candidate and physician Annie Andrews is squaring off against Brandon Brown and Kyle Freeman.
And in the contest to fill Wilson’s attorney general post, Lowcountry Democratic lawyer Richard Hricik will face the victor of a Republican primary that includes Georgetown Sen. Stephen Goldfinch and longtime First Circuit Solicitor David Pascoe, who switched parties last year.
But it was the 1st Congressional District contest that got most of the attention on filing day, when Sanford made a last-minute surprise appearance in the race. The former two-term governor will be running in the GOP primary against Charleston County Councilwoman Jenny Costa Honeycutt, Berkeley County Rep. Mark Smith and a field of eight other candidates.
Huffmon, the Winthrop political scientist, said Sanford’s prospects would likely turn on how GOP primary voters process his complicated political history, which includes periods of real popularity, a longshot 2020 primary challenge to President Donald Trump, and an infamous hike down the Appalachian Trail that almost drove him from the governor’s office.
“It’s really just a question of whether voters still remember what they liked about him or whether they still remember what they didn’t approve of about him, and whether that even matters,” he said. “We’ll have to see how all that plays out.”
Meanwhile, across the aisle, a total of seven Democrats are running for the Lowcountry seat, including Charleston attorney and Coast Guard veteran Mac Deford, Beaufort nonprofit counselor Mayra Rivera-Vazquez and Charleston Vice Adm. Nancy Lacore (ret.).
The state’s other open congressional race is in GOP gubernatorial candidate Ralph Norman’s 5th district, where York County Sen. Wes Climer will face the winner of a Democratic primary between Andrew Clough and Mallory Dittmer.
Before filing day was out, the leaders of both major parties were claiming victory in the candidate recruitment competition.
“We’ve had a near record number of 464 candidates file to run on the Republican ticket for the mid-term elections versus only 384 who are willing to be associated with the Democrat Party,” S.C. GOP Chairman Drew McKissick said. “The reason for that is the same as why so many people are leaving the Democrats behind: because the Republican Party represents the vast majority of voters in South Carolina and our shared conservative values.”
But Democrats touted the strength of their candidates in every race — an accomplishment they ascribed to hard work and “the corruption, the failures and the broken promises that Republicans have delivered decade after decade.”
“South Carolina families deserve a real choice at the ballot box in every county and every district, and this year, we are making that a reality,” Democratic Chair Christale Spain said. “The South Carolina Democratic Party has recruited a historic slate of candidates who reflect the full diversity and shared values of this state, and we intend to compete everywhere.”
Looking forward, Winthrop’s Huffmon said he expects the campaigns to start engaging more aggressively now that the filing period is over.
“What I’m looking for now is who starts spending money where, and who starts raising money from whom,” Huffmon said. “And then, of course, we’ll all be looking to see who starts lobbing grenades.”
For a full list of 2026 candidates, visit the state elections website at scvotes.gov.
- Have a comment? Send to: feedback@statehousereport.com
Controversial immigration bill passes S.C. House
By Jack O’Toole, Statehouse bureau | A controversial bill requiring local law enforcement agencies to assist in federal immigration enforcement passed the Republican-controlled S.C. House on April 1 in a party-line 85-30 vote.
Under the bill, any S.C. law enforcement agency that operates a detention facility must enter into a so-called 287(g) agreement with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).
The agreements can range from simply holding suspected illegal immigrants in local jails at federal request to street-level enforcement actions, such as accompanying federal officers on immigration raids and what critics call “show me your papers” traffic stops.
GOP supporters say the legislation is just a commonsense mandate that will put federal, state and local law enforcement officials on the same page, while Democrats argue that local sheriffs and police are best situated to make enforcement decisions for their own communities. About 37 local agencies in S.C. have voluntarily entered into 287 (g) agreements to date.
The bill now heads to the S.C. Senate, where it’s believed to have broad support among the supermajority of GOP members.
In other recent news
2026: First GOP governor’s debate a mostly civil affair. Despite an increasing chippy environment on the campaign trail, the first Republican gubernatorial debate featured in-door voices and few policy disagreements.
STATEHOUSE: S.C. Senate rejects tax conformity. The Senate on Tuesday voted to shelve legislation that for one year sought to conform the state’s tax code to federal changes made under President Donald Trump’s “One Big Beautiful Bill.”
- S.C. Senate votes to override McMaster’s NIL veto
- S.C. senators do budget prep as priorities pile high before sine die
- S.C. lawmakers consider new drone restrictions
- McMaster signs bills reducing income tax rates, boat property taxes
- S.C. House approves bill aimed at easing state’s doctor shortage
- S.C. bill would give additional protections to police dogs
- S.C. bill would require judges to start child custody cases with 50-50 presumption
- S.C. lawmaker says FBI contacted him about his claim regarding S.C. lobbying activities
S.C. legislator charged with DUI. Rep. Adam Duncan, R-Seneca, was released from the Oconee County jail March 31 on a personal recognizance bond, meaning he does not have to pay as long as he continues to show up for court hearings.
Longtime Greenville County elections director picked to lead state Election Commission. Conway Belangia will take charge of South Carolina’s state election office following months of turmoil at the agency.
Over 3,500 citations issued under hands-free driving law. Data shows drivers in Charleston County received more citations than anywhere in the state in the first 30 days of enforcement of S.C.’s new hands-free driving law.
Residents push back against energy rate increase. Around 100 members of the public attended a public hearing for the South Carolina Public Service Commission March 31, arguing against Dominion Energy’s plans to increase the energy rate by 12%.
S.C. sees no new measles cases as end of outbreak nears. There were no new measles cases in South Carolina in the latest update from the Department of Public Health on March 31, drawing the worst outbreak in decades toward an end.
‘No Kings’ protests draw record crowds in S.C. and across nation. Last weekend’s ‘No Kings’ protests against President Donald Trump saw record crowds at 3,300 sites across the country. In S.C., thousands gathered at several events, including more than 7,000 in North Charleston and more than 1,000 at the S.C. Statehouse.
S.C. Senate overrides McMaster NIL veto
By Jack O’Toole, Statehouse bureau | The S.C. Senate on April 1 voted to join their House colleagues in overriding Gov. Henry McMaster’s veto of a bill exempting state universities’ payments to student athletes from normal disclosure requirements under S.C. law.
Supporters said the amendment to the state’s name, image and likeness law, which regulates payments to student athletes, was necessary to avoid putting S.C. athletic programs at a competitive disadvantage when all 49 other states shield such information from disclosure.
Bills that are on the move
Immigration: Legislation requiring local law enforcement agencies to assist in federal immigration enforcement passed the S.C. House 85-30 along party lines on April 1. The bill now heads to the S.C. Senate.
Taxes: Gov. Henry McMaster this week signed a bill to cut the state’s top tax rate from 6% to 5.21%. Further property and income tax cuts are advancing in both chambers. LATEST: The S.C. Senate on April 1 voted down a House bill that would have extended federal tax breaks under President Trump’s “Big, Beautiful Bill” to state taxpayers.
Concurrency: A bill by Beaufort Republican Sen. Tom Davis that would allow local governments to limit development in areas with insufficient infrastructure was amended and advanced on March 12 by the Labor, Commerce and Industry Committee.
Juvenile justice: Two bills have passed the House — one making it easier to try 16 and 17 year olds as adults and another to mandate fingerprinting when juveniles come into the system. LATEST: A bipartisan bill to add additional guardrails before some juveniles are moved to adult court is pending before the House Judiciary Committee.
Bills in less of a hurry
Judicial selection: A bill with the support of leaders in both chambers would give the governor more power in selecting state judges. LATEST: S.C. House members passed the bill 86-25 on Feb. 11, sending it to the Senate, where it currently resides in the Senate Judiciary Committee.
DOGE S.C.: Multiple bills promising to cut the state workforce and the regulations they enforce have been introduced for consideration in 2026. In particular, House GOP leaders have pledged to get their “Small Business Regulatory Freedom Act” passed through the S.C. Senate this session. LATEST: The bill is still awaiting action in the Senate Judiciary Committee.
Rolling back affirmative action and DEI: Several bills are still currently awaiting consideration, including one to codify Gov. Henry McMaster’s executive order ending affirmative action in state contracting.
Abortion: A House Judiciary subcommittee on Jan. 14 killed one bill to treat abortion as homicide and advanced another to reclassify abortion pills as Schedule IV drugs. LATEST: The S.C. House on Feb. 4 voted 81-31 to advance the abortion pill rescheduling bill to the S.C. Senate.
- Last updated: 9 a.m., April 3, 2026. You can find the latest update every Friday at charlestoncitypaper.com/statehouse.
‘Tis the season
Award-winning cartoonist Robert Ariail has a special knack for poking a little fun in just the right way. This week, he has a little something to say about the absurd amount of pollen.
- Love this week’s cartoon or hate it? Did he go too far, or not far enough? Send your thoughts to feedback@statehousereport.com.
Brack: Verify, then trust: How to get more out of your news diet
Editor’s note: With Andy Brack out of the office, we’re bringing you a blast from the past, in the form of a 2021 column that still holds water today.
Commentary by Andy Brack | When word came this week that a former journalism professor passed away, it led to thoughts about how people’s consumption and understanding of news has evolved.
For 50 years, Donald Shaw taught students at the University of North Carolina’s journalism school, arguably one of the best in the nation. A man who sometimes seemed the stereotype of the absent-minded professor, he was wickedly smart as he labored to drill the tenets of basic newswriting and editing into the thick skulls of know-it-all grad students, some of whom would become know-it-all columnists.
During this training, Shaw’s mild but tough manner belied something that he didn’t talk much about: how he was a rock star in academic journalism circles. In the early 1970s, he and a colleague published research on how the media helped to set the agenda of people in a democracy. That may seem obvious today, but in pre-Internet days, this was the stuff from which legends are made.
In a groundbreaking paper followed by more research and a book, the authors described how news gatherers helped to shape political reality: “Readers learn not only about a given issue, but also how much importance to attach to that issue from the amount of information in a news story and its position. In reflecting what candidates are saying during a campaign, the mass media may well determine the important issues — that is, the media may set the ‘agenda’ of the campaign.”
When there were just a few networks and every town of any size had a newspaper, media were powerful voices in our communities. But as the Internet evolved, they started losing ground in influencing people.
Just look at how political campaigns have changed. When Shaw published his research, candidates relied on advertising, news stories and person-to-person organizing to prevail. But then came more sophisticated methods of politicking — polling, opposition research, professional fundraising, direct mail, websites and a broad array of ways to advertise and spend money.
Similarly, messaging changed. Today’s newspapers remain influential, but no longer rule the roost. In 2020, for example, 10 newspapers stopped printing in South Carolina, The Post and Courier recently reported. And because anyone now has the ability to publish information through the Internet, everyone is a publisher. These days, the noise of so much information is awfully loud.
While news organizations no longer have a stranglehold on what information consumers get, it’s caused a problem that Shaw’s agenda-setting couldn’t envision — a glut of information that’s so hard to sift through that noxious data creeps in to blur the truth. The cacophony of misinformation, disinformation and outright lies that are out there — along with ploys by foreign governments to create disharmony by using fake news reports to replace reality — is threatening societal norms.
So here are a few tips on how to be a more discriminating consumer of news thanks, in part, to a story in Scientific American:
Don’t overdose on news. The more news that you consume isn’t necessarily better. It can lead to feeling overwhelmed and anxious. Get what you need, but turn off the news so you don’t overdose.
Go past the headlines. Soon-to-retire news anchor Bill Sharpe of Charleston recently described how television news often provides headlines and how news consumers need to go to newspapers to learn more details. Six or seven words don’t tell a full story. To understand more about issues, you have to do some homework.
Check the facts. If something sounds fishy, it may well be. So use the power of the Internet to check other sources to see if the information is accurate. A couple of trusted journalism sources: PolitiFact.com and FactCheck.org.
Diversify. Read credible sources outside your comfort zone to get a fuller picture. Credible news organizations should offer more than one viewpoint in a story. But you should also check various sources. If you generally watch TV only, go to a national newspaper website to verify something. Remember: the Facebook algorithm feeds you what it thinks you want to read. Move beyond that to make sure things are what they purport to be.
These days, we’ve got to work a little harder to make sure what we’re reading is true. Verify. Then trust.
Andy Brack is editor and publisher of the Charleston City Paper and Statehouse Report. Have a comment? Send to: feedback@statehousereport.com
Another view: Lawmakers owe victims a vote on hate crimes
By the Charleston City Paper Editorial Board | “You better keep running, boy!”
If that line sounds familiar, it should. You’ve likely heard it a hundred times in a hundred B movies, invariably shouted by the racist White guy who just fired a shot in the general direction of an innocent Black man who’s running for his life in the other direction.
Know who else has heard that line recently? Jarvis McKenzie. Only he didn’t hear it in a movie. Instead, he heard it from one of his White neighbors, Jonathan Felkel, in the Columbia-area gated community of Spring Valley last July.
Right after Felkel fired a shot in the air in his direction.
Why did Felkel do it? Because as he later told investigators, McKenzie was a Black man — and as such, no doubt associated with “dangerous criminals.” The kind of people who should “not be around this area.”
You better keep running, boy!
Last month, Felkel pleaded guilty to a hate crime in a Richland County federal courtroom, where he’s now facing up to ten years in prison and a $250,000 fine.
Which, well, good. Imagine being terrorized by some rifle-toting rube who decided you didn’t belong in your own neighborhood because of your skin color. Mr. McKenzie deserved justice — and thanks to federal prosecutors, he got it.
The problem? His case should never have seen the inside of a federal courtroom. And the only reason it did is because South Carolina is one of just two states where lawmakers refuse to pass a state-level hate crimes law — forcing federal prosecutors to do our job for us.
What’s worse, S.C.’s hate crime bill — titled the Clementa Pinckney Act in honor of the former state senator and pastor who was murdered in the 2015 Mother Emanuel massacre — has long had majority support in both legislative chambers.
In fact, it passed the S.C. House overwhelmingly in 2021 and 2023, only to be killed by parliamentary maneuvers that kept it from coming up for a vote in the S.C. Senate, where opponents say its harsher penalties for crimes motivated by hate are unfair.
“I think we ought to treat everybody the same,” Senate Majority Leader Shane Massey, R-Edgefield, told reporters last year. “If somebody assaults you, it ought to be the same as a penalty for assaulting me.”
Fair enough. And to Massey’s credit, he’s voted against other “enhanced sentencing” bills on the same grounds. But note that the operative word in that sentence isn’t “against” — it’s “vote.”
Which is precisely what hasn’t happened with the hate crimes bill.
In a City Paper story this week, Charleston Rep. Wendell Gilliard says he’s “optimistic” about passing the crime bill in the House again this year, noting that he met for 40 minutes last week with Republican Speaker Murrell Smith on the issue.
That’s right. We could be heading for another Senate showdown on hate crimes between now and the close of the 2026 session on May 14.
At which point, we’d ask only this of every senator: Listen to your constituents. Listen to the arguments. Listen to Jarvis McKenzie.
And then finally, at long last, take a vote.
This editorial was first published in the April 3 edition of the Charleston City Paper.
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
We can use your help
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)
- © 2026, 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.