South Carolina Votes

S136 requires the state to dismiss and expunge pending charges for unlawful possession of a handgun if those charges relate to events that occurred before the enactment of the South Carolina Constitutional Carry / Second Amendment Preservation Act of 2024. It also allows one prior conviction for unlawful handgun possession (if it occurred before that 2024 law) to be expunged, assuming the person applies within five years of this bill’s enactment. And importantly, the dismissal of such charges—or their expungement—may not be used as the basis for civil lawsuits arising from the arrest.

The South Carolina State Senate passed S136 on May 28, 2025 by a vote of 40 to 2. We have assigned pluses to the ayes because this bill rightly restores the Second Amendment-protected rights of individuals who were previously prosecuted under unconstitutional handgun restrictions. By dismissing and expunging these charges, the Senate acknowledges that such prosecutions violated the God-given right to keep and bear arms. This measure is an important step toward upholding the full protections guaranteed by the Bill of Rights.

HCR3008 applies to Congress for an Article V constitutional convention limited to proposing an amendment that would impose term limits on members of the U.S. House and Senate. It specifies that the convention may only consider term limits, bars changes to the Bill of Rights and certain amendments such as the 13th–15th, prevents Congress from controlling delegates or procedures, and reserves South Carolina’s right to instruct or recall its delegates.

The South Carolina State Senate passed HCR3008 on May 7, 2025 by a vote of 29 to 14. We have assigned pluses to the nays because term limits undermine the right of the people to choose their representatives. More importantly, efforts to call an Article V “convention of the states” are dangerous and must be opposed. Although framed as "limited," such a convention could become a “runaway convention” with the power to rewrite or significantly alter the U.S. Constitution—jeopardizing the very protections that limit government power. Article V was intended to correct structural defects in the Constitution, not to address the failure of elected officials to uphold their oath of office. Instead of risking a constitutional convention, states should use Article VI to enforce the Constitution as written by nullifying unconstitutional federal laws. Upholding and applying the Constitution—not rewriting it—is the proper remedy for federal overreach.

S477 would expand access to hormonal birth control by allowing pharmacists to dispense “self-administered hormonal contraceptives” (such as the pill, patch, or ring), and in some cases injectables, without a patient-specific doctor’s prescription.

The South Carolina State Senate passed S477 on May 6, 2025 by a vote of 44 to 0. We have assigned pluses to the nays because this bill dangerously normalizes hormonal contraceptives by allowing them to be dispensed without a doctor’s oversight, risking missed diagnoses and potential abuse by traffickers. Many of these drugs act as abortifacients by preventing implantation of a developing preborn child, resulting in silent abortions. Government’s duty is to protect human life, not facilitate its destruction; lawmakers should work to prohibit all abortion methods and uphold the God-given right to life affirmed in the Declaration of Independence and secured by the Fifth and 14th Amendments.

S102 would let municipalities that didn’t have an operating millage (a local property-tax rate for general operations) as of January 1, 2025—or those that incorporate after that date—begin to impose one. The amount they could raise would be capped: The millage could generate up to one-third of what the municipality’s general fund cost in the previous year (or for new ones, one-third of what their proposed budget calls for).

The South Carolina State Senate passed S102 on May 1, 2025 by a vote of 37 to 2. We have assigned pluses to the nays because property taxes, like income taxes, are an immoral and unconstitutional form of government-imposed theft. True ownership cannot exist if citizens must continually pay the state for the right to keep their own land—failing to do so results in government seizure, proving that the state, not the individual, is the ultimate owner. This violates the very principle of private property, which is essential to self-government and liberty. The Bill of Rights and the 14th Amendment safeguard property rights by forbidding any state from depriving a person of property without due process of law. Rather than creating new avenues to tax citizens, lawmakers should protect property rights and seek to abolish all forms of taxation that threaten individual sovereignty.

S163 prohibits state and local governments from accepting or requiring payment in a central bank digital currency (CBDC) or participating in CBDC testing, while allowing individuals and businesses to use other digital currencies. It ensures digital assets such as cryptocurrency and NFTs are taxed and regulated the same as cash transactions, sets requirements for digital asset mining to avoid overloading the power grid, exempts certain mining and staking services from securities laws, and empowers the attorney general to prosecute fraud related to digital asset services.

The South Carolina State Senate passed S163 on May 1, 2025 by a vote of 38 to 1. We have assigned pluses to the ayes because Article I, Sections 8 and 10 of the U.S. Constitution grant Congress—not unelected bureaucrats or central banks—the sole authority to coin money and regulate its value. Central bank digital currencies threaten to give government unprecedented power to track, monitor, and even control every transaction, paving the way for mass surveillance and political coercion through financial deplatforming or asset freezes. Instead of embracing programmable money, states should work to restore sound money—such as gold and silver—and protect the financial privacy and economic liberty of their citizens.

S425 requires every public school district in South Carolina to annually identify how many of its students live in poverty (using criteria such as eligibility for Medicaid, SNAP, TANF, or being homeless/foster/transient) and expand access to free school meals for those students. It also mandates that districts ensure families get the application materials and help completing them, forbid penalizing students who can’t pay meal debts (e.g., by denying graduation or extracurriculars), and requires school boards to participate in the federal Community Eligibility Provision (CEP) unless that would create a financial hardship.

The South Carolina State House of Representatives passed S425 on April 30, 2025 by a vote of 94 to 15. We have assigned pluses to the nays because feeding—and educating—children is the responsibility of parents, not government. This bill grows the unconstitutional welfare state by using taxpayer dollars to provide “free” meals, further entrenching debt, dependency, and poverty. It also advances the UN’s Agenda 2030 “Zero Hunger” initiative, which promotes state control over “food security”—something that is not the responsibility of government. Neither Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution nor any other provision grants the federal government authority to run social-welfare programs, and government schools should not push social-welfare programs on people. By subsidizing families rather than encouraging self-reliance, S425 deepens dependence on government and expands the already failing, compulsory K-12 system.

H3944 allows electric battery-powered motor vehicles to exceed normal weight limits by up to 2,000 pounds, without surpassing a total of 82,000 pounds.

The South Carolina State House of Representatives passed H3944 on April 22, 2025 by a vote of 87 to 23. We have assigned pluses to the nays because government should not grant special exemptions based on the type of vehicle one drives. Such favoritism violates the fundamental principle of equal protection under the law. Moreover, this bill advances the leftist, globalist climate agenda by incentivizing electric vehicles in line with the United Nations’ Agenda 2030 climate goals.

H4134 would extend the state’s High Growth Small Business Job Creation Act—also known as the Angel Investor Tax Credit Act—for another ten years, through 2035. It renames the law to the "High Growth Small Business Job Creation Act of 2013 – Angel Investor Tax Credit Act," and keeps in place its provisions.

The South Carolina State House of Representatives passed H4134 on April 22, 2025 by a vote of 90 to 19. We have assigned pluses to the nays because government should not pick winners and losers. This violates the Declaration of Independence’s principle that all men are created equal and the 14th Amendment’s guarantee of equal protection under the law. Rather than engaging in corporate welfare, government should remove burdensome regulations and allow businesses to succeed or fail through the free market.

H3930 prohibits government entities from knowingly keeping registries or records of privately owned firearms or their owners (outside of criminal investigations). It also bans payment card networks and other financial processors from using or encouraging merchant category codes (MCCs) that identify firearm or ammunition retailers in order to track those transactions.

The South Carolina State House of Representatives passed H3930 on April 9, 2025 by a vote of 85 to 10. We have assigned pluses to the ayes because this bill blocks unconstitutional efforts to track lawful firearm purchases through credit-card data. The ISO’s adoption of a merchant category code for gun and ammunition retailers—backed by globalist entities and embraced by federal agencies—paves the way for mass surveillance and a de facto national gun registry. Such tracking violates the First, Second, and Fourth Amendments; chills lawful purchases; and opens the door to illegal searches and eventual confiscation.

H3927 would ban state and local public institutions—including state agencies, public schools, colleges, and universities—from promoting diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs. It defines DEI broadly to include offices, units, policies, trainings or programs that give preferences or special treatment based on race, gender, color, ethnicity, national origin, or sexual orientation, except where required by federal or state law. Entities subject to the law would have to certify compliance, file reports of complaints, and could be subject to actions by the attorney general.

The South Carolina State House of Representatives passed H3927 on April 2, 2025 by a vote of 82 to 32. We have assigned pluses to the ayes because DEI programs advance racial and ideological favoritism, undermining the Constitution’s guarantee of equal protection under the law. Equity-based policies promote Marxist ideas of group privilege rather than individual liberty, fostering division instead of unity. Although this bill unfortunately allows for exceptions (which legislators should eliminate), it takes an important step toward restoring equal treatment, protecting freedom of conscience, and pushing back against the Left’s collectivist agenda.

S425 requires every public school district in South Carolina to annually identify how many of its students live in poverty (using criteria such as eligibility for Medicaid, SNAP, TANF, or being homeless/foster/transient) and expand access to free school meals for those students. It also mandates that districts ensure families get the application materials and help completing them, forbid penalizing students who can’t pay meal debts (e.g., by denying graduation or extracurriculars), and requires school boards to participate in the federal Community Eligibility Provision (CEP) unless that would create a financial hardship.

The South Caroline State Senate passed S425 on April 1, 2025 by a vote of 45 to 0. We have assigned pluses to the nays because feeding—and educating—children is the responsibility of parents, not government. This bill grows the unconstitutional welfare state by using taxpayer dollars to provide “free” meals, further entrenching debt, dependency, and poverty. It also advances the UN’s Agenda 2030 “Zero Hunger” initiative, which promotes state control over “food security”—something that is not the responsibility of government. Neither Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution nor any other provision grants the federal government authority to run social-welfare programs, and government schools should not push social-welfare programs on people. By subsidizing families rather than encouraging self-reliance, S425 deepens dependence on government and expands the already failing, compulsory K-12 system.

H3558 establishes a process for selecting, qualifying, and overseeing the state’s delegates to a potential Article V constitutional convention. It provides for seven commissioners and one alternate chosen by the Legislature, sets eligibility requirements (e.g., citizenship, residency, voter status, age, no recent felony or lobbying history), and requires an oath of office. The bill creates a legislative advisory committee to monitor the delegates’ actions, directs that they cannot support amendments infringing on core liberties, and grants them pay and expense allowances similar to legislators.

The South Carolina State House of Representatives passed H3558 on March 5, 2025 by a vote of 76 to 29. We have assigned pluses to the nays because this bill gives a false sense of security that an Article V convention can be controlled, even though delegates from other states would not be bound by South Carolina’s rules and could propose sweeping changes—including a new constitution, as happened in 1787. Convention of States simulations in 2016 and 2023 produced amendments massively expanding federal power, spending, and control—the very abuses advocates claim they want to stop. A convention today would be a “Trojan horse” for globalists and leftists seeking to dismantle constitutional limits on government. Rather than risking a runaway convention that could permanently alter or destroy constitution, legislators must honor their oath, nullify unconstitutional federal actions, and use Article VI to enforce the Constitution.

H5100 is the $14.5 billion General Appropriations Act for FY 2024-25.

The Senate passed H5100 on June 26, 2024, by a vote of 41 to 0. We have assigned minuses to the nays because this bill is comprised of profligate amounts of illegitimate taxation and spending. Not only is it full of numerous earmarks and pet projects that far exceed income and property tax relief, but it doubles the funding to the Office of Resilience, which seeks to implement Biden-Harris' pro-UN Agenda 2030 “Green New Deal” policies. Individual liberty and state sovereignty require fiscal responsibility. South Carolina should end big government and reckless out-of-control spending by eliminating the immoral and anti-constitutional forms of taxation that take from citizens the wages they have rightfully earned.

H4624 bans a health care professional from engaging in the provision or performance of “gender transition procedures” to a person under 18 years of age.

The House passed H4624 on May 9, 2024, by a vote of 67 to 26. We have assigned pluses to the yeas because no person has a right to harm a child using the pretext of LGBTQ+ ideology. Sex mutilation against minor children violates their “unalienable” right to life and limb, as it absurdly attempts to erase their biological sex with fictional “gender identity” constructs. According to the Bill of Rights and the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, every State has a duty to defend the basic humanity of its citizens, each of whom is born distinctly male or female, and, as the Declaration of Independence affirms, created equally in the image of God.

S915 would create the office of the Secretary of Public Health and Policy to develop a “cohesive, coordinated, and comprehensive State Health Services Plan.”

S915 passed the House on May 8, 2024, by a vote of 98 to 15. We have assigned pluses to the nays because this bill would consolidate several state agencies into one and put a single person or "health czar" in control of South Carolina’s public-health bureaucracy. In addition, the new office within the executive branch would have “emergency powers, in addition to its existing powers, over persons as necessary” to issue orders prescribing “restrictive measures,” such as mask mandates, quarantines, or vaccinations. Yet, “public health” is not the legitimate object of government, as an individual’s non-injurious personal health care decisions should be considered private matters not under federal, state, or local jurisdiction in the United States. Compelling every person to receive or pay for “preventive” medical treatment violates the fundamental rights of the people protected by the Bill of Rights and the 14th Amendment.

HA29A-H5100 would have amended the FY 2024-25 General Appropriations Act to prohibit state agencies from distributing voter registration forms to non-citizens.

The House failed to advance HA29A-H5100 when it adopted a motion to table the amendment on May 8, 2024, by a vote of 98 to 14. We have assigned pluses to the nays because non-citizens, especially illegal aliens, should not receive “public assistance benefits” (e.g., Medicaid), let alone voter registration forms. The U.S. Constitution was written to “promote of general Welfare” of American citizens, and only “We the People of the United States” retain the “right of Representation in the Legislature.” Misappropriating taxpayer funds or allowing non-citizens to illegally register to vote fails to “secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity.” South Carolina should exercise its authority under Article I, Section 4, of the Constitution, as well as the 14th and 26th Amendments, for purposes of election integrity, thereby ensuring equal protection of “the right of citizens of the United States to vote.”

H4624 bans a health care professional from engaging in the provision or performance of “gender transition procedures” to a person under 18 years of age.

The Senate passed H4624 on May 2, 2024, by a vote of 28 to 8. We have assigned pluses to the yeas because no person has a right to harm a child using the pretext of LGBTQ+ ideology. Sex mutilation against minor children violates their “unalienable” right to life and limb, as it absurdly attempts to erase their biological sex with fictional “gender identity” constructs. According to the Bill of Rights and the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, every State has a duty to defend the basic humanity of its citizens, each of whom is born distinctly male or female, and, as the Declaration of Independence affirms, created equally in the image of God.

  J35 prevented former State Representative and Democratic gubernatorial candidate James Smith from being elected to the position of Circuit Court Judge, 5th Judicial Circuit, Seat 1.

Senate members adopted a joint motion to recommit the election to the Judicial Merit Selection Commission on April 17, 2024, by a vote of 24 to 21. We have assigned pluses to the yeas because justice is the overall purpose of civil government, and the care of human life—not its destruction—is its greatest responsibility. However, a judicial system is only as good as those who apply the law. James Smith’s open and unabashed support for abortion, as revealed in his endorsement from Planned Parenthood, renders him unfit to hold public office, particularly that of a judge. The right to life is the most fundamental, God-given, and “unalienable” right asserted in the Declaration of Independence and guaranteed by the Fifth and 14th Amendments to the U.S. Constitution.

J35 prevented former State Representative and Democratic gubernatorial candidate James Smith from being elected to the position of Circuit Court Judge, 5th Judicial Circuit, Seat 1.

House members adopted a joint motion to recommit the election to the Judicial Merit Selection Commission on April 17, 2024, by a vote of 70 to 36. We have assigned pluses to the yeas because justice is the overall purpose of civil government, and the care of human life—not its destruction—is its greatest responsibility. However, a judicial system is only as good as those who apply the law. James Smith’s open and unabashed support for abortion, as revealed in his endorsement from Planned Parenthood, renders him unfit to hold public office, particularly that of a judge. The right to life is the most fundamental, God-given, and “unalienable” right asserted in the Declaration of Independence and guaranteed by the Fifth and 14th Amendments to the U.S. Constitution.

S1126 proposes to amend the state's constitution to provide that only a citizen of the United States and South Carolina who is at least eighteen years of age and properly registered is entitled to vote.

The Senate passed S1126 (Second Reading) on April 3, 2024, by a vote of 40 to 3. We have assigned pluses to the yeas because the U.S. Constitution was written to “promote of the general Welfare” of American citizens. Only “We the People of the United States”—who, owing true faith and allegiance to the Constitution and are not subject to any foreign power—retain the “right of Representation in the Legislature.” South Carolina should exercise its authority under Article I, Section 4, of the Constitution, as well as the 14th and 26th Amendments, to implement free, fair, and secure elections, thereby ensuring equal protection of “the right of citizens of the United States to vote.”

H5164 would increase the amounts of annual refundable tax credits allocated to the Education Scholarship Trust Fund through at least 2027-28 and expand eligibility to all private and homeschool students.

The House passed H5164 on March 21, 2024, by a vote of 69 to 27. We have assigned pluses to the nays because this bill would further expand the government’s monopoly on K-12 education, which seeks to displace traditional private or homeschooling in favor of universal state-sponsored schooling. Its exchange of public subsidies for curriculum and other regulatory controls effectively turns every participating student into a government-school student. Moreover, education is not the role of government. A child's education is the responsibility of his or her family. The best “school choice,” by far, is for parents to choose not to place their child’s education in the hands of the state. Educational and economic freedom cannot be achieved by forcing other citizens to furnish their hard-earned tax dollars to fund all that now entails a compulsory, failing, and government-run K-12 school system.

H3676 would apply to Congress for a “convention of the states” under Article V of the U.S. Constitution, “limited” to proposing “fiscal restraints on the federal government through a balanced budget amendment (BBA).

The House passed H3676 on February 29, 2024, by a vote of 68 to 30. We have assigned pluses to the nays because efforts to call an Article V convention should be resisted. Instead of failing to uphold their oath of office and attempting to rewrite the U.S. Constitution, legislators in South Carolina should act to immediately nullify all unconstitutional federal laws. Whenever the federal government assumes undelegated powers, in violation of the 10th Amendment, nullification of such acts is the proper remedy. Moreover, simply following the Constitution’s limitations on federal power would more than balance the budget, whereas a BBA would have significant loopholes allowing for continued excessive spending. Article V was designed to correct potential errors or defects in the Constitution, not to misconstrue or abuse its powers. The States must use Article VI to enforce the Constitution, rather than use Article V to change it.

S915 would create the office of the Secretary of Public Health and Policy to develop a “cohesive, coordinated, and comprehensive State Health Services Plan.”

S915 passed the Senate on February 21, 2024, by a vote of 44 to 1. We have assigned pluses to the nays because this bill would consolidate several state agencies into one and put a single person or ‘health czar’ in control of South Carolina’s public-health bureaucracy. In addition, the new office within the executive branch would have “emergency powers, in addition to its existing powers, over persons as necessary” to issue orders prescribing “restrictive measures,” such as mask mandates, quarantines, or vaccinations. Yet, “public health” is not the legitimate object of government, as an individual’s non-injurious personal health care decisions should be considered private matters not under federal, state, or local jurisdiction in the United States. Compelling every person to receive or pay for “preventive” medical treatment violates the fundamental rights of the people protected by the Bill of Rights and the 14th Amendment.

SA13-H3594 mandates stiffer criminal penalties for persons who carry handguns into various locations specified by law, regardless of whether they have a concealed weapons permit.

The Senate passed SA13-H3594 on January 30, 2024, by a vote of 22 to 20. We have assigned pluses to the nays because “gun-free zones” are blatantly unconstitutional and demonstrably unsafe. Every person has an "unalienable" natural right to self-defense, irrespective of their location, which is why the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution expressly declares that “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

H3726 establishes the Office of Statewide Workforce Development Coordination (SWDC) within the Department of Employment and Workforce (DEW). It also transfers and restructures the Coordinating Council for Workforce Development (CCWD) from the Department of Commerce to DEW. The CCWD is responsible for fostering discussions, collaborations, and information sharing related to workforce preparation and training in the state. Moreover, it must develop the Unified State Plan (USP), which aims to create a comprehensive statewide education and workforce development strategy that streamlines and unifies efforts across relevant entities.

The South Carolina State Senate passed H3726 on May 10, 2023 by a vote of 41 to 2. We have assigned pluses to the nays because this legislation expands the government by establishing a new government office. The objectives of this agency, namely creating a comprehensive statewide education and workforce development strategy, should be entrusted to the private sector and the free market.

SJR739 grants a one-time approval for South Carolina Housing Tax Credits, not to exceed $29,806,029. This amount comprises $12,889,152 from a prior authorization and $16,916,877 for the tax year ending December 31, 2023. Additionally, the resolution permits a non-recurring allocation of up to $25,000,000 from the unassigned balance in the South Carolina Housing Trust Fund. The State Housing Finance and Development Authority (SC Housing) is tasked with devising a plan to provide this funding as supplementary financial aid for specific multifamily housing projects.

The South Carolina State House of Representatives passed SJR739 on May 10, 2023 by a vote of 84 to 26. We have assigned pluses to the nays because this is government interfering in the free market, and this government subsidized housing benefits only a specific part of the population. This is also another step towards socialism as subsidized housing is a misuse of taxpayer dollars.

H3824 amends the alternative fuel property income tax credit in Section 12-6-3695, which currently allows taxpayers who purchase or construct, install, and place in service eligible property used for distribution, dispensing, or storing alternative fuel at a new or existing fuel distribution or dispensing facility to claim an income tax credit equal to 25 percent of the cost of the property. The bill expands the credit to add that the taxpayer may lease the property and includes individuals in the definition of taxpayer. The bill also adds electrical equipment to the definition of “eligible property” and adds electricity to the definition of “alternative fuel”.

The South Carolina State House of Representatives passes H3824 on May 10, 2023 by a vote of 92 to 16. We have assigned pluses to the nays because this narrative plays right into the UN’s Agenda 2030. This legislation creates more government interference in the free market and taxpayers should not be financially responsible for supporting the Marxist climate-change agenda.

SJR739 grants a one-time approval for South Carolina Housing Tax Credits, not to exceed $29,806,029. This amount comprises $12,889,152 from a prior authorization and $16,916,877 for the tax year ending December 31, 2023. Additionally, the resolution permits a non-recurring allocation of up to $25,000,000 from the unassigned balance in the South Carolina Housing Trust Fund. The State Housing Finance and Development Authority (SC Housing) is tasked with devising a plan to provide this funding as supplementary financial aid for specific multifamily housing projects.

The South Carolina State Senate passed SJR739 on May 3, 2023 by a vote of 43 to 0. We have assigned pluses to the nays because this is government interfering in the free market, and this government subsidized housing benefits only a specific part of the population. This is also another step towards socialism as subsidized housing is a misuse of taxpayer dollars.

S39 establishes an educational scholarship initiative aimed at offering financial assistance to eligible elementary and secondary students to cover approved educational costs. Oversight of this initiative will fall under the purview of the South Carolina Department of Education (SCDE). The scholarship grant per student stands at $6,000, unless annual general appropriations legislation permits adjustments to this limit, either upwards or downwards.

The South Carolina State House of Representatives passed S39 on April 27, 2023 by a vote of 74 to 36. We have assigned pluses to the nays because, while the idea of allowing money to follow a child to any school of their choice may initially sound appealing, it raises concerns. This policy essentially directs government funds toward supporting private schools, inevitably attaching certain conditions and implications to this financial support. Private schools should not accept government money.

S576 prohibits corporations controlled by foreign adversaries, as defined in the bill, from acquiring any real property within the state. However, the restriction does not apply to individuals who are citizens of foreign adversaries but are also U.S. citizens or green card holders residing in the United States, provided they acquire limited real estate for residential, recreational, or commercial purposes as specified in the bill.

The South Carolina State Senate passed S576 on March 23, 2023 by a vote of 31 to 5. We have assigned pluses to the ayes because this is a great first step in preserving state sovereignty, Ultimately, selling property to non-American citizens is a sure way to lose sovereignty as a country and a state. This also compromises national security and impedes on citizens' rights.

S241 establishes the South Carolina Board of Genetic Counselors within the Department of Labor, Licensing, and Regulation (LLR). This board can create rules, regulations, and disciplinary procedures for genetic counseling practice. It consists of five members appointed by the Governor. LLR anticipates about 150 genetic counselors seeking licensure in the first year.

The South Carolina State Senate passed S241 on March 22, 2023 by a vote of 39 to 6. We have assigned pluses to the nays because this is an expansion of government authority into an area that should be left to the free market and private sector. This bill creates government positions that could potentially compete with private jobs. Additionally, patients should have the freedom to choose genetic counselors based on their qualifications and reputation rather than relying on government licensure.

H3604 allocates funds received by South Carolina from the ARPA bill to a corporate welfare project, specifically earmarking $1.2 billion for the construction of a site in Columbia to benefit Volkswagen.

The South Carolina State House of Representatives passed H3604 on March 15, 2023 by a vote of 100 to 12. We have assigned pluses to the nays because this is a gross misuse of public funds. Allocating a substantial portion of federal funds to benefit a specific corporation is not the place of government. The government should not be picking winners and losers and propping certain businesses up over others.

H3604 allocates funds received by South Carolina from the ARPA bill to a corporate welfare project, specifically earmarking $1.2 billion for the construction of a site in Columbia to benefit Volkswagen.

The South Carolina State Senate passed H3604 on March 14, 2023 by a vote of 36 to 4. We have assigned pluses to the nays because this is a gross misuse of public funds. Allocating a substantial portion of federal funds to benefit a specific corporation is not the place of government. The government should not be picking winners and losers and propping certain businesses up over others.

H3014 provides for an enhanced penalty for certain violent crimes committed against a victim who was intentionally targeted due to the offender’s belief or perceptions about the victim.

The South Carolina State House of Representatives passed H3014 on March 8, 2023 by a vote of 84 to 31. We have assigned pluses to the nays because many hate crime laws may infringe on the First Amendment rights to freedom of speech and expression.

H3594 enacts the South Carolina Constitutional Carry/Second Amendment Preservation Act of 2023, eliminating the need for a concealed weapon permit to carry or store a firearm in specific areas. It grants law enforcement the authority to manage found firearms, repeals certain illegal carry charges, broadens penalties for those with prior convictions for certain crimes, and allows individuals with a first-time unlawful possession offense to seek record expungement.

The South Carolina State House of Representatives passed H3594 on February 23, 2023 by a vote of 87 to 26. We have assigned the pluses to the ayes because the fundamental right of the American people to keep and bear arms is protected by the U.S. Constitution, particularly in the 2nd, 9th, and 10th Amendments, and should not be infringed. The Constitution does not restrict where one can or cannot possess a firearm.

S39 establishes an educational scholarship initiative aimed at offering financial assistance to eligible elementary and secondary students to cover approved educational costs. Oversight of this initiative will fall under the purview of the South Carolina Department of Education (SCDE). The scholarship grant per student stands at $6,000, unless annual general appropriations legislation permits adjustments to this limit, either upwards or downwards.

The South Carolina State Senate passed S39 on January 1, 2023 by a vote of 28 to 15. We have assigned pluses to the nays because, while the idea of allowing money to follow a child to any school of their choice may initially sound appealing, it raises concerns. This policy essentially directs government funds toward supporting private schools, inevitably attaching certain conditions and implications to this financial support. Private schools should not accept government money.

H5399 prohibits abortion with no exceptions for rape or incest.

The South Carolina State House of Representatives rejected H5399 on August 30, 2022 by a vote of 47 to 55. We have assigned the plusses to the ayes because the right to life is the most fundamental, God-given, and unalienable right asserted in the Declaration of Independence and protected by the U.S. Constitution. Further, there is nothing in the U.S. Constitution that would prevent states from passing well-constructed statutes or adopting amendments to their state constitutions that provide even greater and more specific protections for the right to life than those provided by the 4th, 5th, and 14th Amendments.

H4408 authorizes the expenditure of federal funds that have been disbursed to the state in the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 passed by congress and signed by the President.

The South Carolina State Senate passed H4408 on April 19, 2022 by a vote of 41 to 0. We have assigned pluses to the nays because the spending of taxpayer money for purposes not authorized under Art. 1 Sec. 8 of the U.S. Constitution tightens the federal-state lockstep on redistribution of income. Additionally, distribution of federal taxpayer dollars comes with contingencies and requirements, forcing states into situations that violate the U.S. Constitution.

H3205 applies to Congress, under the provisions of Article V of the U.S. Constitution, to call for a “Convention of the States limited to proposing amendments to the Constitution of the United States that impose fiscal restraints on the federal government, limit the power and jurisdiction of the federal government, and limit the terms of office for its officials and for members of Congress.”

The South Carolina State Senate passed H3205 on March 9, 2022 by a vote of 27 to 13. We have assigned pluses to the nays because a so-called “Convention of the States” would not be of “limited” purpose. The vague and contradictory text contained in this joint resolution dangerously permits what Article V of the U.S. Constitution describes as a “Convention for proposing Amendments” or second constitutional convention. Notably, Article V of the U.S. Constitution was designed to correct structural deficiencies in the federal government, not the behavior of its elected officials. H3205 should be opposed in favor of less risky, more precise, and immediate solutions that would restore power back to the states and to the people, such as clear-cut proposals in Congress to repeal bad amendments or state nullification of specific unauthorized federal laws.

H4608 ensures fairness in women’s sports in the state and requires the designation of separate sex-specific sports teams to maintain fairness in athletic opportunities for women. Additionally, females are allowed to compete in male sports, but males are not permitted to compete in female sports because of physical and athletic fairness.

The South Carolina State House of Representatives passed H4608 on May 10, 2022 by a vote of 70 to 33. We have assigned pluses to the ayes because the left has been promoting radical Marxist ideas for years. This indoctrination is letting people believe that they can choose their pronouns and that they can be transgender. Scientifically and biblically, there are two genders. Taxpayers fund sports programs in schools, so this legislation ensures that taxpayer dollars will not be going to athletic programs that embrace the woke culture.

H4408 authorizes the expenditure of federal funds that have been disbursed to the state in the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 passed by congress and signed by the President.

The South Carolina State House of Representatives passed H4408 on May 4, 2022 by a vote of 102 to 8. We have assigned pluses to the nays because the spending of taxpayer money for purposes not authorized under Art. 1 Sec. 8 of the U.S. Constitution tightens the federal-state lockstep on redistribution of income. Additionally, distribution of federal taxpayer dollars comes with contingencies and requirements, forcing states into situations that violate the U.S. Constitution.

H3126 prohibits state and local government entities from accepting federal funds to enforce illegal federal mask or vaccine mandates. This legislation also prohibits any discrimination against individuals who choose not to receive a COVID-19 vaccination. Furthermore, no government body or school district in the state can impose a vaccine mandate for employees, students, or volunteers.

The South Carolina State Senate passed H3126 on April 6, 2022 by a vote of 29 to 12.  We have assigned pluses to the ayes because an individual’s personal health care decisions should not be the object of government, nor be under its federal, state, or local jurisdictions in the United States. Forcing an individual to receive a vaccination or partake in any medical procedure would be a violation of their fundamental rights, freedoms, privileges, or immunities protected by the Bill of Rights and the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

H3205 applies to Congress, under the provisions of Article V of the U.S. Constitution, to call for a “Convention of the States limited to proposing amendments to the Constitution of the United States that impose fiscal restraints on the federal government, limit the power and jurisdiction of the federal government, and limit the terms of office for its officials and for members of Congress.”

The South Carolina State House of Representatives passed H3205 on March 29, 2022 by a vote of 64 to 48. We have assigned pluses to the nays because a so-called “Convention of the States” would not be of “limited” purpose. The vague and contradictory text contained in this joint resolution dangerously permits what Article V of the U.S. Constitution describes as a “Convention for proposing Amendments” or second constitutional convention. Notably, Article V of the U.S. Constitution was designed to correct structural deficiencies in the federal government, not the behavior of its elected officials. H3205 should be opposed in favor of less risky, more precise, and immediate solutions that would restore power back to the states and to the people, such as clear-cut proposals in Congress to repeal bad amendments or state nullification of specific unauthorized federal laws.

H3094 amendment 3B would allow constitutional carry and would leave it so the requirement that you must possess a permit when carrying a concealable weapon or firearm.

The South Carolina State Senate voted to table H3094 amendment 3B on May 5, 2021 by a vote of 25 to 21. We have assigned the pluses to the nayes because this amendment would have made South Carolina a Constitutional Carry state. The fundamental right of the American people to keep and bear arms is protected by the U.S. Constitution, particularly in the 2nd, 9th, and 10th Amendments, and should not be infringed. The Constitution does not state where you can or cannot possess a firearm.

H4100 amendment 16 directs that none of the state funds appropriated for family planning shall be expended to directly or indirectly subsidize abortion services and procedures or to an organization that provides abortion services.

The South Carolina State Senate rejected to table H4100 Amendment 16 on April 28, 2021 by a vote of 23 to 23. We have assigned pluses to the nays because the right to life is the most fundamental, God-given, and unalienable right asserted in the Declaration of Independence and protected by the U.S. Constitution. Taxpayer money should not be expended to perform abortions.

H3096 removes the requirement that you must possess a permit when carrying a concealable weapon or firearm.

The South Carolina State House of Representatives passed H3096 on April 7, 2021 by a vote of 69 to 47. We have assigned the pluses to the ayes because the fundamental right of the American people to keep and bear arms is protected by the U.S. Constitution, particularly in the 2nd, 9th, and 10th Amendments, and should not be infringed. The Constitution does not state where you can or cannot possess a firearm.

H3770 disburses funds from the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2021 to assist eligible households that are unable to pay rent and utilities due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

The South Carolina State Senate passed H3770 on March 24, 2021 by a vote of 41 to 0. We have assigned the pluses to the nays because subsidized loans are a way government interferes in the free market economy. Subsidies make individuals more reliable on government assistance and when the government has their hands in places they shouldn't, the people lose more control and freedom. This legislation's purpose is to redistribute the wealth and bring us one step closer to socialism.

H3770 disburses funds from the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2021 to assist eligible households that are unable to pay rent and utilities due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

The South Carolina State House of Representatives passed H3770 on March 4, 2021 by a vote of 96 to 14. We have assigned the pluses to the nays because subsidized loans are a way government interferes in the free market economy. Subsidies make individuals more reliable on government assistance and when the government has their hands in places they shouldn't, the people lose more control and freedom. This legislation's purpose is to redistribute the wealth and bring us one step closer to socialism.