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 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.

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 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.

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.”

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 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.

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 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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.