May Bike Rallies Up for Discussion

Taxes, Coastal Kickback and the Primaries

Two of the most extraordinary events I have ever seen occur so close to an election happened this week in Horry County.

The Myrtle Beach city council announced early in the week it will seek to have state legislators eliminate the sunshine provision on the one cent tourism promotion tax so that it can continue indefinitely. Did you ever see politicians want a tax to end even when sunshine provisions are included with it?

One day later, lobbyist Mark Kelley, who includes the Myrtle Beach Area Chamber of Commerce, Coastal Carolina University and the Horry County Board of Education among his clients, sued the Sun News for reporting Kelley’s proximity to certain events in what has become known as the “Coastal Kickback Scandal.”

Election Commission Says NO to Shealy

The South Carolina Election Commission negated the SCGOP decision last night to place Katrina Shealy on the upcoming June 12th primary ballot for Senate District 23.

According to a press release issued Thursday, the Election Commission is holding certification of candidates to the May 4, 2012 date set by the S.C. Supreme Court May 2nd.

“Under order of the S.C. Supreme Court, state and county political parties were required to provide the state and county election commissions with an updated list of candidates who properly filed for office by noon, May 4th,” reads the commission website.

Nikki Haley Overrules S.C. Supreme Court

By a vote of 26-0, an SCGOP Executive Committee placed Katrina Shealy back on the June 12th primary ballot for Senate District 23.

Shealy was the fourth of five candidates whose protests were heard by the committee. She was the only one successful in reversing a former decision about her certification for the ballot.

The entire candidate filing controversy has been pinned to Shealy’s opponent, incumbent Sen. Jakie Knotts who, reportedly, had someone challenge Shealy’s filing in a lawsuit heard by the S.C. Supreme Court with original jurisdiction of the case.

State Ethics Committee Violated State Law

The appeal of Republican operative John Rainey to House Speaker Bobby Harrell asking the full House to re-consider ethics complaints against Gov. Nikki Haley, for actions when she was a House member, virtually screams for an investigation to be opened.

The fact that stands out most in Rainey’s appeal is that just minutes before voting 5-1 to dismiss an ethics complaint by Rainey against Haley, the House Ethics Committee voted unanimously that probable cause existed to investigate the complaint.

S.C. Code of Laws Section 8-13-540 states, “If the ethics committee determines complaint alleges facts sufficient to constitute a violation, it shall promptly investigate the alleged violation and may compel by subpoena the testimony of witnesses and the production of pertinent books and papers.”

In failing to investigate the complaint and, instead, voting to dismiss it, the ethics committee violated state law. There doesn’t appear the committee is allowed any discretion in this decision as the law plainly states “shall promptly investigate.”

Florence’s Jordan tops poll at 7th CD Debate

A crowd of more than 500 piled into the West Florence High School auditorium Monday night to hear what the Republicans seeking their party’s nomination for the 7th Congressional District race had to say – and to cast some of the first votes in that contentious race.

The event’s unique forum, which was driven at least in part by the fact that the race in the brand new district has attracted so many candidates (9 Republicans, 5 Democrats), called for 45 minutes of debate followed by a straw vote to select five candidates for 45 minutes of debate. A final, post-debate poll was supposed to reveal how the crowd felt after hearing both halves of the show.

Apparently it was feeling pretty pro-Pee Dee.

From the Court Room to the Living Room

Election ballot issues shifted from the court room to the living room Monday when a federal three judge panel threw out the lawsuit challenging the continuing candidate certification issues for upcoming Republican and Democratic primaries throughout the state.

The complaint said military personnel serving overseas should have 45 days before the election to receive, fill out and return their ballots. Absentee ballots for federal elections, Congressional races this year, were sent 45 days prior to the election, according to the S.C. Election Commission.

A separate ballot, containing names for state and local candidates was sent later, after the S.C. Supreme Court decision eliminated nearly 200 candidates from certification two weeks ago. The complaint argued the splitting of the ballots was illegal under election law.

Wallace: The Economy Is My Top Priority

Across the nation, our friends and neighbors are struggling in this current economy. People have seen the value of their homes decrease and the prices of goods and services increase, which has unfortunately created a drastic decrease in their quality of life.

The No. 1 issue that directly impacts our livelihood is our economy. Our district has areas with unemployment rates at 20 percent or higher, and many who are working are under-employed or have had their pay scaled back. Over the past few months, I have traveled throughout this district to speak with residents about the economy, and I hear time and time again that people are hurting, and that things have to get better.

One of the biggest contributors to our falling economy is the obscene amount of national debt our country has accumulated.

Candidate Qualifications Remain In Doubt

So far we have had two orders from the S.C. Supreme Court, a recertification of eligibility of candidates by the S.C. Republican and Democratic parties and an ongoing challenge in federal court with respect to the upcoming June 12th primary elections. Yet, there are still difficulties with the candidates currently certified to appear on the ballots.

Despite very strict rulings by the Supreme Court on Section 8-13-1356(B) with respect to certification of non-incumbent candidates, by our tally 10 challengers for S.C. House seats remain in violation of those rulings but are certified for inclusion on the ballot. (See link below)

This would be egregious by itself considering all the questions that have already been raised about the qualifications of candidates for the upcoming June primaries. However, it is not the only question that remains unanswered about candidates for those elections.