Author: Paul Gable

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.

Feds Turn for S.C. Election Decision-Updated

The confusion that has reigned since the close of candidate filing for the June primary elections, became even more chaotic Thursday when the issue had its first day in federal court.

A federal lawsuit was originally filed by candidate Amanda Somers because she believed she was left off the ballot for the Senate District 5 primary. It is now questionable whether Somers even has standing to bring forth a lawsuit because she was certified as a candidate.

After Somers lawyer, Todd Kincannon, discovered Somers was on the ballot, he attempted to shift the focus of the lawsuit, according to the judge, to include the nearly 200 candidates left off the ballot by the S.C. Supreme Court decision last week.

Judges might delay June primaries

South Carolina’s primary election season – already marred by three lawsuits, 180 disqualified candidates and a congressman’s wife yelling at a state senator – could be extended.

A panel of three federal judges will hear arguments Monday about whether to delay South Carolina’s June 12 primary elections because of concerns the state may have violated the federal Voting Rights Act.

It’s a case that U.S. District Judge Cameron Currie – a former chief deputy state attorney general, law professor and attorney with nearly 37 years of experience – described this way:
“It’s all very confusing.”

The case was filed by Columbia attorney Todd Kincannon on behalf of Amanda Somers, a candidate for state Senate District 5 in Greenville County.

South Carolina Senate Kills Do-Over Bill

When they go to the polls June 12, voters will likely not see the names of 180 candidates ousted from the S.C. primary ballot because of a state Supreme Court ruling.

The state Senate rejected a proposal Wednesday that would have reinstated the candidates if they filed statements of economic interest by April 15. That would have restored almost all the ousted candidates, state Sen. Larry Martin, R-Pickens, said.

But some senators objected to the extension of the March 30 state mandated deadline. They also believed that by not changing the deadline the state would avoid a federal review over changing an election law that could delay the primary.

County Undermining Bike Rally?

Only five days before the start of this year’s Harley Davidson Spring Bike Rally, Grand Strand Daily has learned that the county is apparently not living up to its responsibilities on the issuance of vendor permits and other areas related to the event.

County council killed an ordinance that attempted to further limit bike rally vendor permits and attendance last month by a 10-2 vote. This action resulted in no change to current county law with respect to special event and vendor permits.

However, Grand Strand Daily learned this morning that a temporary restraining order was issued against the county to stop changes on a special event permit for the Suck, Bang and Blow restaurant.

S.C. General Assembly to overturn Supremes

The fallout from the election filing mess continues as the General Assembly looks to overturn last week’s Supreme Court ruling with a joint resolution this week.

If successful, the resolution could put back on the ballot the nearly 200 candidates statewide who failed to file paperwork properly at filing.

The key wording in the resolution is:

SECTION 1. Notwithstanding the provisions contained in Section 8-13-1356(E), any person whose name will not appear on the June 2012 primary election ballot pursuant to the Supreme Court holding in Michael Anderson and Robert Barger v. South Carolina Election Commission, et. al.

Nikki Haley And The Dropped Ethics Charges

The S.C. House last week danced a conspicuous ethics two-step, in what one State House watchdog describes as exactly the kind of bull pucky that makes taxpayers cynical about politicians and government.

Simply put – it stinks, says the watchdog, Common Cause of South Carolina director John Crangle.

As The Nerve has reported exclusively and repeatedly, a resolution was introduced in January 2011 to let some sunlight in on the House Ethics Committee.

The resolution, H. 3445, was designed to change the chamber’s operating rules so that matters before its Ethics Committee become public if they involve probable cause of wrongdoing.

The House Ethics Committee and its counterpart, the Senate Ethics Committee, have a long history of being secretive about their activities.

Events Celebrate Little Known Civil War Incident

On a foggy spring night 150 years ago, slave Robert Smalls commandeered a Confederate ammunition ship, steamed upriver to pick up family and friends, and then slipped past five Southern batteries on Charleston Harbor to reach Union blockade ships.

Smalls would return to Charleston a year later to pilot a Union ironclad in an attack on Fort Sumter, while after the war he served in the South Carolina General Assembly, the U.S. Congress and later as a federal customs inspector.

“His story, I think, is lost in the larger picture of the Civil War – Grant and Lee; Appomattox and Gettysburg. It’s important locally, but I would say it’s a story often overlooked,” said Carl Borick, the assistant director of the Charleston Museum.

Candidates Certified, Ballot Problems Continue

Two Supreme Court orders later, candidates certified to be included on the June 12th Republican primary ballot in Horry County still include some who did not file a Statement of Economic Interests (SEI) when they filed their Statement of Intention of Candidacy (SIC), according to information provided to Grand Strand Daily.

Several former Horry County Republican Party officials, who were involved in the filing process, told me they had no information regarding the requirement for the Statement of Economic Interests form to be filed at the same time as the Statement of Intention of Candidacy by non-incumbent candidates.

“The only instructions given were to fill out the two sheets (the Party Pledge and the Statement of Intention of Candidacy) and go look at the SC Ethics Commission website,” said one speaking on conditions of anonymity. “Several candidates brought a Statement of Economic Interests with them and they were the only ones who filed in compliance with the court ruling.”

SCGOP Statement on Candidate Certification

Columbia, SC – The South Carolina Republican Party today issued a statement following the S.C. Supreme Court’s Noon, May 4 filing deadline:

“On behalf of all South Carolina Republicans, I am sad about this week’s candidate filing rulings, but am committed to following the S.C. Supreme Court’s instructions. Our party has meticulously analyzed the filing submissions in compliance with the standards set forth by the Court.

We respect the Court’s decision and in compliance with the Court’s order, we have submitted our list to the Election Commission. We are looking forward to moving ahead and anticipate animated and spirited primary contests on June 12th.”

Link to filings