Search Results for: endorsement

Small Business Association / NFIB endorsement

Received this letter today and will continue to help promote a vibrant business community in our state. I welcome the other endorsements that have previously lent their support.

SC Chamber of Commerce Endorsement

Found this on Twitter today. It’s good to receive endorsements from various groups across the state; but the one that matters most is yours right here in Irmo and Chapin!

NRA endorsement

As someone who recently took up hunting (5 years ago), I’m happy to share another endorsement of my campaign . Like I’ve mentioned before, receiving endorsements are good and they give voters a sense about each candidate; but at the end of the day it’s the endorsement of the community that matters most!

SC Citizens for Life endorsement

With the General Election on the horizon, endorsements are starting to come in. As I shared last election, the endorsement that matters most is from you – the voters. For those new to the area, I will share these as they come in over the next few weeks.

I’m not sure endorsements make or break elections; but they definitely don’t hurt and when they come from various groups it can provide some insight that voters may not know.

Our last election (Republican Primary), we won a three way race with no runoff after receiving 70% of the vote.

The election before that (Republican Primary), we beat a sitting Richland County Council incumbent and received 84% of the vote.

This general election will be Tuesday, November 3rd and I am hopeful my hard work and representation for the Irmo/Chapin/Dutch Fork community continues to show how I focus on People, Not Politics . I’d be honored to have your support again!


The ultimate endorsement comes from you, the voters/the community; but I’m pleased to share these recent endorsements of our campaign and my work for South Carolina! Please vote tomorrow, June 12th!

2008 Primaries: Did endorsements matter?

Does everyone really want to be like Mike?

Anyone over 20 knows “Air Jordan” and at that time, it was one of the largest endorsement deals ever. But now that the primaries are over, I keep asking myself the question I’ve asked since I ran for office four years ago: Do Endorsements matter in local politics?

During my first campaign (2004), I had no “endorsements” except those from my neighbors, church, civic clubs, etc. Obviously I was HOPING the “big name” endorsements wouldn’t matter.

We saw our opposition bring out mail piece after mail piece with the names of incumbent legislators, statewide office holders, sheriffs, and Washington politicians (we later learned some of those might not have been “real endorsements” but, heck, who knows the difference nowadays?). Obviously, we came out ahead in that race and it began to sink in….does the community-voter care who’s supporting who? Could it actually backfire on the candidate touting all the “politicians” support? Or, did it even matter at all?

I don’t have time to analyze all the endorsements, etc but tonight I did ask myself how our Governor did.

You probably have read that the Governor “can count on one hand” the number of endorsements he has done in the last 15 years. This year, he needed two hands.

Off the top of my head tonight, the Governor went 6-4 with WINS for two challengers (Tom Davis, Mike Rose), three open seats (Lee Bright, Tim Scott, Steve Stringer) and one incumbent (Greg Ryberg). His LOSSES were three challengers (Ed Rumsey, Katrina Shealy, Roger Nutt) and one open seat (Scott Singer).

For a Governor that many in the state support (and, yes, I support his fiscal-conservative ideas but have opposed him on things like cigarette tax, seat belts, autism, etc.), I would have expected a better result than my Gamecocks usually do.

Of course, when I look at someone else who has wide popularity in the state and is arguably our “favorite” US Senator, Jim Demint, the results really make me wonder.

Sen. Demint endorsed an open seat (Scott Talley) and a challenger (Katrina Shealy) and lost both. If you go back to the GOP Presidential race (we both supported the same guy – Gov. Mitt Romney), he actually is 0-3 in the 2008 primaries.

How do local voters look past a recommendation from someone who is the “darling” of the state?

Simple…voters want to make up their own mind.

In local races, voters have the time and resources to get to know the candidates and issues. They don’t want “polticians” butting in. They can figure it out themselves.

That’s why I really can count on one hand the primaries I’ve lent my name to: Lt. Governor Andre Bauer and Governor Mitt Romney. In my opinion, statewide races or national races don’t allow the voters the “one-on-one” chance to get to know candidates so MAYBE an endorsement or recommendation from someone can help voters. They’re also “up ballot” races meaning I’m not really telling my community who to pick to represent us locally. I publically stay out of local races and issues (but obviously share my opinion/vote when asked).

So…you tell me (again). When voters go to the polls, do they really care about the “big names” or do they care more about the person who has worked the hardest, shares their values, and whom they feel will do the best job?

SC Club for Growth Endorsement

February 21, 2008
Contact: Matt Moore

SC Club for Growth State Action PAC Endorses Seventeen Legislators for June Primaries

Columbia, SC – Today, the South Carolina Club for Growth State Action PAC endorsed seventeen current South Carolina legislators that are seeking election in the upcoming June 10th primary.

Each of these legislators has shown a continued commitment to limited government and responsible spending, while leading efforts to change South Carolina’s antiquated system of government. All earned a combined grade of “B” or better in the Club’s legislative scorecards and cumulatively represent approximately the top 10% of grades for the entire General Assembly.

South Carolina Club for Growth Executive Director Matt Moore released the following statement on the endorsements:

“On behalf of our membership across the state, I’m proud to announce these endorsements. We believe leadership matters. South Carolina’s future generations will benefit from these legislators leading the charge to reform our state government.

Through the support of hundreds of members around the state, we are hopeful that many more change-oriented legislators will join these reformers at the Statehouse next January. We will be carefully monitoring their re-election efforts. Should credible challengers run against any of them, we will urge our members to contribute generously to these endorsed incumbents.”

SC State Senate:

Legislator – District #, Area, Party
Kevin Bryant – 3rd District, Anderson, Republican
Danny Verdin – 9th District, Laurens, Republican
Mick Mulvaney – 16th District, Lancaster, Republican
Greg Ryberg – 24th District, Aiken, Republican
Larry Grooms – 37th District, Berkeley, Republican
Chip Campsen – 43rd District, Charleston, Republican

SC State House of Representatives:

Legislator – District #, Area, Party
Don Bowen – 8th District, Anderson, Republican
Michael Thompson – 9th District, Anderson, Republican
Jeff Duncan – 15th District, Laurens , Republican
Dwight Loftis – 19th District, Greenville, Republican
Eric Bedingfield – 28th District, Greenville, Republican
Herb Kirsh – 47th District, York, Democrat
Thad Viers – 68th District, Horry, Republican
Nathan Ballentine – 71st District, Lexington, Republican
Nikki Haley – 87th District, Lexington, Republican
Jim Merrill – 99th District, Berkeley, Republican
Chip Limehouse – 110th District, Charleston, Republican


Do endorsements really matter in politics – local, state, national?

From today’s State

“McCain, more than any other candidate, hopes voters factor endorsements into their decision-making.

McCain has been endorsed by U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham, S.C. House Speaker Bobby Harrell and S.C. Senate Majority Leader Glenn McConnell. By one tally, McCain has 48 of 71 Republican lawmakers backing him.”

The article goes on to say that Governor Sanford (who endorsed McCain in 2000) will sit this one out.

All this reminds me of my opinion about endorsements – they may look good on paper but they aren’t going to win the race for you. Maybe I’m wrong?

Does one person’s name make that much difference? Or, is it the candidate himself and his message, abilities, experience and/or passion to serve, that make the difference?

Ever since I became a public servant, I’ve held true to my stance not to endorse candidates in local races. With races at the local level – Mayor, County Council, Town Council, School Board, etc – I believe you, the voter, have the time and resources to follow the race closely and weigh all the candidates. You also have a chance (or should) for one-on-one face time and Q&A sessions with each candidate at local events.

In statewide or national races, you may not have those opportunities. Where candidates aren’t as accessible here locally and there is less of a chance for you to get to know the candidates and their positions, I feel it appropriate for me to assist you with my public support and opinion. In the past I have endorsed Lt. Governor Andre Bauer for his statewide races and most recently Govenor Mitt Romney for his Presidential race.

While I’m in the minority of state policitians supporting Governor Romney, I am pleased to be joined by several conservatives here in the Midlands: Representatives Nikki Haley, Chip Huggins, Ted Pitts and Senator Ronnie Cromer.

Regardless how things end up with the Presidential race, Republicans will “endorse” the same candidate for the General Election. Now how much weight will that carry??

I’d be curious as to your thoughts. Do endorsements matter? Are you more willing to vote for someone because of who’s backing them? If you don’t have the time/resources to vet the candidates (like Presidential), I’m guessing endorsements do make a difference. In local races, I’m thinking they don’t. You’re smart enough (and close enough to the candidates) to form your own opinion.

I think people, not politics matter. Now if you hear your neighbor is supporting a candidate, that’s a whole other type of endorsement in my opinion. One that matters!

The Weekly Rewind – Week of February 2nd

February 5, 2021

The House approved and sent the Senate H. 3609, a joint resolution restoring teacher salary step increases that were suspended by Act 135 of 2020, enacted by the General Assembly due to financial uncertainties caused by the COVID-19 virus. The legislation appropriates $50 million dollars from the 2018-2019 Contingency Reserve Fund to provide for teacher step increases for the 2020-2021 School Year.

The House amended, passed and sent to the Senate H. 3589, a bill that would re-designate certain schools from their previous designation as a “schools of choice” to “schools of innovation.” This designation would relieve a school from following certain statutes, rules, and regulations in allowance and recognition of nontraditional approaches. The bill outlines the steps a school district must follow to achieve the status of exemption. In order to earn this exemption, a district must identify each law, regulation, and policy from which the school is requesting exemption. The bill would allow that public school districts may establish multiple (but a limited number) schools of innovation. (Districts may not name all schools in a district as a school of innovation). This has to be approved by a two-thirds vote of the local board and a two-thirds vote of the State Board of Education. Any change in a request that is pending approval by, or has been approved by, the State Board of Education must be made in the same manner as provided for initial requests. The designation must be renewed every four years through the same process as for the initial approval.

The House passed as amended and sent to the Senate H. 3613, revisions to the Read to Succeed Act. This bill (involving early literacy and numeracy screening assessment instruments) would amend the Read to Succeed Act (Act 284 of 2014) and contains most of the changes that were adopted last year by the House in the Omnibus Education Reform and H. 4761 of 2020. The bill would provide that the SC Department of Education shall approve no more than five reliable early literacy and numeracy screeners. A district would administer the universal screening process in the first “thirty days of the school year and repeat, if and only if, the student demonstrates literacy and numeracy deficiencies at midyear and at the end of the school year to determine student progression in reading and numeracy in kindergarten through third grade.” Waivers can be granted for alternative instruments.

In addition, the bill creates the South Carolina Reading Panel, and determines the composition, functions, and duties of the panel. Moreover, the bill establishes definitions concerning the universal screening processes used in public school districts for students experiencing academic or social-emotional difficulties and provides that all related screening tools must be capable of identifying students with dyslexia or other reading disorders. Reading interventions must be evidence-based, follow a multi-tiered system of support, and holds that professional development on reading practices be scientifically based. The bill clarifies that district reading plans must provide inappropriate in class interventions.

Also, regarding the Read to Succeed Office, the bill revises the requirements concerning coursework necessary for literacy add-on endorsements and revises requirements for professional development for certified reading/literacy coaches and literacy teachers. The coursework must be founded on scientifically based reading practices and evidence-based interventions, including how to use the data to identify struggling readers and inform instruction).
The bill also revises the requirements for screening and diagnostic assessments and interventions relating to mandatory student retention provisions of the Read to Succeed Act, to revise criteria for retention and exemptions from retention, to eliminate an appeals process, and to revise criteria for intensive instructional services and support provided to retained students. The bill would remove the requirement that reading/literacy coaches be employed in all elementary schools, revise requirements concerning the roles and functions of reading/literacy coaches, and provide certain reading and literacy support services to schools identified as having certain levels of lowest achievement on English/language arts summative assessments by third grade students. Section ten clarifies the roles and requirements of reading coaches. SDE will hire reading coaches for schools where more than one-third of third-grade students score at the lowest achievement level on SC READY. Reading coaches will be employees of the Department, but assigned to specific schools. The remaining schools may use state appropriated funds for reading coaches, reading interventionists (who can assist with instructing students), or scientifically-based reading professional development. The Department must monitor their spending, and schools that do not use the funds for these specified purposes will lose reading coach funding.

The House approved and sent the Senate H. 3586, a bill establishing a Department of Insurance Fraud Division. The legislation provides for the transfer of insurance fraud duties and obligations from the Attorney General’s Office and houses them in a new Fraud Division established within the Department of Insurance.

The House passed and sent the Senate H. 3222, a bill enabling the Department of Health and Environmental Control to suspend a waste tire processing facility from accepting waste tires when it is determined that the capacity at the facility is exceeded. In an effort to address concerns dealing with the incompliance of permitted capacity for recycling tire facilities, the bill outlines steps along with timeframes to allow a facility to come into compliance prior to being suspended. The bill also requires DHEC to maintain a list of facilities known as the Waste Tire Rebate Facility List. The Waste Tire Rebate Facility List shall include permitted waste tire processing facilities. In addition, DHEC has the ability to remove any facility whose permit has been revoked or suspended, until the permit has been reinstated.

The House amended, passed and sent H. 3071, a Joint Resolution that creates the Equine Industry Support Measures Study Committee. This Resolution examines the potential for further growth of the equine industry and the resulting economic impact. The committee shall study the potential for equine business growth in South Carolina, outlining steps to encourage growth, as well as identifying any barriers that exist and how to eliminate or reduce them. The committee is to compare South Carolina’s incentives and barriers to other Southeast states (as well as nationally). The study shall investigate any fees, assessments, reimbursements, as well as mills and feed. This seven-member study committee will include two members of the House of Representatives appointed by the chairman of the Agriculture, Natural Resources and Environmental Affairs Committee; two members of the Senate appointed by the chairman of the Senate Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee; two members from the equine industry, with one appointed by the Speaker of the House of Representatives and one appointed by the President of the Senate, upon the recommendation of the South Carolina Thoroughbred Owners and Breeders Association; and the Commissioner of Agriculture, or his designee. The study committee shall provide a report outlining its findings and recommendations to the General Assembly by February 15, 2022. The study committee dissolves upon receipt of its report.

The House passed and sent to the Senate H. 3054, a bill relating to the Department of Natural Resources’ mailing requirements for the Notice of Suspension of Privileges. Currently, when licenses are suspended, the Notice of Suspension is sent by certified mail to ensure that the notice was received and acknowledged. This bill allows the department to mail notifications through the first class mail service. As a result, the change in this requirement provides a cost savings to the agency.

The House passed and sent the Senate H. 3056, a bill that implements recommendations from the House Legislative Oversight Committee’s 2018 study of the Department of Natural Resources to modernize statutes. As a result, the bill deletes outdated Department of Natural Resources commissions and fish and game clubs that are no longer part of the laws and practices of the Department. The bill also deletes language regarding Legislative Delegations appointing game warden for counties, such as, but not limited to, the Prestwood Lake Wildlife Refuge Board, Catawba-Wateree Fish and Game Commission, Cherokee Fish and Game Club, Darlington County Advisory Fish and Game Commission, and the Lee County Legislative Delegation to Protect Fish and Game in Lee County.

The House passed and sent the Senate H. 3059, a bill that repeals provisions relating to the authority of the Department of Natural Resources to issue Heritage Trust Revenue Bonds. In 2006, the General Assembly allowed the Department to issue bonds against the Heritage Trust Account. Those bonds that were issued are now retired and the authority to issue the bonds had a sunset date of 2008. This bill just deletes that authority language. This bill does not affect the Heritage Trust Fund, which is still in effect.

The House passed and sent to the Senate H. 3740, a local bill that went without reference. The bill relates to the Lancaster County Commission for Higher Education and would provide for the Commission’s receipt and administration of Lancaster county millage-derived funds, which must be set aside and used exclusively for the benefit of the University of South Carolina, Lancaster.

In addition, the bill would provide that the Dean of the University of South Carolina Lancaster must be an ex officio member of the commission. The bill also clarifies the commission’s role relating to the offering of post-secondary courses, removes certain archaic language, and requires the Commission to submit an annual report to Lancaster County Council.

The House approved and sent the Senate H. 3585, a bill implementing regular updates and revisions for Department of Insurance provisions.

The House approved and sent the Senate H. 3587, a bill providing a technical correction in reduction in insurance coverage provisions.

The Weekly Rewind – Week of February 25th

Nathan’s News readers are aware that I regularly share a “Week in Review” update which is prepared by legislative staff. It’s straight forward, no spin, not partisan…just the facts.

If you want a more personable read, be sure to read a similar update that I write each week in The New Irmo News. Representative Huggins and I rotate weeks throughout the session so that the entire Irmo/Chapin community can stay informed!

*To read the text of any bill mentioned below, please visit and enter the bill number in the search box *

February 28, 2020

The House of Representatives amended, approved, and sent the Senate H.4431, a bill to enact the “SOUTH CAROLINA BUSINESS LICENSE TAX STANDARDIZATION ACT” as a means of: reducing the complexity of complying with the business license taxes imposed by counties and municipalities by bringing statewide uniformity to the deadlines, application forms, and various other parts of the process; enhancing convenience for businesses by allowing them to pay taxes owed in multiple jurisdictions using a one-stop-shopping online portal; and, allowing counties and municipalities to receive the full amounts they are owed for business licenses without subtracting the portion that has been charged in fees by third parties collecting the taxes. The legislation imposes statewide standardization upon many aspects of the business license taxes imposed by counties and municipalities, including: a single timeline for issuing and renewing licenses and imposing penalties; standards for computing taxes based upon the gross income of the business; a uniform business license application established and provided by the Director of the Revenue and Fiscal Affairs Office; a protocol for issuing refunds to businesses; requirements for taxing jurisdictions to make use of the Standardized Business License Class Schedule as recommended by the Municipal Association of South Carolina and adopted by the Director of the Revenue and Fiscal Affairs Office; requirements for the Municipal Association to determine and revise this Standardized Business License Class Schedule every even year using the latest available nationwide Internal Revenue Service statistics for the calculation of profitability of businesses and using the latest business classification codes of the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS); and, a protocol that allows county and city councils to approve reasonable subclassifications. Provisions are made for a centralized online portal hosted and managed by the Revenue and Fiscal Affairs Office which businesses may use to pay the various license taxes imposed in multiple jurisdictions. In addition to allowing a payment through the business license tax portal, a taxing jurisdiction shall allow a taxpayer to file and pay its business license tax in person at a location within the taxing jurisdiction, by telephone, or by mail. The legislation imposes a prohibition on a private third-party assessing or collecting business license taxes or requiring businesses to remit confidential tax data on behalf of a taxing jurisdiction. Restrictions are imposed on how a taxing jurisdiction may contract with a third party to assist in the collection of business license taxes. The legislation disallows arrangements where a private sector auditing firm or other third party is paid on a contingency fee or success basis. Enforcement measures are provided which authorize the South Carolina Department of Consumer Affairs award to civil penalties to taxpayers for violations. The legislation provides an exemption from business license taxes for charitable organizations that covers their nonprofit activities.

The House amended, approved, and sent the Senate H.4761, a bill providing for “SOUTH CAROLINA READ TO SUCCEED ACT” ENHANCEMENTS that emphasize early intervention for students who are having difficulty learning to read so that they can receive needed instruction before reaching the time when a low score on a literacy assessment can require a student to repeat the third grade. Under the legislation, the State Board of Education is charged with approving no more than five reliable and valid early literacy and numeracy screening assessment instruments for selection and use by school districts in kindergarten through third grade. Assessments must be given at the beginning of the school year. For students who need additional assistance, the screening will also occur during the middle and end of the school year. Assessment results must be reported to the State Department of Education which is responsible for monitoring student progress. Read to Succeed Act provisions are revised to require that districts provide appropriate in-class intervention and at least thirty minutes of supplemental intervention by certified teachers who have a literacy add on endorsement until all students are at grade level. School districts must offer a summer reading camp as intervention for any student enrolled in the first or second grade who is substantially not demonstrating proficiency in reading, based upon the universal screening process. The legislation replaces the current “Not Met 1” benchmark for student retention, and provides, instead that a student must be retained in the third grade if the student fails to demonstrate reading proficiency at the end of the third grade as indicated by scoring at the lowest achievement level on the state summative English/language arts assessment which indicates that the student needs substantial academic support to be prepared for the next grade level. Districts are encouraged to develop policies for intensive support and retention of students in kindergarten through second grade if it is determined to be in the student’s best interest. The reading portfolio exemption from retention is strengthened. When exemptions from retention are granted because of appeals by students’ parents or guardians, school districts are required to report on the number of appeals made, the number granted, and the outcome of the students whose appeals are successful. More specific job duties and position requirements are established for reading coaches. The State Department of Education must screen and approve reading coaches for districts where more than one-third of third grade students score at the lowest achievement level on the state English/language arts assessment. Early childhood, elementary, and special education teacher candidates must pass a test on reading instruction and intervention before they can be certified. The Commission on Higher Education and the Learning Disorders Taskforce are charged with examining the effectiveness of teacher education programs with regard to diagnosing and assisting students with reading difficulties.

The House amended, approved, and sent the Senate H.3328, a bill revising SCHOOL LUNCH provisions. The legislation provides that students eligible for free and reduced meal benefits must be offered the same federally reimbursable meal as students not eligible for these federal free and reduced meal provisions. Federally reimbursable meals must be offered even if the student owes money for previous meals. Schools that offer food and beverages separate from federally reimbursable meals may not allow students to accrue a balance when purchasing items, and only may accept cash payment or allow funds to be electronically drawn from a prepaid balance. A school or school district may not invoke penalties for failing to pay for a school lunch, such as prohibiting students from attending field trips, participating in graduation or other recognition ceremonies, or attending other academic-related activities. The State Department of Education is charged with developing and providing a model policy and template to each school district regarding the collection of school meal debt.

The House approved and sent the Senate H.4765, a bill imposing LIMITATIONS ON COLLECTING SCHOOL MEAL PROGRAM DEBTS. The legislation prohibits a public school or school district from using a debt collection service to collect debts owed on a school lunch or breakfast account of a student. A public school or school district may not assess or collect any interest, fees, or other such monetary penalties for outstanding debts on student school lunch or breakfast accounts.

The House amended, approved, and sent the Senate H.4758, a bill providing authority for ALTERNATIVE PROGRAMS FOR EDUCATOR PREPARATION AND CERTIFICATION as a means of addressing current teacher shortages. Under the legislation, educator preparation programs housed within an institution of higher education may submit a separate and distinct educator preparation program for alternative preparation to the State Board of Education for approval. The board shall promulgate regulations concerning the granting of approval, cyclical review, and revocation of approval for alternative educator preparation programs. The State Department of Education is charged with providing each college of education and state-approved educator preparation program with information evaluating the performance its graduates on a yearly basis so that this information may be used to improve education services.