State of South Carolina Archives: on Government Reform
Will return 10% of congressional salary to the government
Colbert Busch said that, if elected, she would return 10 percent of her congressional salary to the government.
The latest finance reports filed with the Federal Election Commission show
Colbert Busch has raised more money than Sanford--about $1.2 million to about $790,000.
But money from his old campaign accounts left Sanford with about the same amount as Colbert Busch for the campaign.
Colbert Busch is currently on leave from her job as director of business development for Clemson University's Wind Turbine Drive Testing Facility in North Charleston.
Source: News12 on 2013 S.C. House District 1 debate
Apr 29, 2013
I was against earmarks before being anti-earmark was cool
[Colbert-Busch] cited Sanford's vote against the dredging of the Charleston port while he was a member of Congress. Colbert Busch said she met with then-US Rep. Sanford when she was working as a government liaison for a maritime company to encourage him
to support the dredging project. Sanford, she said, indicated he would do so. "And, in fact, you didn't tell the truth. In fact, you turned around and did the opposite," Colbert Busch said to Sanford.
Sanford fired back that Colbert
Busch later wrote him a $500 campaign-contribution check. "I don't think it must have bothered her that much, given she wrote a $500 check in support of my candidacy," said Sanford, smiling. Sanford also denied Colbert Busch's statements that he did
not support the dredging and other economic-development projects, saying he disagreed with the methods of paying for the projects, not the actual projects. "Because I was against (congressional) earmarks before being against earmarks was cool," he said.
Source: TheState.com on 2013 S.C. House District 1 debate
Apr 29, 2013
Limit corporate and PAC campaign contributions
Q: Do you support limits on the following types of contributions for state candidates: Individual?
Q: Political Action Committee?
Q: Political Party?
Q: Do you support requiring full and timely disclosure of campaign finance information??
Q: Do you support requiring a government-issued photo identification in order to vote at the polls??
Hutto adds, "Until the State is prepared to issue new voter id cards with photos, then the current requirements of a voter registration card should be allowed.
Changes to the law should only apply once a new card is issued to a voter."
Source: S.C. Congressional Election 2012 Political Courage Test
Nov 1, 2012
We capped lawsuit damages; next tort reform is loser-pays
Until 2011, South Carolina was the only state in the southeast that did not cap damages on lawsuits. Thanks to the people in this room, that is no longer the case. That was a huge first step. Remember that there is always more to be done on tort reform.
Looking at the states we compete with--the Tennessees, the Alabamas, the Virginias--it would be na‹ve to think they will settle for playing second fiddle to South Carolina in the economic arms race. They will scrap for jobs every bit as hard as we will.
And the greater the protection we give our people and businesses from frivolous lawsuits, the better positioned we will be to capitalize on other assets. The next step in tort reform is a loser-pays system, so that there is a real cost to suits that
waste the time and money of our businesses and our courts, and that our companies understand that South Carolina won't stand for trial lawyers playing games with their bottom line.
Source: 2012 S.C. State of the State Address
Jan 18, 2012
Require photo ID, and inspection of ID, in order to vote
Lee Bright voted Yea on bill H 3003, to pass a bill that requires voters to present a form of photo identification in order to vote. Vote Smart's Synopsis:
- Requires voters to produce a valid and unaltered South Carolina driver's license or other
form of identification containing a photograph.
- Managers shall compare the photograph contained on the required identification with the person presenting himself to vote to verify that the photograph is of the person requesting to vote.
Authorizes the following voters to complete and submit a sworn statement in place of photograph identification: Voters with a religious objection to being photographed; Voters who suffer from a reasonable impediment
that prevents the voter from obtaining photo identification; or Voters that the county board of elections has determined were challenged solely for the inability to provide proof of identification.
- Establishes an aggressive voter education program.
Source: VoteSmart summary of 2011-2012 S.C. legislative session
Feb 10, 2011
Keep campaign donation limits; no voluntary spending limits
Q: Do you support increasing the amount individuals are permitted to contribute to federal campaigns?
Q: Should Congress regulate indirect campaign contributions from corporations and unions?
Q: Do you support removing all contribution limits on federal campaigns?
Q: Should candidates for federal office be encouraged to meet voluntary spending limits?
Source: S.C. Congressional Election 2010 Political Courage Test
Oct 1, 2010
Earmarks are how lobbyists grease the skids
Q: Lisa Murkowski in Alaska lost to a tea party candidate; Bob Bennett in Utah lost to a tea party candidate.
DEMINT: These are appropriators, Bob Bennett, Lisa Murkowski. They believe in their job is to take home the bacon. It's a big part of the
culture here in Washington. Even in Alaska, the voters there threw out someone who was bringing home the bacon. Joe Miller, running against earmarks, because what we're hearing all over America is, "I don't want money for my state if it's going to
bankrupt my country."
Q: But we're talking, really, 1% or 2% of a budget here, when you're talking about the earmarks.
DEMINT: Oh, it's like saying the engine is a small part of the train. All the legislation, you look at health care, was pulled
through by "Cornhusker kickbacks," that's an earmark. The bail-outs failed in the House until they went back and added earmarks. So it's always a way to grease the skids, and it's the power here. It's why thousands of lobbyists are here.
Source: CNN "State of the Union" coverage: 2010 S.C. Senate debate
Sep 19, 2010
I’m “the sheriff”, not Miss Congeniality, about pork bills
As president, I know how to stop the spending. I won’t let another pork-barrel earmark spending bill cross my desk without vetoing it, & I’ll make the authors of it famous. I saved the taxpayers $6 billion on a bogus tanker deal. I’m called “the sheriff”
by my friends in the Senate who are the appropriators, and I didn’t win Miss Congeniality. And as president, I won’t win Miss Congeniality, either. I’ll stop the outrageous spending, and that’ll be the best thing that can happen to America’s economy.
Source: 2008 GOP debate in S.C. sponsored by Fox News
Jan 10, 2008
Limit campaign contributions but not campaign spending
Q: Do you support limiting individual contributions to state candidates?
Q: For PAC contributions?
Q: For Corporate contributions?
Q: For Political Parties?
Q: Do you support requiring full disclosure of
campaign finance information?
Q: Do you support imposing spending limits on state level political campaigns?
A: No. I believe we need to bring sunshine to the political process in SC. Soft money donated to parties should be disclosed.
Source: 2002 S.C. Gubernatorial National Political Awareness Test
Nov 1, 2002
Page last updated: Dec 11, 2015