ROCK HILL, S.C. (AP) — South Carolina legislators have not been getting paid for months since a state senator sued over the first raise in the General Assembly's compensation in three decades.
The issue involves what lawmakers call “in-district compensation” which is money set aside for legislative duties but has few limits on how it can be spent. A line in the budget, passed by both chambers, increased that compensation from $1,000 a month to $2,500 a month for all 46 senators and 124 House members
starting July 1.
Republican state Sen. Wes Climer sued the state in June, saying the South Carolina constitution bans legislators from immediately increasing their pay. Instead, any raise has to wait until the next election.
As it sorts through the lawsuit, the South Carolina Supreme Court handed down a decision in late June just before the extra pay kicked that stopped not only the raise, but the payment of $1,000 a month in the same budget line.
The move took legislators by surprise. Some lawmakers said they have had to use their own private salaries for town halls, equipment needed to help constituents or common expenses to serve the public.
Lawmakers won't get any more money for their General Assembly duties until the case is decided or when the 2026 session starts in January. Part-time legislators, who meet three days a week for about four months, will then get a lump sum of $10,400 to account for their $260 a day compensation.
For Democratic state Rep. Hamilton Grant that means no town halls in his Columbia district nor framed resolutions unless he dips into his own wallet
“Whether you’re a Republican or Democrat — as lawmakers we should not be coming out of pocket for expenses to take care of our constituents,” Grant said.
Climer said he understands the difficulties lawmakers face having to use their own money, but the law is the law. For 250 years it's mostly been frowned on, if not illegal, for legislators to immediately raise their own pay, he said.
While it might be an unpopular with fellow lawmakers, suing them was the only way to do the right thing, said Climer, whose lawyer is Dick Harpootlian, a former Democratic senator known for fighting what he saw as backroom deals.
“This is the consequence of a poorly drafted proviso and bad intentions on the part of a handful of legislators who knew better,” Climer said.
The in-district compensation raise was first suggested toward the end of the budget process by Republican Sen. Shane Martin. He spent about 30 seconds on the Senate floor saying the first raise in 30 years was needed because inflation and a world where there are more expenses means the amount was no longer adequate.
The budget line passed easily and no senator challenged it for the remaining hours of debate. Stories were in the news the next day and opposition started to grow.
A few weeks later, House and Senate budget negotiators agreed on the amount. Lawmakers like Climer continued to challenge the proposal, but to derail it would have required rejecting the entire spending plan.
South Carolina already has some of the lowest compensated legislators in the country. Comparing pay is hard because it includes salary, expenses and mileage, but the combination of $22,400 for salary and in-district expenses is well below other states with part-time legislatures like Alabama and Tennessee, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.
It is a lot more than the $100 a year plus mileage that New Hampshire lawmakers get, but well below California and New York, where being a legislator is considered a full-time job with a salary over $100,000 a year.
Before the state Supreme Court stepped in, about 40 legislators in South Carolina refused to take the raise. All were Republicans.
Both sides just finished submitting their legal briefs and the justices will hear the case Oct. 22.
Lawyers who said the raise is illegal wrote “only action by this Court can vindicate our Constitution from the General Assembly’s open contempt.”
Attorneys for the Senate replied “in Petitioners’ attempt to paint the General Assembly as morally challenged children who must be constantly monitored to keep their hands out of the proverbial cookie jar, they undermine the judgment of the South Carolina electorate and Petitioner Climer’s duly elected colleagues.”
Grant, who is finishing his first year in the House, said doing his job as a lawmaker feels like a full-time position if he does it right. As a leader of a nonprofit, he said it also stretches his finances and he thinks low pay and weekday hours leaves anyone working a regular job, like a teacher or a factory worker, out of luck. Instead, the General Assembly ends up with a glut of lawyers and retirees.
“I firmly believe that if compensation is raised, South Carolina will get better candidates running for office because they can now afford to bring their everyday South Carolina experience and issues that they see and face," Grant said.
Climer said the legislators fighting the suit have their priorities out of place.
“Public service is a sacrifice you make for the betterment of your friends and neighbors,” Climer said. “It’s a sacrifice in all different kinds of ways. And those who seek these jobs for money shouldn’t be in it."
