COLUMBIA, S.C. (AP) — The South Carolina Supreme Court suggested solutions Wednesday that could have prevented lawmakers from going unpaid for months while the court reviewed the legality of a June raise.
During oral arguments for a suit brought by one of the legislature’s own members, the justices said legislators could have officially called the fund for the raise an expense fund instead of compensation. They could have held off paying the extra
money until 2027 after the next election for all members of the General Assembly, or they could have separated the raise in the budget from the money lawmakers already get paid so it all wouldn’t have gone away, the justices said.
But none of that happened, so the legislative branch crossed the street to the South Carolina Supreme Court's building so the five justices could consider if their $1,500 a month raise passed earlier this year and was set to start in July is legal.
On one side of the courtroom were the clerks of the Senate and the House. On the other was Sen. Wes Climer, the Republican who sued over the increase saying the state constitution prohibits the general assembly from increasing its pay until after an election has taken place.
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. It was the first raise in the General Assembly's pay in over three decades.
Attorneys for the House and Senate emphasized the raise was for expenses and not salary and was exempt from the waiting period after the election. The attorneys on the other side argued lawmakers themselves called it compensation and since they aren't required to provide any receipts or documentation, it is salary.
Chief Justice John Kittredge went back to 1988 with one of his questions when legislators changed the name of the payment to “in-district compensation.” It used to be called “legislative expense allowance.”
“They hit the bullseye. There was no question what it was for,” Kittredge said.
Attorneys for the General Assembly don't know why the name was changed.
The budget item with the increase was tied into the reoccurring budget item that pays lawmakers when they aren't in session. So as it sorts through the lawsuit, the South Carolina Supreme Court handed down a decision in late June just before the extra pay kicked in that stopped not only the raise, but the payment of $1,000 a month in the same budget line.
Separating the items in the budget would at least have allowed lawmakers to be paid what they always have.
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.
Depending on how long the justices take to rule on Wednesday's case, legislators may not get any more money for their General Assembly duties until 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.
The South Carolina Supreme Court typically takes months to decide their cases.
Climer, who filed the suit, 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.
“It's supposed to be a sacrificial act of public service,” Climer said after the arguments.
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.
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.
