This week the South Carolina General Assembly returns to Columbia for the beginning of a new two-year cycle. In this update we will primarily address pre-filed bills. We expect a lively session with respect to issues that fall within the League’s Making Democracy Work campaign, especially elections and the judiciary. 

Voting and Election Bills

• Several bills have been filed to require registration by party and close primaries to all but those registered for the party in question. This would effectively disenfranchise large numbers of voters in every statewide election and in the heavily gerrymandered districts of our General Assembly. H.3161 has been filed by Burns and Chumley, and H.3472 has been filed by Long. LWVSC strongly opposes both. We hope that readers of MDW Updates will join with us in opposing these bills.
• Senator Campsen has filed S.92, which would extend the time available to protest an election when the Monday following certification is a holiday. Rep. Brandon Newton has filed H.3484, a House counterpart. This is a needed “fix” that the League has included in its 2023 “wish list.”

Other election-related bills would:

• provide automatic voter registration at the DMV (S.6), a needed change;
• extend the protest time in municipal elections (S.91), another useful change;
• make voter information confidential when there is a court order of protection for the voter (S.93), another needed change;
• require notarized statements of qualifications from presidential primary candidates (H.3167), an unhelpful provision;
• require officials to reimburse the state for special elections costs when they are convicted of a criminal offense (H.3244), which is reasonable;
• require Corrections to inform those completing sentences of their eligibility to vote (H.3349), a measure we have long wanted
• prohibit candidates from running for multiple offices in the same election (H.3480); and 
• make sheriff elections nonpartisan (H.3485), a sound change, law enforcement should not be partisan. 

Both the League of Women Voters and SCARE (organization of county election officials) have wish lists for additional bills and will be working with legislators in hopes of filing bills soon. 

The Judiciary

The Judiciary is always a central concern for the League and for all who care about checks and balances in our system of government. 

Pre-filed bills affecting the judiciary include the following:

• S.130 would make desirable process changes in how the Judicial Merit Selection Committee (JMSC) does its work. 
• S.178 and H.3022 would eliminate active legislators as members of JMSC. The LWVSC position is that the JMSC should be reformed to end dominance by currently serving legislators and we, therefore, support these efforts. Current legislators get to vote later for a final selection, they should not control the entire process. The JMSC should be made up predominantly (preferably entirely) by independent experts who are not currently serving as public officials. 
• S.248 would leave ONLY current House members appointed by the Speaker on the JMSC. The League strongly opposes this bill. 
• S.249 would establish gubernatorial appointment of judges. The League argues that the current practice of legislative election is problematic in some ways (especially in allowing legislators to shop for judges who will rubber stamp their policy preferences) but allows a wide range of voices in the selection process. It is imperfect, but when compared to the common alternatives (gubernatorial appointment and popular election) it is a preferable method of appointment. 
• Another important judicial issue that deserves strong support is found in S.155, which would limit magistrate holdover status to 14 days. At present legislative delegations can hold magistrates hostage by leaving them in holdover status – and thus subject to immediate dismissal. This is particularly problematic when members of the delegation are attorneys who appear before the magistrates. We support this badly needed reform.
• Finally, H.3535 provides JMSC screening of magistrates and gubernatorial appointment of magistrates from a list of senatorial nominations. This bill deserves careful consideration since the current method of magistrate appointment is entirely too dependent on the good will of legislative delegations. 

We are certain that additional bills in these areas will be added, but we will address those in future Updates.