By Nick Reynolds 

COLUMBIA — Here’s a hypothetical: an official with a South Carolina advocacy organization decides to run for the state Legislature. He gets elected to the House of Representatives but, as a part-time legislator can’t afford to quit his full-time job. So he keeps his job and, in his role, occasionally votes on bills that benefit members of his advocacy organization.

Unethical? Potentially disqualifying? His political opponent would argue yes.

One of the more notable hypotheticals this session involves a national lobbyist for major firearms manufacturer Sig Sauer, Greenville Republican Rep. Bobby Cox, sponsoring and leading debate on legislation allowing the permitless carry of firearms across South Carolina. (Cox said in a text message he and his company had no direct financial stake in passing permitless carry and that his CEO had no knowledge of his advocacy on the policy.)

When it comes to evaluating questions of conflict of interest, the threshold is oftentimes a hard one to hit.

“There are questions of legitimate interest for the public such as conflict of interest, like Bobby Cox sponsoring and lobbying for bills to benefit Sig Sauer,” Lynn Teague, a lobbyist for the League of Women Voters who often works on ethics issues in the legislature, wrote in an email to the Post and Courier. “That should be illegal but isn’t. If Russell is doing things that directly benefit the Farm Bureau — I haven’t heard of any — that would also be something that should be illegal and might be, depending on circumstances.”

Read the full article at the link above.