South Carolina lawmakers won't get paid while justices determine whether their raise was legal
The raise is what is called 'in-district compensation' — money set aside for legislative duties that has few limits on how it can be spent and requires no receipts or other documentation.
Lawmakers voted, in the budget set to start July 1, to increase it from $1,000 a month to $2,500 a month for all 46 senators and 124 House members.
Republican Sen. Wes Climer sued his colleagues, saying the raise violates the state constitution, which bans the legislature from increasing their per diem during their terms. House members would get 18 months of the extra money and senators would get more than three years of payments before facing reelection.
Lawyers for the House and Senate disagree. They said the money isn't a 'per diem' considered part of legislators' salaries, but a reimbursement for expenses, even though there are no reporting requirements.
They also said the money isn't an extra cost to taxpayers because it came out of funds already set aside to operate both chambers.
The compensation is usually paid monthly, but neither the $1,000 that has been paid for decades nor the $1,500 raise will land in lawmakers' direct deposits in July since the state Supreme Court decided Wednesday to suspend the budget item containing the money until it rules.
The justices set out a schedule with a deadline in early September for the final legal filings, meaning lawmakers won't get paid for at least two months.
If the justices rule the raise is legal, then lawmakers would get back pay for both the raise and their regular pay.
In South Carolina, the Supreme Court justices are elected by the Legislature.
Along with the in-district compensation, lawmakers also get a salary of $10,400 annually, paid in a lump sum that has not changed since 1990. In addition, they get money for meals, mileage to drive to the state capital in Columbia and hotel rooms while in session.
Legislators are considered part-time because South Carolina's General Assembly meets three days a week from January to May, and outside of the in-district compensation, they don't receive any money when not in session.
The raise was proposed by Republican Sen. Shane Martin late in the budget process in a proviso, which is a one-year order on how to spend money. The monthly stipend hadn't changed in about 30 years, and Martin said the increase was needed to offset inflation. It is meant to pay for computers or other equipment, travel to events in their districts, or holding town halls.
More than 40 of the state's 170 General Assembly members have refused the increase. All are Republicans.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
23 minutes ago
- Yahoo
WKRG News 5 to host Mobile mayoral debate: How to watch and submit questions
MOBILE, Ala. (WKRG) — The four candidates running for mayor of Mobile have agreed to participate in a live, primetime debate on WKRG News 5. The debate will take place on Monday, Aug. 4, from 7-8 p.m. Viewers can watch the debate on WKRG-TV or the WKRG+ app, stream it on or watch on WKRG's Facebook page. Former District Judge Spiro Cheriogotis, State Rep. Barbara Drummond, County Commissioner Connie Hudson and former Police Chief Paul Prine are vying for the seat currently held by Sandy Stimpson. Stimpson is not running for a fourth term in office. will moderate the debate. Questions will be formulated by News 5 and submitted by viewers and the candidates themselves. Ask your question here: Submit a form. Interest in the mayor's race is intense, as this is the first election in 20 years without an incumbent running. Election Day is Aug. 26. If no candidate receives a majority of votes, the top two vote-getters will meet in a runoff election on Sept. 23. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. Solve the daily Crossword
Yahoo
23 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump struggles with facts as Fed Chair Jerome Powell corrects him in real time
To an unprecedented degree, Donald Trump has lobbied his handpicked Federal Reserve chairman, Jerome Powell, to lower interest rates. The heavy-handed tactics, which have unfolded in recent months in public and private, haven't had much of an effect, which in turn has generated no shortage of frustration in the Oval Office. Indeed, the president has resorted to juvenile taunts and name-calling, publicly condemning Powell as, among many other things, a 'moron' for failing to follow Trump's misguided demands. Having exhausted his usual bullying tactics, the Republican and his team began exploring alternative ways to gain leverage over the largely independent Fed chair. Recently, this led the White House in an unexpected direction: Team Trump decided to focus on building renovations at the Federal Reserve, with the president suggesting that cost overruns might constitute grounds to fire Powell, who has ignored calls to resign. So on Thursday Trump made a historically unusual visit to the Fed's headquarters in Washington, D.C., presumably to add a fresh round of pressure. This did not go as well for the president as it could have. During the visit, for example, Trump flubbed basic details about developments at the European Central Bank, which he pretended to know something about. Around the same time, the Republican made specific boasts about the impact of a rate cut, which were quickly discredited. But those comments only set the stage for the pièce de résistance. As The New York Times reported: The chair of the Federal Reserve closed his eyes and shook his head. He was about to do something that few senior government officials ever do, at least in public: fact-check President Trump in real time. This is one of those stories in which watching the video is necessary to fully appreciate what transpired. During brief remarks with reporters, the president, with Powell standing just inches away, declared that cost overruns on the project have reached 'about $3.1 billion.' The Fed chair could be seen immediately and rapidly shaking his head, making clear to those in attendance that Trump was citing a number that wasn't true. 'I'm not aware of that,' Powell interrupted. The figure, the Republican responded, 'just came out.' Moments later, Trump tried to justify his claim, pulling a document from his jacket pocket and handing it to the Fed chair. Powell quickly reviewed the data and noticed an important flaw. 'You just added in a third building,' Powell said. 'It's a building that's being built,' Trump replied. 'No, it was built five years ago,' the Fed chair reminded him. 'It's not new.' Oops. It was not a flattering moment for a president who routinely makes up figures but who is rarely fact-checked by his own appointees on camera. Indeed, one of the more notable elements of the exchange was that Powell didn't seem to care at all about Trump's delicate ego or fear of public humiliation. As for the underlying issue, it's true that the renovation project is over budget, but as The Associated Press reported last week, it was Trump appointees, not Powell, who pushed for elements that raised costs. This article was originally published on
CNN
29 minutes ago
- CNN
Exclusive: ‘A more vulnerable nation': FEMA memos lay out risks of plan to cut $1B in disaster and security grants
Federal agenciesFacebookTweetLink Follow The Federal Emergency Management Agency has proposed cutting nearly $1 billion in grant funding that communities and first responders nationwide use to better prepare for disasters and to bolster security for possible terror or cyberattacks. The proposed cuts, which still require approval from the White House budget office and Congress, would zero out funding for more than half of FEMA's emergency management and homeland security grant programs, according to internal memos and two FEMA officials familiar with the plans. This comes amid an overhaul of the disaster relief agency at the hands of the Trump administration, which seeks to drastically shrink FEMA's footprint and shift more responsibility for disaster preparedness, response and recovery onto states. The Department of Homeland Security, which oversees FEMA, has looked at slashing grant funding as part of that effort. In one memo signed by acting FEMA Administrator David Richardson, the cuts are described as a way to 'focus on appropriate spending for the Agency's core mission in emergency management.' But the memos – signed by Richardson and approved by Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem – also acknowledge in stark terms the potential risks of eliminating the programs. The loss of one program that helps communities plan and train for disasters would 'leave state and local governments more vulnerable to catastrophic incidents,' one memo states. Ending another that bolsters transportation infrastructure and terrorism protections would 'contradict the administration's commitment to a safer and more secure country,' the memo says. Terminating the Urban Areas Security Initiative (UASI) – the largest FEMA program on the chopping block, providing more than $500 million to prepare major cities for catastrophic emergencies – would create 'a less secure nation, especially at the border and in some of the nation's most targeted cities, including Miami, Washington DC, and Dallas,' the memo states. The agency also plans to eliminate funding for the Next Generation Warning System initiative, which is designed to modernize and improve the nation's public alert and warning capabilities for severe storms and other emergencies, after pausing the program earlier this year. According to the memo, FEMA staff had suggested that instead of terminating the program, the money could be allocated 'to high-risk flooding areas including Texas and New Mexico.' But Richardson signed off on eliminating it earlier this month. Among the other impacts from the potential cuts, as outlined by FEMA, would be 'undertrained firefighters,' 'poor wildfire readiness,' more risk at '120 critical United States ports' and less homeland security training for cities hosting World Cup games. Axing another program 'could increase the risk of terror attacks on passenger rail,' the memo says, and cutting off a violence and terrorism prevention program 'results in a more vulnerable nation.' DHS said the memos referenced in this story are 'cherry-picked,' but acknowledged the department is looking to cut 'unaccountable programs.' 'Secretary Noem and this Administration are focused on ending waste, fraud, and abuse across the federal government - and FEMA is no exception,' a DHS spokesman said in a statement to CNN. 'For years, taxpayer dollars have flowed to bloated grants, political pet projects, and groups with questionable ties. That ends now.' This comes after FEMA shut down the Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities program, halting more than $600 million intended to help communities prepare for natural disasters, prompting 20 states to sue the agency. Due to the ongoing litigation, the memos state, FEMA will address the future of the BRIC program at a later date. The cuts to disaster and security grants could have wide-ranging consequences for communities that depend on these funds. The National League of Cities, an advocacy group representing cities, towns and villages across the US, 'strongly opposes' the proposed cuts, according to a statement provided to CNN by a spokesperson. 'Reducing or eliminating these programs would severely undermine the preparedness of our first responders and compromise the ability of local governments to effectively ensure the core capabilities necessary for prevention, protection, mitigation, response, and recovery efforts,' the NLC spokesperson wrote. Congress allocated a total of more than $4 billion this fiscal year for FEMA to support these national preparedness programs, which state and local governments, emergency management agencies, and fire and police departments depend on for essential staffing, equipment, and training. But in recent months, the disaster relief agency, at the direction of DHS, has largely halted the selection of new grant recipients so it could review the programs. That has left emergency managers across the country waiting for FEMA to issue Notices of Funding Opportunities, or NOFOs, which allow local jurisdictions and organizations to apply for grants and are now more than two months behind schedule. 'We've been ghosted by FEMA,' a North Carolina official recently told CNN, expressing frustration over the lack of guidance on whether states can expect funding in the coming months. Now federal and state emergency managers are increasingly concerned that large portions of this year's funds will go unspent, as the funding streams expire unless allocated by the end of September. At a hearing on Capitol Hill Wednesday, Richardson told concerned lawmakers, 'We're getting the NOFOs out the door as we speak.' The acting FEMA chief did not mention the looming cuts he had authorized in the memo he signed days before the hearing, though he criticized the agency's grant programs. 'A lot of the grants sound good, and then you dig into them, and they're not so good,' Richardson said, citing resilience projects 'used for things like bike paths and shade at bus stops.' During Wednesday's hearing, Rep. Dina Titus, a Nevada Democrat, pressed Richardson about the status of UASI funding, emphasizing its importance for protecting Las Vegas from potential terror threats. Richardson responded: 'What I can commit to is that we've been doing due diligence on all of the grants.' He did not mention the program's potential termination. Responding to CNN's new reporting Thursday, Titus said the plan to cut UASI is 'deeply irresponsible and endangers our public safety.' 'These grants played a significant role in the response to the Harvest Festival shootings and are critical to protecting the public in all major cities and at big events such as the Super Bowl, Formula One races, and golf tournaments,' Titus said in a statement to CNN. 'I implore Secretary Noem to administer these public safety grants as Congress directed and ensure that our first responders and emergency personnel have the tools they need to address future threats in our communities.'
