A Fine Mess in SC Election Politics
A brief BRIEF summary:
The election commission changed the rules from last election to this election. Last election (and previous elections) candidates had to fill out their Statement of Economic Interest at the same time they filled out the other forms they needed to file to run for a seat. In the interim the rule was changed … candidates now have to file electronically.
Incumbents, having previously held office, often had already filed their statements. Challengers had an additional step to take, to file online, and many challengers … up to 200 statewide in a variety of races … not having been informed of this rule change by the GOP county chairman at the time they filed … left their filing having done all that was asked of them from the people who took their filing, but who (perhaps because the rule changes was not sufficiently communicated from the election commission) were not asked to file their online statements. Many filed later that day, others filed as soon as the miscommunication was made known.
Tuesday May 1 the SC Supreme Court will have a hearing to determine whether up to 200 candidates will be tossed off the ballots because of this rule change (which did not impact incumbents … or did it?)
Here are a series of articles by Paul Gable at Grand Strand Daily. Plow through them, they are quite complex. Today we learned that TWO of the judges have recused themselves. Now, in SC we already have the unfortunate situation where our judges are APPOINTED by legislators. What does it mean for accountability that TWO of them have recused themselves, at least one of those being replaced by a retired judge … a retired judge has accountability to no one, not legislators, nor voters through their support of legislators.