Latest news with #ShaneMartin
5 hours ago
- Politics
South Carolina lawmakers won't get paid while justices determine whether their raise was legal
COLUMBIA, S.C. -- All money paid to South Carolina lawmakers while they aren't in session has been stopped by the state Supreme Court as the justices sort through a lawsuit from one of their members, alleging legislators improperly gave themselves an $18,000-a-year raise. 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.
San Francisco Chronicle
10 hours ago
- Politics
- San Francisco Chronicle
South Carolina lawmakers won't get paid while justices determine whether their raise was legal
COLUMBIA, S.C. (AP) — All money paid to South Carolina lawmakers while they aren't in session has been stopped by the state Supreme Court as the justices sort through a lawsuit from one of their members, alleging legislators improperly gave themselves an $18,000-a-year raise. 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.
Boston Globe
10 hours ago
- Business
- Boston Globe
South Carolina lawmakers won't get paid while justices determine whether their raise was legal
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. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up 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. Advertisement 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. Advertisement 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.
Winnipeg Free Press
10 hours ago
- Politics
- Winnipeg Free Press
South Carolina lawmakers won't get paid while justices determine whether their raise was legal
COLUMBIA, S.C. (AP) — All money paid to South Carolina lawmakers while they aren't in session has been stopped by the state Supreme Court as the justices sort through a lawsuit from one of their members, alleging legislators improperly gave themselves an $18,000-a-year raise. 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.
Associated Press
09-06-2025
- Business
- Associated Press
South Carolina senator sues his own legislature over $18,000-a-year pay raise
COLUMBIA, S.C. (AP) — A state senator is suing his fellow lawmakers in the South Carolina General Assembly saying they are illegally giving themselves what is effectively an $18,000-a-year raise for all members. The increase in the 'in-district compensation' — money set aside for legislative duties that has few limits on how it can be spent — is set to go from $1,000 a month to $2,500 a month for all 46 senators and 124 House members starting July 1. But Republican Sen. Wes Climer's lawsuit said the raise violates the state constitution, which bans the legislature from increasing their per diem during their term. House members would get 18 months of the extra money and senators would get more than three years of payments before facing reelection. His lawsuit compared it to asking a judge to preside over his own trial or a police officer to investigate himself. The legal question will likely hinge on whether the extra money is considered part of a per diem for lawmakers and meant to pay their daily expenses or if it is personal income that is taxable. Lawyers for the House and Senate have not answered the lawsuit. 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. Climer said Monday he and other opponents of the increase think it should have passed as a stand-alone bill with hearings and a full debate. 'Regardless of how you feel about a legislative pay raise, this is the wrong way to do it. It violates the Madisonian principles that the legislature cannot take the people's money and appropriate it to themselves in real time,' Climer said. Hours after receiving word of the lawsuit, the state Supreme Court ordered both sides to submit briefs before the end of the month in what appears to be an effort to make some kind of decision before the raises start when the fiscal year begins July 1. Otherwise 'we'd have to try to claw back money from legislators. And we don't want that,' said former Democratic state Sen. Dick Harpootlian, an attorney who filed the lawsuit on Climer's behalf. Along with the in-district compensation, lawmakers also get a salary of $10,400 a year that has not changed since 1990. In addition, they get money for meals, mileage to drive to 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. The House sent an email to its 124 members giving them a chance to refuse the extra in-district compensation, and 34 declined the money, House Clerk Charles Reid said in an email. Senators could ask their clerk directly not to pay them, and Climer and two other Republicans have refused the raise, Senate Clerk Jeffrey Gossett said. Joining Climer in the lawsuit is retired educator and Republican activist Carol Herring. She said the raise going into effect immediately is counterproductive to being a good servant. 'I am concerned we are sending people to Columbia to serve in the General Assembly, and somehow it is seen more as a job than part-time service to our state,' Herring said.
