scpol

, , , , ,

A look back at Rutherford’s vaccine lottery

In May, House Minority Leader Todd Rutherford (D-Richland) spoke for all South Carolinians when he pushed for a state vaccine lottery to incentivize COVID-19 vaccination.

“I think the message of the State of South Carolina should be clear,” said Rutherford. “Get vaccinated: protect yourself, protect those around you, and you just might win a million dollars.”

And what did Governor Henry McMaster say in response to this innovative solution to one of the biggest health threats in U.S. history? Through a spokesperson, McMaster dismissed the vaccine lottery.

“South Carolinians have been given all available information about the vaccine and that is all they need in order to make this decision.”

But now, months later, South Carolina is in a much different place than it was when Rutherford initially suggested a vaccine lottery. With the prominence of the delta variant, COVID-19 has reemerged in a much more contagious form, and the state’s current infection rate is now “eerily similar” to August of 2020.

According to DHEC, South Carolina experienced 14,864 new cases of COVID-19 in just one week between August 9th and 13th. That means almost 3,000 new cases were reported each day along with 67 additional deaths that week.

The current spread of COVID-19 is especially concerning as South Carolina’s completed vaccination rate sits at an abysmal 45.8% of the total population. COVIDActNow lists the state’s risk level as Very High with a 14.1% positive test rate.

This time last year, vaccines were unavailable to the general population. But now that everyone 12 and older is eligible for the vaccine, there is no good reason that South Carolina should be experiencing such high rates of infection with stagnant rates of vaccination.

There are times when leadership means taking bold and innovative action. How many more South Carolinians could have been vaccinated since May? How many lives could have been saved? Where would we be as a state if our leaders had listened to Representative Rutherford rather than Governor McMaster’s spokesperson?

Representative Rutherford is usually right when it comes to innovative solutions for South Carolina’s problems. Whether it’s expanding gaming laws to boost tourism and create thousands of new jobs or advocating for medical cannabis, the Richland representative always speaks clearly from a bipartisan perspective on issues important to all South Carolinians. In reality, he says what most of us are thinking out loud.

In the end, though, it’s not just about reconsidering Rutherford’s vaccine lottery — it’s about thinking outside of McMaster’s limited box to protect South Carolina families and save lives. Rutherford was right, but now it’s time for the legislature and Governor to learn from their mistakes and finally right some wrongs. That means taking bold and immediate action to incentivize vaccinations for South Carolinians who remain hesitant due to failures of leadership.

To schedule a free vaccine appointment, click here.

,

A matter of interpretation? SC Dems fire back at mask proviso

South Carolina Governor Henry McMaster and Attorney General Alan Wilson have drawn criticism from Democratic officials due to conflicting interpretations of a budget proviso.

After the University of South Carolina announced that masks would be required in all campus buildings, McMaster and Wilson claimed the move to be against the law. They referenced a budget proviso that prohibits South Carolina’s public schools and universities from using state funds to enforce mask mandates, even as health officials are seeing more children hospitalized with COVID-19 related illnesses.

Representative Leon Stavrinakis is one of many Democratic officials who have criticized the proviso. Calling the legislation “dumb [and] reckless,” he clarified that the proviso does not ban mask mandates in schools — rather, it bans the use of state funding to enforce masking in schools.

Stavrinakis argued that public school districts have “clear legal authority…to regulate conduct in their schools” and may utilize local funds however they would like, including to require masks in schools.

Representative Annie McDaniel has also raised doubts regarding the top Republicans’ legal interpretation of the proviso. In a letter sent to the Attorney General, McDaniel requested his opinion on the phrase “appropriated funds.” 

“The text is a little vague,” McDaniel stated. Her letter calls for Wilson to clarify whether other sources of funding, like county taxes or federal appropriations, could be used to enforce mask mandates in public schools. Wilson has yet to respond to the letter.

If we’re attempting to understand the legislature’s intent in passing the budget proviso, why not refer to the words of the author himself? In an op-ed for The Post and Courier, editorial writer Cindi Ross Scoppe examines the words of Representative Stewart Jones who authored the budget amendment. 

During the legislature’s debate, Jones described to his colleagues that the amendment “prohibits state funds from being used for COVID-19 passports at our higher-learning facilities, any state-funded college.” As Scoppe points out, he never even says the word “mask.”

Scoppe explains that legislative intent can be determined through reviewing the official legislative record, such as the debate regarding the amendment. “You can’t use what legislators say today to determine what the Legislature meant yesterday,” she writes. 

In examining the legislature’s debate of the proviso, Scoppe demonstrates how McMaster and Wilson are attempting to revise history. Democrats are right: the legislature never intended for the proviso to ban mask mandates in the first place.

Governor McMaster and Alan Wilson have irresponsibly twisted the proviso into something it’s not. Mask mandates are not an attack on anyone’s personal liberty, but it does make for a good talking point as the 2022 elections draw near. 

With lives literally at stake, McMaster and Wilson should do the right thing and allow public schools and universities to enforce mask mandates. If protecting South Carolinians and their children proves to be too difficult for the duo, then the courts must intervene and voters must reconsider their support next election cycle.

, , , ,

Representative Gilda Cobb-Hunter urges Congress to act on environmental justice

“It’s time for Democrats in Congress to pass transformational investments in environmental justice,” says Representative Gilda Cobb-Hunter.

In an op-ed penned alongside Former State Representative Harold Mitchell, Cobb-Hunter expressed the urgency of investing in environmental justice efforts on a national level.

The Orangeburg representative emphasized the need for Congress to work to protect communities that are particularly vulnerable to environmental and climate crises, including communities of color. Across the country, communities of color and low-income neighborhoods are disproportionately impacted by environmental hazards such as pollution and natural disasters as a result of inadequate infrastructure and environmental racism.

To combat this reality on the state level, Cobb-Hunter has introduced legislation that would establish the “Justice Forty Oversight Committee.” This committee would be responsible for studying environmental justice opportunities in South Carolina and would ensure that federal benefits reach the communities that need them the most.

But according to Cobb-Hunter, state action alone isn’t enough. She argues that “we need action at all levels of government” to adequately address the climate crisis. This means urgent action by Congress to pass environmental justice investments, including affordable housing construction, clean water infrastructure, expansion of broadband access, Superfund cleanup and Brownfields redevelopment.

As a Democrat in a red state, Representative Cobb-Hunter recognizes the importance of federal action in helping South Carolinians prepare for and recover from environmental disaster. While the Justice Forty Oversight Committee is a step in the right direction, the legislation faces an uphill battle in the Republican-controlled General Assembly. Immediate action by Congress is necessary to ensure the success of the environmental justice movement across the country and here in South Carolina.

Congress cannot continue to delay environmental justice investments and states like South Carolina cannot afford to be left behind because of Republican governance. The climate crisis is already here — now is the time to act.

Read Representative Cobb-Hunter’s full op-ed here.

, , ,

As Dawn Staley shines on Olympic stage, Rep. Rutherford spotlights pay disparity

When Dawn Staley, coach of the University of South Carolina women’s basketball team, reprises her role leading the USA Basketball Women’s National Team at the Olympics this summer, the Gamecocks will have an ambassador for their institution shining on the world stage, at least for now…

Just last month the NBA’s Portland Trailblazers interviewed her as part of their search for a new head coach – a job that Staley herself said she “definitely” had to consider.

One factor that could potentially mean the difference between Staley staying in South Carolina versus exploring options elsewhere? Money.

Rep. Todd Rutherford (D-Columbia), the Democratic Minority leader in the state legislature and UofSC alum, penned an op-ed published this week in the Post and Courier arguing that Coach Staley deserves a pay raise.

“Despite her successes — conference titles, Final Four appearances, a national title, two first-place finishes in final season polls and the honor of coaching the USA Basketball Women’s National Team — Coach Staley is not paid commensurate with a coach of her stature,” writes Rutherford. “In fact, she is not even the highest-paid coach in the Southeastern Conference.”

If this all seems shocking to you, who could blame you? After all, this is the same institution that forked over $12.9 million in a buyout for former head football coach Will Muschamp. You would think that if the University of South Carolina is willing to spend that much on a losing football coach, it has enough funds to invest in a winning, elite basketball coach.

Because, it’s as Rutherford said: “If our state’s flagship university is not careful, [Staley] may go elsewhere.”

You can read Rep. Rutherford’s full piece here.

1 2 3 4›»