We’ve come to view all government scorecards cum grano salis. Actually, we’ve come to view them with an ocean of salt.
They are usually driven by the issuing organization’s specific agenda, not by the individual legislative votes … and they are invariably comprised of cherry-picked tallies as opposed to a full spectrum that’s representative of an individual’s true voting record.
Having said that, the scorecards released by the S.C. Club for Growth are usually worth considering as they do a decent job of cutting through the spin and getting to the heart of state lawmakers’ voting records on bread and butter tax and spending issues.
This year’s report cards are no exception …
“Regular South Carolinians deserve to know what’s really happening in Columbia – and who can be trusted to look out for their best interests,” the club’s chairman Dave Ellison said in a news release. “From the VC Summer nuclear debacle to the ongoing ethics scandal, we’ve seen far too many politicians saying one thing at home and doing something else in Columbia. Club for Growth’s scorecards tell the real story of who cares about reducing spending, conservative reforms, and other pro-growth issues.”
That statement is a tad too self-congratulatory for our taste, but the group did do a good job of highlighting several votes from the 2017 legislative session that really mattered. For example, the Club scored lawmakers on several votes related to raising the state’s gasoline tax – which this news site ardently opposed – as well as a vote in the S.C. Senate to elevate uber-liberal “ex-Democrat” Hugh Leatherman back to his powerful perch as president of the chamber.
(For more on that scam, click here).
How did South Carolina’s “Republican-controlled” legislature fare on the Club’s scorecards? Not well …
[timed-content-server show=”2018-Feb-15 00:00:00″ hide=”2018-Mar-01 00:00:00″]
SPONSORED CONTENT (ARTICLE CONTINUES BELOW)
Learn More at www.catherinetempleton.com
[/timed-content-server]
“Of the 170 lawmakers in the General Assembly, only 18 representatives and 12 senators scored well enough to earn an A or B from the Club,” the group’s release stated. “Sadly, the opposite end of the grading scale was well represented, with 112 legislators receiving F grades from the conservative educational organization.”
Wow … gotta love “Republican” rule, huh?
This is sad but not surprising. As we’ve repeatedly pointed out, GOP lawmakers in Columbia are not conservative. Neither are they “Republican” (to the extent that partisan label means anything anymore).
What are they?
Addicted … to taxing, borrowing and spending on a government that consistently produces abysmal outcomes (economically, fiscally, educationally and with regards to infrastructure, public safety and other core functions of government).
Oh, and one that is increasingly (infuriatingly) corrupt …
Anyway, for those of you keeping score at home here is the Club’s House scorecard …
[tnc-pdf-viewer-iframe file=”https://www.fitsnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/2017-SCCFG-House-Scorecard.pdf” width=”800″ height=”533″ download=”true” print=”true” fullscreen=”true” share=”true” zoom=”true” open=”true” pagenav=”true” logo=”false” find=”true” language=”en-US” page=”” default_zoom=”auto” pagemode=””]
(Via: S.C. Club for Growth)
And here is the scorecard for the Senate …
[tnc-pdf-viewer-iframe file=”https://www.fitsnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/2017-SCCFG-Senate-Scorecard.pdf” width=”800″ height=”533″ download=”true” print=”true” fullscreen=”true” share=”true” zoom=”true” open=”true” pagenav=”true” logo=”false” find=”true” language=”en-US” page=”” default_zoom=”auto” pagemode=””]
(Via: S.C. Club for Growth)
To view a list of keyed votes for both chambers, click here.
***
WANNA SOUND OFF?
Got something you’d like to say in response to one of our stories? Please feel free to submit your own guest column or letter to the editor via-email HERE. Got a tip for us? CLICK HERE. Got a technical question or aglitch to report? CLICK HERE. Want to support what we’re doing? SUBSCRIBE HERE.
Banner: Travis Bell Photography