- BIG STORY: Trump education order sparks debate
- MORE NEWS: Legal reform passes S.C. Senate, but future uncertain
- LOWCOUNTRY, Ariail: Let’s try one more time
- BRACK: Remembering a punny political period from 2010
- MY TURN, Warren: Term limits still needed for Congress
- MYSTERY PHOTO: Open bridge
- FEEDBACK: Send us your thoughts
Trump education order sparks fierce S.C. debate
By Jack O’Toole, Capitol Bureau | A week after President Donald Trump signed an executive order aimed at dismembering the federal Department of Education, S.C. political leaders remain deeply divided over the move.
For some, like Gov. Henry McMaster, it’s a long-overdue effort to return control of education to the states.
“A good education is best shaped by those who know their students and communities—not by Washington bureaucrats,” McMaster spokesman Brandon Charochak told Statehouse Report in a March 27 statement. “Gov. McMaster supports President Trump’s efforts to provide states more control over educational outcomes.”
But others, such as Charleston Democratic Sen. Ed Sutton, see it as a cynical attack on a department that South Carolina residents and school districts rely on for essential funding and expertise.
“When it comes to education, South Carolina is a welfare state,” Sutton said in a March 27 interview. “We can’t get by without federal funding. And without it, the people who are going to suffer are going to be the kids from low income areas and kids with disabilities.”
Sutton says he strongly supports rooting out waste, fraud and abuse in federal education spending. But it’s something he wants done with a scalpel, not gasoline and a box of matches.
“It’s like they’ve got a single rotten board in the house,” Sutton said. “But instead of replacing that board, they’re just burning the whole damn house down.”
Burning down the house?
Founded in 1979, the U.S. Department of Education is the smallest cabinet-level agency in the federal government, with a budget of $238 billion and a narrowly defined set of responsibilities.
Primarily, the department oversees funding for low-income and special-needs students, manages college aid programs and enforces federal civil rights laws in U.S. schools.
Contrary to common misperceptions, it does not set national education standards or impose curricula on local school districts — a job that’s handled by state governors and education officials.
Long a target of GOP budget cutters — President Ronald Reagan tried unsuccessfully to eliminate the agency in the 1980s — the department has been on the chopping block since Trump took office Jan. 20.
Already, roughly half the agency’s workforce has been fired or coaxed into early retirement, with the headcount falling from about 4,400 on Jan. 1 to about 2,400 today.
What’s more, Trump’s March 20 executive order goes much further, directing officials to make preparations for the department’s complete elimination, with its legally mandated duties reassigned to other agencies — though administration officials acknowledge that kind of full dismemberment would require a vote of Congress.
According to current Education Secretary Linda McMahon, downsizing the federal education bureaucracy will improve American schools by redirecting resources into the classroom.
“Today’s reduction in force reflects the Department of Education’s commitment to efficiency, accountability, and ensuring that resources are directed where they matter most: to students, parents, and teachers,” she said in a statement announcing the job cuts.
But many local education officials, such as Somerville, Mass., School Committee Chair Ilana Krepchin, who’s part of a federal lawsuit to overturn the cuts, say Trump’s actions could devastate local schools.
“Dismantling it would cause real harm — not only to our students and schools, but to communities across the country,” Krepchin said in a March 24 news release about the lawsuit.
Meanwhile in South Carolina
S.C. Education Association President Sherry East echoed those concerns in a March 27 interview, noting that the federal Department of Education provides more than 10% of school funding in the Palmetto State.
“Our concern is that a lot of the money coming out of Washington is earmarked for special needs and low income students,” East said. “We need to make sure those communities are protected.”
Moreover, she says she worries about putting a major restructuring of U.S. education in the hands of officials with little or no education experience. McMahon, for example, is the co-founder and former CEO of World Wrestling Entertainment.
“I’m not sure who’s advising them on education policy at this point,” East said. “Anytime you have non-educators in charge of education, it worries me, because they’ve never worked in a school and lived it.”
Those concerns were front and center at a March 19 S.C. House Oversight Committee hearing, where members pressed state Education Superintendent Ellen Weaver on the threat Washington cutbacks could pose to special-needs and poor children here in the Palmetto State.
“Right now, we’re in intensive conversations with our local superintendents and also with the new folks in Washington,” Weaver told the committee. “We have an ironclad commitment to ensure that our low-income students and our special needs students don’t miss a minute of what they are owed.”
Nevertheless, she acknowledged that the road ahead would likely be marked by “bumps and friction” as the administration’s plans became clearer.
“We really don’t know what we’re going to be dealing with,” Weaver said.
Legal reform passes Senate; future uncertain
Staff reports | The South Carolina Senate late Wednesday passed a bill aiming to make the state legal system fairer, clearing a huge hurdle after months of fights, weeks of debate and hours of closed-door negotiations.
Despite the passage, the bill’s future is murky. Similar legislation imploded last year, and the bill still needs to be passed by the S.C. House. It has taken a much narrower approach on similar matters, passing a bill earlier this year that focuses specifically more on liquor liability insurance reform for bars and restaurants.
Senators voted 35-7 late Wednesday to approve the so-called “tort-reform bill,” officially passing it Thursday. Supporters say they believe the legislation will ultimately help South Carolinians save money on insurance costs, while others argue it could be a helping hand for the insurance companies rather than their customers.
In a post on X on Thursday, S.C. Gov. Henry McMaster called the passage of this bill “great news,” saying it was “a wonderful example of leadership, determination, hard work, and collaboration.”
But Democrats, from whom all seven of the votes against the bill came, said there is no data from insurance companies that suggests premiums will go down as a result of its passage. – Skyler Baldwin
S.C. GOP proposes flat income tax flat that would shift burden
Republican leaders in the S.C. General Assembly on Tuesday introduced a new income tax structure proposing billions of dollars in tax changes that would drop the state’s income tax below nearby states.
But critics say the change would simply shift the income tax burden from the rich to the working poor and many in the middle class.
The new proposal would drop the state’s income tax rate from the current 6.2% rate, which leaders say is the highest in the Southeast, to 3.99% in 2026, which they say would cut South Carolina’s income tax rate to the lowest in the region.
“A few years ago, we took a big step [toward lowering income taxes], but we need to take another one,” Gov. Henry McMaster said at a March 25 news conference with GOP leaders announcing new proposed legislation. “So let’s get to work, let’s iron out the details, let’s move forward [and] let’s take that tax down.”
State business leaders argued the lower top rate would make South Carolina more competitive and bring more talent to the state. While the proposal generally would cut taxes for the state’s wealthiest, it would also include tax increases for the roughly 44% of South Carolinians who currently don’t pay state income taxes, many of whom are among the poorest individuals.
What’s more, the new rate would be accompanied by a significant reduction in the state’s standard deduction, effectively raising taxes for an as-yet-unknown number of state residents. Leaders have said that a breakdown of the impacts of that change will be available in the days ahead.
The state’s poorest people likely would bear most of the burden.
A January story in the Charleston City Paper highlighted how income tax cuts “could lead to a bait and switch, where tax rates go down but the average South Carolinian sees no real benefit — or possibly even a backdoor tax increase.”
“Since 2021, about half the states in the country have cut income taxes,” said Neva Butkus, a tax policy analyst with the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy in Washington, D.C.. “And they eventually have to pay for that with something — usually raising or expanding sales taxes and fees or kicking responsibilities down to the locals, all of which ask more of lower- and middle-income families.”
Some worry that potentially lower revenues to the state after an income tax cut could lead it vulnerable, especially now with the federal government working to shift funding burdens to states.
“We’re the fastest growing state in the nation, which means that as people move in here, our infrastructure needs — roads, schools, fire departments, water and sewer — are growing, too,” state Sen. Brad Hutto, D-Orangeburg, said in January. “We just need to make sure that as we lower one tax, we don’t unwittingly leave ourselves without enough money to run state government.” – Jack O’Toole
In other recent news
S.C., N.C. residents chased from homes by rain, then fire. Six months ago, many packed up their homes and fled from Hurricane Helene, a storm which wrought destruction across swaths of the Carolinas. Now, some are at risk again as wildfires burn across more than 20 square miles in mostly rugged, remote forests.
S.C. lawmakers press pause on anti-DEI bill. In a rare move, the S.C. House halted debate on an anti-DEI bill at the request of Education Chairwoman Shannon Erickson.
S.C. energy bill brings optimism for some, concern for others. The state’s growing population strikes concerns for state leaders about the future of energy, but a bill addressing the issue has an organization concerned for impacts on residential ratepayers.
S.C. bills seek to improve safety for S.C. worshipers and students. A pair of bills seek to allow religious institutions to apply for security grants and require extra training for private security in K-12 schools.
S.C. legislators look to expand Heritage Act. New bills in the S.C. House and Senate would place additional restrictions on historical monument removals across the state. According to reports, the move is largely driven by frustration with Charleston’s 2020 removal of the John C. Calhoun memorial in Marion Square.
S.C. Senate considers new restrictions on solar farms. The S.C. Senate is weighing new restrictions on solar farms in response to concerns that they’re disrupting rural residents’ way of life.
S.C. Senate panel calls for the removal of Loftis from office. South Carolina senators are recommending Treasurer Curtis Loftis be removed from office, citing that he “willfully neglected his duties” for his role in a $1.8 billion accounting error that went unreported for nearly a decade.
Lawmaker seeks to loosen offenses for tree trimmers. A bill proposed in the Statehouse would remove criminal penalties for trespassing and willfully cutting and potentially injuring your neighbor’s trees if they encroach on your property.
S.C. attorney general suggests residents to delete 23andMe data. S.C. Attorney General Alan Wilson says South Carolinians who have accounts with the genetic testing company 23andMe should consider deleting them after the company announced it filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection and that its co-founder and CEO resigned.
Norman says he’ll likely run for governor. U.S. Rep. Ralph Norman, R-S.C., says he’s planning a 2026 GOP primary run to succeed term-limited Gov. Henry McMaster.
Let’s try one more time
Award-winning cartoonist Robert Ariail has a special knack for poking a little fun in just the right way. This week, he relates Albert Einstein’s definition of insanity to South Carolina legislators.
Remembering a punny political period from 2010
By Andy Brack | About 150 friends of the late award-winning cookbook chef and Southern icon Nathalie Dupree will gather in Charleston Saturday to remember her extraordinary life.
They’ll tell stories, shed a few tears and revel in the joyful cultured messiness that made Dupree, who died in January at age 85, a memorable soul all over the world. And for those of you wondering, yes there will be food after the gathering, likely to be inspired by the 15 cookbooks she wrote or co-wrote that explain just about everything about Southern food.
While most speakers likely will highlight Dupree’s huge impact on the food world – keeping alive recipes and techniques, mentoring young women chefs, making complicated preparations simpler – she had a pretty good opinionated political side, too.
So much so, in fact, that you might recall a 2010 last-minute write-in bid for the United State Senate against then incumbent Jim DeMint and Alvin Greene, an undistinguished, unknown, surprise Democratic candidate who refused to drop out despite being mired in controversy.
All of this mess led Dupree to drop into the race as a write-in candidate on a bright, fall day at Waterfront Park in Charleston. While it was pretty clear she knew she wouldn’t win, she engagingly pointed out there had been a write-in candidate who won a last-minute bid to the U.S. Senate – and that the person was from South Carolina. (Hint: Strom Thurmond in 1954).
On the day in late September 2010 when Dupree announced, there certainly was a twinkle in her eye about her chances, but she was serious about voters having alternatives so that DeMint didn’t just walk away with the election. (He did and went on to leave the seat early to head the Heritage Foundation, which some argue is a major collaborator in the mess facing the country today.)
With all of this fodder in 2010, it was clear a newspaper column was in order – and perhaps one that was a little tongue-in-cheek. So came a commentary with the headline, “Dupree wants to cream DeMint.” It went downhill from there:
“The entry of Dupree, better known for her shrimp and grits than politics, will add much-needed spice to a relatively dull Senate race. Just imagine the glee that boiled over in newsrooms around the state when Dupree announced the write-in campaign. Like sugar plums, all sorts of headlines certainly danced across their minds, although few actually made their way into print.”
And that led to an effort to see how many bad cooking clichés we could stuff into the column. Here are 10 runners-up to the headline (above) that went with the column:
- Dupree wants to cook DeMint’s goose
- Dupree burns DeMint for being against pork for SC
- Nathalie wants to bring home the bacon
- Dupree punches for DeMint’s sweet spot
- DeMint gives Dupree a bad taste
- Dupree whips up support
- DeMint nutty over port, Dupree steams
- Dupree muddles DeMint
- Dupree stirs the pot
- You, me and Dupree: Why not Nathalie?
Dupree and other write-in candidates didn’t knock off – err, crush – DeMint. All combined, write-in alternatives got less than 2% of the vote to the 61.5% garnered by DeMint, who spent more than $5 million to beat the unknown Democrat.
But Dupree, who by then had won two national James Beard Awards for cookbook writing, went on to win two more – for American cooking in 2013 and the “Who’s Who of Food and Beverage in America” in 2015 for her contributions to the food and beverage industry.
Even two months after her death, people are still talking and remembering how Dupree changed lives and elevated Southern cooking.
So maybe one more bad headline:
- Dupree’s legacy still stews among friends across South.
Andy Brack is editor and publisher of Statehouse Report and the Charleston City Paper. Have a comment? Send to: feedback@statehousereport.com.
Warren: Term limits still needed for Congress
By John Warren | Career politicians. We hear the term every election cycle over and over – in our mailboxes, on our televisions, and on our phones.
Candidates running for office have a good reason for repeating the phrase when describing their opponents who have served in elected offices for years: voters are sick and tired of career politicians. You know the types: they run for state Senate, then Congress, and on it goes. The cycle never ends and they fail to deliver for the American people.
And the best example of failure is the group of politicians sitting in Congress. Year after year, no matter which party is in charge, Congress fails to pass a budget, fails to cut spending, fails to invest in real national defense, fails to counter the threat of China. Congress simply fails to work for the American people.
It’s no surprise that the president is left with no choice but to take action by executive order – even congressional leaders of the president’s party can’t seem to actually cut wasteful spending. In fact, U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., has been the sponsor of many of the very projects that have sent our nation spiraling into devastating national debt. Gender programs in Pakistan? Lindsey Graham made sure that was in the budget. It’s irresponsible and breaches a fiduciary responsibility to American taxpayers.
That’s why now, more than ever, we need congressional term limits.
February 2025 commemorated the 74th anniversary of the adoption of the 22nd Amendment that limited a president to two terms in office. George Washington set the standard that a president served no more than two terms. Although several presidents had attempted to seek a third term, none succeeded until Franklin Roosevelt in 1940, as the nation confronted the possibility of entering World War II.
But it wasn’t until 1947 that Congress passed the legislation that would create the 22nd Amendment and the state ratification process began. South Carolina was the 38th state to ratify the Amendment on March 13, 1951.
The anniversary of this amendment highlights the importance of today’s most popular and bipartisan issue – congressional term limits. A recent RMG Research poll showed 83% of Americans regardless of political affiliation support congressional term limits. That is a remarkable show of support that members of Congress would do well to recognize.
With more than 151 members who have pledged to support congressional term limits now serving in Congress, we are seeing movement to pass congressional term limits. Once passed by Congress and ratified by the states, it would limit representatives to three terms, or six years, and senators to two terms, or 12 years.
Because politicians in Congress are unlikely to limit themselves, it’s time for states to take action by calling for a convention to adopt a congressional term limits amendment. When enough states request a convention to add a congressional term limits amendment to the constitution, Congress is bypassed and the amendment can be proposed by the states for ratification. The convention would be strictly limited to imposing term limits on Congress.
A growing roster of states has called for a limited convention to propose a congressional term limits amendment to the constitution. In South Carolina, House Joint Resolution 3008 calls for a congressional term limits amendment. It is essential the Palmetto State pass this resolution and go on record for congressional term limits.
Term limits represent an opportunity for the people to retake control of Congress, kick out the special interests, and force the career politicians to job outside of government. The people deserve real representation in Congress, not more of the same.
Greenville businessman John Warren is the state chair for U.S. Term Limits.
Open bridge
Since we offered a bridge last week that many found tough to identify, let’s keep on that theme with this bridge. Where is it? Bonus: Tell us something about the bridge that you find neat. Send your name, hometown and guess to: feedback@statehousereport.com.
Our most recent mystery, “Rusty bridge,” came from a photo submitted by dedicated reader Bill Segars of Hartsville. It shows the old Burton’s Ferry Turnstile Crossing on U.S. Highway 301 between South Carolina and Georgia in Allendale County.
Curtis Joyner of Charleston shares that the old bridge has been in the open position for years to accommodate river traffic.
Allan Peel of San Antonio, Texas, wrote that some locals believe the bridge is haunted. “According to legend, before the bridge was built, one of the ferry operators drowned in the river under mysterious circumstances. Some visitors have reported seeing a shadowy figure near the remains of the bridge, believed to be the spirit of the lost ferryman, still waiting to guide travelers across.”
And then there are strange lights and sounds: “Locals claim to have seen floating orbs of light around the abandoned bridge at night. Others report hearing disembodied whispers, footsteps on the old wooden planks, and the sound of creaking metal, as if the rusted structure were still turning—despite being frozen in place for decades.”
Only three others correctly identified the bridge: David Lupo of Mount Pleasant; George Graf of Palmyra, Va.; and Frank Bouknight of Summerville. Congrats for what was a tough mystery from Bill!
- Send us a mystery picture. If you have a photo that you believe will stump readers, send it along (but make sure to tell us what it is because it may stump us too!) Send to: feedback@statehousereport.com and mark it as a photo submission. Thanks.
Send us your thoughts
We encourage you to send in your thoughts about policy and politics impacting South Carolina. We print non-defamatory comments, but unless you provide your contact information – name and hometown, plus a phone number used only by us for verification – we can’t publish your thoughts.
- Have a comment? Send your letters or comments to: feedback@statehousereport.com. Make sure to provide your contact details (name, hometown and phone number for verification. Letters are limited to 150 words.
Statehouse Report, founded in 2001 as a weekly legislative forecast that informs readers about what is going to happen in South Carolina politics and policy, is provided by email to you at no charge every Friday.
Donate today
We’re proud to offer Statehouse Report for free. For more than a dozen years, we’ve been the go-to place for insightful independent policy and political news and views in the Palmetto State. And we love it as much as you do.
But now, we can use your help. If you’ve been thinking of contributing to Statehouse Report over the years, now would be a great time to contribute as we deal with the crisis. In advance, thank you.
More
- Mailing address: Send inquiries by mail to: P.O. Box 21942, Charleston, SC 29413
- Subscriptions are free: Click to subscribe.
- We hope you’ll keep receiving the great news and information from Statehouse Report, but if you need to unsubscribe, go to the bottom of the weekly email issue and follow the instructions.
- Read our sister publication: Charleston City Paper (every Friday in print; Every day online)
- © 2025, Statehouse Report, a publication of City Paper Publishing, LLC. All rights reserved.
Related
Help keep the City Paper free.
No paywalls.
No subscription cost.
Free delivery at 800 locations.
Help support independent journalism by donating today.
(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by PostX News and is published from a syndicated feed.)
