♪ Welcome to This Week in South Carolina.

I'm Gavin Jackson.

The state legislature reconvenes on Tuesday to start its final year of its two year session.

And there are plenty of bills up for debate in both the House and Senate chambers, including redistricting and how to deal with the influx of money coming into the state.

Joining us to discuss what we can expect during this year's legislative session is the Associated Press's Jeffrey Collins and the state's Joseph Bustos.

Jeffrey, I want to start off with you.

Let's set the scene now for what's going on in the Senate.

We had a lot of Republican leadership changes since Senator Hugh Leatherman died in November.

Talk to us about what made Leatherman such a big force in the Senate.

He was one of the most powerful politicians - probably the most powerful politician in the state.

Tell us what made him a force and just what kind of changes we can expect to see going forward this year?

<Jeffrey> Well, it's a combination of longevity and personality.

I mean, you know, the Senate took over, the Republicans took over the Senate in 2000, in large part because of Leatherman's orchestrations after he switched from being a Democrat to Republican.

And then he leads the Senate Finance Committee, which writes the budget and is probably, if not the most powerful body in the state, one of them for that next 21 years.

And you know, that kind of leadership and experience is hard to replace.

Now, it'll be interesting.

Taking over the Senate Finance Committee is the Senate, the former Senate President Harvey Peeler who's been waiting for this shot for that 20 years.

I mean, he spent just as long in the Senate as Hugh Leatherman but Leatherman got the nod on seniority, because his last name starts with 'L' and Peeler starts with a 'P' So, that's going to be a very big difference.

I mean, a lot of people I don't think realize that Harvey Peeler is one of the more conservative senators in the South Carolina Senate, he gets lumped in with people like Thomas Alexander and Hugh Leatherman, who have been there, Nikki Setzler, who have been there a long time.

But as far as that peer group goes, he's a very conservative senator.

I mean, he's one of only a handful of maybe three or four, who voted against removing the Confederate flag both times it came up in 2000, and in 2015, so there may be a big change.

I mean, Hugh Leatherman's Finance Committee, the main goal was to keep South Carolina's finances as stable as possible.

He resented tax cuts - not 'resented' but he kind of tried to stall tax cuts and things like that, because he felt like the state needed its revenue.

It didn't need to cut taxes, and then realize, like states like Alabama and Kansas that suddenly needed that revenue, and ended up in a jam.

<Gavin> Yeah, always talking about big spending bills and always seeing those fights too, Leatherman did, will be different with Peeler.

But we'll talk more about Harvey Peeler taking over the Senate Finance Committee in a moment.

But Joe, you heard Jeffrey just mentioned there, Thomas Alexander being part of that old guard.

Talk to us about Alexander now leading the Senate as Senate president and what that means for that body?

<Joe> Well, he's a very close friend of Hugh Leatherman.

And Thomas Alexander has been described by his colleagues as someone who's mild mannered.

And then you get that when you talk to him.

He doesn't take too many chances.

I mean, he ultimately has control over who serves on which committees, specifically the conference committees and who gets recognized on the floor.

<Gavin> Yeah, again, you know, when you're senate president, you're not as powerful as what it used to be essentially, the Senate Pro Tem was a more powerful position.

And now you're dealing with, you know, rules, debates, you're dealing with a calendar and things like that, appointments.

So it'll be interesting to see how he governs in that body.

But John, want to stick with you looking at the the Finance Committee Chairman, we're talking about Harvey Peeler, from Cherokee County - Gaffney, specifically.

Do we expect to see maybe more love going to the Upstate?

We talk about Thomas Alexander.

He's from Oconee.

So a lot of Upstate action happening there in the Senate.

Can we see maybe, you know, Cherokee County getting a bump like we saw Florence getting for years when that power's over in the Senate Finance Committee?

<Joe> Yeah, I talked to the Francis Marion President Fred Carter about this a little bit.

And he mentioned Hugh Leatherman helped his university a lot.

Florence County may have to work a little bit harder to get funding One other state senator mentioned to me that he wouldn't be surprised if the next big economic development deal comes from Cherokee County.

There is that power shift from the Pee Dee to the Upstate, and it puts Peeler in a position to direct funding, to direct earmarks toward his area, if that's what he chooses to do.

Now, it's going to be a wait and see.

Peeler has kept some of Leatherman's key staffers, and we'll have to wait and see.

Does Peeler keep Democrats as Subcommittee Chairmen going forward as Leatherman did?

<Gavin> Yeah.

Kind of a favor to those long serving Democrats that are taking over some of the subcommittees which, you know, of course, when Republicans are in power, they want every Republican to be in power, essentially.

So, Jeffrey, any other thoughts on Peeler taking over the Senate Finance Committee there?

<Jeffrey> Well, we'll see.

I mean, you know, one of the things that hasn't just been on the back burner in South Carolina, they've been talked about, but not pushed to the forefront is tax reform.

And, you know, Harvey Peeler, I suspect, will be very pro cutting taxes.

Reforming taxes is something that the house has been very interested in for a few years before it got side railed by COVID.

So that may be something to look out for, is what happens with tax policy in South Carolina over these next several months?

<Gavin> Yeah, and that's something that probably will get more attention too, since we have so much money coming to the state as a result of, you know, the COVID stimulus, just juicing our economy.

We're talking about population growth, also just adding to the growth in revenues.

Talk to us about what you might see in this budget, Jeffrey.

I mean, we had a big one last year, we've been getting all these billion dollar surpluses.

Tell us about some of the funding that's already in place that they're expecting to use to craft these budgets when they get back next week going forward.

And what you expect to see some priorities be.

<Jeffrey> Hey, the letter is B, and the word is billions.

Um, there's going to be billions of dollars out there not only in COVID relief funding, but also in money leftover that the state didn't spend, because it was very careful during the COVID-19 pandemic, to not spend a lot just in case the economy ended up doing worse than what ended up happening.

So um, it's gonna be like one of those machines where people are just grabbing cash.

I mean, state agencies, this is your shot.

Yesterday I was listening to the DHEC board meeting, and they're gonna ask for a new lab.

They want a new lab to screen for infectious diseases and everything.

Um, you're gonna have Corrections asking for a lot more money to further improve security.

I mean, roads are going to be humongous.

I mean, I think you'll see a massive influx of money into the roads.

I mean, South Carolina added 500,000 people over the past 10 years.

Did it add enough capacity in the roads to be able to keep up with that growth?

Probably not.

So this is an opportunity to spend money on expanding highways, adding new roads and that kind of thing.

I mean, there's going to be a lot of requests, probably a lot more than can be done.

So as my old friend, Jim Davenport, used to say, "The big debate in the Senate and the House is when you have a lot of money as opposed to a little."

<Gavin> More money, more problems.

<Jeffrey> Yeah, exactly.

<Gavin> Especially when we look at last year when we did see more money going to state prisons that they desperately needed.

We did see teacher starting salaries go up by $1,000.

We saw $1,000 bonus, we saw employee pay raises for the state employees.

I'm assuming a lot of those things we'll see happen again, but then you're talking about some other things on top of that, you know, because those are recurring dollars versus when we talked about surpluses, we're talking about one time dollars, what you can do with that.

<Jeffrey> Yeah, I was kind of mixing the two.

I mean, yeah, I mean, there's the recurring money.

Certainly we're gonna look at not just teacher salaries, but I suspect, you know, there have been promises made to state employees for several years about raises.

And I just, I mean, we'll see.

I mean, I think there will be a very angry group of state employees if they don't get a significant raise this year out of their reoccurring money.

So congratulations, Gavin.

<Gavin> No comment there.

Joe, the governor has not released his budget yet, but we do see that when he does, a lot of lawmakers do follow what his priorities are when he lays out his annual executive budget, more so than any governor that has preceded him in recent memory.

So I'm kind of wondering what you're thinking we might see from some of those priorities that Jeffrey was just talking about; what the governor might implement when he does release his annual executive budget.

<Joe> I think there'd definitely be some big ticket items on there.

The governor has already said he wants to see money for I-73, from I-95, to Myrtle Beach, a combination of COVID relief money and surpluses from previous years.

Does the legislature go along with that?

That's one question.

I think you'll also see some money for the Port of Charleston.

There was a bill last year that allowed up to $550 million to be borrowed to expand operations at the Port of Charleston.

The Senate passed that bill, and it's sitting in the House, but then ultimately, in the budget, they included about $200 million for that project so they wouldn't have to borrow that much.

There's money available to fund the rest of it without borrowing a dime.

We saw the governor's Accelerate SC committee recommend trying to use COVID relief money for that.

There's some questions whether that's actually possible, but there's money available in the surpluses to possibly make that happen.

So I think those are possibilities.

Again, I agree with Jeff, you might see something about teacher pay raises in there.

And we'll see.

I'm looking forward to the battle over how much, if anything, state employees get.

<Gavin> Yeah, well, then his State of the State address is later this month too.

And I'm guessing, you know, they always mention sending money back to taxpayers and we have this much money coming into coffers.

I'm guessing tax refunds will be a big push this time that will probably be backed up, to some extent, more in Senate Finance Committee and in the House.

<Joe> Yeah, definitely, I think how that tax -- if it's a tax reform, or if it's a tax rebate, before the pandemic hit, the governor's office was proposing another rebate, then the pandemic hit, and that went away because no one knew what the budget, what the revenues are going to look like to the state.

<Gavin> So a lot going on there with state money.

Jeffrey, let's switch to federal dollars, because we're also talking about billions.

We're talking about $2.5 billion in the American Rescue Plan Act money alone, that lawmakers are going to determine what to do with.

So far the governor has made some proposals, about a billion dollars worth of proposals, that he'd like to see done with that money.

Of course, it's up to the lawmakers to decide where that goes.

But we're talking about infrastructure investments, we're talking about roads, water, sewer, rural.

What are some of these big ticket items that the governor is proposing?

Do you think that they'll follow suit like they have with some of his budget priorities?

<Jeffrey> Yeah, the overarching story of Governor McMaster's administration since he was, you know, since he was elevated up at the beginning of 2017, is he gets along well with the legislature, and they get along well with him, and they work well together.

So chances are usually pretty good when the governor suggests something, that at least there's some support in the legislature, if not significant support in the legislature for it.

Um, one interesting thing he wants to do with this federal money is he wants to improve water and sewer systems, local water and sewer systems across the state.

And you suggested several 100 million dollars to do that.

The big difference between the two is under McMaster's plan, that money would just be given directly to the local governments to improve their sewer systems.

The legislature seems to think that what they'd like to do is have some kind of local match; that these local folks would have to put up some money to be able to get the state money as well.

So if that's the case, then I mean, it's a fairly significant difference that's going to have to be worked out in the process.

And I mean, I think that the governor's argument is that these local communities don't have the money, and this is a huge pot of money to give them the opportunity to upgrade these systems that are 40, 50, 60 years old.

<Gavin> Yeah, Lord knows, like there were a lot of rural communities, there are plenty of matching grant programs out there, and they would have been taken advantage of these.

That's the problem, the local income, the local revenue is not there for them to take advantage of those programs, but we are seeing, you know, money to move up I- 26.

That was a big rollout with the Department of Transportation Secretary, Christy Hall.

So I'm assuming when you do something like that, when you make these big, splashy announcements that seem to benefit a lot of different jurisdictions, that's going to...take some traction, that's going to actually go forward.

<Jeffrey> That'll be, that - I-26 I suspect we'll get a lot of support the legislature the one road bill that will be more interesting to see if you can get support is interstate 73.

Or, you know, our...forever coming up issue now.

I mean, they've got more money to spend now and I-73 than they've ever had before depending, and they have some, there's some local governments, especially the ones that aren't near Myrtle Beach, the ones that are out further along I-73 like in Dillon County and Marion County, that aren't quite as excited about matching money, but I think there will be a very robust and interesting debate about interstate 73.

And one that pits, you know, the rest of the state against the... Horry County Tourism boosting kind of segment of our state, <Gavin> Not just tourism, too, but one of our more growing parts of the state.

We'll talk about that when we talk about redistricting, once we wrap up with more money, Joe.

Talk about $520 million dollars that the state is getting from the feds because of a settlement over at the Savannah River Site, dealing with that MOX fuel facility that was terminated?

We still have a bunch of plutonium laying around down there.

They're paying us to keep that because they didn't remove it from the state.

But what's going on down there?

It seems like a separate stimulus bill for Aiken, Barnwell and Allendale Counties down there.

>> Yeah.

And there's a lot of money to keep track of... <Gavin> Yeah.

>> 525 million.

McMaster has put out his proposal for what the money should be used for and he wants all of it to stay in Aiken, Barnwell and Allendale Counties and he suggested specific projects, money for like workforce training, a new high school in Barnwell County, industrial parks in the area...a broadband project for the Aiken Electric Cooperative and water and sewer infrastructure and infrastructure for a Cybersecurity Initiative in North Dakota.

Those are just some of the projects that Governor McMaster has been suggesting, and it's all towards trying to make it an investment to... in that area affected by the plutonium being present there at the SRS.

<Gavin> Yeah, definitely those lawmakers are going to probably hold on to those priorities.

I'm sure they were consulted on them.

And then also, you know, make sure that people don't come from other parts of the state and try and grab that money too, but there's some leftover for the rest of the state.

Again, we'll see what lawmakers decide with that.

But moving to redistricting, Jeffrey.

We got that delayed census data late last year and in summer and lawmakers started working in the off season to developed these maps not only for the House and Senate districts, but also congressional districts that need to be redistricted based on population growth in the state.

The Senate plan wasn't very controversial when we look at those 46 districts of those 46 districts in that map, but the House one was a little bit more, so, that got passed in the off season.

Tell us about that and the 124 districts and what's going on with that House map that's been signed into law since they passed in December.

<Jeffrey> The House map had to be drawn a lot differently than it was last, in 2010, because of this, you know, the states had so many people and they've added people it's been lopsided growth.

I mean, there's been a lot of growth in the Upstate.

It didn't get altered quite as much because it's kind of been spread out from, you know, Oconee County all the way up to Cherokee County, but the places that it really was lopsided is, you know, York County, south of Charlotte, North Carolina, Horry County, which is Myrtle Beach, Charleston has grown pretty rapidly and ultimately, several, you know, smaller rural districts got moved one district from Orangeburg goes to Tega Cay, you know, a district from the Marion and Williamsburg County area ends up in Horry County, now.

Ultimately, you know...there's been a lot of complaints about the House districts that they were drawn to protect incumbents, that they were drawn to dilute minority voting interests.

The House would argue back that this actually has more majority of minority districts than any of the other plans that were proposed, this House plan that was passed.

There's already been a lawsuit filed.

So, we're going to wait and see whether that gets heard.

There's a clock ticking in the background because filing for the House, new House districts starts in mid March, the primaries in June.

So something has to be, either...the court has to put them aside and say run on the old maps or run on some different maps by that mid March deadline, or we will get to maps.

<Gavin> Yeah, it's an exciting, exciting time when we get to go up against the clock here.

That's how things get done a lot of times too.

But, Joe, when we talk about these changes in the Statehouse, you know, right now in the... Senate, there are 30 Republican seats, 16 Democratic seats.

Those senators are not up for re-election this year.

But, then we'll be looking at in the House it's 81 Republicans and 43.

Democrats.

Where do we see this going based on what the maps are showing right now and how this...how these maps could alter the future of the Statehouse right now?

<Joseph> Well, there's ...one thing to keep in mind.

There's 14 state lawmakers have been drawn into districts with other incumbents.

So, they will be setting up potential primaries.

So, it's 10 representatives and four senators.

Now, when it comes to the House map, analysts have predicted five democratic seats could flip red in the next election if these maps hold up.

So, that could make the House even more conservative, more Republican.

We won't see the effect of the Senate changes just yet.

Again, they're not up for re-election until 2024.

But, if Democratic trends - if demographic trends continue, it could be Republicans adding potentially two more seats to their majority.

<Gavin> Interesting.

Yes, so, a lot.

Just things getting better there in the Statehouse there and that's a lot of times how these things go, and lawmakers draw their own maps, protecting incumbents and things like that, but Jeffrey, the real controversy, the big fight right now is over the congressional district map that is still in flux.

We see the Senate working on one version, the House working on another version.

House is set to pass a new one in their committees on Monday.

Tell us where the fight is over that where the big sticking points are, and what we can expect going forward?

<Jeffrey> Ultimately, the biggest sticking points, the first district that's the district that Nancy Mace currently represents that stretches from Hilton Head up through Charleston, and you know, back in 2018, Joe Cunningham as a Democrat won that seat...so it was the first time that a congressional seat flipped from Republican to a Democrat in South Carolina in well over 30 years.

So, there's some thought that Republicans that get to draw the mats, because they're in the majority in the legislature want to prevent that from happening again in the first district.

So, there are the maps that have been proposed in the Senate, and then the most recent one proposed in the House would draw some black voters would pull them out of the first district and put them in the sixth district, which is Jim Clyburn's district, which is the majority minority district in South Carolina.

And to do that, they have to take voters out of the Columbia area and out of the Charleston area.

So you have this, this oddly shaped district that stretches, you know, more than 100 miles between the two cities, trying to get in all these African American voters, and so the problem is that, as several people have said, to complain about the maps is, you know, it takes North Charleston out of that first district.

So, North Charleston, and Charleston are in a different district, while parts of Charleston and Columbia are in the same district, and if you're trying to keep neighborhoods with the same kind of ideas together, makes a lot more sense to have Charleston and North Charleston together.

So, and talk about the deadline.

You know, once again, we have the same mid March filing deadline, and they haven't even sent the maps to the floor yet in the House and the Senate hasn't passed its version of the congressional map.

So, that's even got a bigger tick tock waiting on us.

<Gavin> And Jeffrey, when you look at that, when we look at those maps and how they're being drawn right now, do we expect a federal challenge, this going through federal courts.

I mean, there's already been a lawsuit filed, even before seeing a final map dealing with other parts of this whole process, but when you look at North Carolina, we look at other states that have been through stuff like this, and it seems like sometimes in the end, it just ends up being redrawn by courts, and in the end, it makes it more competitive, especially in a place like the first congressional district.

<Jeffrey> No doubt, the there will...be, there will be a lawsuit over it.

There's no doubt about that.

The question is, does it, what happens to it?

The Republicans who are drawing the maps go, Hey, we didn't change the 2010 maps all that much, just did what we had to do because of the population growth and the 2010 maps got approved by both the federal you know, both the federal government and federal judges, so we didn't make that many changes.

They should be fine, but then the devil's in the details.

So, we'll see what... this set of judges do.

I mean, South Carolina has been sued over its redistricting every year since the 1970s, as the Voting Rights Act was passed.

So, you know, sometimes they've won.

Sometimes, they've lost.

So, we'll have to see.

<Gavin> Yep.

Let's switch.

We got about five minutes left.

Let's look at some top issues to expect lawmakers and lawmakers be legislating over this session, which goes straight on Tuesday through May three days a week lawmakers are up here in Columbia debating bills, Joe, we've already seen a hot debate even before they got back.

They were in special session.

And lawmakers were really getting into vaccine mandates.

What happened on that debate?

And what's the likelihood of that getting passed over in the Senate?

<Joseph> So, when the House is back...there were protesters calling for people, alleged lawmakers to ban vaccine mandates, prevent people from being fired for not taking the COVID-19 vaccine.

Business groups did not like that.

They did not like losing the flexibility of how to handle their workplace.

So, after a few hours of debate, the House passed a bill that prevents public employers from firing employees for not taking the COVID vaccine.

It prevents students in school districts, mandating students take the vaccine and allows people who may lose their job and in private businesses, they would be eligible for unemployment benefits if they get fired for not taking the vaccine.

The Senate has passed something similar, last year, but that bill got sent to the House and it was stuck in three M. So, we'll see if the Senate takes up the House version.

<Gavin> And we have a lot of those mandates obviously going through the courts too.

So, Jeffrey, with three minutes, talk about a big bill that passed the House last year dealing with hate crimes, hate crime legislation.

That made it to the Senate.

Probably, that was right at the end of session, I believe, right in May.

Where do you think that's going to head going forward in this session?

>> There's going be a lot of pressure put on the Senate to pass that bill.

South Carolina and Wyoming are right now the only states in America that do not have a hate, their own state level hate crime law.

And there's a lot of businesses, especially businesses with a national presence, that are urging South Carolina to pass it.

So you know, we joined the rest of the country in having that kind of legislation.

The question is, you know, I think it has a pretty good shot at the Senate, I think it's hardest hurdle to climb over was the more conservative people in the House, the arguments against it are, a crime is a crime, no matter what happens, it's a crime, whether it was done because of a motive or not.

The argument back the other direction is, well, you know, some crimes are just hurt society more like when certain groups are targeted, that's actually hurt society and society needs to say this is wrong to target somebody because of these reasons.

Ultimately, I think that does get out, but there may be a couple of days worth the fight.

And it may be a little, maybe one of those votes where we're very carefully tallying each one, as they're called out.

<Gavin> Yeah, and we saw the Chamber of Commerce backed that bill as well, and who wants to be the last state in the nation?

Not to have something like that on the books, even if it is redundant, like some of these are arguing.

Joe with two minutes left?

Do we see any more gun restrictions or I guess, loosening of gun restrictions happening ever since we saw the open carry with training bill pass?

<Joseph> ...we'll see.

There is a constitutional carry bill that passed the House that's in the Senate right now.

When they passed, When the Senate passed the open carry with training bill.

They tried to attach the constitutional carry to that.

The Senate rejected that amendment.

So if constitutional carry gets another vote in the Senate it may have a tough hill to climb.

<Gavin> And just, really quick last minute predictions I want to hear.

Jeffrey, what do you expecting?

Anything big?

medical marijuana moving forward?

It's on the Senate calendar.

Anything that we can maybe be looking forward to maybe a new state flag?

<Jeffrey> On the Senate side?

Yeah, medical marijuana is supposed to be cued up.

One of the first things they debate during this session.

That was a promise made by Davis so I think there will be a debate.

Whether they get it passed, That's tough to say.

I'm think you've probably ought to look against it still.

It's got a lot of powerful opponents.

On the House side, I'm interested to see the conservative bent of the House.

There's a ...group of conservative lawmakers that are much more conservative than the leadership and they have won.

They like to raise their voice sometimes.

That's why we ended up getting this vaccine debate in the special session and some other things.

So I'm interested to see how much power they yield and how much they control the agenda this session with things like the transgender sports bills, things like that.

<Gavin> ...Joe, really quick any predictions?

<Joseph> Jeff got my predictions.

<laughing> I will say this.

Keeping an eye on a bill that would allow for local sales tax to fund conservation projects or land acquisitions for conservation purposes.

Not everyone likes tax increases, but if it's a local sales tax that's passed by a local referendum, sometimes that is an easier thing to swallow.

<Gavin> Well, session starts Tuesday and goes through May and we'll be with you all every step of the way.

We look forward to it.

Thank you guys for both joining us.

It's Jeffrey Collins with the Associated Press, and Joe Bustos with The State newspaper.

>> To stay up to date with the latest news throughout the week and the legislative session.

Check out the South Carolina Lede.

It's a podcast that I host twice a week that can be found on South Carolina public radio.org or wherever you find podcasts, for South Carolina ETV, I'm Gavin Jackson, Be well, South Carolina.

♪ <Gavin> South Carolina ETV is dedicated to presenting you with informative content, and This Week In South Carolina brings you the latest news that matters to you most.

Join me, Gavin Jackson, as I sit down with the top leaders in our state to get you the full story in a time when civil dialogue matters.