It’s a good thing, too – more and more unanswered questions pile up by the day about his liberal views and the votes he has taken as a career Columbia insider.

Today is a perfect opportunity for Vince to start giving South Carolinians the answers he owes them:

-  Where does Sheheen stand on Obamacare? Specifically, what would he do as governor to either speed or impede the implementation of the law? Would he reverse current state policy of not participating in the costly “high-risk” pool? How would he fund the increases in Medicaid eligibility being mandated by Obamacare?

-  Where does Sheheen stand on illegal immigration? Sheheen cast the lone “no” vote on a bill that would make English the official language for conducting state business. Does Sheheen support or oppose the Arizona-style immigration law – a law that served as a model for several pieces of legislation in our own legislature? Would he sign or veto a similar bill?

-  Why won’t Sheheen release his legal clients? It was discovered last week that he raked in a share of a cool $1 million legal profit by suing payday lenders, at the same time he was taking votes on bills to regulate the industry. A leading
newspaper called his participation in the suit a “money grab.” What other clients is he representing while regulating the industries and agencies he is suing?

-  Where does Sheheen stand on abortion? A bill was passed earlier this year on an unrecorded vote to create a 24-hour waiting period before getting an abortion. Since no vote was recorded, did Sheheen vote for or against the bill? Is he pro-life, or pro-choice?

-  Where does Sheheen stand on state suits to stop the implementation of Obamacare, and to force the removal of nuclear waste from South Carolina? As governor, would he work with the next attorney general to pursue those suits, or would he kowtow to the Obama Administration? Would he try to cut funding for those suits?

“So far, Vince Sheheen’s campaign has been long on rhetoric and short on answers about the positions he would take as governor,” SCGOP Chairman Karen Floyd said. “While we don’t expect his made-for-television event today to be much different, it is time for Sheheen to start answering these questions. Voters will quickly see through his attempts to try and avoid tough questions. South Carolina is waiting: Where do you stand, Vince?”

The date of the primary will likely be set in late February of 2012, after the Iowa and New Hampshire contests. All other states are encouraged by the new rule to have their contests in April, but can go in March so long as they award their delegates on a proportional basis.

The new rule has the effect of elongating the primary process, giving more states an opportunity to impact the nominating process.

However, if any states other than Iowa, New Hampshire and Nevada choose to circumvent the process and go earlier than March, the state Party holds – and will use – its “trump card,” the ability to set its own primary date without having to get legislative approval.

During the RNC meeting in Kansas City, Chairman Floyd and the South Carolina delegation worked with the delegations of other early states to ensure no changes were made to adversely impact South Carolina’s role in the presidential nomination process.

“South Carolina voters are eager to do their part in choosing a new Republican president to reverse the destructive path of spending and debt that the Obama Administration and its lieutenants like Nancy Pelosi and John Spratt have put our country on,” Floyd said. “We remain committed to doing whatever is necessary to preserve our unique place in that process. We have a remarkable track record in putting forward a nominee to carry the Republican banner, and as Chairman I am committed to doing whatever is needed to preserve that role and that legacy.”

Since South Carolina’s First in the South Presidential Primary was begun in 1980, no Republican has been nominated for the presidency without first winning South Carolina. The event and the campaigning leading up to the vote are also an enormous
economic boon to the state.

Floyd pointed to a number of benefits to holding the presidential preference primary in South Carolina. South Carolina’s geographic area makes it possible for candidates to attend multiple forums and meet as many voters as possible. Also, the relatively low cost of running a statewide campaign in South Carolina allows candidates to save crucial resources for the real fight in November.

While campaigning as a moderate, Sheheen’s Senate record shows him to be something very different – a “bleeding heart liberal” (The State, 1/11/08) as one Senate colleague dubbed him.

In fact, Sheheen’s voting record has been anything but moderate on any number of issues – from illegal immigration, to taxes, to spending and growing government.

Sheheen cast the lone “no” vote on a Senate subcommittee bill that would have made sure South Carolina’s government business was conducted only in English! (Associated Press, 1/10/08)

Sheheen sought to create loopholes in South Carolina’s anti-illegal immigration law. He “argued for some exceptions” in the law, which would require employers to verify the citizenship status of those they employee. (Greenville News, 10/26/06).

“When it comes to illegal immigration, Senator Sheheen was too busy trying to appease ultra liberals to realize that South Carolinians expect tough action,” SCGOP Chairman Karen Floyd said. “Unfortunately, this is part of a larger pattern with Senator Sheheen – a voting record that doesn’t reflect South Carolina values, and instead follows the Washington liberal model of more government, more spending and more debt.”

Floyd said that today was the beginning of a months-long effort to tell the real story of Vincent Sheheen.

“Senator Sheheen is a liberal in moderate’s clothes,” Floyd said. “But we are going to make sure that voters know the truth about his voting record come November. Today is just the tip of the iceberg.”

“The S.C. Senate had a wonderful opportunity to pass new Voter ID legislation this year.  Such a reform would have gone a long way in preventing voter fraud and abuse. We were all hopeful the Senate could move it past the finish line,” Floyd said.

“Unfortunately it was blocked by a Democratic Party filibuster.  I join many other Republican activists across South Carolina in expressing deep disappointment that a Senate with a substantial Republican majority could not break the filibuster. Sadly, several Republican Senators simply would not join their Republican colleagues to vote for cloture. Specifically, Senators Leatherman, O’Dell and Rankin refused to do so. And while we understand Senator Knotts had agreed to vote for cloture, it was too late.

“However it is worth noting the Republican Senators who fought the hardest for this bill – Majority Leader Peeler, Senator Campsen and Senator Shoopman. We all thank them for their leadership and we thank all the Republicans who voted for cloture.

“We will continue to fight for this issue, and will not hesitate to make it known exactly why the bill did not pass this year.”

“Last night we witnessed the beginning of a Republican Renewal in South Carolina: one built around the conservative principles of economic freedom and individual liberty,” Floyd said.

“Not only did the Republican Party field twice as many statewide and federal candidates as the Democratic Party, but we set a new record for total voter turnout in a state primary. Additionally, we turned out twice as many primary voters as the Democratic Party, which speaks volumes about our field of candidates, and about the strength of our message – voters are tired of the Democratic spending spree, and are ready for conservative leadership centered on lower taxes, limited government, and individual freedom.

“The strength of our message is further evidenced by the results of our ballot questions. Republicans overwhelmingly rejected the $2.5 trillion Spratt-Pelosi-Obama nationalization of healthcare, and they resoundingly spoke in favor of limiting state spending growth. Our Party is focused like never before on issues that matter to working South Carolinians, and the opportunity to speak directly on those issues we believe was in part responsible for the large voter turnout we saw Tuesday.

“We are now heading toward the finish line of the nomination process with some upcoming runoffs. As a Party, we are going to be focused on making sure those runoffs are centered on issues and ideas, and not on any unfortunate distractions that have marred the race in recent weeks. Republicans understand that above all, our goal is winning in November, and the state Party is going to be singularly focused on that goal.”

The suit will have no effect on the June 8th 2010 Primary Elections, as it seeks only to change the way future primaries are conducted.

Currently, South Carolina law allows any registered voter to vote in any political party’s primaries, which denies political parties their 1st Amendment right of “free association,” a legal concept meaning individuals’ right to express themselves and promote common interests as a group.

In addition, the suit maintains that current state law denies political parties the right of equal protection under the law. State law requires that political parties who choose to nominate candidates by convention, rather than by primary, must get a 3/4 majority to nominate, effectively making the convention process prohibitively difficult. The suit notes that other entities, like non‐profits and corporations, have no such restrictions under state law.

By overturning these unconstitutional state statutes, the Republican Party’s goal is to force a change in state law that allows parties to conduct party‐only primaries in the future, if they choose to.

“We’ve seen Democrats influence Republican primaries for too long,: said Patrick Haddon, Chairman of the Greenville GOP. “We think that it’s our right as a party to hold our elections closed to people not registered as Republicans. Whether it’s churches, corporations or non‐profits, government doesn’t mandate that people from outside those organizations tell them how to do their business. It should be the same for political parties.”

“The Executive Committee of the SCGOP made registration by party one of its top three legislative priorities for this year, and I am very proud to be joining Patrick and the Greenville GOP to push this suit forward,” said Karen Floyd,
Chairman of the South Carolina GOP. “Republican primaries ought to be decided by Republicans, period. We believe this suit will be decided in our favor, and our hope is that it will force recognition of our right to make sure our primaries are not decided by outside influences seeking to exploit the system.”

Tuesday, May 11 – Washington, D.C. – South Carolina Republican Party Chairman Karen Floyd today announced that a special committee of the Republican National Committee has recommended preserving the state’s First in the South Republican Presidential Primary status.

Today, the RNC’s Temporary Delegate Selection Committee issued a recommendation to carve out South Carolina, Iowa, New Hampshire and Nevada. The formal vote on those recommendations will be held later this year, but today’s action virtually ensures that South Carolina’s unique First in the South status will be preserved through the 2012 presidential election.

Since South Carolina’s First in the South Presidential Primary was begun in 1980, no Republican has been nominated for the presidency without first winning South Carolina. The event and the campaigning leading up to the vote are also an enormous economic boon to the state.

“South Carolina has a remarkable track record in putting forward a nominee to carry the Republican banner, and we’re pleased today that the Committee has recognized our unique and historic role in this important political process,” Floyd said. “What’s more, South Carolinians are some of the most eager in the nation when it comes to reversing the destructive path of debt and spending that the President has put our country on. While we are singularly focused right now on winning in 2010, keeping our First in the South status has been a top priority of my Chairmanship, and I want to thank the committee, and my fellow Chairmen in the other early states for working cooperatively on this endeavor.”

Floyd pointed to a number of benefits to holding the presidential preference primary in South Carolina. South Carolina’s geographic area makes it possible for candidates to attend multiple forums and meet as many voters as possible. Also, the relatively low cost of running a statewide campaign in South Carolina allows candidates to save crucial resources for the real fight in November.

The Temporary Delegate Selection Committee approved the following language today:

“No primary, caucus, or convention to elect, select, allocate, or bind delegates to the national convention shall occur prior to the first Tuesday in March in the year in which a national convention is held. Except Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, and Nevada may begin their processes at any time on or after February 1 in the year in which a national convention is held.”

Today, we add one more to the list of places where Rob Miller isn’t – raising any money in his own Congressional District.

Here’s a look at Miller’s fundraising from the first quarter of this year, by the numbers:

- Miller has received donations from fewer than 100 people in the second district. By contrast, Congressman Joe Wilson has more than twice as many contributors in Miller’s own Beaufort County – 209, to be exact – than Miller has throughout the District.

- Miller only has 120 individual contributors statewide, compared to 1,547 for Wilson.

- Miller has 40 donors from California, including Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s campaign account.

- Miller’s combined take from liberal PAC’s and labor unions has totaled nearly $40,000, with roughly half of that amount coming from unions.

“Based on the fact that Mr. Miller has had far better luck raising money in California and Washington, D.C., than he has in his very own district, he may want to consider running in a different state next time around,” SCGOP Executive Director Joel Sawyer said. “Miller’s lack of fundraising success in his very own District shows that he simply doesn’t represent the kind of conservative values that South Carolinians want to see in their Congressmen.”

A straw poll, to determine the winner of the debate, will be conducted at the conclusion of the debate by those in attendance.

Candidates who have confirmed their participation include: State House Representative Tim Scott, Charleston County Councilman Paul Thurmond, Mt. Pleasant Town Councilman Ken Glasson, Businessman Carroll “Tumpy” Campbell, III, Businessman Mark Lutz, Attorney Larry Kobrovsky, Gulf War Veteran Katherine Jenerette, Certified Public Accountant Clark Parker, and former Charleston Southern University VP Stovall Witte.

“We are pleased to join this effort with Charleston and Dorchester Counties to showcase these great candidates and to give the general public an opportunity to see and hear what the candidates have to say on the issues South Carolina will face during the upcoming Legislative session in Washington.”, said Tim Callanan, Chairman of the Berkeley County Republican Party.

“Voters are concerned about the way Washington is operating.”, added Carroll Duncan, Dorchester County Chairman. “The choice for a Congressman from the 1^st District will be scrutinized and tough choices will be made by the voters. Who represents the 1^st District in DC will be of the upmost importance to the voters. Information is key.”

Lin Bennett, Chairman of the Charleston County Republican Party stated, “The USS Yorktown is the perfect venue to hold an event of this nature. Patriot’s Point encompasses the spirit of freedom and liberty.” She further added, “This effort, between the three County Parties, shows the unity and resolve that we have to ensure victories leading up to the November elections. We will be doing more events together in the coming months. This is just the beginning steps of a strong partnership.”

Additional details and information about the event can be found at the Party’s websites: www.charlestongop.org; www.berkelycountygop.org; or www.scgop.com .

###

“It’s no shock that instead of holding a town hall meeting with voters of the Fifth District, Spratt’s public defense for leading
the charge for socialized medicine will be delivered to a group of Tar Heels. After all, he knows he’s really stepped in it with
South Carolina voters,” Sawyer said. “South Carolinians simply do not want Washington, D.C. and the Obama Administration dictating
their healthcare decisions to them, but John Spratt has been too busy carrying the president’s water – and sometimes his briefcase -
to listen. Come November, Congressman Spratt won’t be able to hide north of the border anymore, and he will have to answer to South
Carolina voters. Senator Mick Mulvaney will continue to lay out a compelling, conservative vision to the voters of the Fifth District,
and we are confident that vision will win this fall.”

Spratt to give speech at UNC-Chapel Hill

http://www.newsobserver.com/2010/04/19/443964/perdues-approval-ratings-slipping.html