SC Club for Growth PAC aims to push Leatherman out

The South Carolina Club for Growth has a presence in the state as a political action committee with a goal of bringing economic growth and fiscal conservatism to Columbia, and the June primary for state Senate District 31, a rural district in Florence County, has caught the club's attention.

The club sees this election as a chance to oust 36-year incumbent and current Senate President Pro Tempore Hugh K. Leatherman Sr. The group recently endorsed one of Leatherman’s challengers, former Florence County Republican Party Chairman Richard Skipper.

The executive director of the S.C. Club for Growth, R.J. May III, said Leatherman may be a Republican in name but called him a liberal with “a thirst for spending” and a career politician who’s worked the system to gain wealth and power.

“Perhaps more than any other person in South Carolina’s history, Sen. Leatherman has fought every piece of conservative legislation – whether that be ethics reform, transparency in government or school choice – he’s been on the wrong side of the issues,” May said. “Why, in a Republican-controlled Senate, do the Republicans have to take a stand against Hugh Leatherman and the Democrats?”

Leatherman said the Club’s accusations are typical campaign rhetoric that he has no interest in entertaining.

“Those kinds of comments will just increase and before this campaign is over with, they’ll say I’m the worst crook to ever walk into the state Senate,” Leatherman said. “That’s the way they operate. They know nothing about telling the truth.”

May said polling data indicates the District 31 constituents are ready for a change after 36 years of big spending.

Leatherman disagreed and said the June 14 primary will be a tell-all day because voters will make final decision.

“I’ll just say this, my constituents in Florence County see through that,” Leatherman said. “I’ve been there 36 years and my record shows what I’ve done for this area. I’ll leave it in the people’s hands. This is their seat.”

The S.C. Club for Growth has a record of giving Pee Dee delegates -- both Republicans and Democrats --low ratings on its yearly legislative scorecard. In fact, the only Pee Dee delegate to score above an “F” in the last four years is house Speaker Jay Lucas, who got a D in 2014.

Campaign Money

The State newspaper reported earlier this month on Leatherman’s attempt to shed light on campaign “dark money” -- donations given to political organizations that do not have to reveal where the money came from.

While Leatherman didn’t specifically name the S.C. Club for Growth as a dark-money organization, he said similar groups are trying to hijack state politics.

A campaign disclosure filed by Leatherman on April 10 showed more than $1.5 million in campaign money --$750,000 of which shows as a loan balance.

Records also show that the S.C. Club for Growth PAC has contributed only $1,000 to Skipper’s campaign – a far cry from the $200,000 pledge reported by FitsNews earlier this year. Skipper had just over $60,000 in his campaign fund on April 10, most of it from personal contributions and individual donors.

Skipper said the notion that dark money is pouring into his campaign through the Club for Growth is laughable. He said the South Carolina Club for Growth's message of lower taxes, more efficient government, accountable policy and protection from overregulation resonated with his platform so he accepted the club's endorsement.

“To my knowledge there are no out-of-state millionaires giving money or dark money flowing into the South Carolina Club for Growth,” Skipper said. “They support, overall philosophically, a lot of the same things I believe in. When they offered their support to me for $1,000, I did research on who they were, I saw this was a group who tends to think like I think and I didn’t have any problem with accepting their support.”

Skipper said he’s all for openness in campaign contributions and the “dark money” narrative is a ploy being pushed to take the focus off the real problem in South Carolina politics – ethics.

“The real dark money is where our elected officials continually refuse to disclose their sources of income. I am for real, honest, open ethic reform,” he said. “Sunshine is the best disinfectant. I have absolutely no problem telling you who pays me because I have nothing to hide. And I don’t think that’s too much to ask of our elected officials.”

Dean Fowler, Florence County’s treasurer and also a candidate in the District 31 race, weighed in on campaign donations at large and the idea of “dark money.”

He said taking large donations from any organization – personal, local or otherwise – is a shady practice that’s bad for constituents.

“People are putting money into these candidates’ pockets for payback, not from the goodness of their hearts,” Fowler said. “They’re giving them money to plug into the vast, exorbitant amount of money that government controls. Why else would there be a need for hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars to win a seat that only pays a little more than $10,000 a year?”

Fowler, who had about $600 in his campaign account at last check, added that he’s not taking money from donors or special-interest groups because he’s beholden to no one but his constituents.

“With all the money pouring into our election system, it’s certainly not on behalf of people. It’s to help special interest groups.” He said. “You take everybody’s money in the form of taxes, and you put it in a big pot. When you put everybody’s money in that pot, everybody’s money becomes nobody’s money and nobody’s money becomes anybody’s money. That’s the problem in America today.”

This story was originally published April 23, 2016 at 9:15 PM with the headline "SC Club for Growth PAC aims to push Leatherman out."