Wes Climer And Dick Harpootlian’s ‘Shot Heard Round The State’

Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...

South Carolina state senator Wes Climer joined former senator (and veteran Palmetto State attorney) Dick Harpootlian in Columbia, S.C. on Monday (June 9, 2025) to announce the filing of legal action against Climer’s colleagues in the S.C. General Assembly.

Climer – along with state retiree Carol Herring – has asked S.C. supreme court to block the appropriation of millions of dollars earmarked for controversial, constitutionally dubious legislative pay raises which plainly run afoul of a constitutional prohibition against self-enrichment.

News of these raises – and Climer’s bid to block them – were both exclusively reported by FITSNews.

To recap: Last month, the overwhelming majority of South Carolina’s “Republican” supermajority voted to give each member of the legislature an additional $25,500 between now and next November (unless they opted to send the money back). All told, the raises would cost taxpayers $4.3 million between now and the end of the 2025-2026 legislative session.

***

Lawmakers approved these raises despite the state’s constitution holding that “no General Assembly shall have the power to increase the per diem of its own members.” The raises were subsequently rubber-stamped by “Republican” governor Henry McMaster, who declined to veto the legislative proviso authorizing them.

“The legislature voted itself a raise in violation of the South Carolina constitution,” Harpootlian told reporters at Monday’s press conference. “This legislature is free to vote a pay increase – but they can’t vote a pay increase for themselves.”

Harpootlian pushed back against lawmakers’ contention that they were merely raising their “reimbursement” for constituent work done in their home districts.

“This is income,” he said. “They’ve increased their income.”

Climer confirmed the current monthly in-district allowance “arrives in legislators’ bank accounts via direct deposit every month,” calling the proposed increase in these monthly payments “a pay increase in real time.”

***

***

“There are no receipts required to submit for reimbursement,” Climer said. “It’s just a $1,000 deposit into the account legislators are free to expend those fund however they deem appropriate and the Internal Revenue Service taxes it as income. So this is income.”

“Regardless of how you feel about a legislative pay raise, this is the wrong way to do it,” Climer continued. “It violates the Madisonian principle that the legislature cannot take the people’s money and appropriate it to themselves in real time. If there is to be a pay raise, the pay raise can only take effect after the people – by way of election – have had an opportunity to decide who gets that pay raise and who does not.”

Climer’s filing also called out lawmakers for the duplicitous manner in which they gifted themselves this money – approving it as “a budgetary earmark enacted on the last day of the session to avoid all public hearings and legislative deliberation.”

“For shame,” the filing noted.

Indeed…

***

Climer said a budget proviso allowing S.C. state legislators to boost their own pay prior to the next election cycle "run(s) afoul of basic constitutional norms" at a press conference this morning announcing his lawsuit to stop the pay raise. @FITSNews @WesClimer https://t.co/HsLuljvpOn pic.twitter.com/LfEflqKxVv

— Dylan Nolan (@dnolan2000) June 9, 2025

***

As we reported previously, the court seems inclined to move expeditiously on this matter, alerting attorneys for both sides that the state’s return in the case will be due by 5:00 p.m. EDT next Monday (June 16, 2025) with replies due by 5:00 p.m. EDT next Wednesday (June 18, 2025).

On its face, this case certainly looks like a no-brainer: Lawmakers clearly ran afoul of the state’s constitutional prohibition against voting themselves more money from the public treasury while in office. Assuming we resided in a state with clear separation of powers, the judicial branch of government would have no compunction whatsoever in ruling decisively against the legislature.

And the supreme court may ultimately wind up doing just that…

Unfortunately, South Carolina is not a state with clear separation of powers… as FITSNews has repeatedly chronicled. Accordingly, justices – who are appointed by the legislature – will doubtless feel the same pressure as McMaster to simply roll over and accommodate lawmakers’ wishes.

As for Climer, he has taken another bold step in rebuking the Palmetto State’s status quo – and has done so partnering with a familiar ally from the other side of the aisle. Regular members of FITSNews‘ audience will recall Climer and Harpootlian were both staunch opponents of pork barrel spending – efforts which bore some fruit during the current budget process.

Anyone interested in expressing their views on the legislative pay raise can visit Climer’s landing page on the subject and fill out the petition.

Count on FITSNews to keep our audience apprised of any new developments in this case as it moves forward…

***

ABOUT THE AUTHOR…

Will Folks is the founding editor of the news outlet you are currently reading. Prior to founding FITSNews, he served as press secretary to the governor of South Carolina. He lives in the Midlands region of the state with his wife and eight children.

***

WANNA SOUND OFF?

Got something you’d like to say in response to one of our articles? Or an issue you’d like to address proactively? We have an open microphone policy! Submit your letter to the editor (or guest column) via email HERE. Got a tip for a story? CLICK HERE. Got a technical question or a glitch to report? CLICK HERE.