Charleston, SC – Today, the Grooms for Congress campaign received two coveted conservative endorsements when South Carolina’s 3rd District Congressman Jeff Duncan and South Carolina’s 5th District Congressman announced their endorsement of Larry Grooms for Congress.

South Carolina’s Congressman from the 3rd District Jeff Duncan said:

“South Carolina’s Congressional Delegation is known across the country and in Washington for being a united voice for conservatism. In fact, we’ve earned a reputation of working together, standing on principle and protecting South Carolina values. It’s important to ensure that the person who replaces Tim Scott be a reliable conservative, a proven fighter and a leader who will join our mission to cut wasteful Washington spending.I’m convinced the best person for the job is Larry Grooms.While there are several good candidates in the 1st Congressional race, Larry Grooms has the record, values, and conviction best suited to represent the Lowcountry in Congress. I’ve known Larry for years and worked with him in Columbia at the Statehouse. Together, we fought for conservative reforms and I know Larry both as a man of faith and as a conservative leader. Like myself, Larry comes from a small business background, and knows what its like to sign the front of a check, write a budget and limit wasteful spending to keep that budget balanced.Larry is also a strong defender of the 2nd amendment. His “Firearms Liberty Act” recognizes the uniquely American right to bear arms even as our President and many in congress try to limit that right. If South Carolina sends Larry Grooms to Washington, we’d have an ally we could depend on to fight President Obama’s agenda, and help us restore the American dream to all South Carolinians. Larry will be ready on day one to pick up where Tim Scott left off and be key member of our team.During my short time in Washington, I’ve learned that when it comes to electing your representative, it’s not enough to simply have an “R” by your name. We need someone we can count on to hold the Republican Party accountable to conservative principles and follow our Founding Fathers’ example. I’m convinced Larry Grooms is the best person for this job. I hope you’ll join me, Congressman Mulvaney, and conservatives all across the 1st District in supporting Larry Grooms for Congress.”

South Carolina’s Congressman from the 5th district Mick Mulvaney said:

“When I heard that Tim Scott’s congressional seat had opened up, I was excited for Tim, South Carolina and the US Senate. But Tim’s open Congressional seat left me with some serious questions. Who would fill Tim’s conservative shoes in the 1st District and pick up where Tim left off? When Larry Grooms announced for Congress – those questions were answered with a strong credentialed conservative. I know Larry well and I’ve worked with him on several issues when we served together in the state senate. Larry’s brand of conservatism, leadership and strength will serve South Carolina and the 1st District well in Congress.””Conservatives like Jeff and I need Larry to stand with us on the most important issues facing our country today. When it comes to reducing taxes, cutting wasteful Washington spending and protecting our liberties, I believe Larry Grooms is the right man for the job. Larry has been in the trenches, and he has proven his conservative credentials in the state senate. We want Larry on our team. While there are many good candidates in the field – Larry’s record is one we know and trust. He will go to Washington and protect South Carolina from day one.”

Congressional candidate and State Senator Larry Grooms said:

“I’m truly honored and greatly humbled by Jeff and Mick’s endorsement. It means so much, especially in a crowded primary, for sitting Congressmen to come forward and support our campaign. Jeff and Mick realize Washington is spends too much money and they fight every day to cut spending, lower taxes and defend our liberties. And when I’m elected to Congress, Jeff, Mick and I will join together and present a united conservative voice to cut wasteful Washington spending and protect South Carolina values. This is a great day for our campaign – and I’m blessed to receive Jeff and Mick’s support.”

Monday morning around 8:15am I will be on the Rick Driver Show. This is certainly a no spin zone crowd, never throwing softballs, however, I’ve always enjoyed this audience.

“That’s why we call it an open forum” and “All we try to do here is put forth information” I’ve heard Rick say many times. Who knows what the listeners and callers will want to talk about, but I’ll be on air to take whatever they sling my way.

Tune in to 1230 am or online here

Statement by Senators DAVIS, BRIGHT, SHEALY, YOUNG, BRYANT, THURMOND, CORBIN,
SHANE MARTIN and TURNER
With regret, we voted “no” today on 2nd Reading of S. 22, titled the Restructuring Act of 2013, in material part because of the changes made to the bill when the Senate Finance Committee’s amendment was adopted. The bill as passed by the Senate Judiciary Committee had properly put procurement authority — the power to contract with private companies to purchase goods and services in furtherance of the execution of duly passed laws — with the Department of Administration, a new executive-branch cabinet agency. Procurement is clearly an executive-branch function, which is why it is part of cabinet-level Departments of Administration in 45 other states, and we were prepared to vote for the Judiciary Committee’s version of S. 22.

The Finance Committee’s amendment, however, undid the Judiciary Committee’s good work and put procurement right back where it currently resides: with the Budget and Control Board. While S. 22, through adoption of the Senate Finance Committee’s amendment, technically puts the procurement power under a new board called the “State Fiscal Accountability Authority,” the reality is the members of that new board are identical to those on the Budget and Control Board: the governor, the treasurer, the comptroller general, and the chairmen of Senate Finance and House Ways and Means.

Many who voted “aye” today said they did so because the bill “moves the ball forward” and “it is better than doing nothing.” We disagree. The goal of restructuring in South Carolina is, or at least ought to be, truly restoring a constitutional separation of powers and, in particular, lessening the stranglehold over all three branches of state government now exercised by the General Assembly, a phenomenon unique to South Carolina and earning it the sobriquet “the Legislative State.” Very rarely does the Senate have the opportunity it was presented with today, that is, to debate and pass a special-order bill that would undo, at least in part, the structural dysfunction that has prevented South Carolina government from effectively serving the people. Settling today for a severely watered-down version of restructuring, we believe, was a mistake.

It is important to bear in mind, however, that the legislative process is not over. S. 22, if and when it is passed by the House and returned to the Senate, is subject to further amendment by the Senate, and it is our intention to offer an amendment at such time to put procurement under the Department of Administration in the executive branch. We realize that, in order to be successful in that regard, we must ask the people of South Carolina to insist their state legislators provide them with the structure of government they deserve, and we intend to do precisely that. Voting “no” today on S. 22, as amended, puts us in a better position to make that case to the people; voting “yes” would have signaled, improperly in our judgment, that S. 22 is something they should be satisfied with.

s.381 Takes the previous year Department of Labor’s calculation of Improper payments and deducts that percentage from the upper management positions at the South Carolina Department of Employment and Workforce (DEW). As you know, this department has no interest in saving someone else’s money (SC employers), but now, they will personally have “skin in the game”.

It’s not their money. Maybe if it affects them personally they might do their job. I know there’s always going to be some fraud, but when we rank fifth in the nation and they still have their heads in the sand, that’s offensive.

Performance pay usually works in the real world.