Side by Side in House 78 Race: Brady and Bernstein On the Issues

By now, voters have seen countless commercials and received many communications via phone and mail in reference to the election on Nov. 6. Often overlooked within this torrent of information is what the candidates actually believe and how they feel they can best serve you, their constituents.

At Patch, our number one goal is to serve you, our readers. We feel one of the best ways to do that is to provide you with resources that make your life ridiculously easy by allowing you to make informed decisions regarding your vote. With this in mind, we sent a questionnaire to the candidates for House District 78. Both Joan Brady, the incumbent and Beth Bernstein, the challenger responded. Their answers appear below, unedited.

1. School choice was once again a major topic in the last legislative session, and once again it fell short of passing. Do you believe in school choice and which combination of public and private options would you like to see implemented?

BRADY: Parents deserve more opportunities and options for our children to succeed in the classroom, and I believe that is best achieved by giving school districts the flexibility to institute choice. Richland One and Two have benefitted from in-district choice and the establishment of charter schools, and our schools and students have a great technological advantage due to public-private partnerships, all of which I support.

As a fiscal conservative, I believe one of the greatest issues we face regarding education reform is funding, and instituting reforms that will keep taxpayer dollars tied to classroom resources and not state bureaucracy, which is why I support teacher pay-raises, increasing the base student cost while keeping bureaucratic expenses down. That is also why I am the only candidate in the race for House District 78 to have gained the endorsement of the South Carolina Education Association.

BERNSTEIN: While I believe parents have the right to educate their children as they see fit, I do not believe that we should pass laws or take steps that would undermine our public school system.  The focus of education reform should be on empowering parents and teachers to achieve the best result with the individual student in the classroom, instead of providing an economic incentive to parents to withdraw their children from public schools.

2. The public’s desire for ethics reform may be at its highest point since Operation Lost Trust. How, if at all, would you change the current system, which allows for one group of legislators to act in oversight of another group of legislators? In this vein, what role do you believe the Attorney General should play in etics investigations?

BRADY: As a member of the House Ethics Committee, I’m thrilled at the newfound consensus calling for omnibus ethics reforms. We need total income disclosure and we need to close existing loopholes, and create stricter and clearer guidelines for all officeholders.

I fully support reforming the institution of legislative ethics committees as a long as a clear, constitutional separation of power remains.  Ethics reforms need to open discourse in government.

I believe that the Attorney General should be given more oversight in investigating any and all ethics matters, because that office is better equipped to do thorough investigations. Ethics reforms should include clear, concise benchmarks for the Attorney General to be involved in ethics issues where probably cause is found, pointing to public corruption. 

BERNSTEIN:  I am proud of the Seven Point Ethics Reform Plan that I have proposed to help end corruption at the Statehouse. 

Editor’s Note: Bernstein’s Ethics Reform Plan can be viewed in its entirety HERE.

To the extent that there may be an enforcement role for the Attorney General, I would need to study any proposal to make sure that we have a policy that has appropriate due process, separation of powers, and limitations of prosecutorial discretion to ensure that the ethics enforcement mechanisms are removed from political influence.

3. In the spring, hundreds of candidates were removed from ballots as a result of a ruling by the State Supreme Court. Some have called into question the court’s ability to be impartial, considering the influence the legislature has on its budget and personnel. Do you believe the way the Supreme Court is funded, and, in turn, staffed, needs to be re-considered?

BRADY: I believe that appropriating funds is a core function of the legislative branch of government, and that role should not change. What ultimately caused the ballot fiasco was a miscommunication between the Ethics Commission, Election Commission, political parties and the courts. Including clear language on candidate filing forms must be a top priority so we have more good people running for elected office in the future.

BERNSTEIN: Whenever a controversial opinion gets issued from a court, people look for a recourse based on one political agenda or another. As a firm believer in the neutrality of courts and constitutional separation of powers, I do not believe it is appropriate to link (in any way) a particular court case with decisions made by the legislature regarding funding or staffing.

4. Where do you stand on Gov. Haley’s desire to create a Department of Administration?

BRADY: I fully support giving the Executive Branch more administrative oversight because that should be a duty of the Governor, not the General Assembly.  Giving the Executive Branch that administrative oversight can streamline government, saving taxpayer money, and that’s why I’ve worked to pass a Department of Administration Bill through the House 3 years in a row.

As a fiscal conservative, I also believe the Department of Administration needs to make government more efficient and accountable, and needs to be established to cut bureaucracy, not add to it.

BERNSTEIN: We need a balance of power between the three branches of government to work effectively and efficiently. The creation of a Department of Administration would further this balance of power between the Governor's office and the Legislature.

5. Do you believe that South Carolina should accept money for Medicaid once the Affordable Care Act a/k/a ObamaCare is implemented?

BRADY: Let me be clear – I do not support Obamacare because of the burden it places on private healthcare providers and customers and the rate at which it grows government. I believe that the money South Carolina’s taxpayers handover to the federal government needs to be spent in this state. However, federal dollars always come with long, bureaucratic strings attached. We need to take a close look at any additional burden placed on both the private and public sectors of this state before moving forward.

BERNSTEIN: While it is important and necessary to have as many South Carolinians insured, I would need to thoroughly understand the long-term economic impact on taxpayers and the health care industry before implementing this plan.

6. South Carolina has some of the nation’s toughest illegal immigration laws. What, if anything, would you change about them?

BRADY: As a member of the Labor, Commerce and Industry Committee in the House, I have heard first-hand the issues facing South Carolina due to illegal immigration. Illegal Immigration places a heavy burden on public services, at times puts law-abiding businesses at a disadvantage against those that break the law, and is a serious issue to fathom in terms of human rights. South Carolina can continue to have some of the toughest illegal immigration laws in the nation, but ultimately Congress needs to seriously address the issue we face with protecting our borders and realistically addressing the millions of illegal immigrants already living in the United States.

BERNSTEIN:  I would not propose any change to South Carolina's laws concerning illegal immigration. I believe immigration is largely a federal issue, and, therefore, any debates concerning illegal immigration should be dealt with by Congress.

7. Similarly, the state successfully defended its newly passed Voter ID laws in Federal Court. Are you in favor of that legislation?

BRADY: A citizen’s right to vote is fundamental to our democracy.  The right to vote also needs to be protected, which is why I worked to pass the Voter ID legislation and support the court’s recent decision to uphold the law.  

BERNSTEIN: Since the law has been approved as written, this is really a non-issue. I am alarmed, however, that the costs (upwards of $3,000,000.00) incurred to South Carolina's taxpayers in litigating this issue far outweighed the magnitude of any voter fraud (as yet unidentified) in South Carolina. This law seems to be a great example of being passed for political benefit, at significant cost to the taxpayer, with little measurable benefit, to solve a problem that did not exist. 

8. Do you believe the role of the Budget Control Board needs to be revisited for fear that it has become too politicized?

BRADY: Restructuring government is an issue that myself and House colleagues have fought for and passed repeatedly, including efforts to move the administrative functions of the Budget and Control Board to the Executive Branch. While I believe there are certain instances involving mid-cycle appropriations that should have legislative input, the vast majority of the administrative functions of the Budget and Control Board need to be moved to the Executive Branch, giving the Governor more oversight.

BERNSTEIN: The Budget and Control Board should be eliminated. The B&C board is inefficient, costly, and not directly accountable to the voters.  Streamlining state government requires that we focus on restructuring in a way that reduces cost, increases accountability to the voter, and increases the efficient delivery of the legitimate functions of state government. Revisiting the role of the Budget and Control Board should be merely the first step.

9. At present, the insurance policy for employees of the State of South Carolina does not insure abortions, unless the pregnancy occurred as a result of rape or incest, the mother’s life is in danger or there is a risk of “substantial and irreversible impairment of a major bodily function.” Would you amend this law in any way?

BRADY: I have repeatedly supported retaining the above state employee insurance policy. I remain committed to health and safety issues for the women of this state. I also led the effort for South Carolina's Foster Care and adoption reform legislation.

BERNSTEIN: Not at this time.

10. Please use the space below for a closing statement or to address issues not mentioned above.

BRADY: It has been a continuing privilege to represent my neighbors as an elected official; the Mayor of the Town of Arcadia Lakes; the Vice-Chair of Richland County Council; and now as the Representative from District 78. With that strong and effective legacy of public service comes the experience and influence needed to get things done for District 78. The concerns of my constituents have always been my issues.

Advocating for the safety our families has been one of my main priorities. Working closely with local law enforcement and SLED, I sponsored laws that enacted “Offender Watch” an innovative technology used to track convicted sex offenders and prevent offenders from living near our schools and playgrounds. The Attorney General’s “Meth Watch” Program is a direct result of legislation I sponsored in working with the Sheriff’s Assn. and the State Solicitor’s Assn. to curtail the growing problem of illegal “Meth” labs in Richland County.

As one of the few women in the General Assembly, I have been an effective voice for women having sponsored numerous bills regarding Criminal Domestic Violence prevention and successfully fighting to reinstate funding for the state’s Rape Crisis Centers in this year’s budget.

Perhaps, I take the most pride in knowing that many children in SC have found loving homes as a result of my legislation reforming Foster Care and adoption.

As a successful advocate for our families and businesses I have gained respect as a legislator who is not intimidated to work across party lines. 

But make no mistake – I am the only proven, pro-business, fiscally conservative, Republican candidate in this race. My opponent is a liberal, democrat trial lawyer. There is a clear and proven difference in the candidates running for House 78 and my work is not done.

BERNSTEIN: This community is dear to my heart. I was born and raised in this District, and my husband and I have chosen the same for our children. I will be a vocal advocate for the community, not just a bystander. Protecting, preserving, and improving our quality of life will be my number one priority. 

We need honest, ethical leadership that cares less about party affiliation and self-interest and more about producing positive results for South Carolina families. I pledge to work with members of both parties in finding common sense solutions to move South Carolina forward. Funding the key functions of government and cutting waste will be my mission. I also will push hard for real ethics reform, and have unveiled a Seven-Point Ethics Reform Package. 

Remember, the only way to change how we are being represented is to change who represents us. Let's move SC forward and elect me as your representative on November 6!