June 21 2010
Truth, Transparency & Accountability
As we move forward in the campaign for House Seat 123 and Hilton Head Island’s representation, I continue to be committed to the same core values as those I took in oath as a Special Agent with the United States Secret Service: duty, justice, honesty, loyalty and courage. This foundation is what I believe the constituents of this tremendous community continue to be seeking out in their elected representatives. It was for this reason and the reaffirmation in the shared voice of the island that initially motivated me to take on this charge. To be worthy of trust and confidence is critical to all relationships, personal and professional. What I have discovered – the voters’ lack “trust and confidence” in their elected representatives. This week my opponent has felt it necessary to defend his 6 year record in the South Carolina House of Representatives and his service to the constituents of Hilton Head Island by attacking the very nature of my core values.
This campaign has been from day one about providing effective representation to the voters of Hilton Head Island. I have never attacked the incumbents character or integrity. Nor will I. It has been and will continue to be about transparency and accountability. It is important for voters to know Mr. Chalk’s voting record and failure to demonstrate an ability to work with others both locally and across the state.
Recently my opponent chose to characterize me as a puppet of the “Backroom political power brokers in Beaufort County”. The facts are: I have worked hard to build relationships with the local elected officials in the last few years. I learned early on that it would be the relationships developed, consensus building and collaboration that would make a difference in the way Hilton Head Island was represented. It is for this very reason that we move forward established and qualified to make a difference.
The following are the areas that the incumbent has taken issue with. These issues have been raised throughout the course of this campaign. Because they have been re-emphasized by well established leaders of this community, Mr. Chalk is feeling attacked and is defensive. Let me suggest the incumbent is being held accountable for both his votes and for being ineffective in his representation.
Issue #1 – Effectiveness Study
Over the last four years a survey has been sent to every member of the republican caucus in the House of Representatives with the exception of the three members of the Beaufort County delegation, consisting of Bill Herbkersman, Shannon Erickson and Richard Chalk. The survey has one purpose, that being to see how the Beaufort County Delegation is ranked – by their peers – on the single point of effectiveness. Each member is offered a study findings report but no actual information on how a member votes is released. While one study may not reflect 100% accurate information. Four studies with similar results offer a valid trend for consideration.
In 2007 Herbkersman was ranked 10th, Ceips was ranked 40th, Chalk was ranked 54th.
In 2008 Herbkersman was ranked 12th, Erickson was ranked 38th, Chalk was ranked next to last.
In 2009 Herbkersman was ranked 8th, Erickson was ranked 30th, Chalk was ranked last.
In 2010 Herbkersman was ranked 10th, Erickson was ranked 14th, Chalk was tied for last.
Issue #2 – Committee Assignment
Early on in this campaign the incumbent was challenged regarding his committee assignment, not by me but by Kate Keep. I do not challenge the point being made by Kate, but also do not take exception to the pride with which Richard distinguishes himself in service on the 3M Committee(Military, Medical, Municipal). However, I do take exception to the false nature with which Mr. Chalk claims is the reason for his extended service on that committee and the claim he makes for not being a member of a committee he wishes to serve on.
Mr. Chalk claims that there is an un-written rule that you must be serving in your fourth term to be named to the Ways and Means Committee. I questioned Mr. Chalk during our 3rd debate, my question was simple: Are you telling me that there is not one member of the Ways and Means Committee that began their service on that committee prior to their 4th term? His answer was a resounding NO!
The truth is that there are 25 members of the Ways and Means Committee and more than 50% of them were named to that committee prior to their 4th term in office. One member of the committee was named in their freshman term, some during their second term and most of them appointed during their 3rd term.
Issue #3 – Sembler Tax Incentives
Mr. Chalk voted three times in favor of these tax incentives. I have maintained from the very beginning that these incentives represent bad tax policy period. These incentives continue South Carolina on a slippery slope of picking and choosing winners and losers.
To add insult to injury, when a similar tax incentive bill for Bass Pro Shops in another area of the state was presented for a vote on the house floor Mr. Chalk stood silent. Neither voting yea or nay! You cannot vote PRESENT in the South Carolina Legislature. I have asked Mr. Chalk repeatedly to explain his choice and each time he has skillfully avoided answering the question. The only explanation is that he knew by voting yea he would be held accountable for his vote back home by two challengers that were paying attention to his every move. By voting no he would have alienated himself from other members of the house that he may have been working with to have a piece of his own legislation passed.
I have worked hard to bring about positive change. I will continue to do so. The only TRUE response is to hold elected officials accountable for their actions.
These are facts, not attacks and that is the difference.
