Insurance coverage, personal healthcare spending, longevity, mortality, health risks, and provider shortages.
Uninsured rate · all ages9%2024 · #14 of 50 · highest first
Uninsured rate · under age 6511%2024 · #13 of 50 · highest first
Private coverage · under age 6570.1%2024 · #34 of 50 · highest first
South Carolina over time
Explore South Carolina readings, major events and reviewed actions on the same date scale. South Carolina officeholders appear in separate lanes. National event evidence describes national context; it does not measure a South Carolina effect.
Major events & context · A curated selection, including uncertain effects. Milestone dates do not establish that an event caused a South Carolina change.
Enacted / issuedDid not proceedPending / in progressStatus unclear
Colors show the latest recorded status. Passing one chamber is not enactment. A number groups actions with the same date, body and status.
Uninsured rate · all ages South Carolina · source units
South CarolinaPublished U.S. benchmark
Move across the chart to inspect the nearest observation. Click or tap to keep a reading selected, or focus the chart and use the arrow keys. Hover over or focus a marker to explore; click or tap to pin. Press Escape to clear.
36 of 36 reviewed South Carolina actions match · 34 date markers shown. 29 major events shown separately.
South Carolina · 2024: 9% · Rank #14 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: 8.2%
FactVote uses the Census Bureau's HIC-4_ACS historical table. Rates and 90% confidence margins of error are the published ACS 1-year estimates for the civilian noninstitutionalized population. ACS annual estimates, all ages. Standard ACS 2020 one-year data were not released; the chart leaves a gap. Survey ranks describe point estimates and do not establish significant differences. Annual observations use December 31; monthly observations use the first of the month. Lines connect consecutive readings and do not supply values between them. Missing observations break the lines.
View observations and export data
South Carolina Uninsured rate · all ages · source units
The timeline combines the corresponding national fact’s reviewed event catalog, labeled National context, with individually reviewed state milestones. State events use primary sources and distinguish signing, effective and filing dates. Each milestone keeps its source-check date, geographical limits and evidence limits. This curated selection is not a complete history.
Date ranges affect events and actions. Action type, status and official-name search affect government records only. Events remain separate from action counts. An event after the latest observation extends context without creating a new reading.
South Carolina · state comparison
Who has health coverage?
Compare ACS annual estimates for all ages or people under 65. Coverage categories can overlap and do not sum to the insured share.
South Carolina · 20249%
South Carolina rank#14among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark8.2%Same measure and period when published
#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.
Uninsured rate · all ages
FactVote uses the Census Bureau's HIC-4_ACS historical table. Rates and 90% confidence margins of error are the published ACS 1-year estimates for the civilian noninstitutionalized population.
ACS annual estimates, all ages. Standard ACS 2020 one-year data were not released; the chart leaves a gap. Survey ranks describe point estimates and do not establish significant differences.
Hover to inspect. Click or tap to compare that period with every state. Focus the graph and use arrow keys, Home or End to select a period. Press Escape to return to the latest period.
South Carolina
2024 · South Carolina: 9% · Rank #14 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: 8.2% · Selected for state comparisonView history and select a period
South Carolina Uninsured rate · all ages history
Period
South Carolina
Compare
2014
13.6%
2015
10.9%
2016
10%
2017
11%
2018
10.5%
2019
10.8%
2020
Not available
2021
10%
2022
9.1%
2023
9.1%
2024
9%
Compare states on the graph
Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. South Carolina stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.
Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. South Carolina has a dark outline.
Lower value · 2.8%Higher value · 16.7%Striped: unavailable
Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.
South Carolina · 9%2024 · Rank #14 of 50, highest firstSelected state
50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.
Compare South Carolina with every state · 50 ranked
Uninsured rate · all ages · 2024 · highest value ranked #1
Rank
State
Value
Comparison notes
#1
Texas
16.7%
—
#2
Georgia
12%
—
#3
Oklahoma
11.5%
—
#4
Nevada
11.4%
—
#5
Alaska
11%
—
#6
Florida
10.9%
—
#7
Arizona
10.3%
—
#7
Wyoming
10.3%
—
#9
New Mexico
10.1%
—
#10
Mississippi
9.7%
—
#10
Tennessee
9.7%
—
#12
Arkansas
9.4%
—
#13
Idaho
9.2%
—
#14
South Carolina · your comparison
9%
—
#15
Montana
8.8%
—
#16
North Carolina
8.6%
—
#17
Kansas
8.5%
—
#18
Utah
8.3%
—
#19
Alabama
8.2%
—
#20
South Dakota
8.1%
—
#21
Colorado
7.9%
—
#22
Louisiana
7.7%
—
#22
Missouri
7.7%
—
#22
New Jersey
7.7%
—
#25
Indiana
7.5%
—
#26
Nebraska
7.1%
—
#27
Delaware
6.9%
—
#27
Illinois
6.9%
—
#27
Virginia
6.9%
—
#30
Kentucky
6.8%
—
#31
Ohio
6.7%
—
#32
Washington
6.5%
—
#33
Maryland
6.3%
—
#34
North Dakota
6.1%
—
#35
California
5.9%
—
#36
Connecticut
5.8%
—
#36
Pennsylvania
5.8%
—
#36
West Virginia
5.8%
—
#39
Maine
5.5%
—
#40
Iowa
5.4%
—
#41
Wisconsin
5.3%
—
#42
Oregon
5.2%
—
#43
Michigan
5.1%
—
#43
Minnesota
5.1%
—
#45
New York
5%
—
#46
Rhode Island
4.6%
—
#47
New Hampshire
4.5%
—
#48
Vermont
4.2%
—
#49
Hawaii
3.5%
—
#50
Massachusetts
2.8%
—
All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.
Share of South Carolina’s civilian noninstitutionalized residents under age 65 who lacked comprehensive health-insurance coverage at the time of the ACS survey.
This source snapshot keeps its own definition and period. A rank shown elsewhere applies only to that comparison’s measure and period.
Method and limitations
U.S. Census Bureau QuickFacts, sourced from the 2024 American Community Survey 1-year estimate.
This is a survey estimate for people under 65 and does not describe coverage type or continuity of coverage.
Insurance status alone does not measure affordability, access, quality, or health outcomes.
State spending is reported for 2020, the latest year available in this CMS state series. Choose a service to compare South Carolina with every state.
South Carolina · 2020$8,766
South Carolina rank#43among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark$10,191Same measure and period when published
#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.
Personal healthcare spending per resident
Personal health care expenditure per resident, assigned to the state where the patient resides.
2020 is the last year in this CMS state series. Personal health care excludes administration, public health, and investment included in national health expenditures. This is spending by all payers, not a household bill.
Hover to inspect. Click or tap to compare that period with every state. Focus the graph and use arrow keys, Home or End to select a period. Press Escape to return to the latest period.
South Carolina
2020 · South Carolina: $8,766 · Rank #43 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: $10,191 · Selected for state comparisonView history and select a period
South Carolina Personal healthcare spending per resident history
Period
South Carolina
Compare
2014
$7,210
2015
$7,446
2016
$7,669
2017
$7,855
2018
$7,975
2019
$8,345
2020
$8,766
Compare states on the graph
Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. South Carolina stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.
Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. South Carolina has a dark outline.
Lower value · $7.52KHigher value · $14.01KStriped: unavailable
Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.
South Carolina · $8,7662020 · Rank #43 of 50, highest firstSelected state
50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.
Compare South Carolina with every state · 50 ranked
Personal healthcare spending per resident · 2020 · highest value ranked #1
Rank
State
Value
Comparison notes
#1
New York
$14,007
—
#2
Alaska
$13,642
—
#3
Massachusetts
$13,319
—
#4
Delaware
$12,899
—
#5
West Virginia
$12,769
—
#6
Vermont
$12,756
—
#7
South Dakota
$12,495
—
#8
Connecticut
$12,489
—
#9
Maine
$12,077
—
#10
New Jersey
$11,868
—
#11
New Hampshire
$11,793
—
#12
Rhode Island
$11,694
—
#13
Pennsylvania
$11,603
—
#14
North Dakota
$11,301
—
#15
Wyoming
$10,989
—
#16
Minnesota
$10,846
—
#17
Maryland
$10,839
—
#18
Indiana
$10,517
—
#19
Louisiana
$10,515
—
#20
Nebraska
$10,514
—
#21
Ohio
$10,478
—
#22
California
$10,299
—
#23
Hawaii
$10,291
—
#24
Kentucky
$10,257
—
#25
Montana
$10,212
—
#26
Illinois
$10,190
—
#27
Oregon
$10,071
—
#28
Wisconsin
$9,982
—
#29
Missouri
$9,921
—
#30
Michigan
$9,897
—
#31
Florida
$9,865
—
#32
Iowa
$9,789
—
#33
Oklahoma
$9,444
—
#34
Kansas
$9,408
—
#35
Mississippi
$9,394
—
#36
Arkansas
$9,338
—
#37
Tennessee
$9,336
—
#38
Alabama
$9,280
—
#39
Washington
$9,265
—
#40
Virginia
$9,195
—
#41
North Carolina
$8,917
—
#42
New Mexico
$8,902
—
#43
South Carolina · your comparison
$8,766
—
#44
Georgia
$8,758
—
#45
Arizona
$8,756
—
#46
Colorado
$8,583
—
#47
Texas
$8,406
—
#48
Nevada
$8,348
—
#49
Idaho
$8,148
—
#50
Utah
$7,522
—
All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.
Use age-adjusted mortality to account for different age distributions; life expectancy summarizes period death rates.
South Carolina · 202275.1 years
South Carolina rank#41among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark77.5 yearsSame measure and period when published
#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.
Life expectancy at birth
FactVote uses CDC National Center for Health Statistics annual complete life-table estimates for the total South Carolina population. Values are rounded to the published tenth of a year.
The latest published comparable state series ends in 2022, even though newer national life-expectancy estimates may be available. Period life expectancy summarizes current mortality rates; it is not a forecast of how long a particular person will live. The 2020 and 2021 estimates reflect the mortality shock during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Hover to inspect. Click or tap to compare that period with every state. Focus the graph and use arrow keys, Home or End to select a period. Press Escape to return to the latest period.
South Carolina
2022 · South Carolina: 75.1 years · Rank #41 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: 77.5 years · Selected for state comparisonView history and select a period
South Carolina Life expectancy at birth history
Period
South Carolina
Compare
2018
76.5 years
2019
76.8 years
2020
74.8 years
2021
73.5 years
2022
75.1 years
Compare states on the graph
Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. South Carolina stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.
Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. South Carolina has a dark outline.
Lower value · 72.2 yearsHigher value · 80 yearsStriped: unavailable
Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.
South Carolina · 75.1 years2022 · Rank #41 of 50, highest firstSelected state
50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.
Compare South Carolina with every state · 50 ranked
Life expectancy at birth · 2022 · highest value ranked #1
Rank
State
Value
Comparison notes
#1
Hawaii
80 years
—
#2
Massachusetts
79.8 years
—
#3
New Jersey
79.6 years
—
#4
New York
79.5 years
—
#5
Connecticut
79.4 years
—
#6
California
79.3 years
—
#6
Minnesota
79.3 years
—
#8
Rhode Island
79.2 years
—
#9
Utah
79 years
—
#10
New Hampshire
78.7 years
—
#11
Colorado
78.5 years
—
#12
Idaho
78.4 years
—
#12
Washington
78.4 years
—
#14
Nebraska
78.3 years
—
#14
Vermont
78.3 years
—
#16
Wisconsin
78.1 years
—
#17
Florida
77.9 years
—
#17
Iowa
77.9 years
—
#17
North Dakota
77.9 years
—
#20
Maryland
77.8 years
—
#21
Oregon
77.7 years
—
#22
Illinois
77.5 years
—
#22
Virginia
77.5 years
—
#24
Montana
77.3 years
—
#24
Pennsylvania
77.3 years
—
#24
South Dakota
77.3 years
—
#27
Texas
77.1 years
—
#28
Michigan
76.8 years
—
#28
Wyoming
76.8 years
—
#30
Arizona
76.7 years
—
#31
Maine
76.6 years
—
#32
Delaware
76.5 years
—
#32
Kansas
76.5 years
—
#34
Nevada
76.4 years
—
#35
Georgia
75.9 years
—
#35
North Carolina
75.9 years
—
#37
Alaska
75.8 years
—
#38
Ohio
75.6 years
—
#39
Indiana
75.4 years
—
#40
Missouri
75.2 years
—
#41
South Carolina · your comparison
75.1 years
—
#42
New Mexico
74.5 years
—
#43
Arkansas
73.9 years
—
#44
Alabama
73.8 years
—
#44
Louisiana
73.8 years
—
#44
Oklahoma
73.8 years
—
#44
Tennessee
73.8 years
—
#48
Kentucky
73.6 years
—
#49
Mississippi
72.6 years
—
#50
West Virginia
72.2 years
—
All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.
Compare age-adjusted adult prevalence using the same survey year and definition.
South Carolina · 202312.7%
South Carolina rank#6among 48 states with data
U.S. benchmark10.7%Same measure and period when published
#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.
Diagnosed diabetes · age adjusted
Adult self-reported prevalence, age-adjusted to a common population.
Published CDC 2019–2023 series. Missing or suppressed estimates remain unranked. Confidence intervals describe sampling uncertainty; point ranks are not significance tests.
Hover to inspect. Click or tap to compare that period with every state. Focus the graph and use arrow keys, Home or End to select a period. Press Escape to return to the latest period.
South Carolina
2023 · South Carolina: 12.7% · Rank #6 of 48, highest first · U.S. benchmark: 10.7% · Selected for state comparisonView history and select a period
South Carolina Diagnosed diabetes · age adjusted history
Period
South Carolina
Compare
2019
11.7%
2020
12.1%
2021
12.1%
2022
11.1%
2023
12.7%
Compare states on the graph
Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. South Carolina stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.
Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. South Carolina has a dark outline.
Lower value · 7.8%Higher value · 15.1%Striped: unavailable
Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.
South Carolina · 12.7%2023 · Rank #6 of 48, highest first95% confidence interval: 11.9% – 13.6%Selected state
50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.
Compare South Carolina with every state · 48 ranked, 2 unavailable
Diagnosed diabetes · age adjusted · 2023 · highest value ranked #1
Rank
State
Value
Comparison notes
#1
Mississippi
15.1%
95% CI: 13.7–16.6
#1
West Virginia
15.1%
95% CI: 13.9–16.3
#3
Louisiana
14.6%
95% CI: 13.4–15.8
#4
Alabama
14%
95% CI: 12.7–15.3
#5
Arkansas
13.1%
95% CI: 12–14.3
#6
South Carolina · your comparison
12.7%
95% CI: 11.9–13.6
#6
Tennessee
12.7%
95% CI: 11.7–13.8
#8
Texas
12.1%
95% CI: 11–13.3
#9
Indiana
11.7%
95% CI: 11.1–12.4
#10
Georgia
11.5%
95% CI: 10.7–12.3
#10
Ohio
11.5%
95% CI: 10.8–12.2
#12
Oklahoma
11.3%
95% CI: 10.5–12.1
#13
Delaware
11.1%
95% CI: 9.8–12.6
#14
North Carolina
11%
95% CI: 9.8–12.3
#15
Illinois
10.9%
95% CI: 9.9–12.1
#15
Maryland
10.9%
95% CI: 10.2–11.7
#15
Michigan
10.9%
95% CI: 10.1–11.8
#18
Nevada
10.8%
95% CI: 8.9–13
#18
New Mexico
10.8%
95% CI: 9.3–12.6
#20
Missouri
10.7%
95% CI: 9.9–11.7
#20
South Dakota
10.7%
95% CI: 8.9–12.8
#22
California
10.6%
95% CI: 9.8–11.4
#23
Kansas
10.5%
95% CI: 9.7–11.3
#24
Virginia
10.4%
95% CI: 9.5–11.4
#25
Florida
10.1%
95% CI: 9.1–11.1
#26
Rhode Island
10%
95% CI: 9.1–11
#27
Arizona
9.9%
95% CI: 9.2–10.7
#27
Iowa
9.9%
95% CI: 9.2–10.7
#29
Nebraska
9.7%
95% CI: 9–10.3
#30
Wisconsin
9.6%
95% CI: 9–10.2
#31
Hawaii
9.5%
95% CI: 8.7–10.5
#31
New York
9.5%
95% CI: 8.9–10.1
#31
Oregon
9.5%
95% CI: 8.7–10.5
#34
Wyoming
9.4%
95% CI: 8.5–10.5
#35
Minnesota
9.3%
95% CI: 8.6–10
#36
New Jersey
9.1%
95% CI: 8.4–9.9
#37
Maine
9%
95% CI: 8.4–9.7
#38
North Dakota
8.9%
95% CI: 8.1–9.7
#39
Idaho
8.7%
95% CI: 7.9–9.6
#40
Washington
8.6%
95% CI: 8.2–9
#41
Massachusetts
8.5%
95% CI: 7.8–9.4
#42
Connecticut
8.4%
95% CI: 7.6–9.3
#43
Alaska
8.2%
95% CI: 7.4–9.2
#44
Utah
8.1%
95% CI: 7.5–8.7
#45
Colorado
8%
95% CI: 7.3–8.7
#46
Montana
7.9%
95% CI: 7.2–8.7
#46
New Hampshire
7.9%
95% CI: 7.1–8.8
#48
Vermont
7.8%
95% CI: 7–8.7
—
Kentucky
Not available
No comparable published observation for this period; excluded from rank.
—
Pennsylvania
Not available
No comparable published observation for this period; excluded from rank.
All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.
Compare coverage of need, practitioners needed, or affected population for each discipline.
South Carolina · June 30, 202679.4%
South Carolina rank#3among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark47.4%Same measure and period when published
#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.
Primary care · need met
HRSA-designated shortage areas; measures describe need within those areas, not the entire state population.
National report totals can include territories. Designation rules and populations differ by discipline; do not add disciplines. Absolute population and practitioner ranks also reflect state size.
Compare states on the graph
Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. South Carolina stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.
Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. South Carolina has a dark outline.
Lower value · 11.2%Higher value · 83.2%Striped: unavailable
Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.
South Carolina · 79.4%June 30, 2026 · Rank #3 of 50, highest firstSelected state
50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.
Compare South Carolina with every state · 50 ranked
Primary care · need met · June 30, 2026 · highest value ranked #1
Rank
State
Value
Comparison notes
#1
New Jersey
83.2%
—
#2
Vermont
82.6%
—
#3
South Carolina · your comparison
79.4%
—
#4
New Hampshire
74.8%
—
#5
Rhode Island
74.3%
—
#6
Louisiana
72.1%
—
#7
Hawaii
67.1%
—
#8
Utah
65.4%
—
#9
Wisconsin
65.2%
—
#10
Alabama
63%
—
#11
Connecticut
60.3%
—
#12
Massachusetts
58%
—
#13
Tennessee
58%
—
#14
Virginia
57.2%
—
#15
Pennsylvania
56.7%
—
#16
Maine
56%
—
#17
Minnesota
55.4%
—
#18
Wyoming
54.4%
—
#19
Indiana
54.2%
—
#20
California
53.2%
—
#21
Arkansas
52.6%
—
#22
Texas
49.8%
—
#23
Ohio
49.7%
—
#24
Nebraska
49.1%
—
#25
Alaska
48.9%
—
#26
North Carolina
48.1%
—
#27
Colorado
47.5%
—
#28
Michigan
44.9%
—
#29
Oregon
43.9%
—
#30
Idaho
43.9%
—
#31
Washington
42.4%
—
#32
Illinois
41.5%
—
#33
Nevada
41.5%
—
#34
Arizona
41.2%
—
#35
Kansas
41.1%
—
#36
Iowa
40.5%
—
#37
Florida
39.7%
—
#38
Georgia
39.1%
—
#39
Montana
38.5%
—
#40
West Virginia
38.3%
—
#41
North Dakota
36.5%
—
#42
New York
35.3%
—
#43
South Dakota
34.6%
—
#44
Mississippi
34.1%
—
#45
Maryland
31.6%
—
#46
New Mexico
31.4%
—
#47
Kentucky
30.8%
—
#48
Oklahoma
28.6%
—
#49
Missouri
23.7%
—
#50
Delaware
11.2%
—
All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.
Premium comparisons use a published historical all-state employer survey. Total premiums combine employer and employee payments.
South Carolina · 2020$7,516
South Carolina rank#7among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark$7,149Same measure and period when published
#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.
Single coverage premium · all firms
Average total annual employer-plan premium per enrolled employee at private-sector establishments offering coverage.
Historical 2020 published all-state table; not a current quote. Includes both employer and employee contributions, rather than just a worker’s payment. Survey estimates and small firm samples carry uncertainty. Missing estimates remain unavailable.
Compare states on the graph
Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. South Carolina stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.
Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. South Carolina has a dark outline.
Lower value · $6.39KHigher value · $8.64KStriped: unavailable
Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.
South Carolina · $7,5162020 · Rank #7 of 50, highest firstSelected state
50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.
Compare South Carolina with every state · 50 ranked
Single coverage premium · all firms · 2020 · highest value ranked #1
Rank
State
Value
Comparison notes
#1
Alaska
$8,635
—
#2
New York
$8,177
—
#3
New Hampshire
$7,991
—
#4
Vermont
$7,868
—
#5
Wyoming
$7,743
—
#6
Nebraska
$7,611
—
#7
South Carolina · your comparison
$7,516
—
#8
Connecticut
$7,501
—
#9
Maine
$7,496
—
#10
Massachusetts
$7,452
—
#11
Washington
$7,440
—
#12
New Mexico
$7,424
—
#13
Illinois
$7,376
—
#14
New Jersey
$7,373
—
#15
Maryland
$7,352
—
#16
Rhode Island
$7,326
—
#17
Indiana
$7,319
—
#18
Delaware
$7,280
—
#19
Wisconsin
$7,250
—
#20
Pennsylvania
$7,246
—
#21
North Dakota
$7,216
—
#22
Colorado
$7,206
—
#23
Missouri
$7,179
—
#24
California
$7,173
—
#25
Florida
$7,078
—
#26
South Dakota
$7,070
—
#27
Oklahoma
$7,058
—
#28
Hawaii
$7,040
—
#29
North Carolina
$7,036
—
#30
Texas
$7,017
—
#31
West Virginia
$6,993
—
#32
Ohio
$6,989
—
#33
Kentucky
$6,949
—
#34
Iowa
$6,932
—
#35
Virginia
$6,928
—
#36
Oregon
$6,917
—
#37
Minnesota
$6,910
—
#38
Georgia
$6,876
—
#39
Montana
$6,860
—
#40
Idaho
$6,744
—
#41
Louisiana
$6,713
—
#42
Michigan
$6,683
—
#43
Kansas
$6,675
—
#44
Arizona
$6,612
—
#45
Utah
$6,593
—
#46
Mississippi
$6,561
—
#47
Nevada
$6,493
—
#48
Tennessee
$6,485
—
#49
Arkansas
$6,414
—
#50
Alabama
$6,393
—
All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.
Adult statewide estimates use the same SAMHSA model and survey period. Treatment use is a share of all adults, not a share of adults with mental illness.
South Carolina · 2023–202419.8%
South Carolina rank#49among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark23.1%Same measure and period when published
#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.
Any Mental Illness · adults 18+
Civilian noninstitutionalized adults age 18+, past-year prevalence or treatment use, estimated by small-area survey models.
Mental illness and depression estimates pool 2023–2024; treatment use covers 2024 only. Definitions and model-based uncertainty differ from the national page’s annual 2025 survey estimates. Point-estimate ranks do not establish significant differences. Serious mental illness is a subset of any mental illness, so their percentages must not be added.
Compare states on the graph
Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. South Carolina stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.
Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. South Carolina has a dark outline.
Lower value · 18.1%Higher value · 31.6%Striped: unavailable
Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.
South Carolina · 19.8%2023–2024 · Rank #49 of 50, highest firstSelected state
50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.
Compare South Carolina with every state · 50 ranked
Any Mental Illness · adults 18+ · 2023–2024 · highest value ranked #1
Rank
State
Value
Comparison notes
#1
Oregon
31.6%
—
#2
Vermont
29.1%
—
#3
West Virginia
28.1%
—
#4
Washington
27.9%
—
#5
New Hampshire
27.7%
—
#6
Tennessee
27%
—
#7
Utah
26.7%
—
#8
Maine
26.7%
—
#9
Arkansas
26.6%
—
#10
Colorado
26.4%
—
#11
Rhode Island
25.8%
—
#12
Missouri
25.7%
—
#13
Montana
25.6%
—
#14
Indiana
25.3%
—
#15
Kentucky
25.3%
—
#16
Georgia
25.2%
—
#17
Iowa
25%
—
#18
Massachusetts
24.9%
—
#19
Wyoming
24.7%
—
#20
Nevada
24.6%
—
#21
Arizona
24.6%
—
#22
Wisconsin
24.6%
—
#23
Idaho
24.5%
—
#24
Nebraska
24.1%
—
#25
Louisiana
24.1%
—
#26
Alaska
24%
—
#27
Pennsylvania
23.9%
—
#28
New Mexico
23.9%
—
#28
Ohio
23.9%
—
#30
Connecticut
23.7%
—
#31
Kansas
23.7%
—
#32
Michigan
23.6%
—
#33
Virginia
23.1%
—
#34
Alabama
23%
—
#35
North Dakota
23%
—
#36
Maryland
22.7%
—
#37
Oklahoma
22.6%
—
#38
Minnesota
22.6%
—
#39
Illinois
22.2%
—
#40
Delaware
22.1%
—
#41
New York
21.9%
—
#42
South Dakota
21.8%
—
#43
California
21.6%
—
#44
North Carolina
21.4%
—
#45
Florida
20.8%
—
#46
Texas
20.7%
—
#47
Mississippi
20.5%
—
#48
Hawaii
19.8%
—
#49
South Carolina · your comparison
19.8%
—
#50
New Jersey
18.1%
—
All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.
Explore current officeholders and explicitly reviewed historical executive officials, labeled at the time of their actions. Timeline dates, action type, status and search also filter this list. Read any record’s summary, latest recorded status and official evidence below, or open it beside the timeline.
36 of 36 reviewed South Carolina actions · newest first
Jun 24, 2026 · HR 9421 · Ban Abortion by Mail Act · In CongressU.S. Congress · South Carolina delegation · HR 9421
Ban Abortion by Mail Act
Jun 24, 2026 · In Congress
Rep. Sheri Biggs · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
Proposes removing a provider’s abortion-drug REMS certification for at least two years for knowingly prescribing, dispensing, or administering without an in-person visit or without a medical license in the patient’s state. The definition excludes treatment of ectopic pregnancy and removal of a dead fetus.
Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Why this record is included
The fact counts abortions occurring or prescribed in South Carolina and reported to DPH in 2025, including patients from other states and excluding South Carolina residents treated or prescribed elsewhere. Access, restrictions and reporting concern this occurrence measure. This connection does not establish causation. An action after the measurement period cannot explain an earlier observed value.
Retained South Carolina evidence context: Abortions occurring or prescribed in South Carolina. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
3.Health care provider REMS-certified status (a) In-Person visit required Any REMS-certified provider that knowingly prescribes, dispenses, or administers mifepristone or any other abortion drug without an in-person visit with the patient for whom such drug is prescribed shall lose REMS-certified status, with respect to such drug, for a period of not less than 2 years. (b)License in patient’s State requiredAny REMS-certified provider that knowingly prescribes, dispenses, or administers mifepristone or any other abortion drug to a patient residing in a State where the provider does not have a medical license shall lose REMS-certified status, with respect to such drug, for a period of not less than 2 years. (c)ReportingThe Secretary shall, on an annual basis, submit to Congress a report listing each REMS-certified provider who has lost REMS-certified status due to— (1)a violation of this section; or (2)improper or unsafe prescribing of mifepristone or any other abortion drug. (d)DefinitionsIn this section: (1)Abortion drugThe term abortion drug means any drug, substance, or combination of drugs or substances that is intended for use or that is in fact used (irrespective of how the product is labeled) to intentionally kill the unborn child of a woman known to be pregnant, or to intentionally terminate the pregnancy of a woman known to be pregnant, with an intention other than— (A)to produce a live birth; (B) to remove a dead unborn child; or (C) to treat an ectopic pregnancy. (2)REMS-certified statusThe term REMS-certified status means, with respect to mifepristone or any other abortion drug, the certification of a REMS-certified provider by the Secretary to dispense such drug pursuant to a risk evaluation and mitigation strategy under section 505–1 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 355–1). (3)REMS-certified providerThe term REMS-certified provider means a health care professional who has successfully completed the FDA’s Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) certification program for prescribing mifepristone. (4)SecretaryThe term Secretary means the Secretary of Health and Human Services, acting through the Commissioner of Food and Drugs.
Inspect this action on the timeline ↑May 26, 2026 · HB 3650 · Discharging firearms into dwellings and other structures · EnactedSouth Carolina Legislature · HB 3650
Discharging firearms into dwellings and other structures
May 26, 2026 · Enacted
Rep. G. Murrell Smith, Jr. · Sponsored / Rep. Chris Wooten · Sponsored / Rep. Thomas E. "Tommy" Pope · Sponsored / Rep. Donald G. "Don" Chapman · Sponsored / Rep. Wm. Weston J. Newton · Sponsored / Rep. William H. Bailey · Sponsored / Rep. Robby Robbins · Sponsored / Rep. Heather Ammons Crawford · Sponsored / Rep. Thomas Duval "Val" Guest, Jr. · Sponsored / Rep. Micajah P. "Micah" Caskey IV · Sponsored / Rep. Cally R. "Cal" Forrest, Jr. · Sponsored / Rep. Brandon Newton · Sponsored / Rep. William M. "Bill" Hixon · Sponsored / Rep. Bill Taylor · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
Revises offenses and penalties for deliberately or recklessly firing into regularly occupied structures or occupied vehicles, including enhanced penalties when someone is struck or injured. The text preserves specified defense and hunting exceptions. Assault-related conduct is only one component of reported violent crime.
The official record’s latest entry is Act No. 138 (2026-05-26). This records enactment, not present enforceability.
Why this record is included
Firearm mortality includes suicide, homicide, and other intents. The provision concerns firearm access, safety, or prevention of firearm injury and may address only part of the death count. This connection does not establish causation. An action after the measurement period cannot explain an earlier observed value.
Retained South Carolina evidence context: Firearm deaths. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
Section 16-23-440. (A) It is unlawful for a person to knowingly, unlawfully and deliberately or with a reckless disregard for life discharge or cause to be discharged firearms at or into a dwelling house, other building, structure, or enclosure regularly occupied by persons unless it is in defense of that person's own property or the life of himself or another as provided in Title 16, Chapter 11, Article 6. A person need not have a specific intent to strike a dwelling house, other building, structure, or enclosure regularly occupied by persons to be guilty under this section. A person who violates the provisions of this subsection is guilty of a felony and, upon conviction, must be fined not more than: (1) twenty thousand dollars and imprisoned not more than ten years; and (2) fifty thousand dollars and imprisoned not more than fifteen years when any occupant is struck or bodily injury occurs as a proximate cause of the discharge of a firearm. (B) It is unlawful for a person to knowingly, unlawfully and deliberately or with a reckless disregard for life discharge or cause to be discharged firearms at or into any vehicle, aircraft, watercraft, or other conveyance, device, or equipment while it is occupied unless it is in defense of that person's own property or the life of himself or another as provided in Title 16, Chapter 11, Article 6. A person need not have a specific intent to strike a vehicle, aircraft, watercraft, or other conveyance, device, or equipment while it is occupied by persons to be guilty under this section. For purposes of this section an unmanned aerial vehicle shall not constitute an aircraft. A person who violates the provisions of this subsection is guilty of a felony and, upon conviction, must be fined not more than: (1) twenty thousand dollars and imprisoned not more than ten years; and (2) fifty thousand dollars and imprisoned not more than fifteen years when any occupant is struck or bodily injury occurs as a proximate cause of the discharge of a firearm. (C) A person who discharges or causes to be discharged a firearm in a criminally negligent manner while in preparation for, engaged in the act of, or returning from hunting, in violation of Section 50-1-85, cannot be charged with a violation of this section. Nothing however herein prohibits the charging of a violation under any other applicable section.
Discharging firearms into dwellings and other structures
May 15, 2026 · Signed
Gov. Henry McMaster · Signed
FactVote reviewed summary
Henry McMaster signed HB 3650. Revises offenses and penalties for deliberately or recklessly firing into regularly occupied structures or occupied vehicles, including enhanced penalties when someone is struck or injured. The text preserves specified defense and hunting exceptions. Assault-related conduct is only one component of reported violent crime.
Signed By Governor. This records the historical action; current enforceability and implementation are not inferred.
Why this record is included
Firearm mortality includes suicide, homicide, and other intents. The provision concerns firearm access, safety, or prevention of firearm injury and may address only part of the death count. This connection does not establish causation. An action after the measurement period cannot explain an earlier observed value.
Retained South Carolina evidence context: Firearm deaths. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
Section 16-23-440. (A) It is unlawful for a person to knowingly, unlawfully and deliberately or with a reckless disregard for life discharge or cause to be discharged firearms at or into a dwelling house, other building, structure, or enclosure regularly occupied by persons unless it is in defense of that person's own property or the life of himself or another as provided in Title 16, Chapter 11, Article 6. A person need not have a specific intent to strike a dwelling house, other building, structure, or enclosure regularly occupied by persons to be guilty under this section. A person who violates the provisions of this subsection is guilty of a felony and, upon conviction, must be fined not more than: (1) twenty thousand dollars and imprisoned not more than ten years; and (2) fifty thousand dollars and imprisoned not more than fifteen years when any occupant is struck or bodily injury occurs as a proximate cause of the discharge of a firearm. (B) It is unlawful for a person to knowingly, unlawfully and deliberately or with a reckless disregard for life discharge or cause to be discharged firearms at or into any vehicle, aircraft, watercraft, or other conveyance, device, or equipment while it is occupied unless it is in defense of that person's own property or the life of himself or another as provided in Title 16, Chapter 11, Article 6. A person need not have a specific intent to strike a vehicle, aircraft, watercraft, or other conveyance, device, or equipment while it is occupied by persons to be guilty under this section. For purposes of this section an unmanned aerial vehicle shall not constitute an aircraft. A person who violates the provisions of this subsection is guilty of a felony and, upon conviction, must be fined not more than: (1) twenty thousand dollars and imprisoned not more than ten years; and (2) fifty thousand dollars and imprisoned not more than fifteen years when any occupant is struck or bodily injury occurs as a proximate cause of the discharge of a firearm. (C) A person who discharges or causes to be discharged a firearm in a criminally negligent manner while in preparation for, engaged in the act of, or returning from hunting, in violation of Section 50-1-85, cannot be charged with a violation of this section. Nothing however herein prohibits the charging of a violation under any other applicable section.
Inspect this action on the timeline ↑Mar 26, 2026 · HR 8112 · Preserving Social Security and Medicare for Citizens Act of 2026 · In CongressU.S. Congress · South Carolina delegation · HR 8112
Preserving Social Security and Medicare for Citizens Act of 2026
Mar 26, 2026 · In Congress
Rep. Nancy Mace · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
Proposes limiting monthly Social Security benefits to U.S. citizens or nationals and lawful permanent residents for months after enactment. Lawful permanent residents remain eligible under this provision; it is not a citizens-only rule.
Referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Why this record is included
Foreign-born residents include naturalized citizens and lawfully and unlawfully present noncitizens. A provision about a particular immigration status concerns only a subset of that population; it does not change a person’s birthplace. This connection does not establish causation. An action after the measurement period cannot explain an earlier observed value.
Retained South Carolina evidence context: Residents who are foreign-born · Social Security beneficiaries. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
3.Limiting Social Security benefits eligibility to certain individuals (a)In generalSection 202(y) of the Social Security Act is amended to read as follows: (y)Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no monthly benefit under this title shall be payable to an individual who is not— (1)a citizen or national of the United States; or (2)an alien who is lawfully admitted for permanent residence under the Immigration and Nationality Act. . (b)Effective dateThe amendment made by this section shall apply with respect to monthly benefits for months beginning after the date of enactment of this Act. 4.Expanding FICA tax to include remuneration paid to certain individuals (a)In generalSection 3121(b) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking paragraphs (1), (18), and (19). (b)Effective dateThe amendments made by this section shall apply with remuneration paid in taxable years beginning after December 31 of the calendar year in which this Act is enacted.
Inspect this action on the timeline ↑Feb 13, 2026 · Attorney General action — 2026-02-13 · Amicus brief challenging the FDA’s mifepristone mail and telehealth rule · Joined amicus briefSouth Carolina agencies · Attorney General action — 2026-02-13
Amicus brief challenging the FDA’s mifepristone mail and telehealth rule
Feb 13, 2026 · Joined amicus brief
Attorney General Alan Wilson · Joined amicus brief
FactVote reviewed summary
Alan Wilson joined a multistate brief supporting a request to block the FDA’s 2023 mifepristone mail and telehealth rule. The brief is dated February 13, 2026; his office announced it on February 16. The filing is an advocacy action, not a court ruling or a determination of the case’s current status.
The brief is dated February 13, 2026; the office release is dated February 16, 2026. A filing does not establish a court ruling.
Why this record is included
The fact counts abortions occurring or prescribed in South Carolina and reported to DPH in 2025, including patients from other states and excluding South Carolina residents treated or prescribed elsewhere. Access, restrictions and reporting concern this occurrence measure. This connection does not establish causation. An action after the measurement period cannot explain an earlier observed value.
Retained South Carolina evidence context: Abortions occurring or prescribed in South Carolina. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA LAFAYETTE DIVISION THE STATE OF LOUISIANA, by and through its Attorney General, LIZ MURRILL, and ROSALIE MARKOZICH, Plaintiffs, v. U.S. FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION, et al., Defendants. Case No. 6:25-cv-01491-DCJ-DJA AMICI CURIAE OF NEBRASKA, ALABAMA, ALASKA, ARKANSAS, GEORGIA, IDAHO, INDIANA, IOWA, KANSAS, MISSISSIPPI, MISSOURI, MONTANA, NORTH DAKOTA, OHIO, OKLAHOMA, SOUTH CAROLINA, SOUTH DAKOTA, TEXAS, UTAH, WEST VIRGINIA, AND WYOMING IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION […] 19 Dated: February 13, 2026 Respectfully submitted, MICHAEL T. HILGERS Attorney General /s/ CODY S. BARNETT* Solicitor General Nebraska Department of Justice 1445 K Street, Room 2115 Lincoln, Nebraska 68508 Tel.: (402) 471-2683 Fax: (402) 471-3297 [email protected] *Admitted Pro Hac Vice Counsel for Amici Curiae /s/ R ACHEL T. VOGELTANZ Rachel T. Vogeltanz (La. Bar No. 33501) The Law Office of Rachel Thyre Vogeltanz, LLC 428 W. 21st Ave. Covington, Louisiana 70433 Tel.: (985) 377-9271 Fax: (985) 302-0972 [email protected] Local Counsel for State of Nebraska 20 On behalf of: Steve Marshall Attorney General State of Alabama Steve Cox Attorney General State of Alaska Tim Griffin Attorney General State of Arkansas Christopher M. Carr Attorney General State of Georgia Raúl R. Labrador Attorney General State of Idaho Theodore E. Rokita Attorney General State of Indiana Brenna Bird Attorney General State of Iowa Kris W. Kobach Attorney General State of Kansas Austin Knudsen Attorney General State of Montana Lynn Fitch Attorney General State of Mississippi Catherine L. Hanaway Attorney General State of Missouri Drew Wrigley Attorney General State of North Dakota Dave Yost Attorney General State of Ohio Gentner F. Drummond Attorney General State of Oklahoma Alan Wilson Attorney General State of South Carolina Marty J. Jackley Attorney General State of South Dakota Ken Paxton Attorney General State of Texas Derek Brown Attorney General State of Utah John B. McCuskey Attorney General State of West Virginia Keith G. Kautz Attorney General State of Wyoming 21 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that the foregoing brief has been served on all counsel of rec- ord by ECF. Dated: February 13, 2026 /s/ Cody S. Barnett CODY S. BARNETT Counsel for Amici Curiae
Rep. John R. McCravy III · Sponsored / Rep. Melissa Lackey Oremus · Sponsored / Rep. William M. "Bill" Chumley · Sponsored / Rep. Sarita L. Edgerton · Sponsored / Rep. Josiah Magnuson · Sponsored / Rep. Joseph S. "Joe" White · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
Proposes excluding abortion clinics and affiliated medical practices from Medicaid family-planning funding. This concerns provider funding and abortion-service organizations, not a change in who is insured.
The official record’s latest entry is Member(s) request name added as sponsor: White (2026-01-20). No enactment is recorded as of September 6, 2026; a proposed effective date does not establish enactment.
Why this record is included
The fact counts abortions occurring or prescribed in South Carolina and reported to DPH in 2025, including patients from other states and excluding South Carolina residents treated or prescribed elsewhere. Access, restrictions and reporting concern this occurrence measure. This connection does not establish causation. An action after the measurement period cannot explain an earlier observed value.
Retained South Carolina evidence context: Abortions occurring or prescribed in South Carolina. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
Section 44-6-120. Any facility deemed an abortion clinic as defined by Section 44-41-75, and any affiliated physicians or professional medical practices, must be deemed unqualified to provide family planning services as part of the South Carolina Medicaid program pursuant to 42 U.S.C. Section 1396a(a)(23)(A). Accordingly, the South Carolina Department of Health and Human Services may not direct Medicaid funds for family planning services to any organizations providing abortion services, as these organizations are not qualified to participate in the South Carolina Medicaid program.
Records come from published fact relationships or reviewed topic records with official supporting evidence and verified South Carolina officeholder attribution. Historical executive officials require evidence tied to the action date and are excluded from incumbent proposals. Inclusion follows an explicit topic review, a related state fact, or the action’s title and supporting evidence. Explicit topic reviews take priority; repeated actions use the most recent explicit review for this topic. Duplicate actions attached to several facts appear once. This topic match is not a new finding that an action caused a result, and the reviewed collection is selective. Collection reviewed Oct 6, 2026.
What candidates are saying
Explore statements about health coverage, healthcare costs, access to care and public health from FactVote’s South Carolina candidate profiles. Compare candidates within each recorded race, with each person’s matching statements kept together. These are candidate and campaign statements, not verified outcomes.
63 statements from 16 candidates
2026 South Carolina Attorney General — General Election
1 candidate with matching statements · 1 statement
Saying you are a Republican isn't enough. David Stumbo is a lifelong conservative. David has never wavered in his conservative principles - fiercely supporting bold pro-family truths that the sanctity of life of the unborn, religious liberty, and parental rights must be protected. An advocate for la…
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Reproductive rights and health care
Candidate campaign source
Saying you are a Republican isn't enough. David Stumbo is a lifelong conservative. David has never wavered in his conservative principles - fiercely supporting bold pro-family truths that the sanctity of life of the unborn, religious liberty, and parental rights must be protected. An advocate for law enforcement, healthcare freedom, lower taxes, and a transparent government - David will fight for our conservative values as Attorney General.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 23, 2026
Rural communities across South Carolina are getting left behind, especially when it comes to healthcare. We can’t have healthy families and thriving communities, if people can’t see a doctor. Wilson will support rural clinics, expand telemedicine, and incentive medical professionals to serve under-s…
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Health care
Candidate campaign source
Rural communities across South Carolina are getting left behind, especially when it comes to healthcare. We can’t have healthy families and thriving communities, if people can’t see a doctor. Wilson will support rural clinics, expand telemedicine, and incentive medical professionals to serve under-served areas.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026
It is time to invest in South Carolinians’ mental health. Veterans, teens, moms, dads: everyone knows someone who is struggling. Jermaine wrote a bill that calls for basic mental health training for school administrators, religious leaders, and community leaders—including neighborhood association pr…
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Education, child care, and workforce training
Candidate campaign source
It is time to invest in South Carolinians’ mental health. Veterans, teens, moms, dads: everyone knows someone who is struggling. Jermaine wrote a bill that calls for basic mental health training for school administrators, religious leaders, and community leaders—including neighborhood association presidents and crime watch members—to improve early identification and response to mental health crises.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026
It’s time to invest in our state’s rural healthcare access. Over a third of our state live in rural communities, and yet our hospitals are overwhelming concentrated in our cities. Jermaine will fund the opening of more rural hospitals across South Carolina to provide much needed care for our citizen…
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Health care
Candidate campaign source
It’s time to invest in our state’s rural healthcare access. Over a third of our state live in rural communities, and yet our hospitals are overwhelming concentrated in our cities. Jermaine will fund the opening of more rural hospitals across South Carolina to provide much needed care for our citizens.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026
It is time to invest in South Carolina’s law enforcement. Jermaine would raise the salaries for and hire additional state and local law enforcement officers around the state to ensure the safety of all South Carolinians. Jermaine would also ensure that there are mental health response teams trained …
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Health care
Candidate campaign source
It is time to invest in South Carolina’s law enforcement. Jermaine would raise the salaries for and hire additional state and local law enforcement officers around the state to ensure the safety of all South Carolinians. Jermaine would also ensure that there are mental health response teams trained to handle the de-escalation of crises that don’t need armed police intervention, so that those officers can focus on preventing crimes and keeping neighborhoods safe. Police do their job best when they have trust and buy in from their communities. Jermaine is committed to building that trust.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026
With health insurance rates expected to double or triple next year, Hakim proposes creating the Carolina Insurance Company: a state-owned insurer, offering full coverage to every resident. For $100 a month per individual or $200 per family, South Carolinians would receive medical, dental, and vision…
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Affordable Healthcare for Every South Carolinian
Candidate campaign source
With health insurance rates expected to double or triple next year, Hakim proposes creating the Carolina Insurance Company: a state-owned insurer, offering full coverage to every resident. For $100 a month per individual or $200 per family, South Carolinians would receive medical, dental, and vision coverage with no deductibles, no co-pays, and assistance for seniors, disabled, veterans, and low-income families.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026
As governor of South Carolina, Hakim would take many steps to restructure law enforcement. We have created an unnecessary burden on law enforcement by envisioning the “do it all cop.” Law enforcement, traffic enforcement, first responder to car crashes, first responder to attempted suicide, first r…
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Health care
Candidate campaign source
As governor of South Carolina, Hakim would take many steps to restructure law enforcement. We have created an unnecessary burden on law enforcement by envisioning the “do it all cop.” Law enforcement, traffic enforcement, first responder to car crashes, first responder to attempted suicide, first responder to mental health emergencies, first responder to animal attacks, and the list goes on. Police were not trained to respond to every situation, yet they are expected to. This creates a dangerous situation for both law enforcement and the general public when we send people to do jobs they were not trained to do. By mandating the hiring, (academy) training, and employment of SLED social workers deployed with local law enforcement, we can allow police to get back to doing what they were hired to do: enforce laws. Social workers would respond to nonviolent mental health situations and work as a victims' advocate for domestic violence, child abuse/endangerment, mental health emergencies and rape. The social worker would complete paperwork related to these events and act as the victims advocate, which would allow police to get back to what they were trained to do more quickly: enforce the laws they were sworn to uphold.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026
All licensed medical professionals would be required to accept the plan as in-network, and new procedures would never be denied. Every child born in South Carolina would be automatically enrolled for life. By keeping healthcare affordable and accessible, the Carolina Insurance Company would save fam…
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Health care
Candidate campaign source
All licensed medical professionals would be required to accept the plan as in-network, and new procedures would never be denied. Every child born in South Carolina would be automatically enrolled for life. By keeping healthcare affordable and accessible, the Carolina Insurance Company would save families money, support businesses, and build a healthier South Carolina.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026
As a mom, former college athlete, and girls’ youth sports coach, Jenny has long made health and wellness a priority for her family. Long before it became a national movement, she believed America should focus more on preventing illness, not simply treating it. In Congress, Jenny will fight chronic d…
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Education, child care, and workforce training
Candidate campaign source
As a mom, former college athlete, and girls’ youth sports coach, Jenny has long made health and wellness a priority for her family. Long before it became a national movement, she believed America should focus more on preventing illness, not simply treating it. In Congress, Jenny will fight chronic disease, put children’s health first, improve the quality and transparency of our food, bring greater transparency to healthcare costs, and hold federal health agencies and special interests accountable.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026
Jenny knows families are struggling with skyrocketing costs – from groceries to housing to healthcare. She will champion policies to lower costs and advocate for responsible stewardship of taxpayer dollars, so families can plan, save, and thrive. You work hard for your money; your government should …
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Housing affordability
Candidate campaign source
Jenny knows families are struggling with skyrocketing costs – from groceries to housing to healthcare. She will champion policies to lower costs and advocate for responsible stewardship of taxpayer dollars, so families can plan, save, and thrive. You work hard for your money; your government should work just as hard to protect it.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026
Allow Medicare to negotiate lower prescription drug prices and ensure every American benefits from these negotiations. Rapidly expand the number of drugs that Medicare negotiates.
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Social Security, Medicare, and retirement
Candidate campaign source
Allow Medicare to negotiate lower prescription drug prices and ensure every American benefits from these negotiations. Rapidly expand the number of drugs that Medicare negotiates.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026
Address rising costs that hit small businesses directly including healthcare, energy, and insurance so they can grow without passing those costs onto employees or customers.
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Energy, water, and environment
Candidate campaign source
Address rising costs that hit small businesses directly including healthcare, energy, and insurance so they can grow without passing those costs onto employees or customers.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026
Expand the National Health Service Corp to incentivize more health care providers – especially providers working in primary care and mental health care – to serve in rural communities with provider shortages. Providers who join the National Health Service Corps receive medical school loan forgivenes…
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Education, child care, and workforce training
Candidate campaign source
Expand the National Health Service Corp to incentivize more health care providers – especially providers working in primary care and mental health care – to serve in rural communities with provider shortages. Providers who join the National Health Service Corps receive medical school loan forgiveness for their service.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026
This section matches specific health coverage, healthcare costs, access to care and public health terms in retained, attributed source text from published South Carolina candidate profiles. A profile heading or biography alone does not qualify. The Florida geography is fixed; saved state preferences cannot change these results. A mention can concern a community or group rather than Florida’s statewide measure.
Matching is automatic and does not establish a candidate’s stance, the accuracy of a claim, or an effect on the measured result. Results are grouped by recorded race, then by candidate name. Within each candidate, the matching issue mentions appear first. Only candidates with matching retained statements are shown; this is not a complete race roster. Repeated identical text for the same candidate is shown once. Coverage follows the existing state profiles and is not a complete record of all candidates or everything they have said. Review dates are not statement dates.
South Carolina incumbents
What incumbents are proposing
Explore reviewed bills sponsored by current South Carolina legislators and South Carolina’s congressional delegation, plus retained proposals from South Carolina’s governor and agencies. Each record keeps its latest recorded status and official evidence.
179 matching sponsorships or proposals · 100 South Carolina incumbents. These filters apply only to this section.
Rep. Annie E. McDaniel
South Carolina House of Representatives · District 41 · D–SC
1 proposalView proposals from Rep. Annie E. McDanielSouth Carolina Legislature · HB 4383
South Carolina Medicaid Protection and Expansion Act
Apr 23, 2025 · Not enacted
Rep. Wendell K. Jones · Sponsored / Rep. Robert Q. Williams · Sponsored / Rep. Jermaine L. Johnson, Sr. · Sponsored / Rep. John Richard C. King · Sponsored / Rep. Wendell G. Gilliard · Sponsored / Rep. Michael F. Rivers, Sr. · Sponsored / Rep. Roger K. Kirby · Sponsored / Rep. Heather Bauer · Sponsored / Rep. William "Bill" Clyburn · Sponsored / Rep. Lonnie Hosey · Sponsored / Rep. Annie E. McDaniel · Sponsored / Rep. Courtney S. Waters · Sponsored / Rep. Chandra E. Dillard · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
Proposes expanding Medicaid eligibility to 138% of the federal poverty level and creating a Medicaid Stability Fund to offset federal funding reductions, with enrollment and fiscal planning requirements.
The official record’s latest entry is Referred to Committee on Ways and Means (House Journal-page 50) (2025-04-23). No enactment is recorded as of September 6, 2026; a proposed effective date does not establish enactment.
Why this record is included
The fact measures residents under 65 without health insurance. Insurance eligibility, enrollment, coverage continuity and premium assistance concern the covered population. Provider payments and covered services alone do not establish a coverage change, and Medicare-only changes mostly concern a different age population. This connection does not establish causation. An action after the measurement period cannot explain an earlier observed value.
Retained South Carolina evidence context: People under 65 without health insurance. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
Section 44-6-1210. (A) There is created in the State Treasury a fund to be known as the "Medicaid Stability Fund." (B) The fund shall be used exclusively to offset reductions in federal Medicaid funding that impact the State of South Carolina or its Medicaid-eligible populations. […] Section 44-6-1220. (A) The Department of Health and Human Services shall take all actions necessary to fully expand Medicaid eligibility as provided for under the federal Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, including: (1) expanding eligibility to individuals earning up to one hundred thirty-eight percent of the federal poverty level; and (2) accessing the enhanced federal match rate of ninety percent for new enrollees. (B) The department shall develop an enrollment plan, fiscal impact report, and implementation timeline within ninety days of the effective date of this article. (C) The department shall submit its report and implementation plan to the General Assembly and the Governor within one hundred twenty days of the effective date of this article.
South Carolina House of Representatives · District 6 · R–SC
1 proposalView proposals from Rep. April CromerSouth Carolina Legislature · HB 3594
Constitutional Carry
Mar 14, 2024 · Enacted
Rep. G. Murrell Smith, Jr. · Sponsored / Rep. Phillip D. Lowe · Sponsored / Rep. Chris Wooten · Sponsored / Rep. David R. Hiott · Sponsored / Rep. William H. Bailey · Sponsored / Rep. Thomas Beach · Sponsored / Rep. James Mikell "Mike" Burns · Sponsored / Rep. Micajah P. "Micah" Caskey IV · Sponsored / Rep. Heather Ammons Crawford · Sponsored / Rep. April Cromer · Sponsored / Sen. Jason Elliott · Sponsored / Rep. Cally R. "Cal" Forrest, Jr. · Sponsored / Rep. Patrick B. Haddon · Sponsored / Rep. Kevin Hardee · Sponsored / Rep. William M. "Bill" Hixon · Sponsored / Rep. Wallace H. "Jay" Jordan, Jr. · Sponsored / Rep. Thomas R. "Randy" Ligon · Sponsored / Rep. Steven Wayne Long · Sponsored / Rep. Josiah Magnuson · Sponsored / Rep. Donald Ryan McCabe, Jr. · Sponsored / Rep. John R. McCravy III · Sponsored / Rep. T. Alan Morgan, Jr. · Sponsored / Rep. Travis A. Moore · Sponsored / Rep. Brandon Newton · Sponsored / Rep. Melissa Lackey Oremus · Sponsored / Rep. Marvin "Mark" Smith · Sponsored / Rep. Bill Taylor · Sponsored / Rep. Mark N. Willis · Sponsored / Rep. Richard L. "Richie" Yow · Sponsored / Rep. M. Brian Lawson · Sponsored / Rep. Donald G. "Don" Chapman · Sponsored / Rep. William M. "Bill" Chumley · Sponsored / Sen. Matthew W. "Matt" Leber · Sponsored / Rep. Jordan S. Pace · Sponsored / Rep. Robert J. "Rob" Harris · Sponsored / Rep. John Gregory "Jay" Kilmartin · Sponsored / Rep. Gary S. Brewer, Jr. · Sponsored / Rep. Robby Robbins · Sponsored / Rep. William "Bill" Hager · Sponsored / Rep. Leon D. "Doug" Gilliam · Sponsored / Rep. Sylleste H. Davis · Sponsored / Rep. Brandon L. Cox · Sponsored / Rep. David Vaughan · Sponsored / Rep. Joseph S. "Joe" White · Sponsored / Rep. Neal A. Collins · Sponsored / Rep. Jeffrey E. "Jeff" Johnson · Sponsored / Rep. Craig A. Gagnon · Sponsored / Rep. Daniel Gibson · Sponsored / Rep. Wm. Weston J. Newton · Sponsored / Rep. Joseph M. "Joe" Bustos · Sponsored / Rep. William G. "Bill" Herbkersman · Sponsored / Rep. Kathy Landing · Sponsored / Rep. Dennis C. Moss · Sponsored / Rep. Thomas E. "Tommy" Pope · Sponsored / Rep. Thomas Duval "Val" Guest, Jr. · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
Allows lawful open or concealed firearm carrying without a permit, retains the permit system, lowers the permit application age to 18, and requires free SLED permit training throughout the state. Other possession and location restrictions remain applicable.
The official record’s latest entry is Act No. 111 (2024-03-14). This records enactment, not present enforceability.
Why this record is included
Firearm mortality includes suicide, homicide, and other intents. The provision concerns firearm access, safety, or prevention of firearm injury and may address only part of the death count. This connection does not establish causation. An action after the measurement period cannot explain an earlier observed value.
Retained South Carolina evidence context: Firearm deaths. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
(2) The availability of a permit to carry a concealable weapon under this section must not be construed to prohibit the permitless transport or carrying of a firearm in a vehicle or on or about one's person, whether openly or concealed, loaded or unloaded, in a manner not prohibited by law. […] (V)(1) The State Law Enforcement Division shall provide a statewide concealed weapon permit training course that satisfies the proof of training requirement for the issuance of a concealed weapon permit. SLED may not charge participants a fee of any kind for the concealed weapon permit training course provided for in this subsection. SLED may contract with private certified concealed weapon permit training class instructors or local law enforcement to provide the course or SLED itself may provide the course. (2) The training course must be offered in every county in South Carolina at least twice per month. If demand exceeds the capacity of the training course in any county, SLED shall provide additional classes until there exists a sufficient number of classes offered at least twice a month to meet the demand for training in each respective county. If SLED is unable to contract with a certified concealed weapon permit training class instructor or local law enforcement in any county, SLED must conduct the training class for that county. […] (D) The State Law Enforcement Division shall develop a document and distribute it to retailers that are federally licensed to engage in the business of dealing in or selling firearms in South Carolina. Such retailers shall provide the document to gun purchasers in South Carolina to inform them that South Carolina law provides a process for gun owners to obtain a concealed weapon permit and allows law-abiding gun owners to carry their weapons without a permit. The document must inform gun purchasers that if a gun owner commits a crime involving a concealable weapon, and the owner does not have a valid concealed weapon permit, then there may be an additional criminal penalty for the underlying offense. […] (A) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, except subject to subsection (B), SLED must issue a permit, which is no larger than three and one-half inches by three inches in size, to carry a concealable weapon to a resident or qualified nonresident who is at least eighteen years of age and who is not prohibited by state law from possessing the weapon upon submission of:
South Carolina House of Representatives · District 78 · D–SC
1 proposalView proposals from Rep. Beth E. BernsteinSouth Carolina Legislature · HB 3587
Criminally negligent storage of firearms
Mar 10, 2025 · Not enacted
Rep. Beth E. Bernstein · Sponsored / Rep. Paula Rawl Calhoon · Sponsored / Rep. Hamilton R. Grant · Sponsored / Rep. Heather Bauer · Sponsored / Rep. Carla M. Schuessler · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
Proposes criminal penalties when negligent firearm storage allows a child to access a loaded firearm, with higher penalties when a discharge causes death or serious injury and specified lawful-use and unlawful-entry defenses.
The official record’s latest entry is Member(s) request name added as sponsor: Schuessler (2025-03-10). No enactment is recorded as of September 6, 2026; a proposed effective date does not establish enactment.
Why this record is included
Firearm mortality includes suicide, homicide, and other intents. The provision concerns firearm access, safety, or prevention of firearm injury and may address only part of the death count. This connection does not establish causation. An action after the measurement period cannot explain an earlier observed value.
Retained South Carolina evidence context: Firearm deaths. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
(1) "Child" means a person younger than eighteen years of age. (2) "Criminal negligence" means the reckless disregard of the safety of others. […] (5) "Readily dischargeable firearm" means a firearm that is loaded with ammunition, whether or not a round is in the chamber. (6) "Secure" means to take steps that a reasonable person would take to prevent a child's access to a readily dischargeable firearm including, but not limited to, placing a firearm in a locked container or temporarily rendering the firearm inoperable by a trigger lock or other means. […] (B) A person commits an offense if a child gains access to a readily dischargeable firearm, and the person, with criminal negligence: (1) failed to secure the firearm; or (2) left the firearm in a manner that the person knew or should have known a child would be able to gain access to the firearm. (C) It is an affirmative defense to prosecution under this section that the child's access to the firearm: (1) was supervised by a person eighteen years of age or older, and was for hunting, sporting, or other lawful purposes; (2) consisted of lawful defense by the child of people or property; or (3) was gained as the result of an unlawful entry by any person. (D)(1) Except as provided in item (2), a person who violates the provisions of this section is guilty of a misdemeanor and, upon conviction, must be fined not more than one thousand dollars or imprisoned for not more than one year, or both. (2) For violations of this section in which the child discharges the firearm and causes death or serious bodily injury to himself or another person, a person who violates the provisions of this section is guilty of a misdemeanor and, upon conviction, must be fined not more than two thousand dollars or imprisoned for not more than three years, or both.
South Carolina House of Representatives · District 86 · R–SC
4 proposalsView proposals from Rep. Bill TaylorSouth Carolina Legislature · HB 3650
Discharging firearms into dwellings and other structures
May 26, 2026 · Enacted
Rep. G. Murrell Smith, Jr. · Sponsored / Rep. Chris Wooten · Sponsored / Rep. Thomas E. "Tommy" Pope · Sponsored / Rep. Donald G. "Don" Chapman · Sponsored / Rep. Wm. Weston J. Newton · Sponsored / Rep. William H. Bailey · Sponsored / Rep. Robby Robbins · Sponsored / Rep. Heather Ammons Crawford · Sponsored / Rep. Thomas Duval "Val" Guest, Jr. · Sponsored / Rep. Micajah P. "Micah" Caskey IV · Sponsored / Rep. Cally R. "Cal" Forrest, Jr. · Sponsored / Rep. Brandon Newton · Sponsored / Rep. William M. "Bill" Hixon · Sponsored / Rep. Bill Taylor · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
Revises offenses and penalties for deliberately or recklessly firing into regularly occupied structures or occupied vehicles, including enhanced penalties when someone is struck or injured. The text preserves specified defense and hunting exceptions. Assault-related conduct is only one component of reported violent crime.
The official record’s latest entry is Act No. 138 (2026-05-26). This records enactment, not present enforceability.
Why this record is included
Firearm mortality includes suicide, homicide, and other intents. The provision concerns firearm access, safety, or prevention of firearm injury and may address only part of the death count. This connection does not establish causation. An action after the measurement period cannot explain an earlier observed value.
Retained South Carolina evidence context: Firearm deaths. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
Section 16-23-440. (A) It is unlawful for a person to knowingly, unlawfully and deliberately or with a reckless disregard for life discharge or cause to be discharged firearms at or into a dwelling house, other building, structure, or enclosure regularly occupied by persons unless it is in defense of that person's own property or the life of himself or another as provided in Title 16, Chapter 11, Article 6. A person need not have a specific intent to strike a dwelling house, other building, structure, or enclosure regularly occupied by persons to be guilty under this section. A person who violates the provisions of this subsection is guilty of a felony and, upon conviction, must be fined not more than: (1) twenty thousand dollars and imprisoned not more than ten years; and (2) fifty thousand dollars and imprisoned not more than fifteen years when any occupant is struck or bodily injury occurs as a proximate cause of the discharge of a firearm. (B) It is unlawful for a person to knowingly, unlawfully and deliberately or with a reckless disregard for life discharge or cause to be discharged firearms at or into any vehicle, aircraft, watercraft, or other conveyance, device, or equipment while it is occupied unless it is in defense of that person's own property or the life of himself or another as provided in Title 16, Chapter 11, Article 6. A person need not have a specific intent to strike a vehicle, aircraft, watercraft, or other conveyance, device, or equipment while it is occupied by persons to be guilty under this section. For purposes of this section an unmanned aerial vehicle shall not constitute an aircraft. A person who violates the provisions of this subsection is guilty of a felony and, upon conviction, must be fined not more than: (1) twenty thousand dollars and imprisoned not more than ten years; and (2) fifty thousand dollars and imprisoned not more than fifteen years when any occupant is struck or bodily injury occurs as a proximate cause of the discharge of a firearm. (C) A person who discharges or causes to be discharged a firearm in a criminally negligent manner while in preparation for, engaged in the act of, or returning from hunting, in violation of Section 50-1-85, cannot be charged with a violation of this section. Nothing however herein prohibits the charging of a violation under any other applicable section.
Rep. G. Murrell Smith, Jr. · Sponsored / Rep. Phillip D. Lowe · Sponsored / Rep. Chris Wooten · Sponsored / Rep. David R. Hiott · Sponsored / Rep. William H. Bailey · Sponsored / Rep. Thomas Beach · Sponsored / Rep. James Mikell "Mike" Burns · Sponsored / Rep. Micajah P. "Micah" Caskey IV · Sponsored / Rep. Heather Ammons Crawford · Sponsored / Rep. April Cromer · Sponsored / Sen. Jason Elliott · Sponsored / Rep. Cally R. "Cal" Forrest, Jr. · Sponsored / Rep. Patrick B. Haddon · Sponsored / Rep. Kevin Hardee · Sponsored / Rep. William M. "Bill" Hixon · Sponsored / Rep. Wallace H. "Jay" Jordan, Jr. · Sponsored / Rep. Thomas R. "Randy" Ligon · Sponsored / Rep. Steven Wayne Long · Sponsored / Rep. Josiah Magnuson · Sponsored / Rep. Donald Ryan McCabe, Jr. · Sponsored / Rep. John R. McCravy III · Sponsored / Rep. T. Alan Morgan, Jr. · Sponsored / Rep. Travis A. Moore · Sponsored / Rep. Brandon Newton · Sponsored / Rep. Melissa Lackey Oremus · Sponsored / Rep. Marvin "Mark" Smith · Sponsored / Rep. Bill Taylor · Sponsored / Rep. Mark N. Willis · Sponsored / Rep. Richard L. "Richie" Yow · Sponsored / Rep. M. Brian Lawson · Sponsored / Rep. Donald G. "Don" Chapman · Sponsored / Rep. William M. "Bill" Chumley · Sponsored / Sen. Matthew W. "Matt" Leber · Sponsored / Rep. Jordan S. Pace · Sponsored / Rep. Robert J. "Rob" Harris · Sponsored / Rep. John Gregory "Jay" Kilmartin · Sponsored / Rep. Gary S. Brewer, Jr. · Sponsored / Rep. Robby Robbins · Sponsored / Rep. William "Bill" Hager · Sponsored / Rep. Leon D. "Doug" Gilliam · Sponsored / Rep. Sylleste H. Davis · Sponsored / Rep. Brandon L. Cox · Sponsored / Rep. David Vaughan · Sponsored / Rep. Joseph S. "Joe" White · Sponsored / Rep. Neal A. Collins · Sponsored / Rep. Jeffrey E. "Jeff" Johnson · Sponsored / Rep. Craig A. Gagnon · Sponsored / Rep. Daniel Gibson · Sponsored / Rep. Wm. Weston J. Newton · Sponsored / Rep. Joseph M. "Joe" Bustos · Sponsored / Rep. William G. "Bill" Herbkersman · Sponsored / Rep. Kathy Landing · Sponsored / Rep. Dennis C. Moss · Sponsored / Rep. Thomas E. "Tommy" Pope · Sponsored / Rep. Thomas Duval "Val" Guest, Jr. · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
Allows lawful open or concealed firearm carrying without a permit, retains the permit system, lowers the permit application age to 18, and requires free SLED permit training throughout the state. Other possession and location restrictions remain applicable.
The official record’s latest entry is Act No. 111 (2024-03-14). This records enactment, not present enforceability.
Why this record is included
Firearm mortality includes suicide, homicide, and other intents. The provision concerns firearm access, safety, or prevention of firearm injury and may address only part of the death count. This connection does not establish causation. An action after the measurement period cannot explain an earlier observed value.
Retained South Carolina evidence context: Firearm deaths. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
(2) The availability of a permit to carry a concealable weapon under this section must not be construed to prohibit the permitless transport or carrying of a firearm in a vehicle or on or about one's person, whether openly or concealed, loaded or unloaded, in a manner not prohibited by law. […] (V)(1) The State Law Enforcement Division shall provide a statewide concealed weapon permit training course that satisfies the proof of training requirement for the issuance of a concealed weapon permit. SLED may not charge participants a fee of any kind for the concealed weapon permit training course provided for in this subsection. SLED may contract with private certified concealed weapon permit training class instructors or local law enforcement to provide the course or SLED itself may provide the course. (2) The training course must be offered in every county in South Carolina at least twice per month. If demand exceeds the capacity of the training course in any county, SLED shall provide additional classes until there exists a sufficient number of classes offered at least twice a month to meet the demand for training in each respective county. If SLED is unable to contract with a certified concealed weapon permit training class instructor or local law enforcement in any county, SLED must conduct the training class for that county. […] (D) The State Law Enforcement Division shall develop a document and distribute it to retailers that are federally licensed to engage in the business of dealing in or selling firearms in South Carolina. Such retailers shall provide the document to gun purchasers in South Carolina to inform them that South Carolina law provides a process for gun owners to obtain a concealed weapon permit and allows law-abiding gun owners to carry their weapons without a permit. The document must inform gun purchasers that if a gun owner commits a crime involving a concealable weapon, and the owner does not have a valid concealed weapon permit, then there may be an additional criminal penalty for the underlying offense. […] (A) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, except subject to subsection (B), SLED must issue a permit, which is no larger than three and one-half inches by three inches in size, to carry a concealable weapon to a resident or qualified nonresident who is at least eighteen years of age and who is not prohibited by state law from possessing the weapon upon submission of:
Rep. James Mikell "Mike" Burns · Sponsored / Rep. William M. "Bill" Chumley · Sponsored / Rep. Josiah Magnuson · Sponsored / Rep. Bill Taylor · Sponsored / Rep. Patrick B. Haddon · Sponsored / Rep. Steven Wayne Long · Sponsored / Rep. Cally R. "Cal" Forrest, Jr. · Sponsored / Rep. Donald Ryan McCabe, Jr. · Sponsored / Rep. Melissa Lackey Oremus · Sponsored / Rep. Marvin "Mark" Smith · Sponsored / Rep. Chris Wooten · Sponsored / Rep. Nathan Ballentine · Sponsored / Rep. Joseph M. "Joe" Bustos · Sponsored / Sen. Jason Elliott · Sponsored / Rep. Mark N. Willis · Sponsored / Rep. John R. McCravy III · Sponsored / Rep. Travis A. Moore · Sponsored / Rep. William M. "Bill" Hixon · Sponsored / Rep. Sylleste H. Davis · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
Provides unemployment-benefit eligibility for state or local-government employees when a federal COVID-19 vaccination mandate requires termination to avoid forfeiting federal funds, subject to ordinary benefit requirements. It also prohibits vaccination-based compensation reductions for specified first responders.
The official record’s latest entry is Act No. 142 (2022-05-02). This records enactment, not present enforceability.
Why this record is included
Wages and cash benefits can be components of household money income. Census income is measured before taxes, so tax relief alone is not an increase in this statistic; the provision does not determine the statewide median. This connection does not establish causation. An action after the measurement period cannot explain an earlier observed value.
Retained South Carolina evidence context: Median household income. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
(B) If the State or any political subdivision thereof, including a school district, is subject to a federal requirement that would lead to the forfeiture of federal funds due to a failure to require employees, independent contractors, or nonemployee vendors to receive a COVID-19 vaccination: (1) the employer may require an unvaccinated employee, independent contractor, or nonemployee vendor to undergo weekly COVID-19 testing if the federal requirement allows for testing as an alternative to vaccination; or (2) the employee is eligible for unemployment benefits subject to the benefit amounts, duration, and requirements as provided in Article 1, Chapter 35, Title 41 if the federal mandate gives the employer no alternative to terminating the employee without forfeiting federal funds. […] "Section 8-15-80. (A) Neither the State, nor any of its political subdivisions, may terminate, suspend, or otherwise reduce the compensation of a person employed as a first responder if the first responder does not undergo a COVID-19 vaccination.
Rep. James Mikell "Mike" Burns · Sponsored / Rep. Micajah P. "Micah" Caskey IV · Sponsored / Rep. William M. "Bill" Chumley · Sponsored / Rep. Neal A. Collins · Sponsored / Rep. Heather Ammons Crawford · Sponsored / Rep. Sylleste H. Davis · Sponsored / Sen. Jason Elliott · Sponsored / Rep. Shannon S. Erickson · Sponsored / Rep. Cally R. "Cal" Forrest, Jr. · Sponsored / Rep. Craig A. Gagnon · Sponsored / Rep. Gil Gatch · Sponsored / Rep. Leon D. "Doug" Gilliam · Sponsored / Rep. Patrick B. Haddon · Sponsored / Rep. Kevin Hardee · Sponsored / Rep. Lee Hewitt · Sponsored / Rep. David R. Hiott · Sponsored / Rep. William M. "Bill" Hixon · Sponsored / Rep. Wallace H. "Jay" Jordan, Jr. · Sponsored / Rep. Thomas R. "Randy" Ligon · Sponsored / Rep. Steven Wayne Long · Sponsored / Rep. Josiah Magnuson · Sponsored / Rep. John R. McCravy III · Sponsored / Rep. Brandon Newton · Sponsored / Rep. Wm. Weston J. Newton · Sponsored / Rep. Melissa Lackey Oremus · Sponsored / Rep. Thomas E. "Tommy" Pope · Sponsored / Rep. G. Murrell Smith, Jr. · Sponsored / Rep. Marvin "Mark" Smith · Sponsored / Rep. Bill Taylor · Sponsored / Rep. William R. "Bill" Whitmire · Sponsored / Rep. Mark N. Willis · Sponsored / Rep. Chris Wooten · Sponsored / Rep. Richard L. "Richie" Yow · Sponsored / Rep. Donald Ryan McCabe, Jr. · Sponsored / Rep. Lonnie Hosey · Sponsored / Rep. Travis A. Moore · Sponsored / Rep. William H. Bailey · Sponsored / Rep. Phillip D. Lowe · Sponsored / Rep. Lucas Atkinson · Sponsored / Rep. Jeffrey E. "Jeff" Johnson · Sponsored / Rep. T. Case Brittain, Jr. · Sponsored / Rep. Timothy A. "Tim" McGinnis · Sponsored / Rep. Jeff Bradley · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
Historically allowed holders of valid concealed-weapon permits to carry openly, while preserving specified employer and property-owner restrictions. Later permitless-carry legislation is a separate action.
The official record’s latest entry is Act No. 66 (2021-06-01). This records enactment, not present enforceability.
Why this record is included
Firearm mortality includes suicide, homicide, and other intents. The provision concerns firearm access, safety, or prevention of firearm injury and may address only part of the death count. This connection does not establish causation. An action after the measurement period cannot explain an earlier observed value.
Retained South Carolina evidence context: Firearm deaths. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
"(5) 'Concealable weapon' means a firearm having a length of less than twelve inches measured along its greatest dimension that may be carried openly on one's person or in a manner that is hidden from public view in normal wear of clothing except when needed for self defense, defense of others, and the protection of real or personal property." […] (b) carried openly or concealed on or about his person, and he has a valid concealed weapons permit pursuant to the provisions of Article 4, Chapter 31, Title 23;" […] (1) the right of a public or private employer to prohibit a person who is licensed under this article from carrying a concealable weapon, whether concealed or openly carried, upon the premises of the business or work place or while using any machinery, vehicle, or equipment owned or operated by the business; (2) the right of a private property owner or person in legal possession or control to allow or prohibit the carrying of a concealable weapon, whether concealed or openly carried, upon his premises. (B) The posting by the employer, owner, or person in legal possession or control of a sign stating 'NO CONCEALABLE WEAPONS ALLOWED' shall constitute notice to a person holding a permit issued pursuant to this article that the employer, owner, or person in legal possession or control requests that concealable weapons, whether concealed or openly carried, not be brought upon the premises or into the work place. A person who brings a concealable weapon, whether concealed or openly carried, onto the premises or work place in violation of the provisions of this paragraph may be charged with a violation of Section 16-11-620. In addition to the penalties provided in Section 16-11-620, a person convicted of a second or subsequent violation of the provisions of this paragraph must have his permit revoked for a period of one year. The prohibition contained in this section does not apply to persons specified in Section 16-23-20, item (1).
South Carolina House of Representatives · District 92 · R–SC
1 proposalView proposals from Rep. Brandon L. CoxSouth Carolina Legislature · HB 3594
Constitutional Carry
Mar 14, 2024 · Enacted
Rep. G. Murrell Smith, Jr. · Sponsored / Rep. Phillip D. Lowe · Sponsored / Rep. Chris Wooten · Sponsored / Rep. David R. Hiott · Sponsored / Rep. William H. Bailey · Sponsored / Rep. Thomas Beach · Sponsored / Rep. James Mikell "Mike" Burns · Sponsored / Rep. Micajah P. "Micah" Caskey IV · Sponsored / Rep. Heather Ammons Crawford · Sponsored / Rep. April Cromer · Sponsored / Sen. Jason Elliott · Sponsored / Rep. Cally R. "Cal" Forrest, Jr. · Sponsored / Rep. Patrick B. Haddon · Sponsored / Rep. Kevin Hardee · Sponsored / Rep. William M. "Bill" Hixon · Sponsored / Rep. Wallace H. "Jay" Jordan, Jr. · Sponsored / Rep. Thomas R. "Randy" Ligon · Sponsored / Rep. Steven Wayne Long · Sponsored / Rep. Josiah Magnuson · Sponsored / Rep. Donald Ryan McCabe, Jr. · Sponsored / Rep. John R. McCravy III · Sponsored / Rep. T. Alan Morgan, Jr. · Sponsored / Rep. Travis A. Moore · Sponsored / Rep. Brandon Newton · Sponsored / Rep. Melissa Lackey Oremus · Sponsored / Rep. Marvin "Mark" Smith · Sponsored / Rep. Bill Taylor · Sponsored / Rep. Mark N. Willis · Sponsored / Rep. Richard L. "Richie" Yow · Sponsored / Rep. M. Brian Lawson · Sponsored / Rep. Donald G. "Don" Chapman · Sponsored / Rep. William M. "Bill" Chumley · Sponsored / Sen. Matthew W. "Matt" Leber · Sponsored / Rep. Jordan S. Pace · Sponsored / Rep. Robert J. "Rob" Harris · Sponsored / Rep. John Gregory "Jay" Kilmartin · Sponsored / Rep. Gary S. Brewer, Jr. · Sponsored / Rep. Robby Robbins · Sponsored / Rep. William "Bill" Hager · Sponsored / Rep. Leon D. "Doug" Gilliam · Sponsored / Rep. Sylleste H. Davis · Sponsored / Rep. Brandon L. Cox · Sponsored / Rep. David Vaughan · Sponsored / Rep. Joseph S. "Joe" White · Sponsored / Rep. Neal A. Collins · Sponsored / Rep. Jeffrey E. "Jeff" Johnson · Sponsored / Rep. Craig A. Gagnon · Sponsored / Rep. Daniel Gibson · Sponsored / Rep. Wm. Weston J. Newton · Sponsored / Rep. Joseph M. "Joe" Bustos · Sponsored / Rep. William G. "Bill" Herbkersman · Sponsored / Rep. Kathy Landing · Sponsored / Rep. Dennis C. Moss · Sponsored / Rep. Thomas E. "Tommy" Pope · Sponsored / Rep. Thomas Duval "Val" Guest, Jr. · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
Allows lawful open or concealed firearm carrying without a permit, retains the permit system, lowers the permit application age to 18, and requires free SLED permit training throughout the state. Other possession and location restrictions remain applicable.
The official record’s latest entry is Act No. 111 (2024-03-14). This records enactment, not present enforceability.
Why this record is included
Firearm mortality includes suicide, homicide, and other intents. The provision concerns firearm access, safety, or prevention of firearm injury and may address only part of the death count. This connection does not establish causation. An action after the measurement period cannot explain an earlier observed value.
Retained South Carolina evidence context: Firearm deaths. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
(2) The availability of a permit to carry a concealable weapon under this section must not be construed to prohibit the permitless transport or carrying of a firearm in a vehicle or on or about one's person, whether openly or concealed, loaded or unloaded, in a manner not prohibited by law. […] (V)(1) The State Law Enforcement Division shall provide a statewide concealed weapon permit training course that satisfies the proof of training requirement for the issuance of a concealed weapon permit. SLED may not charge participants a fee of any kind for the concealed weapon permit training course provided for in this subsection. SLED may contract with private certified concealed weapon permit training class instructors or local law enforcement to provide the course or SLED itself may provide the course. (2) The training course must be offered in every county in South Carolina at least twice per month. If demand exceeds the capacity of the training course in any county, SLED shall provide additional classes until there exists a sufficient number of classes offered at least twice a month to meet the demand for training in each respective county. If SLED is unable to contract with a certified concealed weapon permit training class instructor or local law enforcement in any county, SLED must conduct the training class for that county. […] (D) The State Law Enforcement Division shall develop a document and distribute it to retailers that are federally licensed to engage in the business of dealing in or selling firearms in South Carolina. Such retailers shall provide the document to gun purchasers in South Carolina to inform them that South Carolina law provides a process for gun owners to obtain a concealed weapon permit and allows law-abiding gun owners to carry their weapons without a permit. The document must inform gun purchasers that if a gun owner commits a crime involving a concealable weapon, and the owner does not have a valid concealed weapon permit, then there may be an additional criminal penalty for the underlying offense. […] (A) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, except subject to subsection (B), SLED must issue a permit, which is no larger than three and one-half inches by three inches in size, to carry a concealable weapon to a resident or qualified nonresident who is at least eighteen years of age and who is not prohibited by state law from possessing the weapon upon submission of:
Discharging firearms into dwellings and other structures
May 26, 2026 · Enacted
Rep. G. Murrell Smith, Jr. · Sponsored / Rep. Chris Wooten · Sponsored / Rep. Thomas E. "Tommy" Pope · Sponsored / Rep. Donald G. "Don" Chapman · Sponsored / Rep. Wm. Weston J. Newton · Sponsored / Rep. William H. Bailey · Sponsored / Rep. Robby Robbins · Sponsored / Rep. Heather Ammons Crawford · Sponsored / Rep. Thomas Duval "Val" Guest, Jr. · Sponsored / Rep. Micajah P. "Micah" Caskey IV · Sponsored / Rep. Cally R. "Cal" Forrest, Jr. · Sponsored / Rep. Brandon Newton · Sponsored / Rep. William M. "Bill" Hixon · Sponsored / Rep. Bill Taylor · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
Revises offenses and penalties for deliberately or recklessly firing into regularly occupied structures or occupied vehicles, including enhanced penalties when someone is struck or injured. The text preserves specified defense and hunting exceptions. Assault-related conduct is only one component of reported violent crime.
The official record’s latest entry is Act No. 138 (2026-05-26). This records enactment, not present enforceability.
Why this record is included
Firearm mortality includes suicide, homicide, and other intents. The provision concerns firearm access, safety, or prevention of firearm injury and may address only part of the death count. This connection does not establish causation. An action after the measurement period cannot explain an earlier observed value.
Retained South Carolina evidence context: Firearm deaths. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
Section 16-23-440. (A) It is unlawful for a person to knowingly, unlawfully and deliberately or with a reckless disregard for life discharge or cause to be discharged firearms at or into a dwelling house, other building, structure, or enclosure regularly occupied by persons unless it is in defense of that person's own property or the life of himself or another as provided in Title 16, Chapter 11, Article 6. A person need not have a specific intent to strike a dwelling house, other building, structure, or enclosure regularly occupied by persons to be guilty under this section. A person who violates the provisions of this subsection is guilty of a felony and, upon conviction, must be fined not more than: (1) twenty thousand dollars and imprisoned not more than ten years; and (2) fifty thousand dollars and imprisoned not more than fifteen years when any occupant is struck or bodily injury occurs as a proximate cause of the discharge of a firearm. (B) It is unlawful for a person to knowingly, unlawfully and deliberately or with a reckless disregard for life discharge or cause to be discharged firearms at or into any vehicle, aircraft, watercraft, or other conveyance, device, or equipment while it is occupied unless it is in defense of that person's own property or the life of himself or another as provided in Title 16, Chapter 11, Article 6. A person need not have a specific intent to strike a vehicle, aircraft, watercraft, or other conveyance, device, or equipment while it is occupied by persons to be guilty under this section. For purposes of this section an unmanned aerial vehicle shall not constitute an aircraft. A person who violates the provisions of this subsection is guilty of a felony and, upon conviction, must be fined not more than: (1) twenty thousand dollars and imprisoned not more than ten years; and (2) fifty thousand dollars and imprisoned not more than fifteen years when any occupant is struck or bodily injury occurs as a proximate cause of the discharge of a firearm. (C) A person who discharges or causes to be discharged a firearm in a criminally negligent manner while in preparation for, engaged in the act of, or returning from hunting, in violation of Section 50-1-85, cannot be charged with a violation of this section. Nothing however herein prohibits the charging of a violation under any other applicable section.
Rep. G. Murrell Smith, Jr. · Sponsored / Rep. Phillip D. Lowe · Sponsored / Rep. Chris Wooten · Sponsored / Rep. David R. Hiott · Sponsored / Rep. William H. Bailey · Sponsored / Rep. Thomas Beach · Sponsored / Rep. James Mikell "Mike" Burns · Sponsored / Rep. Micajah P. "Micah" Caskey IV · Sponsored / Rep. Heather Ammons Crawford · Sponsored / Rep. April Cromer · Sponsored / Sen. Jason Elliott · Sponsored / Rep. Cally R. "Cal" Forrest, Jr. · Sponsored / Rep. Patrick B. Haddon · Sponsored / Rep. Kevin Hardee · Sponsored / Rep. William M. "Bill" Hixon · Sponsored / Rep. Wallace H. "Jay" Jordan, Jr. · Sponsored / Rep. Thomas R. "Randy" Ligon · Sponsored / Rep. Steven Wayne Long · Sponsored / Rep. Josiah Magnuson · Sponsored / Rep. Donald Ryan McCabe, Jr. · Sponsored / Rep. John R. McCravy III · Sponsored / Rep. T. Alan Morgan, Jr. · Sponsored / Rep. Travis A. Moore · Sponsored / Rep. Brandon Newton · Sponsored / Rep. Melissa Lackey Oremus · Sponsored / Rep. Marvin "Mark" Smith · Sponsored / Rep. Bill Taylor · Sponsored / Rep. Mark N. Willis · Sponsored / Rep. Richard L. "Richie" Yow · Sponsored / Rep. M. Brian Lawson · Sponsored / Rep. Donald G. "Don" Chapman · Sponsored / Rep. William M. "Bill" Chumley · Sponsored / Sen. Matthew W. "Matt" Leber · Sponsored / Rep. Jordan S. Pace · Sponsored / Rep. Robert J. "Rob" Harris · Sponsored / Rep. John Gregory "Jay" Kilmartin · Sponsored / Rep. Gary S. Brewer, Jr. · Sponsored / Rep. Robby Robbins · Sponsored / Rep. William "Bill" Hager · Sponsored / Rep. Leon D. "Doug" Gilliam · Sponsored / Rep. Sylleste H. Davis · Sponsored / Rep. Brandon L. Cox · Sponsored / Rep. David Vaughan · Sponsored / Rep. Joseph S. "Joe" White · Sponsored / Rep. Neal A. Collins · Sponsored / Rep. Jeffrey E. "Jeff" Johnson · Sponsored / Rep. Craig A. Gagnon · Sponsored / Rep. Daniel Gibson · Sponsored / Rep. Wm. Weston J. Newton · Sponsored / Rep. Joseph M. "Joe" Bustos · Sponsored / Rep. William G. "Bill" Herbkersman · Sponsored / Rep. Kathy Landing · Sponsored / Rep. Dennis C. Moss · Sponsored / Rep. Thomas E. "Tommy" Pope · Sponsored / Rep. Thomas Duval "Val" Guest, Jr. · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
Allows lawful open or concealed firearm carrying without a permit, retains the permit system, lowers the permit application age to 18, and requires free SLED permit training throughout the state. Other possession and location restrictions remain applicable.
The official record’s latest entry is Act No. 111 (2024-03-14). This records enactment, not present enforceability.
Why this record is included
Firearm mortality includes suicide, homicide, and other intents. The provision concerns firearm access, safety, or prevention of firearm injury and may address only part of the death count. This connection does not establish causation. An action after the measurement period cannot explain an earlier observed value.
Retained South Carolina evidence context: Firearm deaths. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
(2) The availability of a permit to carry a concealable weapon under this section must not be construed to prohibit the permitless transport or carrying of a firearm in a vehicle or on or about one's person, whether openly or concealed, loaded or unloaded, in a manner not prohibited by law. […] (V)(1) The State Law Enforcement Division shall provide a statewide concealed weapon permit training course that satisfies the proof of training requirement for the issuance of a concealed weapon permit. SLED may not charge participants a fee of any kind for the concealed weapon permit training course provided for in this subsection. SLED may contract with private certified concealed weapon permit training class instructors or local law enforcement to provide the course or SLED itself may provide the course. (2) The training course must be offered in every county in South Carolina at least twice per month. If demand exceeds the capacity of the training course in any county, SLED shall provide additional classes until there exists a sufficient number of classes offered at least twice a month to meet the demand for training in each respective county. If SLED is unable to contract with a certified concealed weapon permit training class instructor or local law enforcement in any county, SLED must conduct the training class for that county. […] (D) The State Law Enforcement Division shall develop a document and distribute it to retailers that are federally licensed to engage in the business of dealing in or selling firearms in South Carolina. Such retailers shall provide the document to gun purchasers in South Carolina to inform them that South Carolina law provides a process for gun owners to obtain a concealed weapon permit and allows law-abiding gun owners to carry their weapons without a permit. The document must inform gun purchasers that if a gun owner commits a crime involving a concealable weapon, and the owner does not have a valid concealed weapon permit, then there may be an additional criminal penalty for the underlying offense. […] (A) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, except subject to subsection (B), SLED must issue a permit, which is no larger than three and one-half inches by three inches in size, to carry a concealable weapon to a resident or qualified nonresident who is at least eighteen years of age and who is not prohibited by state law from possessing the weapon upon submission of:
Rep. James Mikell "Mike" Burns · Sponsored / Rep. Micajah P. "Micah" Caskey IV · Sponsored / Rep. William M. "Bill" Chumley · Sponsored / Rep. Neal A. Collins · Sponsored / Rep. Heather Ammons Crawford · Sponsored / Rep. Sylleste H. Davis · Sponsored / Sen. Jason Elliott · Sponsored / Rep. Shannon S. Erickson · Sponsored / Rep. Cally R. "Cal" Forrest, Jr. · Sponsored / Rep. Craig A. Gagnon · Sponsored / Rep. Gil Gatch · Sponsored / Rep. Leon D. "Doug" Gilliam · Sponsored / Rep. Patrick B. Haddon · Sponsored / Rep. Kevin Hardee · Sponsored / Rep. Lee Hewitt · Sponsored / Rep. David R. Hiott · Sponsored / Rep. William M. "Bill" Hixon · Sponsored / Rep. Wallace H. "Jay" Jordan, Jr. · Sponsored / Rep. Thomas R. "Randy" Ligon · Sponsored / Rep. Steven Wayne Long · Sponsored / Rep. Josiah Magnuson · Sponsored / Rep. John R. McCravy III · Sponsored / Rep. Brandon Newton · Sponsored / Rep. Wm. Weston J. Newton · Sponsored / Rep. Melissa Lackey Oremus · Sponsored / Rep. Thomas E. "Tommy" Pope · Sponsored / Rep. G. Murrell Smith, Jr. · Sponsored / Rep. Marvin "Mark" Smith · Sponsored / Rep. Bill Taylor · Sponsored / Rep. William R. "Bill" Whitmire · Sponsored / Rep. Mark N. Willis · Sponsored / Rep. Chris Wooten · Sponsored / Rep. Richard L. "Richie" Yow · Sponsored / Rep. Donald Ryan McCabe, Jr. · Sponsored / Rep. Lonnie Hosey · Sponsored / Rep. Travis A. Moore · Sponsored / Rep. William H. Bailey · Sponsored / Rep. Phillip D. Lowe · Sponsored / Rep. Lucas Atkinson · Sponsored / Rep. Jeffrey E. "Jeff" Johnson · Sponsored / Rep. T. Case Brittain, Jr. · Sponsored / Rep. Timothy A. "Tim" McGinnis · Sponsored / Rep. Jeff Bradley · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
Historically allowed holders of valid concealed-weapon permits to carry openly, while preserving specified employer and property-owner restrictions. Later permitless-carry legislation is a separate action.
The official record’s latest entry is Act No. 66 (2021-06-01). This records enactment, not present enforceability.
Why this record is included
Firearm mortality includes suicide, homicide, and other intents. The provision concerns firearm access, safety, or prevention of firearm injury and may address only part of the death count. This connection does not establish causation. An action after the measurement period cannot explain an earlier observed value.
Retained South Carolina evidence context: Firearm deaths. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
"(5) 'Concealable weapon' means a firearm having a length of less than twelve inches measured along its greatest dimension that may be carried openly on one's person or in a manner that is hidden from public view in normal wear of clothing except when needed for self defense, defense of others, and the protection of real or personal property." […] (b) carried openly or concealed on or about his person, and he has a valid concealed weapons permit pursuant to the provisions of Article 4, Chapter 31, Title 23;" […] (1) the right of a public or private employer to prohibit a person who is licensed under this article from carrying a concealable weapon, whether concealed or openly carried, upon the premises of the business or work place or while using any machinery, vehicle, or equipment owned or operated by the business; (2) the right of a private property owner or person in legal possession or control to allow or prohibit the carrying of a concealable weapon, whether concealed or openly carried, upon his premises. (B) The posting by the employer, owner, or person in legal possession or control of a sign stating 'NO CONCEALABLE WEAPONS ALLOWED' shall constitute notice to a person holding a permit issued pursuant to this article that the employer, owner, or person in legal possession or control requests that concealable weapons, whether concealed or openly carried, not be brought upon the premises or into the work place. A person who brings a concealable weapon, whether concealed or openly carried, onto the premises or work place in violation of the provisions of this paragraph may be charged with a violation of Section 16-11-620. In addition to the penalties provided in Section 16-11-620, a person convicted of a second or subsequent violation of the provisions of this paragraph must have his permit revoked for a period of one year. The prohibition contained in this section does not apply to persons specified in Section 16-23-20, item (1).
Only current South Carolina officeholders retained in the reviewed collection qualify. Bills require a recorded primary sponsorship; cosponsors and signing officials are excluded from sponsorship counts. An official introducer recorded as acting by request is labeled “Introduced by request”; that procedural role does not establish personal policy endorsement. Governor and agency records qualify when recorded as proposed. A separately verified governor transmittal can also establish an original proposal whose latest status reflects its later outcome. Signing an enacted law alone does not establish a proposal. A record appearing under several facts is counted once per officeholder. A bill with multiple primary sponsors appears under each recorded sponsor.
Enacted bills, adopted resolutions and unsuccessful measures remain visible as proposal history. Passing one chamber is not enactment. These counts do not measure effectiveness or prove that an action changed a South Carolina statistic. Collection reviewed Oct 6, 2026.
Sources & methods
Every section retains its primary sources, units, reporting periods and comparison limits. Maps, graphs and tables use the same observation and cohort. All 50 states are listed; D.C. and territories are excluded. Missing and suppressed values remain unavailable and never become zero.
#1 is the highest measured value. Equal source values share a rank and leave gaps (1, 2, 2, 4). Ranks use source precision and are descriptive, not a score of the state. Survey uncertainty and reporting coverage can limit comparisons. Published U.S. benchmarks are used where available; a state average is not substituted.
South Carolina snapshots and fiscal sources keep their own dates and accounting scope. National events and federal distribution explainers describe national context. Actions and statements are filtered to South Carolina, retain their reviewed evidence, and do not establish that a policy caused a measured change.
Retained state source collections assembled October 5, 2026. Original review and source dates remain visible. Refreshing this page does not refresh an official data release.