The Conservative Argument for Reforming South Carolina’s Eviction System

Felicity Ropp
SCHC 330

INTRODUCTION

When one pictures the policymakers and advocates who prioritize policies to reduce
evictions and combat homelessness, only the most left-wing actors come to mind. Almost
exclusively, the Democratic Party has held “issue ownership” over issues like poverty and
homelessness. The political science theory of issue ownership says that one political party can be
perceived as better able to address and solve certain problems than the other party, and this
impacts how parties, candidates, policymakers, and voters behave and speak.1 In this case,
ownership of the issue of poverty affects both Democrat and Republican candidates’ rhetoric and
policies, and any voters who care about poverty issues or have experience with evictions will
naturally gravitate toward voting Democrat.2

Why does this matter? It means that Republicans are not even a part of the conversation
on poverty in the United States, except as a naysayer to Democrats’ left-wing policies. The Party
does not offer alternatives to Democrats’ plans or compromise on common-sense solutions that
both parties can support. Donald Trump brought a more populist vision to the GOP and rallied a
coalition of voters that looks very different than the business-class conservatives of Bush and
Reagan—these are voters who have experienced economic hardships, known the pain of
deindustrialization, and felt neglected by traditional Republican rhetoric. The Party has been
losing the battle to turn out those voters in any election where Donald Trump is not on the ballot;
the 2022 and 2018 midterms were disastrous for the GOP. I firmly believe that if the GOP wants
electoral success and wants to move into a post-Trump era, the Party must take ownership of
conversations around poverty, drive the conversation away from the shameful racist dog-whistles
that have characterized Republicans’ poverty rhetoric since Nixon, and champion thoughtful
alternatives to left-wing policies.

With this paper, I aim to offer a small contribution toward this effort, targeted at the
General Assembly here in my home state of South Carolina. I focus particularly on common-
sense policies to reduce evictions in the state, as the data indicates that eviction reduction is key
to fighting homelessness and poverty. South Carolina has, in recent years, gained national
attention for our extremely high eviction rates, which create ripples throughout the economic and
social fabric of the state. My hope is that this paper will inform conservative lawmakers and
activists on the importance of this issue and spur them to action in upcoming legislative sessions.

1
John R. Petrocik, “Issue Ownership in Presidential Elections, with a 1980 Case Study,” American Journal of
Political Science 40, no. 3 (1996): 825–50, https://doi.org/10.2307/2111797.
2
For further research on issue ownership and framing of poverty/welfare issues, refer to the following: Shanto
Iyengar, “Framing Responsibility for Political Issues: The Case of Poverty,” Political Behavior 12, no. 1 (March
1990): 19–40, https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00992330; Martín Carcasson, “Ending Welfare as We Know It: President
Clinton and the Rhetorical Transformation of the Anti-Welfare Culture,” Rhetoric and Public Affairs 9, no. 4
(2006): 655–92.
THE PROBLEM

Eviction refers to a landlord’s ability to eject the tenant of a non-commercial rental

property through legal means and termination of a lease. This process is governed by South
Carolina’s Residential Landlord and Tenant Act (S.C. Code § 27-40-710), which outlines the
allowable reasons for evictions: nonpayment of rent, breach of the terms of the rental agreement,
failure of the tenant to maintain the dwelling unit in a healthy and safe manner, abandonment of
rental unit, or when the lease has elapsed.3 I do want to emphasize that these are all, of course,
reasonable and legitimate causes for eviction. Landlords are business-owners trying to make a
profit and pay their property taxes (which are higher for owners’ nonprimary residences), and
unlike many left-wing activists, I do not believe landlords are inherently evil or deserve a system
working against them. However, I do believe that some targeted changes to South Carolina’s
eviction process will have positive, stabilizing effects for the whole rental market, landlords and
tenants alike, and uphold the rights of all involved.

Princeton Eviction Lab’s Matthew Desmond makes the case that, “without a home,
everything else falls apart” for an individual. When someone is evicted, often because they are
unable to afford rent in a particular month, living without housing makes it much more difficult
to get back on their feet. Finding and/or holding down a job is much harder when someone does
not have the very basics of a safe place to sleep, eat, and get ready for the day. South Carolina is
blessed to have many wonderful nonprofits and churches who work to fight homelessness
through shelters, training programs, free meals, and case management to help people find a job
and get back on their feet, but these services are all highly strained and under-resourced. In my
personal conversations with nonprofit staff, workers at the Department of Social Services,
lawmakers, and academic researchers, one thing holds true across the board—there is never
enough to go around and serve everyone who needs help. The state’s high eviction rates directly
contribute to this scarcity and inflate governments’ social service budgets. Evictions create
negative externalities that extend far beyond individual landlords and tenants; they directly
increase homelessness, disrupt communities, harm the wider economy and development efforts,
and cause financial burden on public resources and social services.4

Just how bad are evictions in South Carolina? The Eviction Lab, the nation’s leading
database of eviction statistics ranked North Charleston as the highest eviction rate in the nation
for a “large city,” at 16.5%. Columbia was just behind, ranked eighth in the nation. In national
rankings of eviction rates in mid-sized cities, South Carolina boasts seven of the top twenty-five.
And, from 2000-2016, South Carolina evicted more tenants per capita than any other state.
After the end of a federal and state temporary moratorium on evictions during the COVID-19
pandemic, the eviction pace has been picking back up in South Carolina. 5
3
“Eviction,” South Carolina Bar, 2023, https://www.scbar.org/public/get-legal-help/common-legal-topics/eviction/;
S.C. Code § 27-40-710.
4
Eviction Lab, “Eviction Rankings,” Eviction Lab, accessed June 2, 2023, https://evictionlab.org/rankings/; Scott
Morgan, “‘Normal’s Already a Crisis’: Why South Carolina’s Appetite for Eviction Scares Housing Advocates,”
South Carolina Public Radio, July 20, 2021,
https://www.southcarolinapublicradio.org/sc-news/2021-07-20/normals-already-a-crisis-why-south-carolinas-
appetite-for-eviction-scares-housing-advocates.
5
These rankings are based on the most recent data available, from 2016-2018. Lab, “Eviction Rankings”; Eviction
Lab, “The Eviction Tracking System,” Eviction Lab, accessed June 2, 2023, https://evictionlab.org/eviction-
 Reducing eviction rates is not about interfering with the free market but rather
ensuring its sustainability and long-term success. By implementing the following common-
sense, targeted changes to the South Carolina Code of Laws and eviction system, we can foster a
more stable and thriving rental market, benefiting tenants, landlords, and businesses alike. These
five policies will promote economic stability, reduce homelessness, and help South Carolina
continue to be a great place to live and work.

COMMON-SENSE POLICY PROPOSALS

1. Raise SC’s Eviction Filing Fee

As it stands, South Carolina has one of the lowest eviction filing fees both nationally and
regionally. The initial filing fee is a mere $45 for landlords, according to the South Carolina
Judicial Branch website.6 This fee is uniform statewide and does not vary by county.7

By comparison, look at this table of eviction filing fees across the Southeast.8
State Initial Filing Fee
Tennessee $42 (in general sessions court) to $225 (in circuit
court)
Mississippi $85 (in justice court) to $161 (in county court)
Georgia $87 (average across all counties; minimum charge
is $56).
North Carolina $96 (statewide)
Louisiana $100 (some parishes will charge more)
Arkansas $165 (statewide)
Florida $185 (statewide)
Alabama $297 (average across all counties)
NATIONAL AVERAGE $109

This table shows that South Carolina’s $45 fee is clearly far below the norm for the region and
the nation. Contrary to what you might expect, nationally, eviction filing fees do not correlate
with a state’s politics or partisanship. In an extensive analysis of states’ eviction filing fees,
Eviction Lab researchers could not find any correlation between eviction fees and a state’s
politics, region, demographics, or broader trends in its landlord/tenant laws. There are red states
with incredibly high fees, blue states with very low fees, landlord-centric states with huge fees,

tracking/; Morgan, “‘Normal’s Already a Crisis.’”

6
On top of the $45, other regular court fees (a $10 summons fee and a $25 statewide magistrate court fee) bring the
total up to $80. However, for the purposes of state-to-state comparison, researchers use the initial filing fee amount.
7
South Carolina Judicial Department, “Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) in South Carolina - Magistrates Court”
(2010), https://www.sccourts.org/selfhelp/FAQMagistrate.pdf; South Carolina Judicial Department,
“ATTACHMENT K - MANDATORY SCHEDULE OF CIVIL FEES TO BE COLLECTED IN MAGISTRATES
COURT” (June 30, 2011), https://www.sccourts.org/selfHelp/attachmentK.pdf; Elizabeth Souza, “Cost of an
Eviction in South Carolina (2023): Average + by Fee,” iPropertyManagement, April 13, 2023,
https://ipropertymanagement.com/research/south-carolina-eviction-cost.
8
“Eviction Process by State [2023]: Steps, Timeline & Laws,” iPropertyManagement.com, accessed August 3,
2023, https://ipropertymanagement.com/laws/eviction-process; Henry Gomory et al., “When It’s Cheap to File an
Eviction Case, Tenants Pay the Price,” Eviction Lab, June 26, 2023, https://evictionlab.org/tenants-pay-for-cheap-
evictions/.
and pro-renter states with minimal fees. Evidently, most of these filing fees are set completely
arbitrarily.9

By raising the eviction filing fee, South Carolina can reduce backlog in our court system,
encourage landlords and tenants to seek mediated resolutions outside the courtroom, and make
sure that these filings—which often leave people homeless on the street—are treated with the
gravity necessary. Going through the court system and filing an eviction should be a landlord’s
last resort when facing issues with a tenant, not the first course of action.

For our state’s notoriously backlogged judicial system, a higher filing fee promotes out-of-
court resolution and increases courts’ financial resources to process existing cases. With the
pandemic worsening the backlog, we need to take new and aggressive steps. Too often, the
judicial system is flooded by serial eviction filings that are never intended to go to court. Serial
eviction filing is when a landlord uses the cheap cost of evictions to repeatedly file against the
same tenant to coerce him into paying rent, rather than seeking a solution that does not drain
court resources and delay justice in other cases. Research shows that the cost of filing has a
significant impact “both on how often and for what reasons evictions are filed…when filing fees
are low, landlords make frequent use of eviction filings and often file serially against the same
tenants to collect rents. However, when fees are high, landlords make use of the judicial system
less often, and when they do, they are more likely to file in order remove tenants than file
repeatedly against them to collect rents.”10 Thus, the number of cases filed can be reduced with a
higher filing fee, and this is one step toward combatting court backlog.

Finally, I cannot neglect the human angle here—evicting someone and causing them to
become homeless is serious. It should never be taken lightly. A higher filing fee reflects this
gravity.

Raising our initial filing fee for evictions to at least the national average of $109 will reduce
frivolous eviction filings, encourage more cost-effective means of rent collection, reduce backlog
in the court system, and ultimately ensure the state is spending taxpayer dollars efficiently and
effectively.

2. Strengthen Landlord-Tenant Mediation Programs

You may then wonder how a landlord is to resolve problems with rent payment and other
tenant issues efficiently and cost-effectively if court filing fees are increased. Thus, my second
recommendation is to couple a filing fee increase with an investment in landlord-tenant
mediation programs throughout the state. These voluntary mediation programs allow a landlord
and a tenant to meet in a formal setting and talk through problems with rental payment or other
potential reasons for eviction to see if they can find a solution prior to the landlord pursuing legal
action.

If a tenant is going through an unexpected situation—such as a sudden severe illness or

hospitalization, the loss of a job, or other extenuating circumstances that jeopardize his ability to

9
Henry Gomory et al., “The Racially Disparate Influence of Filing Fees on Eviction Rates,” Housing Policy Debate
0, no. 0 (May 26, 2023): 1–21, https://doi.org/10.1080/10511482.2023.2212662.
10
Gomory et al.
make rent for the coming month—he is able to communicate this with the landlord in mediation.
The landlord can voice his concerns about issues with the property (such as property
damage/maintenance) and explain difficulties in paying his mortgage and other expenses when
rent is delayed. With mediation, the two parties can work out a written agreement (such as a
payment plan) that works best for all. A formal mediator will facilitate the discussion, make sure
agreements are documented, defuse any arguments, ensure both parties understand what they are
agreeing to, and provide a peaceful, neutral environment for the conversation. Landlord-tenant
relationships are better preserved in these settings, and landlords reap the benefits from not
having negative online reviews (since “88% of renters read reviews to determine the quality of a
potential property!”)11. These mediations can even take place online, a far more convenient
option than appearing in a courtroom. Formal mediation provides teeth, so to speak, to hold each
party to the agreement reached. If such a mediated agreement falls through, the landlord can then
turn to the judicial system to collect rent and/or remove the tenant, and he has a fast-track to do
so. Particularly in rural areas where judges and lawyers are much harder to come by, mediation
provides an easier, more accessible avenue for landlords. Benefits would be felt across the state
as mediation gives landlords a quick, cost-effective first step prior to a lengthy legal process. 12

Mediation programs have proven to be successful in other states in reducing eviction rates by
fostering open communication between landlords and tenants and promoting mutually beneficial
agreements. In Texas, a highly successful state program called the Texas Eviction Diversion
Program ran for over two years during the pandemic and allowed landlord/tenant issues to be
solved efficiently with mediation while courts were shut down. Landlords and tenants were
incentivized to use mediation; if a resolution was reached and if parties were eligible under
certain criteria, the state would use federal COVID funding to cover in full past due rent
obligations and utility delinquencies and dismiss the eviction case. While this was a targeted
program specifically for problems caused by COVID, we can learn from its effectiveness in
reducing homelessness and solving landlord/tenant disputes.13 Ideally, mediation should be
promoted for landlords and tenants to try even before a case is filed, as research has shown that
“tenant-landlord mediations held before a landlord filed for eviction were far more successful at
reaching a settlement than mediations that were held after a landlord already filed for an
eviction.”14 In those pre-litigation mediations, tenants were more likely to remain housed, while
landlords were more likely to receive their rent owed.

South Carolina currently offers ADR (Alternative Dispute Resolution) mediation in Family
Courts and Circuit Courts. Family Court judges usually order mediations for any contested issues
before the case comes to court. The state should make mediation a promoted and codified route
11
Casey Schwab, “Landlord Tenant Mediation: A Modern Approach to Tenant Issues,” Avail - Part of the
Realtor.Com Network (blog), January 19, 2016, https://www.avail.co/education/articles/landlord-tenant-mediation-
a-modern-approach-to-tenant-issues.
12
Casey Schwab.
13
“Texas Rent Relief and the Texas Eviction Diversion Program,” accessed August 4, 2023,
https://www.tdhca.state.tx.us/TEDP.htm; Texas Judicial Branch, “Eviction Diversion Program,” accessed August 4,
2023, https://www.txcourts.gov/programs-services/eviction-diversion-program/.
14
“Research Demonstrates Importance of Holding Tenant-Landlord Mediation Prior to Eviction Litigation,”
National Low Income Housing Coalition, October 31, 2022, https://nlihc.org/resource/research-demonstrates-
importance-holding-tenant-landlord-mediation-prior-eviction. This study compares mediation programs in the state
of Hawaii pre and post COVID-19 to figure out which programs were most effective in producing positive outcomes
for all.
for landlord-tenant cases to be resolved, and the SC Bar Association’s public information site
should allow visitors to search specifically for mediators to deal with eviction proceedings. 15 A
nonprofit called the Midlands Mediation Center currently contracts with Richland’s and
Lexington’s respective Magistrate Court to provide volunteer mediators that parties can opt into
using.16 Mediation service contracts like this should be expanded statewide, and both parties in
cases should be made clearly aware of their right to seek mediation. A targeted investment in
expanding mediation services for eviction disputes will save tenants’, landlords’, and taxpayers’
dollars in the long run.

3. Provide Tenants with a Right to Counsel in Eviction Proceedings

When an eviction filing goes to court, tenants should be guaranteed the right to legal counsel.
Someone struggling to pay rent is certainly not going to be able to afford a lawyer, and, while
organizations like SC Legal Services and the South Carolina Bar offer pro bono counsel for low-
income community members in civil cases, the demand for such programs far outweighs the help
available. The South Carolina Bar website says that applicants may need to wait four weeks to be
matched with an attorney; this is far longer than the entirety of most eviction cases. When
tenants are served their summons, they only have ten days to respond. Additionally, many
tenants’ income may fall above the federal poverty line ($30,000 for a family of four) and not
qualify for those pro bono programs, while those tenants certainly cannot afford an attorney.17

Nationwide, 81% of landlords have legal representation during eviction proceedings, while
only 3% of tenants do.18 This leads to a tremendous power and knowledge imbalance in eviction
proceedings, and many tenants find themselves homeless simply because they did not understand
the legal process. When tenants have counsel, it benefits everyone involved. Landlords are more
likely to receive the money they are owed (without expensive rent collection efforts). Tenants are
more likely to stay in their housing and not end up homeless. The community as a whole benefits
from a stable rental environment. And taxpayer dollars are saved when fewer need to turn to
welfare and social services.19

This is not a partisan issue. National public opinion polling has shown that 81% of all voters
—including 87 percent of Democrats, 73 percent of independents, and 70 percent of Republicans
— support a right to counsel for tenants facing eviction. A large majority of voters across the

15
“ADR Search,” South Carolina Bar, accessed August 4, 2023, https://www.scbar.org/lawyers/directory/adr-
search/.
16
“Learn About Our Services,” Midlands Mediation Center, accessed August 4, 2023,
https://midlandsmediation.org/services-2/.
17
“Pro Bono Resources,” South Carolina Bar, accessed August 5, 2023, https://www.scbar.org/public/get-legal-
help/find-lawyer-or-mediator/pro-bono-resources/; “Eviction in South Carolina,” South Carolina Legal Services
(blog), April 13, 2023, https://sclegal.org/eviction-in-south-carolina/; Elizabeth Souza, “South Carolina Eviction
Process (2023): Grounds, Steps & Timeline,” iPropertyManagement.com, September 19, 2022,
https://ipropertymanagement.com/laws/south-carolina-eviction-process; “Federal Poverty Level (FPL) - Glossary,”
HealthCare.gov, 2023, https://www.healthcare.gov/glossary/federal-poverty-level-fpl.
18
“Tenant Right to Counsel,” National Coalition for a Civil Right to Counsel, accessed June 3, 2023,
http://civilrighttocounsel.org/highlighted_work/organizing_around_right_to_counsel.
19
Stout Risius Ross, LLC and Neil Steinkamp, “The Estimated Economic Impact of an Eviction Right to Counsel in
South Carolina,” Stout Eviction RTC Evaluations and Cost-Benefit Studies, December 1, 2022,
https://www.aclusc.org/sites/default/files/field_documents/the_estimated_economic_impact_of_an_eviction_right_t
o_counsel_in_south_carolina_final_2022.12.01.pdf; “Tenant Right to Counsel.”
political spectrum support the fundamental American principle that legal proceedings should be
decided based on the merits of the claim, not the financial status of the parties.20

Right to counsel in eviction proceedings is a fiscally responsible policy. Economic analysis

by Stout Risius Ross, LLC—a global investment bank and advisory firm—found that, with an
annual investment of $7.2 million in eviction right to counsel (their estimated cost of a fully-
funded program), South Carolina could expect fiscal benefits of at least $21 million per year.
The state would save taxpayer dollars in education, welfare programs, homelessness services,
foster care and social services, court resources, and more. In other words, “for every $1 invested
in a right to counsel program for renters facing eviction in South Carolina, the State could reduce
its expenditure by $3.”21 In high-eviction places like Charleston, Greenville, and Columbia,
city/county policies for right to counsel would save additional local dollars. In the cities and
states where eviction right to counsel policies have been enacted, results have been highly
successful and cost-effective. Eviction right to counsel upholds fairness, justice, and individual
liberties in our court system, and it is an efficient, targeted way to address homelessness and
economic instability in our state that deserves lawmakers’ priority.22

4. Promote Accountability and Consistency in Eviction Court by Implementing

Magistrate Judge Reform
Eviction proceedings almost always take place in South Carolina’s magistrate courts. 23 In
recent years, structural problems and corruption in South Carolina magistrate system have been
repeatedly highlighted in media and filed legislation. Over the years, these problems have led to
repeated miscarriages of justice in many cases, including evictions.

While, constitutionally, magistrates are appointed by the Governor, in practice, each county’s
magistrate judges are hand-selected by the local senator(s) and rubber-stamped by the Governor
and the Senate body. In that process, candidates’ qualifications or records are never considered
by the Senate, and Senators are able to select family members, former General Assembly
members, or whomever they want as magistrate judge. Unlike other court circuits, judges are not
required to have a juris doctorate or any legal background. They complete a laughable multiple-
choice “qualification test” that asks questions like “which number is largest” and after
appointment receive a short 57 hours of training before being sent out on the bench.24 To quote
my prior writing on the matter: “For the nearly three-fourths of South Carolina’s magistrates who
do not possess a law degree, this five-day intensive and ten trial observations are the only legal

20
“Tenant Right to Counsel.”
21
“South Carolina Renters Should Have the Right to Legal Counsel When Facing Eviction,” ACLU of South
Carolina, December 10, 2022, https://www.aclusc.org/en/our-work/south-carolina-renters-should-have-right-legal-
counsel-when-facing-eviction.
22
“Tenant Right to Counsel”; “South Carolina Renters Should Have the Right to Legal Counsel When Facing
Eviction”; Stout Risius Ross, LLC and Steinkamp, “The Estimated Economic Impact of an Eviction Right to
Counsel in South Carolina.”
23
The exceptions are when cases are appealed to Circuit Court after a magistrate’s initial ruling OR when the initial
eviction claim exceeds $7,500 (then, the case goes to the Court of Civil Pleas).
24
Joseph Cranney, “These SC Judges Can Have Less Training than Barbers but Still Decide Thousands of Cases
Each Year,” Post and Courier, November 27, 2019, https://www.postandcourier.com/news/these-sc-judges-can-
have-less-training-than-barbers-but-still-decide-thousands-of-cases/article_deeac12e-eb6f-11e9-927b-
5735a3edbaf1.html.
training they have before they can make rulings on civil disputes and even send people to jail,
forever altering lives.”25

As if the corrupt appointment process and lack of training is not enough, magistrates’
reappointments are even more problematic. After their four-year term, magistrates are supposed
to be reappointed by the Senate. However, they may continue serving indefinitely in “holdover
capacity” until that reappointment, and many magistrates serve years longer than their term. If a
magistrate is finally brought up for reappointment, their disciplinary record and any complaints
against them are not disclosed to the Senate body before voting, so they are once again rubber-
stamped with no accountability or oversight. In one infamous instance, the wife of the county
sheriff was repeatedly reappointed as magistrate despite suspensions from the bench and a
laundry list of ethics complaints.26

Recently, the Chief Justice of the South Carolina Supreme Court had to step in to remedy an
extralegal, subjective practice by magistrate judges in eviction proceedings. Some magistrates—
but not all—required tenants appealing eviction rulings to the Circuit Court to first repay all their
past-due rent. This completely varied with the discretion of each judge, with some charging no
extra fees and others requiring tenants to pay thousands of dollars in additional bond payments,
all past-due rent, and rent payments for the next three months before a case could be appealed.
Such an exorbitant financial barrier kept many tenants from having their case heard by a higher
court, denying them a very fundamental constitutional right. Only after a lengthy Post and
Courier exposé did Chief Justice Beatty issue a memo ordering magistrates to halt this practice.
Unfortunately, other subjective practices like this still exist in eviction proceedings. Landlords
quickly learn which local judges are more likely to throw tenants out on the curb the next day
and which judges are much less strict. To me, this really summarized problems in our magistrate
system—until magistrate judges are equipped with sufficient legal training and better oversight,
administrative requirements and magistrate practices will continue to vary dramatically in
eviction cases and beyond.27

South Carolina’s whole magistrate system needs major reform. Accountability and
transparency in the (re)appointment process, dramatically increased training for non-lawyer
magistrates, and vigilant oversight and crackdowns on arbitrary, subjective administrative
decisions are all crucial to ensuring due process and equal justice in eviction cases. For a list of
specific changes, I would direct lawmakers to my judicial reform research with the Palmetto
Promise Institute.28

25
Felicity Ropp, “What Can Be Done to Fix South Carolina’s Broken Magistrate System,” Palmetto Promise
Institute, June 2021, https://palmettopromise.org/what-can-be-done-to-fix-south-carolinas-broken-magistrate-
system/.
26
Cranney, “These SC Judges Can Have Less Training than Barbers but Still Decide Thousands of Cases Each
Year”; Ropp, “What Can Be Done to Fix South Carolina’s Broken Magistrate System.”
27
Thad Moore, “To Appeal an Eviction in SC, Tenants Are Required to Pay Thousands of Dollars First,” Post and
Courier, July 25, 2020, https://www.postandcourier.com/news/to-appeal-an-eviction-in-sc-tenants-are-required-to-
pay-thousands-of-dollars-first/article_7f8e2a42-cbd2-11ea-8d20-df3fb28181ad.html; Thad Moore, “SC Renters No
Longer Need to Pay Thousands to Appeal Evictions, Chief Justice Says,” Post and Courier, October 17, 2020,
https://www.postandcourier.com/business/real_estate/sc-renters-no-longer-need-to-pay-thousands-to-appeal-
evictions-chief-justice-says/article_77a27cf4-0f2d-11eb-9422-73d75c9bc9b0.html.
28
Ropp, “What Can Be Done to Fix South Carolina’s Broken Magistrate System.”
 5. Wisely Spend Federal Dollars Earmarked for Eviction Reduction
Finally, as federal funding continues to prioritize and target evictions after COVID, South
Carolina should continue to spend those dollars on data-supported, preventative initiatives.
Rental assistance programs have proven to be extremely effective in reducing evictions and
helping tenants who may be experiencing a temporary disruption to their income; the SC Stay
Plus pandemic program disbursed $335,497,307.53 in rent and utility assistance to more than
80,000 applicants from 2020-summer 2023.29 As federal funds for housing vouchers and rental
assistance trickle down, the state should continue such programs and provide state funding too.
Additionally, public and private funding should be spent on tenant education and support
services, so tenants can learn their rights in eviction proceedings and understand their different
options, whether mediation, right to counsel, or other rights guaranteed under the Residential
Landlord and Tenant Act.

CONCLUSION

It is in the best interest of all South Carolinians to reduce evictions. Taxpayers across the
state pay more because their dollars support social services and programs for the evicted and
homeless, when targeted, preventative investment can save public dollars in the long run and
keep families across the state in their homes. Because of such notoriously high eviction rates in
the state, an unstable housing and rental market hurts economic development efforts and drives
away potential residents and businesses. Communities are stronger and have better social ties
with less turnover in residents; people patronize local businesses more, schools function better
when students are in stable homes, and violent crime rates are much lower.30

Landlords benefit from all these community health outcomes and a stable rental market to
manage their properties. With reduced evictions and better mediations, landlords more often
receive rent owed and save both time and money by evading lengthy legal proceedings and the
management of constant turnover and new leases in their properties. These policies I propose do
not make evictions unnecessarily difficult for landlords—they preserve the fair, balanced judicial
system that the Founding Fathers intended.31

Tenants are able to pursue work, education, and self-sufficiency when they are housed,
and when evictions are reduced, tenants avoid impacts to their credit scores and background
checks that can set them and their children behind for decades to come. Evidence
overwhelmingly shows that the children of the evicted and the homeless experience worse
outcomes in their neurodevelopment, academic careers, and overall health, from greater neonatal

29
Nan McKay and Associates, “Monthly Report - SC Stay Plus COVID-19 Housing Assistance,” SC STAY PLUS
PORTAL, July 19, 2023, https://southcarolina.onlinepha.com/en-US/Pages/View/158/monthly-report.
30
James T. Spartz, “Eviction Prevention: Reducing Harm to Households and Society,” Institute for Research on
Poverty, February 22, 2023, https://www.irp.wisc.edu/resource/eviction-prevention-reducing-harm-to-households-
and-society/; Dr. Russell Weaver, “No Shelter, No Safety: How Rising Evictions in New York Could Post a Risk to
Public Safety and How Eviction Prevention Is Violence Prevention,” Cornell ILR Buffalo Co-Lab, March 2023,
https://public.tableau.com/views/EvictionsandSocialTies/EconConnectedness; Stout Risius Ross, LLC and
Steinkamp, “The Estimated Economic Impact of an Eviction Right to Counsel in South Carolina.”
31
Casey Schwab, “Landlord Tenant Mediation.”
complications to more emergency room stays through lifelong health conditions and generational
poverty. 32

Eviction reduction is pro-life. It is pro-community, pro-safety, pro-business, and pro-free

market. South Carolina Republicans can be national leaders in redefining what it looks like to
defend the right to life and take ownership in conversations about homelessness and poverty.
Homelessness cannot and should not be a Democrat-owned issue; it affects all of us and deserves
good-faith discourse. I firmly believe that the only way forward for those who proudly affirm
bedrock conservative values—the sanctity of life, the need for a fair and equitable justice system,
and the importance of spending taxpayer dollars with utmost efficiency—is to promote these
common-sense, data-driven policies to combat homelessness and poverty.

32
Bruce Ramphal et al., “Evictions and Infant and Child Health Outcomes: A Systematic Review,” JAMA Network
Open 6, no. 4 (April 2023), https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.7612; Emily A. Benfer, “U.S. Eviction
Policy Is Harming Children: The Case for Sustainable Eviction Prevention to Promote Health Equity,” Harvard Law
Bill of Health, November 2, 2022, https://blog.petrieflom.law.harvard.edu/2022/11/02/pandemic-eviction-policy-
children/, https://blog.petrieflom.law.harvard.edu/2022/11/02/pandemic-eviction-policy-children/; Spartz, “Eviction
Prevention.”