Could a South Carolina legislator serve while his spouse sat on a regional hospital board?

Plain-English summary

A state representative asked whether his wife's service on the Spartanburg Regional Healthcare System board conflicted with his House seat. The Attorney General found no absolute prohibition on his serving in the House while she served on the board. He did not treat that board membership alone as a violation of the state Ethics Act.

The answer did not dispose of future conflicts. If the representative faced an official action affecting his own or his wife's economic interest, the AG said the Act required a written statement to the House presiding officer describing the matter and potential conflict, followed by nonparticipation in the relevant vote, deliberation, or other action. The office deferred to the House Legislative Ethics Committee as the supervisory body for House members and did not adjudicate a particular future decision.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 2005. Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later AG opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here.

Common questions

Did the spouse's hospital-board seat automatically disqualify the representative?
No. The 2005 opinion found no automatic prohibition based on the two roles alone.

What if a House matter affected the spouse's economic interest?
The AG described a written conflict statement to the presiding officer and excusal from action on that matter under the Act then in force.

Who supervised House ethics compliance?
The opinion identified the House Legislative Ethics Committee and deferred to its findings about House members' activities.

Background and statutory framework

The opinion read the state Ethics Act's economic-interest and legislative-oversight provisions. It separated the absence of an automatic conflict from duties that could arise on a specific official matter.

Citations and references

The opinion discussed the State Ethics Act and its provisions on official action affecting immediate-family economic interests.

Official title

Regarding whether the service of your wife on the Spartanburg Regional Healthcare System Board of Directors (hereinafter “Board”) would be in conflict with your position of serving in the State House of Representatives.

Requester

The Honorable Joe Mahaffey, Member, House of Representatives

Source

• Landing page: https://www.scag.gov/opinions/opinions-archive/august-17-2005/
• Original PDF: https://www.scag.gov/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/05august-17-Mahaffey.pdf

Original opinion text

The State of South Carolina

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
HENRY McMAsTER
ATTORNEY GENERAL

August 17, 2005

If.

The Honorable Joe Mahaffey
Member, House of Representatives
413 Kaleb Mark Drive
Lyman, South Carolina 29365
Dear Representative Mahaffey:
In a letter to this office you requested an opinion regarding whether the service of your wife on the Spartanburg Regional Healthcare System Board of Directors (hereinafter "Board") would be in conflict with your position of serving in the State House of Representatives.

I. -

Based upon my review of the State Ethics Act, codified at S.C. Code Ann. §§ 8-13-100 et seq., it appears that there would be no absolute prohibitions to your serving in the House of Representatives in a situation where your wife serves on the referenced Board. However, certain provisions of the Ethics Act must be followed to avoid conflicts therewith. Moreover, the House of Representatives Legislative Ethics Committee is the designated appropriate supervisory office under the Ethics Act for State representatives. See Sections 8-13-510 et seq. As a result, that Committee is charged with supervisory enforcement of the Act and we would defer to its findings on the propriety ofthe activities of House members. However, to be of assistance, I would refer you to particular provisions of the Ethics Act which may be applicable to the question raised. I am also enclosing copies of these provisions for your complete review. Generally, the Ethics Act generally prohibits the use ofan official position or office to obtain an economic interest for yourself or a member of your immediate family. See Section 8- l 3-700(A). However, I do not see such prohibition as coming into play with the service of your wife on the referenced Board. If you, as a House member, would be faced with a situation, in the discharge of your official duties, which would require you to take action or make a decision which would affect the economic interest of yourself or your wife, you would have to comply with the provisions of Section 8-13-700. In summary, these provisions require the preparation of a written statement describing the matter requiring action, and the nature ofthe potential conflict ofinterest with respect to that action. The statement would be delivered to the presiding officer of the House, and you would then be excused from votes, deliberations, and other actions on the matter on which a potential conflict of interest exists.

~~A BUD.DING • POST OrncE Box 11549 • CoWMBlA, S.C. 29211 -1549 • TELEPHONE: 803-734-3970 • FACSIMILE: 803-253-6283

The Honorable Joe Mahaffey
Page2
August 17, 2005

If there are any further questions, please advise.

Sincerely,

I
I

Charles H. Richardson
Senior Assistant Attorney General
REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY:

~£>.~

R~D~

Assistant Deputy Attorney General