Behind the bigger fight over Columbia’s conversion therapy ban | Opinion
Since the 1970s, South Carolinians have recognized that rule over local governments by the General Assembly has been ineffective and inefficient. However, recent threats by the South Carolina General Assembly over the city of Columbia’s conversion therapy ban have taken a direct shot at the spirit of “home rule” and everything that it stands for.
Regardless of where you stand on the issue, the people of South Carolina should recognize what this attack means and speak up in the public square to advocate that local officials, elected by their local community, are the best people to dictate policy that best serves their constituency and communities.
Historically, South Carolina was ruled from the top down with the General Assembly wielding its power over both state and local government. Fast forward to today. Cities generally have autonomy to provide services to their constituents that best address the issues and the needs that are closest to them. The South Carolina state constitution was amended in 1973 to add home rule amendments and subsequently passed the Home Rule Act of 1975 that created stronger local governments with true independence from the state Legislature.
Yet today, the Legislature is systematically undermining this independence through preemption — using state power to override local decision-making. The current threat to withhold funding from Columbia unless we on the City Council repeal our conversion therapy ban is just the latest example in a disturbing pattern.
The Legislature has repeatedly attempted to strip local governments of their authority across multiple issues. It has sought to preempt local plastic bag bans implemented by coastal communities addressing environmental concerns specific to their areas. It has blocked cities from setting local minimum wage standards that would help residents struggling with rising costs. And it has prohibited cities and counties from enacting ordinances requiring employers to provide employees with paid sick days or paid family leave.
These cases represent a direct challenge to the democratic principle that the government closest to the people best represents their interest. When Columbia residents elect City Council members, they expect us to address local concerns and implement policies that reflect our community’s values and needs.
The Legislature’s use of financial leverage by threatening to withhold funding unless we comply with its demands sets a dangerous precedent. Today it’s conversion therapy in Columbia, but tomorrow it could be any policy where local communities and state lawmakers disagree.
This approach effectively transforms “home rule” into “rule by permission,” where local governments can only exercise authority when it aligns with the Legislature’s ruling preferences.
The original intent of the Home Rule Act was to grant true autonomy to cities and counties. The current Legislature’s actions directly contradict this intent and threaten to return us to an era of state micromanagement.
I urge all South Carolinians, regardless of their stance on any particular policy, to consider the broader implications for democratic governance. When the legislature can override local decisions through financial coercion, it undermines the foundation of representative democracy at the community level.
Local governments can generate creative approaches to policy challenges that might not be politically feasible at the state level. By silencing these innovations, we lose valuable opportunities to address complex social issues through diverse approaches.
If you value self-governance and believe that Columbia residents should determine Columbia’s policies, I ask you to speak out against this overreach. Contact your state representatives and tell them to respect home rule. The future of local democracy in South Carolina depends on it.
This story was originally published May 20, 2025 at 5:00 AM with the headline "Behind the bigger fight over Columbia’s conversion therapy ban | Opinion."