The South Carolina Election Commission is embroiled in a significant scandal involving a suspicious $4 million cost overrun on a new voting machine contract, leading to the abrupt firing of its top two officials and multiple state investigations. This, coupled with allegations of internal misconduct, including wiretapping, and a protracted battle over voter data privacy with the U.S. Department of Justice, casts a long shadow over the state’s election integrity and underscores urgent calls for greater transparency and accountability.
The South Carolina Election Commission is facing intense scrutiny following a series of alarming revelations that have shaken public trust and triggered multiple state investigations. At the heart of the controversy is an unexplained $4 million overrun on a contract for new voting machines, which has directly led to the firing of key election officials and exposed deeper issues within the agency’s leadership.
The Unexplained $4 Million Overrun on Voting Machines
The commission is actively trying to determine how a $28 million contract for 3,200 new ballot scanners, approved in 2024, ballooned to an authorized payment of $32 million. This significant discrepancy has become a central focus of investigations by at least three state agencies. Commission Chairman Dennis Shedd admitted at a recent meeting that he does not know what happened to the additional $4 million.
The procurement process for these critical election machines is now under a microscope, raising concerns about potential mismanagement of public funds and the integrity of the contracting process. The investigation into this financial irregularity was a primary catalyst for the recent leadership upheaval.
Internal Turmoil: Firings and Allegations of Misconduct
The fallout from the voting machine contract investigation has been swift and severe. Howard Knapp, the former executive director of the election agency, was fired at the commission’s September meeting. His “very close friend and fellow employee,” Deputy Director Paige Salonich, was also terminated, along with a third staffer. Officials stated that Salonich was caught on video planting a recording device in a room before commissioners met to discuss Knapp’s fate and subsequently issued a profane outburst.
Chairman Shedd openly stated, “We’re finding out new stuff that old management did,” indicating a broader pattern of problematic conduct during the previous administration. Beyond the hidden recorder incident, allegations have surfaced regarding Knapp’s 18-month investigation into misuse of agency time and resources for personal affairs, including an alleged affair and the promotion of Salonich despite her reported lack of experience. Both officials are also under investigation for alleged wiretapping, which could lead to legal repercussions, as detailed by SC Safe Elections.
Howard Knapp has not publicly commented since his firing. Paige Salonich’s lawyer also declined comment but Salonich has filed a lawsuit against the Election Commission, claiming the agency released embarrassing details about her.
The Battle Over Voter Data Privacy with the DOJ
Adding another layer of complexity, the Election Commission is engaged in ongoing negotiations with the U.S. Department of Justice over a request for sensitive data concerning all South Carolina voters. This dispute predates Knapp’s firing, though there was initial speculation his dismissal was linked to his stance on releasing this information. Chairman Shedd clarified that Knapp’s position, like his own, was to release the data only with a strict agreement on security, and that the firing was unrelated to these negotiations.
The state is pushing for a legally binding agreement to protect voter data, which includes names, addresses, and other information, some of which the state sells, and highly sensitive details like driver’s license numbers and the last four digits of Social Security numbers. This caution stems from past incidents, such as the 2012 hack that stole personal data from over 3.6 million South Carolinians via tax returns, a fact Chairman Shedd personally recalled.
South Carolina has previously shared voter data with about 25 other states under “very strict security protocols” to identify individuals registered in multiple states. However, the lack of explanation from the federal government regarding its intended use of the information has led a number of states to push back harder against the request, with at least eight states being sued for non-compliance.
Broader Implications for Election Integrity
The cumulative effect of these scandals — the unexplained financial overrun, internal misconduct allegations, and data privacy concerns — has raised profound questions about election integrity in South Carolina. Chairman Shedd insisted that any misconduct did not affect the integrity of any election, but public trust is undoubtedly impacted.
The situation has reignited debates about the structure of election management. Some argue that the centralized control seen in this case highlights the dangers of concentrating too much power, suggesting that decentralized and local authority could foster better accountability and integrity, a view shared by groups like SC Safe Elections.
Community Engagement and the Push for Paper Ballots
In response to declining public trust, there is a growing grassroots movement advocating for greater transparency and security in the electoral process. A significant part of this involves a demand for paper ballots and hand-counting, as many voters remain concerned about the security of electronic voting machines. Organizations like SC Safe Elections have even conducted successful training initiatives on hand-counting methods in various counties, demonstrating effective and rapid counting procedures that allow for better post-election verification.
The Road Ahead for South Carolina Elections
As state agencies continue their investigations into the voting machine contract and other matters, the South Carolina Election Commission faces a critical period of rebuilding trust and implementing reforms. The ongoing legal battles, internal probes, and public demands for transparency will likely shape the future of election administration in the state. Ensuring the security of both voting processes and sensitive voter data will be paramount to restoring confidence among South Carolina citizens.
