SENECA — As the June 10 primary nears, campaign contributions for incumbent Rep. Bill Sandifer and challenger Ed Rumsey are picking up steam.

The two contenders for the South Carolina House of Representative’s District 2 seat have received thousands of dollars in campaign contributions in April and May. Sandifer has received $20,675 and Rumsey, $8,190, according to South Carolina’s State Ethics Commission public disclosure and accountability reporting system.

The average contribution to Sandifer’s campaign, like his cumulative contribution amount, doubles Rumsey’s average contribution at $608 to $303.

MONEY FROM THE BIG APPLE

Outside interests continue to hold significant sway in Rumsey’s campaign, as $3,000 of his contributions come from purported Howard Rich connections in New York City.

Rich has an extensive history as a political activist across the nation. He is the founder and president of U.S. Term Limits, chairman of Americans for Limited Government, founder of Legislative Education Action Drive (LEAD), chairman of Parents in Charge Foundation, as well as a board member for the national organization, Club for Growth.

Rich is known for funneling money through obscure LLCs, a tactic used to circumvent South Carolina’s contribution laws that restrict contributions to $3,500 for statewide offices and $1,000 for local offices.

Rumsey’s campaign received contributions from Bradford Management and LaSalle Associations, both of which are listed at the same New York, NY address, to the very room. Alan J. Pomerantz of New York City, a prominent lawyer and real-estate guru, also donated $1,000.

Rumsey has gone on record saying he does not owe allegiance to any outside special interests but has said he accepts their support.

SIMILAR STANCES

The South Carolina Club for Growth, a state branch of Rich’s broader Club for Growth, sent a press release Thursday chastising the House of Representatives for early adjournment. Rumsey did the same.

"Today's vote to adjourn, along with his votes to override the first two of the three votes on the governor's vetoes, demonstrates once again what a clear choice the voters of District 2 have when they go to the polls on June 10,” Rumsey said. “On the one hand, they have Bill Sandifer, who repeatedly has shown his contempt for the governor and his efforts to cut government spending and me, who the governor came to Seneca to endorse.”

The Rich-funded Club for Growth echoed Rumsey’s sentiments, saying the adjournment was a ploy to stop any movement to sustain Sanford’s budget vetoes.

Rumsey continued the political harmoniousness between Sanford, the Club for Growth and himself when he directly stated he sided with the governor on spending.

“When I'm elected, I can promise, that I'll be an ally to Governor Sanford in his attempts to bring conservative values and common sense fiscal restraint back to South Carolina," Rumsey said.

STAYING IN-STATE

Sandifer, meanwhile, boasts contributions from numerous political action committees (PACS), almost all of which are within the state of South Carolina.

“I know all of the PACS that have contributed to me, and I’m very aware of who they are and who the organizations and companies are,” Sandifer said.

Among the contributions are PACs backed by the S.C. Chamber of Commerce, manufacturers in South Carolina, S.C. State Farm Agents, South Carolina Association of Convenience Stores and several PACs in Myrtle Beach.

Sandifer, however, does have one contribution of $500 from a contributor in Ohio. The Timken Company, which produces metals, allows and other miscellaneous industrial materials, has strong ties to the state, Sandifer said.

“Timken has several plants in South Carolina, but the financial arm of their company, as with so many large companies, is located out of state,” Sandifer said. “I’m a close business acquaintance with the plant manager for the plant near Greenville.”

Sandifer said the Rich-funded South Carolinians for Responsible Government’s mail-in campaign in support of Rumsey, coupled with direct contribution from Rich front groups, makes it very clear who runs Rumsey’s operation.

“Those contributions coming from New York are directly connected to Howard Rich,” he said. “That connection follows through to South Carolinians for Responsible Government and to Club for Growth. It indicates this group basically controls his campaign, and if they are controlling his campaign, then I question whether or not they would control him in the event he were elected.”

The incumbent representative said his contributions differ greatly from his opponent’s, saying the fact that more than a third of Rumsey’s funding in the last two months has come from New York is indicative of an attempt of outside interests to control politics at a state level. He defended his PAC contributions as deliberate and straightforward and said Rumsey’s are a part of wider effort to push a pro-school choice agenda.

“My contributions have been from people and or companies that I know, people I work with and that I have openly solicited their contributions,” Sandifer said. “The contributions that I have seen for Rumsey’s campaign indicate that they are given by one main benefactor in New York City for a known purpose.”

Twenty of Rumsey’s contributors are from Seneca, usually giving anywhere from $25-$50 each. In fact, the majority of both men’s campaign contributions come from the Palmetto State. Despite that fact, Sandifer insists the clear connection between Rich and Rumsey shows a deliberate attempt by an outsider to use politicians within the state to influence elections.

“It is absolutely the worst possible thing for South Carolina politics,” Sandifer said. “It is an attempt by a very rich individual to buy a state government.”