Cally R. “Cal” ForrestHouseDistrict HD-039RepublicanContact:Phone: (803) 212-6938
Office: 323C Blatt Bldg.
Columbia 29201 |
Pro-liberty Votes
|
Cally R. “Cal” Forrest
House
District HD-039
Republican
Status: Active Legislator
Contact:
Columbia 29201
Pro-liberty Votes
Score | Session |
---|---|
33% | Cumulative |
33% | 2023-2024 Regular Session 2023-2024 Regular Session |
33% | 2021-2022 Regular Session 2021-2022 Regular Session |
Voting History
Legislative Scorecard Based on the U.S. Constitution
The Legislative Scorecard is a nationwide educational program of The John Birch Society. Its purpose is to create an informed electorate on how state legislators are voting. The Scorecard is nonpartisan; it does not promote any candidate or political party. Bills are selected for their constitutional implications and cost to the taxpayers.
Please share this Scorecard in your district to inform people about your legislator's record on key votes.
U.S. Constitution, Amendment I --- 11 C.F.R. §114(4)(c)(4) --- 616 F.2d 45 (2d Cir. 1980)
Legislative Scorecard
Based on the U.S. Constitution
SC Scorecard 2024
The Legislative Scorecard is a nationwide educational program of The John Birch Society. Its purpose is to create an informed electorate on how state legislators are voting. The Scorecard is nonpartisan; it does not promote any candidate or political party. Bills are selected for their constitutional implications and cost to the taxpayers.
Please share this Scorecard in your district to inform people about your legislator's record on key votes.
U.S. Constitution, Amendment I --- 11 C.F.R. §114(4)(c)(4) --- 616 F.2d 45 (2d Cir. 1980)
The following scorecard lists several key votes in the South Carolina General Assembly in 2024 and ranks state representatives and senators based on their fidelity to (U.S.) constitutional and limited-government principles.
The following scorecard lists several key votes in the South Carolina General Assembly in 2024 and ranks state representatives and senators based on their fidelity to (U.S.) constitutional and limited-government principles.
This legislator voted constitutionally on 33% of the votes shown below. |
---|
Yes H4624 Ban on Sex Mutilation of Children (passed 67 to 26 on 5/9/2024). Bans a health care professional from engaging in the provision or performance of “gender transition procedures” to a person under 18 years of age. H4624 bans a health care professional from performing “gender transition procedures” on a person under 18 years of age. No person has a right to harm a child using the pretext of LGBTQ+ ideology. Sex mutilation against minor children violates their “unalienable” right to life and limb, as it absurdly attempts to erase their biological sex with fictional “gender identity” constructs. According to the Bill of Rights and the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, every State has a duty to defend the basic humanity of its citizens, each of whom is born distinctly male or female, and, as the Declaration of Independence affirms, created equally in the image of God. Read more about this rollcall. H4624 bans a health care professional from engaging in the provision or performance of “gender transition procedures” to a person under 18 years of age. The House passed H4624 on May 9, 2024, by a vote of 67 to 26. We have assigned pluses to the yeas because no person has a right to harm a child using the pretext of LGBTQ+ ideology. Sex mutilation against minor children violates their “unalienable” right to life and limb, as it absurdly attempts to erase their biological sex with fictional “gender identity” constructs. According to the Bill of Rights and the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, every State has a duty to defend the basic humanity of its citizens, each of whom is born distinctly male or female, and, as the Declaration of Independence affirms, created equally in the image of God. View vote details at scstatehouse.gov/billsearch.php?billnumbers=4624&session=125&summary=B |
Yes S915 South Carolina "Health Czar" Bill (passed 98 to 15 on 5/8/2024). Would create the office of the Secretary of Public Health and Policy to develop a “cohesive, coordinated, and comprehensive State Health Services Plan.” S915 would create the office of the Secretary of Public Health and Policy. This bill would consolidate several state agencies into one and put a "health czar" in control of South Carolina’s public-health bureaucracy. In addition, the new government health office would have “emergency powers, in addition to its existing powers, over persons as necessary” to issue orders prescribing “restrictive measures” (e.g., lockdowns). Yet, “public health” is not the legitimate object of government. An individual’s non-injurious personal health care decisions should not be under federal, state, or local jurisdiction. Compelling “preventive” medical treatment violates the fundamental rights of the people protected by the Bill of Rights and the 14th Amendment. Read more about this rollcall. S915 would create the office of the Secretary of Public Health and Policy to develop a “cohesive, coordinated, and comprehensive State Health Services Plan.” S915 passed the House on May 8, 2024, by a vote of 98 to 15. We have assigned pluses to the nays because this bill would consolidate several state agencies into one and put a single person or ‘health czar’ in control of South Carolina’s public-health bureaucracy. In addition, the new office within the executive branch would have “emergency powers, in addition to its existing powers, over persons as necessary” to issue orders prescribing “restrictive measures,” such as mask mandates, quarantines, or vaccinations. Yet, “public health” is not the legitimate object of government, as an individual’s non-injurious personal health care decisions should be considered private matters not under federal, state, or local jurisdiction in the United States. Compelling every person to receive or pay for “preventive” medical treatment violates the fundamental rights of the people protected by the Bill of Rights and the 14th Amendment. View vote details at scstatehouse.gov/billsearch.php?billnumbers=0915&session=125&summary=B |
Yes Motion to Table: HA29A-H5100 Prohibiting Non-Citizen Voter Registration (passed 98 to 14 on 5/8/2024). Struck down an amendment to the FY 2024-25 General Appropriations Act that would have prohibited state agencies from distributing voter registration forms to non-citizens. HA29A-H5100 would have amended the FY 2024-25 General Appropriations Act to prohibit state agencies from distributing voter registration forms to non-citizens. Non-citizens, especially illegal aliens, should not receive voter registration forms. The U.S. Constitution was written to “promote the general Welfare” of American citizens, and only “We the People of the United States” retain the “right of Representation in the Legislature.” Allowing non-citizens to illegally register to vote fails to “secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity.” South Carolina should exercise its authority under Article I, Section 4, of the Constitution, as well as the 14th and 26th Amendments, for purposes of election integrity, thereby ensuring equal protection of “the right of citizens of the United States to vote.” Read more about this rollcall. HA29A-H5100 would have amended the FY 2024-25 General Appropriations Act to prohibit state agencies from distributing voter registration forms to non-citizens. The House failed to advance HA29A-H5100 when it adopted a motion to table the amendment on May 8, 2024, by a vote of 98 to 14. We have assigned pluses to the nays because non-citizens, especially illegal aliens, should not receive “public assistance benefits” (e.g., Medicaid), let alone voter registration forms. The U.S. Constitution was written to “promote the general Welfare” of American citizens, and only “We the People of the United States” retain the “right of Representation in the Legislature.” Misappropriating taxpayer funds or allowing non-citizens to illegally register to vote fails to “secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity.” South Carolina should exercise its authority under Article I, Section 4, of the Constitution, as well as the 14th and 26th Amendments, for purposes of election integrity, thereby ensuring equal protection of “the right of citizens of the United States to vote.” View vote details at scstatehouse.gov/billsearch.php?billnumbers=5100&session=125&summary=B |
Yes J35 Defeating James Smith for Circuit Court Judge (passed 70 to 36 on 4/17/2024). Prevented former State Rep. and Democratic gubernatorial candidate James Smith from being elected to the position of Circuit Court Judge, 5th Judicial Circuit, Seat 1. J35 prevented former State Representative and Democratic gubernatorial candidate James Smith from being elected to the position of Circuit Court Judge, 5th Judicial Circuit, Seat 1. Justice is the overall purpose of civil government, and the care of human life—not its destruction—is its greatest responsibility. However, a judicial system is only as good as those who apply the law. James Smith’s open and unabashed support for abortion, as revealed in his endorsement from Planned Parenthood, renders him unfit to hold public office, particularly that of a judge. The right to life is the most fundamental, God-given, and “unalienable” right asserted in the Declaration of Independence and guaranteed by the Fifth and 14th Amendments to the U.S. Constitution. Read more about this rollcall. J35 prevented former State Representative and Democratic gubernatorial candidate James Smith from being elected to the position of Circuit Court Judge, 5th Judicial Circuit, Seat 1. House members adopted a joint motion to recommit the election to the Judicial Merit Selection Commission on April 17, 2024, by a vote of 70 to 36. We have assigned pluses to the yeas because justice is the overall purpose of civil government, and the care of human life—not its destruction—is its greatest responsibility. However, a judicial system is only as good as those who apply the law. James Smith’s open and unabashed support for abortion, as revealed in his endorsement from Planned Parenthood, renders him unfit to hold public office, particularly that of a judge. The right to life is the most fundamental, God-given, and “unalienable” right asserted in the Declaration of Independence and guaranteed by the Fifth and 14th Amendments to the U.S. Constitution. View vote details at scstatehouse.gov/sess125_2023-2024/sj24/20240417.htm |
Yes H5164 Expanding Government-Run Education (passed 69 to 27 on 3/21/2024). Would increase the amounts of annual refundable tax credits allocated to the Education Scholarship Trust Fund and expand eligibility to all private and homeschool students. Estimated Cost Per Household: $94 H5164 would increase the amounts of annual refundable tax credits allocated to the Education Scholarship Trust Fund and expand eligibility to all private and homeschool students. This bill would further expand the government’s monopoly on K-12 education, which seeks to displace traditional private or homeschooling in favor of universal state-sponsored schooling. Its exchange of public subsidies for curriculum and other regulatory controls effectively turns every participating student into a government-school student. Moreover, education is not the role of government; it is the responsibility of a child's family. The best “school choice" is for parents to choose not to place their child’s education in the hands of the state. Educational and economic freedom cannot be achieved by forcing other citizens to furnish their hard-earned tax dollars to fund all that now entails a compulsory, failing, and government-run K-12 school system. Read more about this rollcall. H5164 would increase the amounts of annual refundable tax credits allocated to the Education Scholarship Trust Fund through at least 2027-28 and expand eligibility to all private and homeschool students. The House passed H5164 on March 21, 2024, by a vote of 69 to 27. We have assigned pluses to the nays because this bill would further expand the government’s monopoly on K-12 education, which seeks to displace traditional private or homeschooling in favor of universal state-sponsored schooling. Its exchange of public subsidies for curriculum and other regulatory controls effectively turns every participating student into a government-school student. Moreover, education is not the role of government. A child's education is the responsibility of his or her family. The best “school choice,” by far, is for parents to choose not to place their child’s education in the hands of the state. Educational and economic freedom cannot be achieved by forcing other citizens to furnish their hard-earned tax dollars to fund all that now entails a compulsory, failing, and government-run K-12 school system. View vote details at scstatehouse.gov/billsearch.php?billnumbers=5164&session=125&summary=B |
Yes H3676 Article V Convention: Balanced Budget Amendment (passed 68 to 30 on 2/29/2024). Would apply to Congress for a “convention of the states” under Article V of the U.S. Constitution "limited" to proposing a balanced budget amendment. H3676 would apply to Congress for an Article V Convention “limited” to proposing a balanced budget amendment (BBA). Efforts to call an Article V convention should be resisted. Instead of failing to uphold their oath of office and attempting to rewrite the U.S. Constitution, state legislators should act to immediately nullify all unconstitutional federal laws. Whenever the federal government assumes undelegated powers, in violation of the 10th Amendment, nullification of such acts is the proper remedy. Moreover, simply following the Constitution’s limitations on federal power would more than balance the budget, whereas a BBA would have significant loopholes allowing for continued excessive spending. Article V was designed to correct potential errors or defects in the Constitution, not to misconstrue or abuse its powers. The States must use Article VI to enforce the Constitution, rather than use Article V to change it. Read more about this rollcall. H3676 would apply to Congress for a “convention of the states” under Article V of the U.S. Constitution, “limited” to proposing “fiscal restraints on the federal government through a balanced budget amendment (BBA). The House passed H3676 on February 29, 2024, by a vote of 68 to 30. We have assigned pluses to the nays because efforts to call an Article V convention should be resisted. Instead of failing to uphold their oath of office and attempting to rewrite the U.S. Constitution, legislators in South Carolina should act to immediately nullify all unconstitutional federal laws. Whenever the federal government assumes undelegated powers, in violation of the 10th Amendment, nullification of such acts is the proper remedy. Moreover, simply following the Constitution’s limitations on federal power would more than balance the budget, whereas a BBA would have significant loopholes allowing for continued excessive spending. Article V was designed to correct potential errors or defects in the Constitution, not to misconstrue or abuse its powers. The States must use Article VI to enforce the Constitution, rather than use Article V to change it. View vote details at scstatehouse.gov/billsearch.php?billnumbers=3676&session=125&summary=B |