The South Carolina Chamber of Commerce (SC Chamber) and the South Carolina Manufacturers Alliance (SCMA) today announced a merger to form the South Carolina Manufacturers and Commerce (SCMC), effective January 1, 2026. While hailed as a bold step to unify the state’s business voice, critics warn the merger could marginalize small businesses, drown out citizens’ voices in policy-making, and fuel political cronyism by prioritizing corporate interests over community needs, potentially complicating local issues like zoning appeals.
The new organization – South Carolina Manufacturers and Commerce (SCMC) – will be the largest and most powerful advocacy organizations in the history of South Carolina.
Merging the SC Chamber and SCMA will allow the business community across the state to speak with one unified voice, bolster its presence in Columbia, expand its reach across South Carolina, and align its goals, according to a press release from the Chamber. SCMA Chair Grant Burns and SC Chamber Chair Thomas Rhodes led teams from both organizations in the merger discussions.
At an event in Columbia today, Gov. Henry McMaster, House Speaker Murrell Smith, R-Sumter, and Senate President Thomas Alexander, R-Walhalla, praised the merger as a way of pushing for the needs of the business community.
BREAKING NEWS 📰 @scchamber and @SCManufacturers are merging to form South Carolina Manufacturers and Commerce (SCMC) — a powerful new voice for business and industry across the Palmetto State.
Read more here: https://t.co/o8lLAnRwdX pic.twitter.com/XOtnIY0Zag
— SC Chamber of Commerce (@scchamber) October 14, 2025
While state leaders and business executives hail the merger as a “transformational opportunity”, the merger poses significant dangers, including:
1. Prioritizing Big Corporations Over Small Operators
The merger creates a “unified voice” that could tilt heavily toward large manufacturers and multi-national conglomerates, sidelining smaller, community-based enterprises. In South Carolina, where small businesses drive much of the job creation, this consolidation risks entrenching “crony capitalism” – where big players secure taxpayer-funded incentives and regulatory favors, leaving locals at a disadvantage.
- Example: Conservative critics have already noted that frustrated small business owners are shifting allegiance to groups like the Mom and Pop Alliance of SC, which explicitly opposes cronyism and advocates for sole proprietorships, partnerships, and small corporations. With the SCMC pushing for tax reforms and energy access that benefit large-scale operations (e.g., big factories needing cheap power), smaller retailers or family-run shops might face higher competition without equivalent support, potentially leading to closures or reduced market share in areas like Greenville or Charleston.
- Broader Impact: Past chamber efforts, such as lobbying for economic development deals, have been accused of favoring out-of-state giants over homegrown firms, exacerbating income inequality and forcing local businesses to compete on uneven terms.
2. Centralizing Power and Reducing Accountability
By blending the resources of two major lobbies into one mega-entity representing over 900 companies, the SCMC could dominate Statehouse discussions, making it harder for everyday South Carolinians to influence policies on taxes, workforce training, and more. This “politics of dependence” shifts decision-making to unelected business elites, potentially atrophying public engagement in democracy.
- Example: In recent legislative battles, like the failed push for broad lawsuit reform in 2025, the SC Chamber and SCMA were “beaten like rented mules” by trial lawyers, highlighting how consolidated power can lead to high-stakes wins or losses that bypass citizen input. Post-merger, residents in rural areas like Sumter or Walhalla might find their concerns – such as equitable job training programs – overshadowed by corporate agendas, fostering a sense of disempowerment and lower voter turnout.
- Broader Impact: Critics warn this echoes a “liberal corporatocracy,” where public funds indirectly support business advocacy, alienating taxpayers and reducing reliance on elected officials for reforms.
3. Favoring Development Over Community Protections
Chambers of commerce often lobby for business-friendly zoning changes to enable expansions, but a merged SCMC could intensify this, making it tougher for citizens to appeal decisions that prioritize industrial growth over neighborhood preservation. In South Carolina, zoning laws are governed locally but influenced by state-level advocacy, and increased lobby clout might streamline approvals for big projects while burdening residents with appeals processes.
- Example: In cases like the ongoing zoning disputes over Silfab in Fort Mill or John’s Marine Service in Travelers Rest, business interests have been accused of pushing annexations or rezoning without adequate community dialogue, showing “a lack of integrity and a refusal to engage in honest dialogue.” With the SCMC advocating for energy and manufacturing reforms, it could back rezoning for new factories or warehouses (e.g., in Richland County), leading to appeals under SC Code Section 6-29-800 where citizens challenge variances but face well-funded opposition from the merged group. This might result in more industrial sites near residential areas, raising property values for some but displacing others or harming local environments.
- Broader Impact: A 2018 SC Supreme Court ruling already exempted chambers from FOIA transparency requirements, potentially allowing opaque influence on local regulations without public scrutiny. Critics fear this merger could worsen such issues, turning zoning appeals into uphill battles against a “louder, stronger” business voice.
As the SCMC finalizes its structure under incoming CEO Sara Hazzard, supporters argue the merger will boost competitiveness and job growth. However, with no immediate responses to criticisms, observers recommend watching how it handles transparency and inclusivity. For now, the move underscores South Carolina’s evolving business-political dynamics – promising efficiency for some, but peril for others.