South Carolina voters got a rare side-by-side look Tuesday night at the two men vying to become the state’s next governor.

Democrat Jermaine Johnson and Republican Alan Wilson faced off Oct. 6 in what could be their only debate before Election Day, laying out competing visions for South Carolina on health care, taxes, housing, education, crime and other issues.

For Black voters across the Upstate, several exchanges stood out.

Health care

One of the sharpest differences came over Medicaid expansion.

Johnson supports expanding Medicaid in South Carolina, arguing that the state is leaving federal dollars on the table while residents continue to struggle with access to affordable health care. He also called for mental health to be treated with the same urgency as physical health.

“We need to actually treat mental health just how we treat health,” Johnson said.

Wilson opposes Medicaid expansion, raising concerns about its long-term cost to the state. He argued that South Carolina could eventually be forced to choose between rising health care expenses and other priorities, including education and law enforcement.

Hate crimes

South Carolina remains one of only two states without a statewide hate-crime law, and the issue produced a notable exchange.

Johnson supports passage of a hate-crime law and challenged Wilson’s record on the issue.

Wilson pushed back, saying it was “categorically false” to suggest he opposes tougher punishment for crimes motivated by hate. He said he supports enhanced penalties when someone commits a crime because of a victim’s identity but does not support laws that punish speech or thoughts.

Housing

Both candidates acknowledged South Carolina’s affordable housing challenges but offered different approaches.

Johnson proposed putting vacant and deteriorating buildings back into use, including converting properties into affordable housing. He also pointed specifically to the need to address homelessness among veterans.

Wilson focused on cutting regulatory barriers. He argued that unclear rules can discourage private investment in affordable housing and said South Carolina should make it easier for developers and investors to put money into housing.

Taxes and the cost of living

Both candidates promised tax relief, but their approaches differ.

Wilson said he wants South Carolina to eventually eliminate the individual state income tax.

“I’ve always advocated that South Carolina should go in a 0% income tax for everybody,” Wilson said.

Johnson criticized recent state income tax changes, arguing that they increased the burden on some lower-income residents.

“They raised taxes on the poorest working class people of South Carolina,” Johnson said.

Johnson said he would seek to repeal the changes and move toward a system in which more South Carolinians pay no state income tax.

Crime, fentanyl and surveillance

Crime produced some of the night’s most personal and contentious moments.

Wilson leaned heavily on his experience as South Carolina’s attorney general and criticized Johnson over his legislative record on fentanyl-related crimes.

Johnson countered that he supports tougher penalties for fentanyl offenses but objected to provisions in specific legislation that he believed could result in disproportionate punishment.

Johnson also shared the story of losing his brother to gun violence, bringing his personal experience with violent crime into the discussion.

The candidates also split over Flock license-plate reader cameras.

Johnson supports a statewide ban, citing concerns about privacy and misuse. Wilson does not support banning the technology, arguing that it can help law enforcement find kidnapping victims and criminal suspects. Wilson said safeguards should instead be put in place to prevent abuse.

Education: Who gets a seat at the table?

Johnson pointed to his experience volunteering and substitute teaching in South Carolina schools and called for citizen oversight committees that would give parents and community members a greater role in education.

Wilson focused on accountability for taxpayer dollars. His proposed Families First Audit Initiative would increase scrutiny of spending across major state agencies.

Data centers: Hit pause or move forward?

With data centers becoming an increasingly contentious issue across South Carolina, the candidates offered distinctly different approaches.

Johnson described the state’s data-center boom as the “wild, wild West” and supports a temporary moratorium while South Carolina develops stronger regulations. He also said communities should have a voice in whether data centers are built in their neighborhoods.

Wilson opposes a statewide moratorium. He supports guardrails but said communities that want the economic development and tax revenue associated with data centers should be allowed to pursue it.

Wilson also said data centers should bear the costs of the additional energy infrastructure they require rather than passing those costs along to existing utility customers.

Two very different choices

The debate ultimately showed South Carolina voters two candidates with very different ideas about how state government should work.

Johnson repeatedly argued that after more than two decades of Republican control in Columbia, South Carolinians should question promises to fix problems that have persisted under GOP leadership.

“The same broken promises that we’ve been hearing for 24 years,” Johnson said.

Wilson pointed instead to his experience as attorney general and promised to focus on public safety, affordability, infrastructure and government accountability while working across party lines.

“I’m asking all of you tonight that are watching for your vote because we are in this together,” Wilson said.

The stakes are historic. Johnson is seeking to become South Carolina’s first Black governor, while Wilson is looking to extend Republican control of the Governor’s Mansion.

But history isn’t the only thing on the ballot.

From the cost of a doctor’s visit and finding an affordable place to live to what families pay in taxes and how communities are policed, the next governor will make decisions that reach directly into the lives of South Carolinians.

For voters, the question now is which vision looks most like the South Carolina they want to live in.