| Printed Page 1048, Feb. 23 | Printed Page 1060, Feb. 28 |

The SPEAKER granted Rep. S. WHIPPER a temporary leave of absence for the day.

The SPEAKER granted Rep. McKAY a leave of absence due to an accident.

Announcement was made that Dr. Robert Cutting of Aiken is the Doctor of the Day for the General Assembly.

The House stood in silent prayer in memory of former Speaker of the House, Solomon Blatt, on occasion of his 100th birthday.

The following Bills were taken up, read the third time, and ordered sent to the Senate.

H. 3649 -- Reps. Jennings, J. Harris and Kinon: A BILL TO PROVIDE THAT THE BOARDS OF TRUSTEES OF THE SCHOOL ADMINISTRATIVE AREAS OF MARLBORO COUNTY ARE ABOLISHED AND THEIR POWERS AND DUTIES DEVOLVED UPON THE MARLBORO COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION, AND TO PROVIDE THAT THE ABOVE PROVISIONS SHALL NOT BE DEEMED TO ABOLISH THE ADMINISTRATIVE AREAS THEMSELVES.

H. 3659 -- Rep. Cato: A BILL TO AMEND ACT 199 OF 1971, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE NORTH GREENVILLE FIRE DISTRICT, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT MEMBERS OF THE GOVERNING BODY MUST BE ELECTED ON THE FIRST TUESDAY AFTER THE FIRST MONDAY IN NOVEMBER OF ODD-NUMBERED YEARS AND PROVIDE THAT THE TERMS OF MEMBERS SERVING ON THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS ACT ARE EXTENDED UNTIL THEIR SUCCESSORS ARE ELECTED AND QUALIFY.

The following Bill was taken up, read the second time, and ordered to a third reading:

S. 535 -- Senator Moore: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 22-2-190, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO JURY AREAS FOR MAGISTRATES' COURT, SO AS TO REVISE THE AREAS FOR AIKEN COUNTY.

The following Bill was taken up.

H. 3115 -- Reps. Shissias, Gamble, Neilson, Baxley, Allison, Elliott, Stuart and Knotts: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 20-7-420, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO JURISDICTION OF THE FAMILY COURT, SO AS TO INCLUDE THE AUTHORITY TO ORDER PARTIES IN A DIVORCE ACTION TO ATTEND THE PARENT AND CHILD TRANSITIONS PROGRAM, AN EDUCATIONAL PROGRAM CONDUCTED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF ALCOHOL AND OTHER DRUG ABUSE SERVICES ON THE EFFECTS OF DIVORCE ON CHILDREN; AND TO ADD SECTION 44-49-90 SO AS TO DIRECT THE DEPARTMENT TO DEVELOP AND IMPLEMENT THIS PROGRAM AND TO AUTHORIZE THE DEPARTMENT TO CHARGE A FEE FOR THE PROGRAM.

The Judiciary Committee proposed the following Amendment No. 1 (Doc Name L:\council\legis\amend\GJK\21426AC.95).

Amend the bill, as and if amended, by striking all after the enacting words and inserting:

/SECTION 1. Section 20-7-420 of the 1976 Code is amended by adding an appropriately numbered item to read:

"( ) In a proceeding involving minor children in matters of divorce, custody, or separation the court on its own motion or the motion of either party may order the parties to attend the Parent and Child Transitions program, an educational program to be conducted by the Department of Alcohol and Other Drug Abuse Services on the effects of divorce on children. The court must require the parties to pay to participate in the program, unless the parties are financially indigent. The department must develop a sliding fee scale to apply in assessing fees for the cost of the program."

"Section 44-49-90. The department shall develop and implement the Parent and Child Transitions program for use with the department's clients and as may be ordered by the Family Court in proceedings involving minor children in matters of divorce, custody, or separation. The department must charge a fee to participants in the program and must develop a sliding fee scale to apply in assessing these fees to make the program totally self-sufficient after the first year."

SECTION 3. The Legislative Audit Council must conduct a review of the Department of Alcohol and Other Drug Abuse Services' Parent and Child Transition program to evaluate the effectiveness of the program in assisting families and in particular children in coping with and adjusting to divorce. The council shall submit a report of its review and evaluation to the General Assembly before July 1, 1998.

SECTION 4. This act takes effect upon approval by the Governor./

Renumber sections to conform.

Amend totals and title to conform.

Rep. JENNINGS explained the amendment.

Rep. FLEMING moved to adjourn debate upon the Bill.

Rep. HARRISON moved to table the motion.

Rep. FLEMING demanded the yeas and nays, which were not ordered.

The motion to adjourn debate was tabled by a division vote of 30 to 28.

Rep. FLEMING spoke against the amendment.

Reps. MARCHBANKS, FLEMING, COOPER, CHAMBLEE, RICHARDSON, SIMRILL, ROBINSON, TRIPP, ELLIOTT, EASTERDAY, TROTTER and KIRSH objected to the Bill.

The following Bill was taken up.

H. 3042 -- Reps. Kirsh, Meacham and Richardson: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 40-11-160, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE FINANCIAL STATEMENT REQUIRED TO LICENSE A CONTRACTOR, SO AS TO REQUIRE AN AFFIDAVIT OF FINANCIAL CONDITION INSTEAD OF A FINANCIAL STATEMENT.

Amend the bill, as and if amended, by striking all after the enacting words and inserting:

/SECTION 1. Section 40-11-160 of the 1976 Code is amended to read:

"Section 40-11-160. The board shall may not issue a license to any a contractor above at the Group 1 2 or 3 level as this is defined by regulation of the board until such the contractor furnished furnishes the board with a financial statement certified by a certified public accountant or a public accountant. The board may not issue a license to a contractor at the Group 1 Level or the Group 4 Level as defined by regulation of the board until the contractor furnishes the board with an affidavit by the contractor of his financial condition."

SECTION 2. This act takes effect upon approval by the Governor./

Amend title to conform.

Rep. RICE explained the amendment.

Rep. ELLIOTT moved to adjourn debate upon the Bill until Tuesday, March 7, which was adopted.

The following Bill was taken up.

H. 3647 -- Ways and Means Committee: A BILL TO SUSPEND THE LIMITATION ON GENERAL FUND APPROPRIATIONS PROVIDED PURSUANT TO SECTION 11-11-140, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BEGINNING WITH APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 1995-96, TO PROVIDE FOR THE USE OF THE ADDITIONAL REVENUE FOR PROPERTY TAX RELIEF AND FOR THE CONTINUED SUSPENSION OF THE LIMITATION UNTIL SUFFICIENT RECURRING REVENUES ARE AVAILABLE FOR THE STATE PROPERTY TAX RELIEF FUND TO REPLACE OPERATING PROPERTY TAX REVENUES ON OWNER-OCCUPIED RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY, AND TO PROVIDE FOR THE REINSTATEMENT OF THE LIMITATION WHEN THESE RECURRING REVENUES ARE AVAILABLE.

Rep. SHEHEEN moved to recommit the Bill.

Rep. SHARPE moved to table the motion.

Those who voted in the affirmative are:

Allison          Brown, H.        Cain
Cato             Chamblee         Cooper
Cotty            Dantzler         Davenport
Easterday        Elliott          Fleming
Fulmer           Gamble           Hallman
Harrell          Harrison         Haskins
Herdklotz        Huff             Hutson
Jaskwhich        Keegan           Kelley
Klauber          Knotts           Koon
Lanford          Law              Limbaugh
Limehouse        Littlejohn       Marchbanks
Mason            McTeer           Meacham
Quinn            Riser            Robinson
Sandifer         Seithel          Sharpe
Shissias         Simrill          Smith, D.
Smith, R.        Stille           Tripp
Trotter          Vaughn           Walker
Wells            Whatley          Wilkins
Witherspoon      Wofford          Wright
Young, A.        Young, J.

Those who voted in the negative are:

Anderson         Askins           Bailey
Baxley           Beatty           Boan
Breeland         Brown, G.        Brown, J.
Brown, T.        Canty            Carnell
Cave             Clyburn          Cobb-Hunter
Delleney         Felder           Govan
Harris, J.       Harris, P.       Harwell
Hines            Hodges           Howard
Jennings         Kennedy          Keyserling
Kinon            Kirsh            Lloyd
McAbee           McCraw           McElveen
McMahand         Moody-Lawrence   Neal

Neilson          Rhoad            Richardson
Rogers           Scott            Sheheen
Spearman         Stuart           Tucker
Whipper, L.      Wilder           Williams

So, the motion to recommit was tabled.

Reps. HUFF, A. YOUNG, FELDER, HARRELL, DAVENPORT, FULMER, ROBINSON, KELLEY, KNOTTS and CARNELL objected to the Bill.

The following Bill was taken up.

H. 3124 -- Reps. Cromer, Keyserling, Meacham, Stille, Richardson, Stuart and Cotty: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 38-73-470, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO DISPOSITION OF THE UNINSURED MOTORIST PREMIUM, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT THREE DOLLARS, RATHER THAN ONE DOLLAR, OF THE YEARLY PREMIUM FOR UNINSURED MOTORIST COVERAGE MUST BE TRANSFERRED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF INSURANCE, RATHER THAN THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY, TO PROVIDE FUNDS FOR THE COSTS OF ADMINISTERING THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 38-73-738, RATHER THAN ARTICLE 3, CHAPTER 10, TITLE 56; TO AMEND THE 1976 CODE BY ADDING SECTION 38-73-738 SO AS TO PROVIDE FOR A SYSTEM WHEREBY THE DEPARTMENT OF INSURANCE ISSUES TO EACH FIRST TIME DRIVER'S LICENSE APPLICANT WHO IS AT LEAST FIFTEEN YEARS OLD BUT LESS THAN SEVENTEEN YEARS OLD A DRIVER TRAINING VOUCHER, AND PROVIDE FOR RELATED MATTERS; AND TO AMEND THE 1976 CODE BY ADDING SECTION 56-1-75 SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT A DRIVER'S LICENSE CANNOT BE ISSUED TO ANY PERSON WHO IS AT LEAST FIFTEEN YEARS OLD BUT UNDER SEVENTEEN YEARS OLD UNTIL THE PERSON HAS PROVIDED EVIDENCE OF SATISFACTORY COMPLETION OF AN APPROVED DRIVER TRAINING COURSE AS PROVIDED IN SECTION 38-73-738, AND PROVIDE FOR RELATED MATTERS.

Amend the bill, as and if amended, by striking all after the enacting words and inserting:

/SECTION 1. The 1976 Code is amended by adding:

"Section 56-1-75. (A) The department shall not issue a driver's license to any person who is at least fifteen years of age but less than seventeen years of age until the applicant has provided the department satisfactory evidence of successful completion of an approved driver training course as provided in this section.

(B) This requirement does not apply to a beginner's permit as provided in Section 56-1-50; however, it must be complied with before the issuance of a special restricted license as provided for in Section 56-1-180.

(C) An `approved driver training course' for purposes of this section is a driver training course which has been approved by the South Carolina Department of Education, the South Carolina Department of Public Safety, or any other responsible educational agency and conducted by:

(1) a recognized secondary school, college, or university;

(2) instructors certified by the South Carolina Department of Education, the South Carolina Department of Public Safety, or other responsible educational agency; or

(3) any other school approved and supervised by the South Carolina Department of Education, the South Carolina Department of Public Safety, or other responsible educational agency.

(D) The requirements of the course must include the following minimum criteria:

(1) eight hours of classroom instruction for driver training school approved courses;

(2) six hours of actual on-street practice driving;

(3) instruction on the effects drugs and alcohol have on the operation of motor vehicles and the consequences of drug or alcohol impaired driving; and

(4) a relevant test on the course material.

(E) For purposes of this section `satisfactory evidence' is a certificate, on a form prescribed by the Department of Revenue and Taxation, signed by an official of the school, the South Carolina Department of Education, the South Carolina Department of Public Safety, or other responsible educational agency, which certifies that:

(1) the person achieved a passing grade on a relevant test on the course material;

(3) for schools other than recognized secondary schools, college, or universities, the school was approved and supervised by the South Carolina Department of Education, the South Carolina Department of Public Safety, or other responsible educational agency.

(F) Successful completion of a driver training course as provided in this section entitles the person to the driver training credit provided in Regulation 69-13.2(I) for youthful operators.

(G) The department, upon satisfactory proof that a minor who is at least fifteen years of age but less than seventeen years of age has become a resident of South Carolina and has a valid driver's license from his prior state of residence but has not completed a driver training course, may grant the minor a temporary driver's license under such terms considered necessary by the department to allow the minor to operate a motor vehicle of a specified type or class in this State in order to obtain the driver training course necessary for a driver's license in South Carolina."

SECTION 2. This act takes effect January 1, 1996, but does not apply to any person born before January 1, 1980./

Amend title to conform.

Rep. COOPER explained the amendment and moved to adjourn debate upon the Bill until Wednesday, March 1, which was adopted.

The following was introduced:

H. 3695 -- Rules Committee: A HOUSE RESOLUTION TO SET BY SPECIAL ORDER H.3534, RELATING TO THE ENTERPRISE ZONE ACT OF 1995, FOR SECOND READING OR OTHER CONSIDERATION ON FEBRUARY 28, 1995, IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING THE CALL OF THE MOTION PERIOD AND TO PROVIDE FOR THE CONTINUING SPECIAL ORDER CONSIDERATION OF H.3534 UNTIL THIRD READING OR OTHER DISPOSITION.

Be it resolved by the House of Representatives:

That H.3534 is set by special order for second reading or other consideration on February 28, 1995, immediately following the call of the motion period and continuing each legislative day immediately following

Rep. HUFF explained the Resolution.

Rep. McTEER raised the Point of Order that the Bill was out of order under Rule 5.10 in that it had not been on the members' desks the required amount of time. He stated that the Rules regarding the setting of Special Order would not preclude the Rule. He stated that Rule 6.3, 14 (a), stated that notwithstanding the order of business set forth in Rule 6.3 a matter may be set for Special Order for consideration on a particular day at a particular hour or at a particular place on the Calendar and that it was clear that it was referring to the remainder of Rule 6.3, which was just the daily order of business and in no way would preclude the rights of the membership to know what the Bill said before they voted on it, which was what Rule 5.10 assured the House.

The SPEAKER stated that the position on the Point was that the House under Rule 6.3, 14 (a), could not set a matter for Special Order unless it had been on the Calendar for more than 24 hours.

Rep. McTEER stated that it could be set for Special Order but it could not be taken up until it had been on the Calendar for more than 24 hours.

The SPEAKER stated that on April 21, 1994, the House did exactly that on S. 1196.

Rep. McTEER inquired if the Point was raised on that day.

The SPEAKER stated that the Point was not raised.

Rep. McTEER stated that the Rules guaranteed the membership the opportunity to study a Bill before it was debated.

The SPEAKER stated that if you looked at Rule 6.3, 14 (a) as the ability of the House to change the Calendar, then you would conclude that it preempted that Rule. He further stated that there was precedence from then Speaker Pro Tempore Mike Daniel from June of 1981, which was the only thing found on this direct Point, and it indicated that setting a Bill for Special Order in effect preempted the 24-hour Point.

Rep. FELDER stated further into Rule 6.3, it stated that once the Bill had been set for Special Order, then it would be transferred on the Calendar. He stated that to raise the 24-hour Point, that the House had not reached the place where it would be permitted. He stated that once it had been set for Special Order, then the Body had placed it on a special place on the Calendar and therefore, not subject to that Point.

Rep. SHEHEEN stated that there was a way to resolve Rule 5.10 and that Rule 5.10 was merely a printing rule. He further stated that you could waive the printing under Rule 5.14 and the Rules addressed that, but that Rule 4.15 stated that you could not alter or suspend the Rules of the House by the vote of the House unless it was by a written resolution of the Rules Committee voted on and amended by two-thirds. He further stated that you could not suspend the printing rule except for how the Rules of the House allowed you to.

Rep. HASKINS stated that the Point was being raised too early and at an improper time because the question before the Body was the Special Order resolution and not the Bill and there was a Point raised on April 12, 1984, with regard to a Bill where a motion to commit the Bill had been made prior to the 24-hour Point being raised and at that time Speaker Schwartz stated that there was precedence supporting the position that the motion was the prevailing question and he sustained the Point. He ruled that the 24-hour Point was improper because the motion before the House was the Special Order.

The SPEAKER stated that if he didn't rule on it now, then he would be preempting Rep. McTEER from raising the Point.

Rep. McELVEEN stated that under Rep. SHEHEEN's reasoning earlier, that since it was a printing rule that he would not be waiving his right for a later time.

Rep. HUFF stated that the printing rule would normally be raised when you arrive at the Bill itself.

Rep. McELVEEN stated the Rule was there to protect every member and give them the opportunity to look over legislation.

Rep. HUFF stated that the remedy for that would be to vote not to set it for Special Order.

The SPEAKER stated that this Bill had been printed and was on the desk and on the Calendar.

Rep. SHEHEEN stated that Rule 5.14 stated any documents required to be printed under the Rules of the House. He stated that Rule 5.10 had always been interpreted as a printing rule and required the printed copies to be on the desks for 24 hours and the House had waived that before.

| Printed Page 1048, Feb. 23 | Printed Page 1060, Feb. 28 |