Printed Page 770, Feb. 8
| Printed Page 790, Feb. 8
|
Printed Page 770, Feb. 8
| Printed Page 790, Feb. 8
|
Amend the Report further, as and if amended, in SECTION 5, beginning on line 25, page 3281-3, by striking /For those constitutional officers elected in the 1994 election whether or not they have prior service in that constitutional office, the limitation on terms herein contained begins with the terms starting in January, 1995. For those constitutional officers elected after 1994 whether or not they have prior service in that constitutional office, the limitation begins with the terms the constitutional officers first serve after 1994./ and inserting /A constitutional officer serving in office on the effective date of the ratification of the provision in this section limiting the number of terms a constitutional officer may serve may continue to serve his then current term if the above term limitations apply to him./
Amend the Report further, as and if amended, in SECTION 6, beginning on line 43, page 3281-3, by striking /to provide that for those constitutional officers elected in the 1994 election whether or not they have prior service in that constitutional office, this limitation on terms begins with the terms starting in January, 1995, and to provide that for those constitutional officers elected after 1994 whether or not they have prior service in that constitutional office, the limitation begins with the term the constitutional officer first serves after 1994/ and inserting /and to provide that a constitutional officer of this State serving in office when
Renumber sections to conform.
Amend totals and title to conform.
Rep. HASKINS raised the Point of Order that Amendment No. 2A was out of order under Rule 9.2 which states that at the third reading of a Resolution no amendment shall be permitted without unanimous consent.
Rep. ROGERS argued contra the Point.
The SPEAKER stated that Rule 9.2 stated that no amendment shall be permitted without unanimous consent on third reading and he sustained the Point of Order and ruled the amendment out of Order.
Rep. SHEHEEN asked unanimous consent to propose Amendment No. 2A on third reading.
Rep. SHARPE objected.
Reps. NEAL, ROGERS and HODGES proposed the following Amendment No. 3A (Doc Name L:\council\legis\amend\GJK\21355SD.95), which was ruled out of order.
Amend the Report of the Committee on Judiciary, as and if amended, by striking all after the enacting words and inserting:
/SECTION 1. It is proposed that Article III, Section 2 of the Constitution of South Carolina, 1895, be amended to read:
"Section 2. The House of Representatives shall must be composed of members chosen by ballot every second year by citizens of this State, qualified as in this Constitution is provided.
A member of the House of Representatives may not serve more than six complete two-year terms. A member of the House of Representatives serving in office on the effective date of the ratification of the provision in this section limiting the number of terms a House member may serve may continue to serve his then current term if the above term limitations apply to him. Service in another public office does not constitute prior service for purposes of this provision and this limitation on the number of terms which may be served applies whether or not the terms served in this office are consecutive or nonconsecutive."
SECTION 2. The proposed amendment must be submitted to the qualified
electors at the next general election for representatives. Ballots must be
provided at the various voting precincts with the following words printed or
written on the ballots:
SECTION 3. It is proposed that Article III, Section 2 of the Constitution of South Carolina, 1895, be amended by adding the following paragraph at the end:
"A member of the House of Representatives serving in office on the effective date of the ratification of the provision in this section limiting the number of terms a House member may serve, in addition to completing his then current term if such term limitations apply to him, may also serve additional terms as hereinafter specified. For those House members elected in the 1994 election whether or not they have prior House service, the six-term limitation begins with the terms starting in January, 1995, and for those members elected after 1994 whether or not they have prior House service, the limitation begins with the terms the members first serve after 1994."
SECTION 4. The proposed amendment must be submitted to the qualified electors at the next general election for representatives. Ballots must be provided at the various voting precincts with the following words printed or written on the ballots:
"Must Article III, Section 2 of the Constitution of this State relating
to the House of Representatives be amended so as to provide that House members
serving in office when a six-term limitation is ratified into law, in addition
to completing the term which they are currently serving if such term limitations
apply to them, may also serve additional terms thereafter, in that for those
House members elected in the 1994 election whether or not they have prior House
service, this six-term limitation begins with the term starting in January,
1995, and that for those members elected after 1994 whether or not they have
prior House service, the limitation begins with the terms the members first
serve after 1994?
SECTION 5. It is proposed that Article III, Section 6 of the Constitution of South Carolina, 1895, be amended to read:
"Section 6. The Senate shall must be composed of one member chosen from each County senatorial election district as established by law, to be elected for the term of four years by the qualified electors in each County, of the district in the same manner in which members of the House of Representatives are chosen.
A member of the Senate may not serve more than three complete four-year terms. A member of the Senate serving in office on the effective date of the ratification of the provision in this section limiting the number of terms a Senator may serve may continue to serve his then current term if the above term limitations apply to him. Service in another public office does not constitute prior service for purposes of this provision and this limitation on the number of terms which may be served applies whether or not the terms served in this office are consecutive or nonconsecutive."
SECTION 6. The proposed amendment must be submitted to the qualified electors at the next general election for representatives. Ballots must be provided at the various voting precincts with the following words printed or written on the ballots:
"Must Article III, Section 6 of the Constitution of this State relating
to the Senate be amended so as to provide that Senators may serve only three
complete four-year terms in office and to provide that Senators serving in
office when this provision is ratified into law may complete the term which they
are currently serving if the above term limitations apply to them?
SECTION 7. It is proposed that Article III, Section 6 of the Constitution of South Carolina, 1895, be amended by adding the following paragraph at the end:
"A member of the Senate serving in office on the effective date of the ratification of the provision in this section limiting the number of terms a Senator may serve, in addition to completing his then current term if such
SECTION 8. The proposed amendment must be submitted to the qualified electors at the next general election for representatives. Ballots must be provided at the various voting precincts with the following words printed or written on the ballots:
"Must Article III, Section 6 of the Constitution of this State relating
to the Senate be amended so as to provide that Senators serving in office when a
three-term limitation is ratified into law, in addition to completing the term
which they are currently serving if such term limitations apply to them, may
also serve additional terms thereafter, in that for those Senators elected in
the 1996 election whether or not they have prior Senate service, this limitation
on terms begins with the terms starting in January, 1997, and that for those
Senators elected after 1996 whether or not they have prior Senate service, the
limitation begins with the terms the members first serve after 1996?
SECTION 9. It is proposed that Article VI, Section 7 of the Constitution of South Carolina, 1895, be amended to read:
"Section 7. There shall must be elected by the qualified voters of the State a Secretary of State, an Attorney General, a Treasurer, a Superintendent of Education, Comptroller General, Commissioner of Agriculture, and an Adjutant General who shall hold their respective offices for a term of four years coterminous with that of the Governor. The duties and compensation of such these offices shall must be prescribed by law and their compensation shall must be neither increased nor diminished during the period for which they shall have been elected.
These constitutional officers may not serve more than three complete four-year terms. A constitutional officer serving in office on the effective date of the ratification of the provision in this section limiting the number of terms a constitutional officer may serve may continue to serve his then current term if the above term limitations apply to him. Service in
SECTION 10. The proposed amendment must be submitted to the qualified electors at the next general election for representatives. Ballots must be provided at the various voting precincts with the following words printed or written on the ballots:
"Must Article VI, Section 7 of the Constitution of this State relating
to the constitutional officers of this State be amended so as to provide that
these constitutional officers may not serve more than three complete four-year
terms and to provide that a constitutional officer of this State serving in
office when this provision is ratified into law may complete the term which he
is currently serving if the above term limitations apply to him?
SECTION 11. It is proposed that Article VI, Section 7 of the Constitution of South Carolina, 1895, be amended by adding the following paragraph at the end:
"A constitutional officer serving in office on the effective date of the ratification of the provision in this section limiting the number of terms a constitutional officer may serve, in addition to completing his then current term if such term limitations apply to him, may also serve additional terms as hereinafter specified. For those constitutional officers elected in the 1994 election whether or not they have prior service in that constitutional office, the three-term limitation begins with the terms starting in January, 1995, and for those constitutional officers elected after 1994 whether or not they have prior service in that constitutional office, the limitation begins with the terms the constitutional officers first serve after 1994."
SECTION 12. The proposed amendment must be submitted to the qualified electors at the next general election for representatives. Ballots must be provided at the various voting precincts with the following words printed or written on the ballots:
"Must Article VI, Section 7 of the Constitution of this State relating to the constitutional officers of this State be amended so as to provide that a constitutional officer of this State serving in office when a three-term
Renumber sections to conform.
Amend title to conform.
Rep. HASKINS raised the Point of Order that Amendment No. 3A was out of order under Rule 9.2.
The SPEAKER sustained the Point of Order and ruled the amendment out of order.
Rep. ROGERS spoke against the Joint Resolution.
Rep. LANFORD spoke in favor of the Joint Resolution.
Reps. JENNINGS and COBB-HUNTER spoke against the Joint Resolution.
Rep. HARRISON spoke in favor of the Joint Resolution.
Rep. WILKES spoke against the Joint Resolution.
Rep. McELVEEN spoke in favor of the Joint Resolution.
Rep. BAXLEY spoke upon the Joint Resolution.
Rep. SHEHEEN spoke upon the Joint Resolution.
Rep. FELDER spoke in favor of the Joint Resolution.
Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Allison Boan Brown, H. Brown, J. Brown, T. Cain Canty Carnell Cato Chamblee Cooper Cotty Cromer Dantzler Davenport Easterday Elliott Fair Felder Fleming Fulmer Gamble Hallman Harrell Harris, J. Harris, P. Harrison Harvin Harwell Haskins Herdklotz Huff Hutson Jaskwhich Keegan Kelley Keyserling Kinon Klauber Knotts Koon Lanford Law Limbaugh Limehouse Littlejohn Marchbanks Mason McAbee McElveen McKay Meacham Neilson Quinn Rhoad Rice Richardson Riser Robinson Sandifer Seithel Sharpe Shissias Simrill Smith, D. Smith, R. Stille Stoddard Stuart Thomas Townsend Tripp Trotter Tucker Vaughn Waldrop Walker Wells Whatley Wilkins Witherspoon Wofford Worley Wright Young, A. Young, J.
Those who voted in the negative are:
Anderson Askins Breeland Brown, G. Byrd Cave Clyburn Cobb-Hunter Delleney
Howard Jennings Kirsh Lloyd McCraw McMahand Moody-Lawrence Neal Spearman Whipper, L. Whipper, S. White Wilkes
So, the Joint Resolution, as amended, having received the necessary two-thirds vote, was passed, read the third time, and ordered sent to the Senate.
I am for term limits and believe 12 years is reasonable. I will not vote for a Joint Resolution which does not apply equally to all South Carolinians.
Rep. ROBERT J. SHEHEEN
I voted for the passage of term limits legislation; however, I must state that I personally oppose the concept expressed by such legislation in that I feel that our citizens, through their use of the ballot box, have the ultimate choice in defining the term of office that all elected officials serve. I recognize that term limits is a proposition that has been embraced by the public at large and, consequently, feel that it is my duty to represent the position of our citizens; therefore, my reason for voting for the term limits legislation today is to allow the people to decide this issue by referendum vote in the next General Election.
Rep. JENNINGS G. McABEE
I voted for the passage of term limits legislation; however, I must state that I personally oppose the concept expressed by such legislation in that I feel that our citizens, through their use of the ballot box, have the ultimate choice in defining the term of office that all elected officials serve. I recognize that term limits is a proposition that has been embraced by the public at large and, consequently, feel that it is my duty to represent the position of our citizens; therefore, my reason for voting for the term limits legislation today is to allow the people to decide this issue by referendum vote in the next General Election.
Rep. MARION P. CARNELL
As stated in the Journal in previous votes on this issue, I am a supporter of term limits but cannot in good conscience vote for a Joint Resolution which exempts the vast majority of the present General Assembly by not taking immediate effect. Citizens want term limits now, not twelve years from now. Therefore I abstain.
Rep. J. MICHAEL BAXLEY
I voted against H. 3281 "Term Limits" Joint Resolution because it gives a special exemption to sitting legislators and protects incumbents. True term limits should apply equally to everyone.
Rep. TIMOTHY C. WILKES
I was out of the House Chamber attending a meeting in the Office of the Division of Local Government discussing a grant for the Town of Ridgeville and the Town of Harleyville when the third vote on H. 3281 was taken. I have already voted in favor of H. 3281. Had I been in the House Chamber I would have voted yes on H. 3281 on the third reading. I wish my statement to be published in the Journal. Thank you.
Rep. GEORGE H. BAILEY
I did not vote on H. 3281 because I did not think it offered the voters a clear choice as to whether the term limits should be retroactive. Term limits should apply to everyone, including the current members.
Rep. DONNY WILDER
Rep. H. BROWN moved that the House recur to the morning hour, which was agreed to.
On motion of Rep. ALLISON, with unanimous consent, the following was taken up for immediate consideration:
H. 3538 -- Reps. Allison, Cobb-Hunter, Wells, Sheheen, Meacham, Seithel, G. Brown, White, Moody-Lawrence, Neilson, Wofford, J. Harris, Wilkes, Spearman, Gamble, Neal, Byrd, Cromer, Thomas and L. Whipper: A HOUSE RESOLUTION EXTENDING THE PRIVILEGE
Printed Page 770, Feb. 8
| Printed Page 790, Feb. 8
|