Printed Page 790, Feb. 8
| Printed Page 810, Feb. 8
|
Printed Page 790, Feb. 8
| Printed Page 810, Feb. 8
| On motion of Rep. H. BROWN, with unanimous consent, the following Bill was ordered recalled from the Committee on Labor, Commerce and Industry.
S. 442 -- Senators Rose and Mescher: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 58-31-330, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE AUTHORITY TO PROVIDE ELECTRIC POWER SERVICE IN BERKELEY COUNTY, SO AS TO REVISE THE
On motion of Rep. THOMAS, with unanimous consent, the following Bill was ordered recalled from the Committee on Education and Public Works.
S. 45 -- Senator Greg Smith: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 54-15-10, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY PROVIDING THAT BEGINNING FEBRUARY 1, 1995, AT THE EXPIRATION OF THE TERMS OF THE MEMBERS OF THE GEORGETOWN PILOTAGE COMMISSION, THE TERMS OF THE COMMISSIONERS ELECTED INITIALLY THEREAFTER SHALL BE STAGGERED, TWO SHALL SERVE FOR THREE YEARS, TWO SHALL SERVE FOR TWO YEARS, AND TWO SHALL SERVE FOR ONE YEAR. PROVIDED, HOWEVER, THAT AT THE EXPIRATION OF THESE TERMS, COMMISSIONERS SHALL BE ELECTED TO TWO-YEAR TERMS.
On motion of Rep. WELLS, with unanimous consent, the following Bill was ordered recalled from the Committee on Education and Public Works.
H. 3528 -- Reps. Wells, Allison, Littlejohn, Lanford, Beatty, Wilder, Walker, Vaughn, Davenport and D. Smith: A BILL TO AMEND ACT 36 OF 1967, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE SPARTANBURG COUNTY COMMISSION FOR HIGHER EDUCATION, SO AS TO PROVIDE FOR ONE ADDITIONAL MEMBER OF THE COMMISSION FROM GREENVILLE COUNTY, AND ONE ADDITIONAL MEMBER FROM CHEROKEE COUNTY AND TO PROVIDE FOR THE MANNER IN WHICH THESE MEMBERS SHALL BE APPOINTED.
The following House Resolution was taken up.
H. 3432 -- Reps. Harvin and Quinn: A HOUSE RESOLUTION AFFIRMING THE BELIEF THAT THIS STATE'S ON-GOING COMMERCIAL RELATIONSHIP WITH THE PEOPLE OF THE
Whereas, the people of the State of South Carolina enjoy a sister state relationship with the people of the Republic of China on Taiwan; and
Whereas, commercial interaction with the Republic of China on Taiwan has grown substantially in recent years to the benefit of our State; and
Whereas, a democratic, multi-party political system has been smoothly established in the Republic of China on Taiwan in recent years; and
Whereas, the direct role of the Republic of China on Taiwan in international development programs and humanitarian relief operations has expanded significantly during the past decade, often in close coordination with our nation's own such efforts; and
Whereas, seven Central American countries have proposed to the Secretary General of the United Nations that a supplementary item be included in the provisional agenda of the 48th General Assembly session to consider the exceptional situation of the Republic of China on Taiwan in the international community, based on the principle of universality and in accordance with the established pattern of parallel representation by divided countries in the United Nations. Now, therefore,
Be it resolved by the House of Representatives:
That the House of Representatives of the State of South Carolina, by this resolution, strongly believes that this State's on-going commercial relationship with the people of the Republic of China on Taiwan should be recognized as serving our mutual interests in an equitable and reciprocal manner; that the record of the Republic of China on Taiwan concerning her democratization at home and her humanitarian service abroad be accorded appropriate recognition by the people of this State; and that due consideration should be given by the United States to the readiness of the
Be it further resolved that a copy of this resolution be forwarded to the appropriate representative of the Republic of China on Taiwan.
Rep. HARVIN explained the House Resolution.
The Resolution was adopted.
The following Concurrent Resolution was taken up.
H. 3341 -- Reps. Fulmer, Hallman and Seithel: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION MEMORIALIZING THE CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES TO PROPOSE AN AMENDMENT TO ARTICLE V OF THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION THAT WILL ENABLE THREE-FOURTHS OF THE STATES TO AMEND THE CONSTITUTION SUBJECT TO CONGRESSIONAL VETO.
Whereas, all thirty-three amendments proposed to the United States Constitution since 1788 have been initiated by Congress; and
Whereas, more than four hundred petitions from the several states requesting a constitutional convention to propose amendments have been filed with Congress but have never resulted in the calling of a convention or adoption of an amendment; and
Whereas, there should be a proper balance of national and state power in a federal system; the present mechanism for the states to initiate a constitutional convention has proved to be unworkable; and the envisioned and desirable equipoise between national and state powers requires a means for the several states to be able to propose amendments to the Constitution; and
Whereas, an Intergovernmental Partnership Task Force has proposed in its 1989 report to the Intergovernmental Affairs Committee of The Council of State Governments an amendment to Article V of the United States Constitution to establish a thoughtful balancing of national and state interests in the constitutional amendment process; and
Whereas, the gist of the task force proposal is to enable the legislatures of
three-fourths of the states to propose amendments to the Constitution subject to
the veto of the Congress by a two-thirds vote of both houses within two years of
the states' submission of the amendments; and
Be it resolved by the House of Representatives, the Senate concurring:
That the General Assembly of South Carolina requests the Congress of the
United States to propose an amendment to Article V of the Constitution of the
United States which in essence provides that:
Whenever three-fourths of the legislatures of the several states deem it
necessary, they shall propose amendments to this Constitution. After two years
from the date of receipt by the clerk of the House of Representatives of a
certified copy of the proposed amendments from the state which represents three-
fourths or more of the several states, the proposed amendments shall be valid to
all intents and purposes as part of this Constitution, unless disapproved by
two-thirds of both Houses of Congress within that two-year period. Each state
shall have the power to rescind its action to propose the amendments only until
the beginning of that two-year period.
Be it further resolved that the General Assembly of South Carolina requests the legislatures of the several states to apply to Congress for the proposal of this amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
Be it further resolved that copies of this resolution be sent to the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives of the United States, to each of the senators and representatives in Congress from South Carolina, and to the legislatures of each of the several states, attesting to the adoption of this resolution.
Rep. FULMER explained the Concurrent Resolution.
The Concurrent Resolution was adopted and ordered sent to the Senate.
The motion period was dispensed with on motion of Rep. SHEHEEN.
The following Bill was taken up.
H. 3158 -- Reps. Quinn, Robinson and Harrell: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 8-17-370, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES EXEMPT FROM THE STATE EMPLOYEE GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE, SO AS TO EXEMPT EMPLOYEES OF THE OFFICE OF THE LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR, AND TO EXEMPT IN THE
The Judiciary Committee proposed the following Amendment No. 1 (Doc Name L:\council\legis\amend\JIC\5350HTC.95), which was tabled.
Amend the bill, as and if amended, in Section 8-17-370(2), as contained in SECTION 1, page 1, by striking (c) on lines 32 through 37 and inserting:
/(c) employees within the office of the Attorney General appointed by the Attorney General to serve at or above the organizational level of assistant directors of individual program components; and
(d) employees listed in subitems (a), (b), and (c) of this item serve at the will and pleasure of the employing constitutional officer./
So that when amended, item (2) reads:
/(2) (a) employees within the Office of the Governor who work at the mansion or in the State House or those employees appointed by the Governor to serve at or above the organizational level of assistant directors of the individual program components;
(b) employees within the Office of the Lieutenant Governor;
(c) employees within the office of the Attorney General appointed by the Attorney General to serve at or above the organizational level of assistant directors of individual program components; and
(d) employees listed in subitems (a), (b), and (c) of this item serve at the will and pleasure of the employing constitutional officer./
Renumber subitems to conform.
Amend title to conform.
Rep. HARRISON explained the amendment.
Rep. HARRISON continued speaking.
Rep. QUINN spoke in favor of the amendment.
Rep. S. WHIPPER moved to adjourn debate upon the Bill until Tuesday, February 14.
Rep. SIMRILL moved to table the motion.
Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Allison Bailey Brown, G. Brown, H. Cain Cato Chamblee Clyburn Cooper Cotty Dantzler Davenport Delleney Easterday Elliott Fair Fleming Fulmer Gamble Hallman Harrell Harrison Harwell Haskins Herdklotz Hines Huff Hutson Jaskwhich Kelley Keyserling Kirsh Klauber Lanford Law Limbaugh Limehouse Littlejohn Marchbanks Mason McCraw McKay Meacham Quinn Rice Richardson Riser Robinson Sandifer Seithel Shissias Simrill Smith, D. Smith, R. Stille Stuart Thomas Tripp Trotter Vaughn Wells Whatley Wilder Wilkins Witherspoon Wofford Wright Young, A. Young, J.
Those who voted in the negative are:
Anderson Baxley Boan Breeland Brown, J. Brown, T. Byrd Canty Cave Govan Harris, J. Harvin Jennings Kinon Knotts Lloyd McAbee McMahand Moody-Lawrence Neilson Phillips Rhoad Rogers Sheheen
Spearman Whipper, L. Whipper, S. White
So, the motion to adjourn debate was tabled.
Rep. HARRELL moved to table the amendment, which was agreed to.
Rep. BAXLEY proposed the following Amendment No. 4 (Doc Name L:\council\legis\amend\GJK\21382SD.95), which was tabled.
Amend the bill, as and if amended, by striking SECTION 2 and inserting:
/SECTION 2. This act takes effect January 1, 1996./
Renumber sections to conform.
Amend totals and title to conform.
Rep. BAXLEY explained the amendment.
Rep. D. SMITH moved to table the amendment.
Rep. BAXLEY demanded the yeas and nays, which were taken resulting as
follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Allison Bailey Brown, H. Cain Cato Chamblee Cooper Cotty Dantzler Davenport Delleney Easterday Elliott Fair Felder Fleming Fulmer Gamble Hallman Harrell Harwell Haskins Herdklotz Hutson Jaskwhich Keegan Kelley Koon Lanford Law Limbaugh Limehouse Littlejohn Marchbanks Mason McKay Meacham Quinn Rice Richardson Riser Robinson Sandifer Seithel Simrill Smith, D. Smith, R. Stille
Tripp Trotter Vaughn Walker Wells Whatley Witherspoon Wofford Wright Young, A. Young, J.
Those who voted in the negative are:
Askins Baxley Boan Breeland Brown, G. Brown, J. Brown, T. Byrd Canty Cave Clyburn Cromer Govan Harris, J. Hines Inabinett Jennings Kennedy Keyserling Kinon Kirsh Knotts Lloyd McAbee McCraw McElveen McMahand Moody-Lawrence Neal Neilson Phillips Rhoad Sheheen Spearman Stuart Thomas Tucker Whipper, L. Whipper, S. White Wilder
So, the amendment was tabled.
Rep. BAXLEY spoke against the Bill.
Rep. QUINN spoke in favor of the Bill.
Rep. BAXLEY proposed the following Amendment No. 11 (Doc Name L:\council\legis\amend\GJK\21383SD.95), which was rejected.
Amend the bill, as and if amended, by striking SECTION 2 and inserting:
/SECTION 2. This act takes effect July 1, 1996./
Renumber sections to conform.
Amend totals and title to conform.
Rep. BAXLEY explained the amendment.
The amendment was then rejected by a division vote of 40 to 54.
Amend the bill, as and if amended, by striking SECTION 2 and inserting:
/SECTION 2. This act takes effect December 31, 1995./
Renumber sections to conform.
Amend totals and title to conform.
Rep. GOVAN spoke against the Bill.
Rep. KENNEDY moved that the House do now adjourn.
Rep. CROMER demanded the yeas and nays, which were taken resulting as
follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Baxley Byrd Cave Clyburn Cobb-Hunter Govan Harris, J. Jennings Kennedy Martin McAbee Neal Thomas Whipper, S.
Those who voted in the negative are:
Allison Askins Bailey Boan Brown, G. Brown, H. Cain Carnell Chamblee Cotty Cromer Dantzler Davenport Delleney Easterday Elliott Fair Fleming Fulmer Gamble Hallman Harrell Harrison Harvin Harwell Haskins Herdklotz Huff Hutson Inabinett Jaskwhich Keegan Keyserling Kinon Kirsh Klauber Knotts Koon Lanford Law Limbaugh Limehouse Littlejohn Lloyd Marchbanks
Mason McKay Meacham Neilson Phillips Quinn Rhoad Rice Richardson Riser Robinson Sandifer Seithel Sheheen Shissias Simrill Smith, D. Smith, R. Spearman Stille Stuart Tripp Vaughn Walker Wells Whatley Wilder Witherspoon Wofford Wright Young, A. Young, J.
So, the House refused to adjourn.
Printed Page 790, Feb. 8
| Printed Page 810, Feb. 8
|