Indicates Matter Stricken
Indicates New Matter
The Senate assembled at 12:00 Noon, the hour to which it stood adjourned, and was called to order by the PRESIDENT.
A quorum being present, the proceedings were opened with a devotion by the Chaplain as follows:
In the 96th Psalm we read:
"O sing to the Lord a new song; sing to the Lord, all the earth."
(Psalm 96:1)
Please join me as we bow in prayer:
Gracious and loving God, as we gather in this Senate Chamber we acknowledge our need to sing Your praises, to worship You, and to serve You. May these Senators do just that today through their debate and though all of their actions, O Lord. Guide them and their staff members as they work to complete the important business of this State, doing so in ways that not only benefit the women and men and children of South Carolina, but also in a manner that brings honor and praise to You, dear God. And let the results truly lead to a joyful chorus of praise, to a heartfelt celebration in song. In addition, Lord, we lift up to You this morning Your servant and our colleague and friend, Senator FLOYD NICHOLSON. Be with the Senator and his family in the death this morning of his sister, Carrie Lee Jones. May the Nicholson family experience the comfort of Your embrace in their time of loss.
In Your loving name we pray, O Lord.
Amen.
Senators ROSE and DAVIS wished the following revised Statement to be included in the Journal of June 17, 2010, regarding the vote on Veto 48 to H. 4657, the General Appropriations Act.
We voted to sustain the Gov. Sanford's Veto 48, the increase in the Senate's operating budget, for the following reasons:
First, at a time when the South Carolina General Assembly is making severe cuts to other state agency budgets - cuts that are resulting in massive government employee layoffs - it is important for state senators to show that the Senate as an institution is willing to share the pain. State senators lose credibility as leaders by increasing the Senate operating budget by 46% while other agencies that deliver core government services are having their budgets cut to the bone. As stated by the governor, the money saved by forgoing this increase could be used to put 72 more troopers on the road, 64 more teachers in the classroom or 184 more social services case workers to work in helping the neediest among us.
Second, we do not believe everything that was said in an attempt to justify this increase to the Senate's budget is completely accurate. For example, this increase has nothing to do with reapportionment, as some state senators have claimed; the budget lists the dollars to be expended regarding reapportionment as a separate $1 million line-item appropriation. Nor does this increase have anything to do (nor should it) with the possible structural problems at the Gressette Building; at this point those problems are unknown and speculative, and at the time they are known, the amount for any repairs should be handled as a separate line-item appropriation.
Third, we believe the Senate had alternatives other than simply increasing its budget. For example, smaller increases could have been put in place gradually over a period of years rather than all at once. In addition, there should have been serious consideration given to curtailing some of the usual state senator perquisites. By our estimation over $300,000 would be saved if House and Senate members received a per diem, within limits, only for their actual and verified food and lodging expenses, as required by private businesses and other government agencies, instead of giving legislators in excess of $130 each day the Senate or House is in session even when no food or lodging expense is incurred. And another half million would have been saved if state senators had forgone next year's in-district expense allowance.
Unfortunately, the Senate refused to consider even the most modest of perquisite curtailments. On April 28, 2010, the Senate voted down a modest proposal (Amendment No. 36 to H. 4657) sponsored by Senators MASSEY and SHEHEEN, for which we voted, to cut $100, or 10%, off our monthly in-district expense. And no consideration was given to state senators doing without page services for the next fiscal year, as Sen. Rose has done for almost all of the past two years. Even these mostly symbolic gestures, had we implemented them, would have given the Senate more credibility with South Carolinians both in and out of state government.
Fourth, when faced with current budget constraints, we believe the Senate could have, and should have, adopted appropriate paradigm shifts in how it conducts its business, as other state agencies faced with steep budget cuts have been forced to do. One idea that deserves consideration is adopting a budget every two years and the legislature meeting only every other year, as are done in Texas. Simply increasing the Senate's budget by 46% will lead to business as usual without consideration being given to possible paradigm shifts; an opportunity to improve the efficiency with which the Senate conducts business on behalf of the people of South Carolina was lost due to the Senate financing its old way of doing business.
On April 29, 2010, the following remarks by Senator MULVANEY and accompanying questions and answers were ordered printed in the Journal regarding Amendment No. 55 to H. 4657, the General Appropriations Bill.
Gentlemen, I have one amendment -- one real amendment. We have had some small ones, some less controversial ones, but I want to warn you, this one is controversial. So I want to talk a little bit about why I am doing this because on its face, it seems fairly hard-hearted. This budget amendment is fairly simple. It takes all of the money from Educational Television this year -- all of it -- every single penny and gives it to the Department of Public Safety for law enforcement officers. That's about it. What's the argument? You know what the argument is and I guess we'll get a chance to talk about it with some questions. The argument is -- what's the priority? What's the priority as a State when we're as short as we are with funding our law enforcement officers? Do we really need to be in the television business? I'll be happy to take some questions.
Senator LEATHERMAN: Senator, are you aware that ETV supports K-12 beyond belief? Throughout the schools are we proposing that we shut them down for one year and not allow those programs to be broadcast in the classrooms?
Senator MULVANEY: Yes, sir.
Senator LEATHERMAN: Senator, we are trying to improve education. Are you opposed to little Johnny and little Suzy out there getting those ETV programs to help to them learn to read and write? Are you opposed to that?
Senator MULVANEY: I'm not opposed to education, Mr. Chairman. You know that I am not. You also know you may be aware that the next amendment in line actually takes the money from ETV and gives a portion of it to EFA, so we can have more discussions about how to best spend money for education in a few minutes; but, the bottom line is that we are in the television business -- the State of South Carolina is in the television business. You can go home any night. I do. I watch ETV, and you can't tell the difference most of the time in the special programs featuring the President Pro Tempore and the Speaker across the way and most of the time you cannot tell the difference between this and regular television. It has nothing to do with ETV. It is simply, in my mind, sir, a prioritization. Is this more important than putting more law enforcement officers on the roads?
Senator LEATHERMAN: Senator, I thought I heard you say just now "take a part of the money" and transfer it. What I am reading here is that it suspends operation and transfers all of their General Funds and other funds.
Senator MULVANEY: Yes, sir, but, Mr. Chairman, what I had mentioned was that the next amendment in line actually does the same thing. It takes all of the money away from ETV and splits it into three pieces, one of which is for EFA funding.
Senator HAYES: I just wanted to follow up with what the Senator from Florence was telling you. Not only does ETV provide distance learning for K-12, but, also, it is an integral part of higher education and also for law enforcement. They do training for law enforcement as well. So the very people you are trying to help with this, once again, are being hurt. It's not just your public television or public radio; it's a very small part. We have invested a great deal of money and effort to get these programs out to the colleges and the K-12 and law enforcement all over the State. Certainly, as well-intentioned as your set of priorities are, I think this is against some of the priorities that you claim to be seeking.
Senator MULVANEY: I appreciate that Senator. I do accept that reasonable minds can disagree on this, but I would suggest to you that if your interest is really in public safety then the top priority should be officers. While ETV certainly does play a public safety role, it's a very attenuated role -- it's not a direct role -- and that the best way to deal with public safety would be with more officers. The same way that ETV has a role in education certainly the best role of education would be to get more teachers in the classroom, which will be in the next amendment. So, I hear what you are saying. I think we will have to respectfully disagree on this one, but, I think your point is well-made.
Senator PINCKNEY: What do you have against Big Bird? I mean, did Elmo do something to you or did Oscar the Grouch say something wrong?
Senator MULVANEY: Senator, you make an excellent point. You can get that on regular television these days. When you and I were young men that was not the case. When ETV was started, it was what? One of three or four channels and there was no outlet with that kind of educational television.
Senator PINCKNEY: But, now Senator, you can't get Big Bird on anyplace but public television. Now how am I going to explain to my one-year old that she can no longer watch Barney and I tell her that my seatmate from Lancaster said that public TV is no longer worth funding? How do we tell teachers in the classroom that they can no longer have the science shows. What about Great Performances for our fellow lovers of classical music. How do we not have these wonderful shows that really add to the life of our children and bring families together? I can't go home and tell my daughter that I cancelled Big Bird. I just can't do that. Help me explain to her why we are cancelling Big Bird.
Senator MULVANEY: Let me answer this way, Senator. My 10-year old triplets are at the point where they are not watching many -- if not any -- of those shows, but they used to just the same as all the rest of our children did. We were big into Blues Clues, that was the big one for us and then there was Where in the World is Carmen San Diego, I think, was another one, all right? Those are all available on regular television. The history shows that you talked about are excellent programming which is another part of ETV. There's the History Channel, there's a National Geographic Channel, there are literally dozens of channels that are privately owned and not funded by the State.
Senator PINCKNEY: Now Senator, I don't mind if you cancel Barney and I take away all the funding in the world from Barney. I don't mind that. Now, if you are going to cancel all of public television, that becomes almost as silly as my questions. I mean public television is a vital part of what we do as a State and, I mean, law enforcement is important but wouldn't you agree that for preschoolers and their parents and the rest of us -- don't you see any real benefit for public television?
Senator MULVANEY: Absolutely I do. This is not about whether or not there is a benefit here. Absolutely, that is not the debate. The debate is the priorities. We have heard so much for the last several months about how we are cutting through fat, we're cutting through muscle, all the way down to the bone. We have heard that we cannot provide the most basic essential services and my point is simply, that in this circumstance, educational television is not an essential service.
Senator PINCKNEY: Senator from Lancaster, if we don't fund public television, you are going to need to help me explain it to a six-year old why we cancelled Barney and Sesame Street, and Cailliou and Word Girl, and Between the Lions, and I know all of that because I have young children so I am going to need you to help me understand if we are going to pass your amendment.
Senator MULVANEY: We have been down that road together. This past summer tremendous series -- a baseball series and Ken Burns' series -- were also available on regular television. It is almost impossible these days, aside from the pledge drive and the special programming that usually focuses on this Chamber and that Chamber, to tell the difference in what we are doing in educational television and what you can get on regular TV. Again, this is not about the benefits, this is not about the lack of, it's not about the fact that ETV does not provide something valuable to the community; certainly, it does. It's simply about priorities in an unusually desperate financial situation.
Senator BRYANT: Isn't it true that there is a lot of private support for Educational Television?
Senator MULVANEY: It is my understanding that there is. I have contributed to it in the past in this State and in other states. That's why I would imagine there is a lot of private support.
Senator BRYANT: They'll say brought to you by and they'll name a corporation or foundation, whatever. So, your amendment wouldn't necessarily shut down ETV, would it? It would just shut down the state portion and it might even increase private investment. And maybe they might want to sponsor "This Week in the Senate," the President Pro Tempore show. I don't know.
Senator MULVANEY: And maybe the Senator from Jasper would be the first in line to increase his donation so that his child can continue to watch Sesame Street. If it is valuable enough to the community, they will support it. That is the whole concept behind pay television. And, if you do believe that ETV does provide a valuable service, let it stand on it's on. What I really think we are saying, what we are hearing in here, is that it doesn't provide enough of a service to stand on its own. And in that circumstance, I think it is time for it to go for this year.
Senator BRYANT: And, Senator, if this does pass, I would tell constituents that are disappointed, if they can't see Big Bird -- and we don't know that -- but, that we could tell them that the roads are safer because we are putting the funds toward law enforcement. Did you know that if this passes that I plan to tell folks that are disappointed if their favorite shows are discontinued, that the roads are a little bit safer now because we put this money in law enforcement?
Senator MULVANEY: I think that would make sense, yes, sir.
Senator PEELER: Senator from Lancaster, did you know that a group of Representatives meet every Thursday morning about 9:30 in 518 Blatt Building to watch "This week in the Senate," -- the President Pro Tempore calls it "The Senate Speaks," I think, and if this amendment passed, it would be dead on arrival in the House because they have nothing else to do on Thursday morning and it would eliminate this show. I can't imagine the House going along with you doing away with ETV.
Senator MULVANEY: I would have you know that my first introduction to the Senate -- actually my first two formal introductions to the Senate were thanks to ETV. Number one, I was amongst that group that used to have nothing better to do on Thursday morning than to sit in Jimmy Merrill's office and watch that program -- all five of us in the State who were doing that. And, then my first formal introduction was as a member of the Senate on the President Pro Tempore's show with the Senator from Lexington. I can tell you that was a very interesting introduction to the Senate when you come over from the House.
Senator PEELER: I'll have to get the archives and look at that one, and, when everyone else gets through with their humor, Mr. PRESIDENT, I remember either you or the other presiding officer ruled yesterday that a similar amendment was ruled out of order because it violated Rule 24 and this would be the same thing. This amendment suspends permanent law and transfers so I would make that Point of Order that it is in violation of Rule 24.
Senator MULVANEY: I think it's pretty straightforward that it does none of those things. It simply takes for one year, the money from ETV. It does not change any permanent law in any fashion. It simply takes the funding and then moves it over to other line items and in this case another line item in the budget. It is exactly the type of amendment that I think is well within the lines of Rule 24. There is no permanent law affected in any fashion and it deals with the expenditure of funds.
Senator CAMPSEN: Senator, I applaud your efforts to try to focus the budget on the core functions of government, but, I am sure you would agree, that one core function of government is legislating. Wouldn't you agree with that? What we do in the General Assembly, that's a core function of government, isn't it?
Senator MULVANEY: I would think so, yes sir.
Senator CAMPSEN: And you would also agree that since the House does watch the President Pro Tempore's show every week, since they began that, that the quality of their legislative product has gone up dramatically has it not? Senator, would you agree with that one?
Senator MULVANEY: Can I pass on that one?
Senator CAMPSEN: As a recent former House member, you can pass on that one. But, my concern is that they are not watching it just for entertainment value, but, also to be enlightened. And my only concern, my only concern with your amendment is that if we cut out that show and we have that educational opportunity no longer available to the House that a core function of government, dealing with lawmaking, may go down dramatically -- the quality of the work product.
Senator MULVANEY: Let's talk about that, because I use this service. In fact, often times I know many of us will sit at our desks and watch what's happening in the House on the ETV link that is available on the website. To that extent, it is used. There is no question. First, I would say that that is easily enough done without ETV. We could simply wire this room up to do a live feed on the Internet without ETV's intervention and still allow that information to get out. Secondly, with all due respect to the group that watched this on Thursday morning -- and I was one of them -- there were maybe half a dozen of us on a really, really good day.
Senator CAMPSEN: No, I'm trying to be funny.
Senator MULVANEY: The point is that a lot of the things that ETV does, including coverage of the State House, both Chambers, could be done in another fashion without spending the taxpayer's dollars.
Senator CAMPSEN: I agree with that.
Senator MASSEY: Senator, tell us again how much money we are talking about here from ETV, do you know?
Senator MULVANEY: I do, I think it's about $9.9 million plus whatever is in the appropriate carry forward funds which, I think, was another $2 or $3 million. It translated, by the way, roughly into someplace between 175 and 190 additional law enforcement officers on the roads next year.
Senator MASSEY: And that was going to be my next question. We're talking to somewhere between probably $12 and $13 million and how many troopers are we talking about with that?
Senator MULVANEY: 175 to 190 are the numbers I was given by staff.
Senator MASSEY: Senator, my good friend, the birthday boy, over here, asked me if public radio is included in this? Do you know anything about that?
Senator MULVANEY: I believe that it is, but, again, I don't want to say something that is inaccurate from the dais. I believe that it is a line item from within the ETV section.
Senator MASSEY: So, what you are trying to do is to give more money Public Safety to put troopers on the road, is that right?
Senator MULVANEY: That is the intent of what this amendment does. Yes, sir.
Senator MASSEY: Senator, are you aware that and I hope that everybody will listen to this, because there are probably some people who don't know this; but, are you aware that there is hidden within the provisos of this budget an increase in registration fees for motor vehicles?
Senator MULVANEY: Would you tell me more about that, please?
Senator MASSEY: Well, every year we have to register our cars, are you aware of that?
Senator MULVANEY: Are you talking about Proviso number 89.135?
Senator MASSEY: Sounds like you are familiar with it.
Senator MULVANEY: This is the proviso that raises the registration fees for automobiles by $6?
Senator MASSEY: That's right. And are you aware that this fee is being increased in order to give money to troopers, a bunch of it.
Senator MULVANEY: I think that the proviso specifically says that the money that is used from that car registration fee, or the increase in the car registration fee, will be used for law enforcement officers, yes sir.
Senator MASSEY: All right then. Are you aware that what we are talking about with that increase in registration fees is somewhere a little over $22 million?
Senator MULVANEY: I had heard that, yes, sir.
Senator MASSEY: All right, now, Senator, you were here last week, when we had a pretty spirited debate on legislation that the Chief Justice asked for regarding court fees. Do you remember that?
Senator MULVANEY: I was here for that.
Senator MASSEY: Do you remember us having a debate about whether we should raise fees $22 million in order to help the highway patrol?
Senator MULVANEY: I don't remember any debate as to whether or not we should raise taxes $22 million for the highway patrol.
Senator MASSEY: Do you remember us having any debate at all on this floor about what kind of position the highway patrol was in, the financial position the highway patrol was in and whether we actually need to, let's call it what it is -- we are raising taxes on everybody across the State pretty much, on people who own cars, isn't that right?
Senator MULVANEY: We are.
Senator MASSEY: Do you remember hearing any type of debate in this body about what the financial situation was with the patrol and why we needed to raise that amount of money?
Senator MULVANEY: Nope.
Senator MASSEY: Are you aware, Senator, that there are several people in here who believe that that proviso potentially violates the Rules of the Senate?
Senator MULVANEY: I am aware of that, yes sir.
Senator MASSEY: Now tell us, Senator, what happens, if that Point of Order is made and sustained -- as I believe that it probably would be -- and the patrol loses that amount of money and they are not getting the $9 million that you are asking for here. What's going to happen to the patrol?
Senator MULVANEY: They are going to lose several hundred positions. What you are talking about is Proviso 89.135 which proposes to raise registration fees on automobiles by about $22 million. There has been some discussion, I have been aware of some discussion, as whether that money violates Rule 24. If it goes away, wouldn't it be nice to have the additional money here to keep those officers on the road? If that is what you are getting at, I tend to agree with you Senator.
Senator MASSEY: Now tell me, I know you are not opposed to education. You probably even like Big Bird. Is that right?
Senator MULVANEY: I was a Grover fan, myself. But, that probably is getting more information than most people need, so, I was a big Grover fan.
Senator MASSEY: Senator, do you believe like I do that at some point this State is going to have to make responsible budget decisions and going to have to start prioritizing the things that are core essentials for government as opposed to the things that we want?
Senator MULVANEY: Well, let's talk about that. Why would somebody, by the way, who is running for Congress get up and do something as unpopular as this? Why would I do that? Because I believe that we are making some mistakes here in this process. What I have not seen -- and with all due respect to the Finance Committee -- what I have not seen are the really, really difficult cuts. I know that there have been cuts. I know that there have been cuts through fat, through muscle, down to the bone. But, when I see a budget that still has Educational Television services in it, what that tells me is that we are in a state of denial.
Senator MASSEY: How about the Arts Commission, Senator?
Senator MULVANEY: And the Human Rights Commission and the various other groups? What that tells me is that we have not come to grips with what is going to happen next year when the stimulus money is gone. We are simply kicking the can down the road for another year saying that, "Well, we hope it gets better next year." We really are in a position to make the really, really unpopular decisions this year by going after things that are very popular like the Arts Commission and like Educational Television. So, yes, sir. That is the root of what is getting ready to happen here.
Senator MASSEY: So when that Point of Order is made and it is sustained and we lose that money and then we also don't have the $9 million or actually $12 or $13 million from here, then we are talking about the patrol having some real problems because this body, and lets include the House in this, failed to budget in a responsible manner, isn't that right?
Senator MULVANEY: I tend to agree, yes, sir.
Senator MASSEY: I appreciate your amendment. Thank you.
Senator RANKIN: Is this a sincere amendment where you genuinely want to take the money that is operating ETV away from them and let them rest solely on sponsorships?
Senator MULVANEY: Well, Senator, I have not been in the body very long -- you and I don't know each other extraordinarily well -- but I think it would be entirely consistent with everything you have seen out of me for the last year and a half to say that I am very interested as to what the core function of government is. So, I think that, yes, it is absolutely a sincere motion. In fact, I am at somewhat of a loss as what you think it might be other than that.
Senator RANKIN: Well, I wonder. Do you have an educational radio or television satellite within Lancaster? Do they broadcast in Lancaster?
Senator MULVANEY: I think that the nearest broadcast is in Rock Hill.
Senator RANKIN: Is that part of your district?
Senator MULVANEY: It's not. I believe that the actually facility itself lies in the other Senator from York's district, but, it is very close to the boundary between my district and his. My guess is that I probably have folks in my district who work for educational television.
Senator RANKIN: OK. Are you aware of what the State appropriated to modernize the technology for ETV? Perhaps, when you were in the House? Do you recall?
Senator MULVANEY: That number does not ring a bell for me, Senator. I'm sorry.
Senator RANKIN: OK. We appropriated a huge expense of money that we as a State advanced to modernizing the satellites and the broadcast and broadband.
Senator MULVANEY: Wasn't there something there for broadband as well? Yes, I remember that.
Senator RANKIN: And so, would you have that money and that expense effectively shut down or were you just saying you can exist, but you are not going to exist with state dollars.
Senator MULVANEY: I don't think it's wasted, if that's your point. I mean it is certainly an asset. It can still function. Again, if ETV offers something worthwhile to the public, it would strike me that the public would support it and it would continue to work and that the money we have expended as a State would not go to waste. You could see it being privatized possibly and sold off.
Senator RANKIN: So, you would want to sell ETV?
Senator MULVANEY: I would want ETV to make its own decisions. What I am trying to do is to simply say, "Listen, we can no longer afford in this economic environment to make ETV a priority."
Senator RANKIN: Do you know that they are actually making money, when they produce locally within South Carolina, both music and television programming? Are you aware that they make money?
Senator MULVANEY: I have no reason to believe that is false, no, sir.
Senator RANKIN: Are you a listener, by chance, of either the radio or do you watch ETV?
Senator MULVANEY: No, I listen to more public radio than folks on my side of the aisle would probably be comfortable with.
Senator RANKIN: Are you aware of the fundraising efforts that they have where they will give you a cup, give you music, give you a T-shirt if you give $100 or higher?
Senator MULVANEY: Yes, sir.
Senator RANKIN: Have you ever contributed to that?
Senator MULVANEY: You probably can tell from my political philosophy that I am a big fan of the Prairie Home Companion, which I do listen to religiously on Saturday.
Senator RANKIN: Have you ever contributed to ETV as a member?
Senator MULVANEY: I don't know if I did to the channel when I lived in North Carolina or if I do now.
Senator RANKIN: You know, in fact, there is talk about people like you. I'm not talking about North Carolina ETV, I'm talking about your own State. You are a taker and not a giver.
Senator MULVANEY: The point is there were several gentlemen who got beat up last week for telling things that were not exactly 100% accurate from the dais, but I'm telling you I have supported public television and public radio in the past.
Senator RANKIN: Is that with your heart or with your pocketbook?
Senator MULVANEY: There were checks, there was no question about that.
Senator RANKIN: All right, is that SC ETV or is that North Carolina?
Senator MULVANEY: Where I live, it is always hard to tell.
Senator RANKIN: I am genuinely concerned because it is not just about what we have spent and the federal money that is also appropriated that we get as a result of a product that we generate here. Marian McPartland's show, Piano Jazz, is made here. It is a product produced out of South Carolina. She is a world-renowned pianist. Have you ever heard of her?
Senator MULVANEY: I have, yes.
Senator RANKIN: And there are others, many others, that they produce that are making money for us. I wonder for not just the Barney's and the other great programs that are now leaving my mind because my children now are ages 9 and 12 -- I wonder for the young families who not only are getting the benefit of all this, but also, for those in the classroom -- whether you would tell the teachers that this is positive for them? That we are going to shut the lights off at ETV.
Senator MULVANEY: Absolutely I would. I would not hesitate to tell teachers that this is good for them. Because what I would tell them is, "Listen, we had a choice in Columbia between continuing ETV and putting 180 additional police officers on the streets." Now, I could have that conversation straight in the face with any teacher in this State. So, yes, sir. I could not be up here making this amendment in good faith if I could not have that exact conversation.
Senator RANKIN: So, you are taking this money and putting this to hiring more police officers for the streets and highway patrolmen?
Senator MULVANEY: That's exactly right.
Senator RANKIN: And your support -- and I don't know if there are efforts to increase within the budget by the agency responsible for that or the subcommittee -- are you saying that you are taking ETV off the TV and putting more cars and troopers on the road and that's for one year?
Senator MULVANEY: Yes, I can only do it for one year without violating Rule 24.
Senator RANKIN: And you would hire somebody and you as a potential employee would take a job that you knew had a shelf life of only one year?
Senator MULVANEY: I think I took a job like that in the House, didn't I?
Senator RANKIN: That's a two-year job.
Senator MULVANEY: OK. Is that what it was?
Senator RANKIN: And sincerely, there is no way you are going to train, the police academy is going to train these folks...
Senator MULVANEY: This body can see the benefit of having the additional 180 officers on the road. Actually we can do this again next year, can't we? This a recurring line at ETV. So we can be right back up again next year and have this same conversation and you can vote for it again next year if you want to.
Senator RANKIN: To delete ETV, but increase law enforcement?
Senator MULVANEY: Yes, sir.
Senator RANKIN: Now, that is a great argument and I hope you get to make that somewhere beyond the Senate. Perhaps you'll get to make that in Congress. I am curious though, in all sincerity, with all that you've got that are the benefits of ETV and you have heard smatterings of the offerings that they have -- radio, television, broadcasting, production -- I guess, perhaps, if there is one show that you might not like, perhaps not the Senate or the House, but maybe you would like to delete the State of the State Address? Because, surely there are fewer people watching that than watch the ....
Senator MULVANEY: You are barking up the wrong tree on that one, Senator. I would have no difficulty cutting out the State of the State Address.
Senator RANKIN: And I am curious, have you ever, after the State of the State Address, gotten in the line-up as a House member, Senator, to speak about the comments of the Governor?
Senator MULVANEY: No, sir.
Senator RANKIN: You have not?
Senator MULVANEY: No, sir.
Senator RANKIN: You ought to try it. You get a lot of points at home if you do.
Senator MULVANEY: No, sir. I don't have the patience for that.
Senator SHEHEEN: Mr. PRESIDENT, has the PRESIDENT ruled on the Point of Order?
Senator McCONNELL: No, I am getting ready to.
Senator SHEHEEN: I would love to hear it before we have a lot more dialogue.
Senator McCONNELL: All right, I have looked very carefully at this. It was probably one of the most difficult Points of Order, Senator from Cherokee. And, at first glance it raises serious questions under Rule 24. We looked at the statute on ETV. The statute on ETV is loosely drawn and only uses precatory language regarding decision-making. The amendment has been carefully worded to use the word "spend" for the fiscal year and the appropriation and then has excepted out from coverage all the funds that are otherwise directed in the statute. For that reason, it appears to fit. It does not conflict with, amend or add to the permanent law. It very neatly fits into an exception to suspend for a year. So for that reason we will have to overrule the Point of Order. But, I tell you it was a very difficult Point of Order.
Senator FAIR: Senator, did the Senator from Aiken when he was questioning you ask if you knew that there was a proviso hidden in the budget? Did he say "hidden" in the budget?
Senator MULVANEY: No. What I heard was there was a tax increase hidden in the budget. If he had said there was a proviso hidden in this budget, obviously -- we don't "hide" provisos in the budget.
Senator FAIR: He was referring to the $6 tag saying that you subsequently talked about?
Senator MULVANEY: Yes, sir.
Senator FAIR: Did you have any trouble finding it?
Senator MULVANEY: No, sir. I sat down to read it.
Senator FAIR: Would you say that it was hidden?
Senator MULVANEY: As a tax, yes, sir, I think that it is. Because it doesn't use the word "tax." It doesn't pass nearly, for example, the level of debate that we had last week on something that was one tenth the size.
Senator FAIR: Putting semantics aside, wouldn't you agree that it was not hidden? And, did you know Senate Finance and maybe three subcommittees debated that with the leadership with the public present? To suggest to the public that it was hidden I think is an attack really on what we were trying to get done -- what we are trying to get done with that and we will have to live with the consequences of what comes in the hours ahead. But, one of the questions that you asked, I have the answers to. What will happen if that $6 additional tax -- although it is not a tax -- on tags, doesn't come to fruition? The House, by the way -- with the House version of the budget when it came over here had already cut the Highway Patrol by 90 officers without any further reductions, the Department of Public Safety has to lay off an additional 152 officers and not all of those are highway patrolmen.
Anyway, it gets down to, without this money, it gets down to 654 which is roughly half of what the highway patrol will be. Do you know which counties they are coming to Senator, to do away with the third shift first? I'm just kidding. There are a lot of us -- I have a smile on my face -- but I am very, very concerned about what is going to happen to Public Safety of South Carolina. Now, we have the option in the Senate, did you know, to pull the trigger on what we think is an "ought to be" situation and override a circumstance that we refer to as "what is"? And we are talking about "what is". We are looking at a reduction in force in the Highway Patrol based on, did you know that? Let me suggest something. You may get some more votes if you were to carry this over. Because if the attack on the Highway Patrol continues, and that funding source is removed, then eliminating ETV becomes an option along with eliminating libraries in Clarendon County and other things because we have to have the Highway Patrol.
Senator MULVANEY: Well, it's not true, because what you are getting ready to say is that the funding source we have is the tax, and it's not true. The funding source we have is the General Fund. And we made a decision not to fund the officers fully.
Senator FAIR: That's correct, and you are trying to offer something by replacing it. At least that is better than what some will do and I am suggesting to you that you don't have a chance of passage, in my opinion, with this right now. And, whereas later, if the attack on the Highway Patrol continues and if successful, then you might have a chance in passing your desire.
Senator MULVANEY: Thank you, Senator.
Senator MASSEY: Senator, I want to see if you heard what I just heard? Did you just hear that if we actually follow the rules, imagine that, if we actually follow the rules, that we will actually be responsible and find money to fund the Highway Patrol? Did you just hear that?
Senator MULVANEY: I could see how you could have heard that, yes, sir.
Senator MASSEY: That if we actually follow the rules, that we will start prioritizing in funding the core essentials of government. By cutting things like -- unfortunately and I would hate to do this -- but if we have to start ranking the Highway Patrol and ETV, the patrol is going to win out for me. But that we will start ranking things and we are going to start funding the core essentials of government.
Senator MULVANEY: That's what this is. This is ranking. Face it. That's what we're doing. That's what this entire process is about. How are we going to rank the priorities of the State of South Carolina? I think this amendment simply looks at the budget and says, I think, that a small piece of it is out of whack. $9 million is not properly spent. It has nothing to do with ETV. Gentlemen, I appreciate your time. I also appreciate your questions and I move adoption of the amendment.
The PRESIDENT called for Petitions, Memorials, Presentments of Grand Juries and such like papers.
The following appointment was transmitted by the Honorable Mark C. Sanford:
Initial Appointment, Anderson County Magistrate, with the term to commence April 30, 2010, and to expire April 30, 2011
Samuel Thompson Tucker, III, 230 Grace Lane, Piedmont, SC 29673 VICE William P. Steele, Jr.
Pursuant to an invitation the Honorable Speaker and House of Representatives appeared in the Senate Chamber on June 21, 2010, at 5:30 P.M. and the following Acts and Joint Resolutions were ratified:
(R339, S. 107 (Word version)) -- Senators Ryberg, Bryant, Massey, Peeler, L. Martin and Alexander: AN ACT TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING SECTION 16-3-755 SO AS TO DEFINE NECESSARY TERMS, CREATE LEVELS OF SEXUAL BATTERY WITH A STUDENT OFFENSES, PROVIDE PENALTIES, AND PROVIDE AN EXCEPTION FOR PERSONS LAWFULLY MARRIED.
L:\COUNCIL\ACTS\107AHB10.DOCX
(R340, S. 304 (Word version)) -- Senators Leatherman, Alexander, Land, Campsen and Grooms: AN ACT TO AMEND SECTION 6-1-760, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO MUNICIPAL OR COUNTY ORDINANCES IMPOSING AN ACCOMMODATIONS FEE AND THE USE OF THE REVENUE FROM THE FEES INCLUDING THE ISSUANCE OF CERTAIN BONDS SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT THE PROCEEDS OF LOCAL ACCOMMODATIONS FEES, HOSPITALITY FEES, AND STATE ACCOMMODATIONS FEES MAY BE PLEDGED AS SECURITY FOR THE PAYMENT OF BONDS FOR CAPITAL PROJECTS USED TO ATTRACT AND SUPPORT TOURISTS; AND TO AMEND SECTION 6-4-10, RELATING TO STATE ACCOMMODATIONS TAXES, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT REVENUES ALLOCATED FOR TOURISM ADVERTISING AND PROMOTION MAY NOT BE PLEDGED AS SECURITY FOR CERTAIN BONDS OR TO RETIRE SUCH BONDS.
L:\COUNCIL\ACTS\304HTC10.DOCX
(R341, S. 382 (Word version)) -- Senator Hayes: AN ACT TO AMEND SECTION 62-2-804, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE EFFECT OF PROVISION FOR SURVIVORSHIP ON SUCCESSION TO JOINT TENANCY, SO AS TO MAKE SUCH PROVISIONS APPLICABLE TO REAL PROPERTY HELD IN JOINT TENANCY; AND BY ADDING SECTION 62-2-805 SO AS TO PROVIDE FOR A PRESUMPTION THAT A DECEDENT AND THE DECEDENT'S SPOUSE HELD TANGIBLE PERSONAL PROPERTY IN A JOINT TENANCY WITH RIGHT OF SURVIVORSHIP, FOR EXCEPTIONS TO THE PRESUMPTION, AND FOR THE STANDARD OF PROOF TO OVERCOME THE PRESUMPTION.
L:\COUNCIL\ACTS\382SD10.DOCX
(R342, S. 981 (Word version)) -- Senators Rose and Knotts: AN ACT TO AMEND SECTION 63-3-530, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE JURISDICTION OF THE FAMILY COURT, INCLUDING JURISDICTION TO ORDER VISITATION FOR GRANDPARENTS, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT THE COURT MAY ORDER GRANDPARENT VISITATION IF THE COURT FINDS THAT THE CHILD'S PARENTS ARE UNREASONABLY DEPRIVING THE GRANDPARENT VISITATION WITH THE CHILD AND HAVE DENIED VISITATION FOR MORE THAN NINETY DAYS, THAT THE GRANDPARENT MAINTAINED A RELATIONSHIP WITH THE CHILD SIMILAR TO A PARENT-CHILD RELATIONSHIP, THAT AWARDING VISITATION WOULD NOT INTERFERE WITH THE PARENT-CHILD RELATIONSHIP, AND THAT THE PARENTS ARE UNFIT OR THAT THERE ARE COMPELLING CIRCUMSTANCES TO OVERCOME THE PRESUMPTION THAT THE PARENTAL DECISION IS IN THE CHILD'S BEST INTEREST; TO AUTHORIZE THE JUDGE TO AWARD ATTORNEY'S FEES TO THE PREVAILING PARTY; AND TO DEFINE "GRANDPARENT".
L:\COUNCIL\ACTS\981AC10.DOCX
(R343, S. 1051 (Word version)) -- Senator Davis: AN ACT TO AMEND SECTION 48-39-290, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO RESTRICTIONS, EXCEPTIONS, AND SPECIAL PERMITS CONCERNING CONSTRUCTION AND RECONSTRUCTION SEAWARD OF THE BASELINE OR BETWEEN THE BASELINE AND THE SETBACK LINE, SO AS TO REVISE THE DESCRIPTION OF A PRIVATE ISLAND WITH AN ATLANTIC SHORELINE, WHICH IS EXEMPT FROM THE PROVISIONS THAT DO NOT ALLOW NEW EROSION CONTROL STRUCTURES SEAWARD OF THE SETBACK LINE AND TO PROVIDE THAT THE BASELINE OF THIS ISLAND IS AT THE LANDWARD EDGE OF THE EROSION CONTROL DEVICE AND THAT THE SETBACK LINE IS TWENTY FEET LANDWARD OF THE BASELINE; AND BY ADDING SECTION 48-39-45 SO AS TO CREATE THE COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT ADVISORY COUNCIL TO THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL'S OFFICE OF OCEAN AND COASTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AND TO PROVIDE FOR ITS MEMBERS, POWERS, AND DUTIES IN IMPLEMENTING THE SOUTH CAROLINA COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT ACT.
L:\COUNCIL\ACTS\1051AC10.DOCX
(R344, S. 1392 (Word version)) -- Transportation Committee: AN ACT TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING ARTICLES 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, AND 123 TO CHAPTER 3, TITLE 56 SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT THE DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES MAY ISSUE "DISTINGUISHED SERVICE MEDAL" SPECIAL LICENSE PLATES, "SECOND AMENDMENT" SPECIAL LICENSE PLATES, "DISTINGUISHED SERVICE CROSS" SPECIAL LICENSE PLATES, "DEPARTMENT OF NAVY" SPECIAL LICENSE PLATES, "PARENTS AND SPOUSES OF ACTIVE DUTY OVERSEAS VETERANS" SPECIAL LICENSE PLATES, "STATE FLAG" SPECIAL LICENSE PLATES, "SOUTH CAROLINA HIGHWAY PATROL-RETIRED" LICENSE PLATES, "I SUPPORT LIBRARIES" SPECIAL LICENSE PLATES, "SOUTH CAROLINA EDUCATOR" SPECIAL LICENSE PLATES, "COON HUNTERS" LICENSE PLATES, "BEACH MUSIC" SPECIAL LICENSE PLATES, "CITADEL ALUMNI ASSOCIATION 'BIG RED'" SPECIAL LICENSE PLATES, "LARGEMOUTH BASS" SPECIAL LICENSE PLATES, "HIGH SCHOOL" SPECIAL LICENSE PLATES, AND "SOUTH CAROLINA WILDLIFE FEDERATION" SPECIAL LICENSE PLATES; BY ADDING SECTIONS 56-3-2240, 56-3-2241, 56-3-2242, 56-3-2243, 56-3-2244, AND 56-3-2245 SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT THE DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES MAY ISSUE "HISTORIC" SPECIAL LICENSE PLATES; TO AMEND SECTION 56-3-7330, RELATING TO THE ISSUANCE OF "BOY SCOUTS OF AMERICA" SPECIAL LICENSE PLATES, SO AS TO MAKE TECHNICAL CHANGES AND TO PROVIDE FOR THE ISSUANCE OF "EAGLE SCOUTS OF AMERICA" SPECIAL LICENSE PLATES; TO AMEND SECTION 56-3-2150, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE ISSUANCE OF SPECIAL LICENSE PLATES TO CERTAIN CURRENT AND FORMER ELECTED OFFICIALS AND JUDICIAL OFFICERS, SO AS TO INCREASE THE NUMBER OF SPECIAL LICENSE PLATES THAT A CORONER MAY BE ISSUED FROM ONE TO TWO; TO AMEND SECTION 56-3-1240, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE DISPLAY OF A LICENSE PLATE, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT A FRAME MAY BE PLACED ON A LICENSE PLATE UNDER CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES; TO AMEND SECTION 56-3-10410, RELATING TO THE ISSUANCE OF "VETERAN" SPECIAL LICENSE PLATES, SO AS TO PROVIDE FOR THE PLACEMENT OF THE WHEELCHAIR SYMBOL ON CERTAIN "VETERAN" LICENSE PLATES; TO AMEND SECTION 56-3-3310, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE ISSUANCE OF "PURPLE HEART" SPECIAL LICENSE PLATES, SO AS TO INCREASE THE NUMBER OF LICENSE PLATES THAT MAY BE ISSUED TO A PERSON FROM ONE TO THREE AND TO PROVIDE A FEE FOR THE THIRD LICENSE PLATE; TO AMEND SECTION 56-3-8000, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE ISSUANCE OF SPECIAL LICENSE PLATES THAT CONTAIN THE EMBLEM OF A TAX EXEMPT ORGANIZATION, SO AS TO SPECIFY THEIR SIZE, GENERAL DESIGN, AND PERIOD OF VALIDITY, TO REVISE THEIR COSTS AND DISTRIBUTION OF FEES COLLECTED FROM THEIR SALE, TO REVISE THE MINIMUM NUMBER OF PREPAID APPLICATIONS AND MINIMUM PAYMENT THAT THE DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES MUST RECEIVE BEFORE A SPECIAL LICENSE PLATE MAY BE ISSUED, AND TO PROVIDE THAT THE ORGANIZATION MUST GIVE ITS LEGAL AUTHORITY TO THE DEPARTMENT FOR THE DEPARTMENT'S USE OF THE ORGANIZATION'S LOGO, TRADE MARK, OR DESIGN; AND TO AMEND SECTION 56-3-8100, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE ISSUANCE OF SPECIAL LICENSE PLATES CREATED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY, SO AS TO REVISE THE MINIMUM NUMBER OF PREPAID APPLICATIONS AND MINIMUM PAYMENT THAT THE DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES MUST RECEIVE BEFORE A SPECIAL LICENSE PLATE MAY BE ISSUED AND TO REVISE THE COSTS AND THE DISTRIBUTION OF FEES COLLECTED FROM THEIR SALES.
L:\COUNCIL\ACTS\1392CM10.DOCX
(R345, H. 3245 (Word version)) -- Reps. Delleney, Nanney, Simrill, G.R. Smith, G.M. Smith, Lucas, Cooper, Stringer, Parker, Allison, Pinson, Hamilton, Erickson, J.R. Smith, Clemmons, Bedingfield, E.H. Pitts, Owens, Rice, Hiott, Littlejohn, Stewart, Viers, Willis, Loftis, Toole, Wylie, Vick, Millwood, Haley, Duncan, Ballentine, Frye and Barfield: AN ACT TO AMEND SECTION 44-41-330, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO, AMONG OTHER THINGS, PREREQUISITES TO PERFORMING AN ABORTION, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT NO ABORTION MAY BE PERFORMED SOONER THAN TWENTY-FOUR HOURS AFTER A WOMAN RECEIVES AND VERIFIES SHE HAS RECEIVED CERTAIN INFORMATION THAT MUST BE PROVIDED TO HER BY LAW; TO AMEND SECTION 44-41-340, RELATING TO THE PUBLICATION OF INFORMATION THAT MUST BE PROVIDED TO A WOMAN BEFORE UNDERGOING AN ABORTION, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT THE INFORMATION MUST INCLUDE A LIST OF HEALTH CARE PROVIDERS, FACILITIES, AND CLINICS THAT PERFORM ULTRASOUNDS FREE OF CHARGE, A PLAINLY WORDED EXPLANATION OF HOW A WOMAN MAY CALCULATE THE GESTATIONAL AGE OF HER EMBRYO OR FETUS, A SCIENTIFICALLY ACCURATE STATEMENT CONCERNING THE CONTRIBUTION THAT EACH PARENT MAKES TO THE GENETIC CONSTITUTION OF THEIR BIOLOGICAL CHILD, AND FORMS FOR NOTIFICATIONS, CERTIFICATIONS, AND VERIFICATIONS REQUIRED BY LAW; TO REQUIRE THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL TO POST THIS INFORMATION ON ITS INTERNET WEBSITE AND TO REQUIRE THE DEPARTMENT'S WEBSITE TO PROVIDE A LINK TO THE INTERNET WEBSITES MAINTAINED BY HEALTH CARE PROVIDERS, FACILITIES, AND CLINICS THAT PERFORM ULTRASOUNDS FREE OF CHARGE AND THAT HAVE REQUESTED TO BE LISTED BY THE DEPARTMENT; AND TO AMEND SECTION 44-41-380, RELATING TO SEVERABILITY PROVISIONS CONCERNING THE "WOMEN'S RIGHT TO KNOW ACT", SO AS TO MAKE A TECHNICAL CORRECTION.
L:\COUNCIL\ACTS\3245AC10.DOCX
(R346, H. 3541 (Word version)) -- Reps. Hiott, Frye, Duncan, M.A. Pitts, Whitmire and Rice: AN ACT TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING SECTION 50-9-665 SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT A HUNTER MUST OBTAIN A BEAR TAG IN ORDER TO TAKE A BEAR AND TO PROVIDE THE PROCEDURES AND FEES FOR OBTAINING THESE TAGS; BY ADDING SECTION 50-11-435 SO AS TO PROHIBIT TAKING OR ATTEMPTING TO TAKE A BEAR WEIGHING LESS THAN ONE HUNDRED POUNDS AND PROVIDE CRIMINAL PENALTIES; TO AMEND SECTION 50-9-920, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO REVENUE FROM THE SALE OF LIFETIME LICENSES, SO AS TO DESIGNATE THE USES FOR REVENUE GENERATED FROM THE SALE OF BEAR TAGS; TO AMEND SECTION 50-11-310, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE OPEN SEASON FOR ANTLERED DEER, SO AS TO DESIGNATE WHEN ARCHERY AND FIREARMS MAY BE USED IN GAME ZONE 1; TO AMEND SECTION 50-11-430, RELATING TO THE OPEN SEASON FOR TAKING BEAR IN GAME ZONE ONE AND PENALTIES FOR VIOLATIONS, SO AS TO REVISE THE DATES OF THIS SEASON AND PROVIDE REQUIREMENTS FOR PARTY HUNTS; TO AUTHORIZE THE DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES TO ESTABLISH REQUIREMENTS FOR THE TAKING AND HUNTING OF BEAR IN ALL OTHER GAME ZONES; TO REQUIRE BEAR TAGS; AND TO REVISE VARIOUS BEAR TAKING REQUIREMENTS AND PROHIBITIONS; AND TO REPEAL SECTION 50-11-380 RELATING TO THE TAKING OF ANTLERLESS DEER.
L:\COUNCIL\ACTS\3541AC10.DOCX
(R347, H. 4215 (Word version)) -- Reps. Harrison, McLeod and Weeks: AN ACT TO AMEND SECTION 18-3-30, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE APPEAL OF A DECISION OF A MAGISTRATE, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT AN APPELLANT MUST FILE A NOTICE OF APPEAL WITH THE CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT AND SERVE NOTICE UPON THE DESIGNATED AGENT FOR THE PROSECUTING AGENCY OR ATTORNEY WHO PROSECUTED THE CHARGE IN ADDITION TO THE MAGISTRATE WHO TRIED THE CASE.
L:\COUNCIL\ACTS\4215AHB10.DOCX
(R348, H. 4256 (Word version)) -- Reps. Harrison and Weeks: AN ACT TO AMEND SECTION 17-30-125, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO INCIDENCES WHEN THE SUPERVISING AGENT OF A LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY MAY ORDER CERTAIN PERSONS TO CUT, REROUTE, OR DIVERT TELEPHONE LINES FOR CERTAIN PURPOSES, SO AS TO DEFINE "ATTORNEY GENERAL" AND "SLED", INCLUDE THREATENING A CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE AS AN INCIDENT COVERED BY THIS SECTION, AND TO PROVIDE THAT CERTAIN SLED EMPLOYEES MAY ISSUE AN ADMINISTRATIVE SUBPOENA TO A TELEPHONE COMPANY, INTERNET SERVICE PROVIDER, OR ANOTHER COMMUNICATIONS ENTITY WHEN THERE IS REASONABLE CAUSE TO BELIEVE THAT AN ACTIVE EMERGENCY SITUATION EXISTS; TO AMEND SECTION 17-30-20, RELATING TO UNLAWFUL INTERCEPTION OF WIRE, ELECTRONIC, AND ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT IT IS UNLAWFUL TO USE, ATTEMPT TO USE, OR PROCURE A PERSON TO USE AN ELECTRONIC, MECHANICAL OR OTHER DEVICE OR SERVICE TO DISPLAY A MISLEADING TELEPHONE NUMBER ON A PHONE CALL RECIPIENT'S CALLER IDENTIFICATION DISPLAY UNDER CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES.
L:\COUNCIL\ACTS\4256CM10.DOCX
(R349, H. 4261 (Word version)) -- Reps. Harrison and Weeks: AN ACT TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING SECTION 23-3-75 SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT AN OFFICER OF THE COURT WHO IS EMPLOYED BY THE SOUTH CAROLINA LAW ENFORCEMENT DIVISION MAY ISSUE AN ADMINISTRATIVE SUBPOENA TO A FINANCIAL INSTITUTION, PUBLIC OR PRIVATE UTILITY, OR COMMUNICATIONS PROVIDER FOR THE PRODUCTION OF RECORDS DURING THE INVESTIGATION OF CERTAIN CRIMINAL CASES THAT INVOLVE FINANCIAL CRIMES.
L:\COUNCIL\ACTS\4261CM10.DOCX
(R350, H. 4350 (Word version)) -- Reps. Limehouse, Sottile, Gilliard and Mack: AN ACT TO AMEND SECTION 40-29-340, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO CRITERIA REQUIRED FOR A MANUFACTURED HOME, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT FOR A SALE OF A PREVIOUSLY OWNED MANUFACTURED HOME, THE BUYER AND SELLER MUST CERTIFY THAT AT LEAST TWO FUNCTIONING SMOKE DETECTORS ARE IN THE HOME.
L:\COUNCIL\ACTS\4350AB10.DOCX
(R351, H. 4478 (Word version)) -- Reps. Harrell, Cato, Cooper, Duncan, Harrison, Owens, Sandifer, White, Bingham, Barfield, D.C. Moss, Horne, Skelton, V.S. Moss, Bannister, Whitmire, Toole, J.R. Smith, Merrill, Hamilton, Thompson, Bedingfield, Stewart, Alexander, Allen, Allison, Anderson, Anthony, Bales, Ballentine, Battle, Bowen, Bowers, Brady, Branham, Brantley, G.A. Brown, Chalk, Clemmons, Clyburn, Cole, Crawford, Daning, Delleney, Dillard, Erickson, Forrester, Gambrell, Govan, Hardwick, Harvin, Hayes, Hearn, Herbkersman, Hiott, Hodges, Hutto, Hosey, Jefferson, Kelly, Huggins, Kennedy, Knight, Limehouse, Littlejohn, Loftis, Long, Lowe, Mack, McEachern, Miller, Millwood, Nanney, J.M. Neal, Norman, Ott, Parker, Parks, Pinson, M.A. Pitts, Rice, Scott, Simrill, D.C. Smith, G.M. Smith, G.R. Smith, J.E. Smith, Sottile, Spires, Stavrinakis, Stringer, Umphlett, Vick, Viers, Weeks, Willis, Wylie, A.D. Young, T.R. Young, Mitchell, Lucas and Jennings: AN ACT TO ENACT THE "SOUTH CAROLINA ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMPETITIVENESS ACT OF 2010", INCLUDING PROVISIONS; TO AMEND SECTION 4-12-30, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO FEES IN LIEU OF TAXES, SO AS TO INCREASE THE NUMBER OF YEARS A FEE IS AVAILABLE, TO REVISE CERTAIN REQUIREMENTS FOR THE FEE IN LIEU AGREEMENT, AND FOR THE MANNER THE FAIR MARKET VALUE MUST BE REPORTED DURING THE TERM OF THE FEE AGREEMENT, TO PROVIDE FOR ADDITIONAL PROPERTY WHICH IS AN EXCEPTION TO PROVISIONS LIMITING PROPERTY NOT QUALIFIED TO BE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROPERTY; TO AMEND SECTION 4-29-67, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS REQUIRING A FEE IN LIEU OF PROPERTY TAXES AGREEMENT, SO AS TO ADD CERTAIN DEFINITIONS, TO FURTHER PROVIDE FOR THE MINIMUM LEVEL OF INVESTMENT FOR A QUALIFIED NUCLEAR PLANT FACILITY, TO PROVIDE FOR THE TIMELINE WHEN THE SPONSOR MUST ENTER INTO AN INITIAL LEASE AGREEMENT WITH THE COUNTY IN REGARD TO A QUALIFIED NUCLEAR PLANT FACILITY, AND THE TIMELINES WHEN THE SPONSOR MUST MEET MINIMUM INVESTMENT REQUIREMENTS IN THE CASE OF A QUALIFIED NUCLEAR PLANT FACILITY AND PLACE THE PROJECT INTO SERVICE, TO REVISE THE MANNER IN WHICH THE FAIR MARKET VALUE OF THE PROPERTY MUST BE REPORTED DURING THE TERM OF THE FEE AGREEMENT, TO PROVIDE FOR ADDITIONAL PROPERTY WHICH IS AN EXCEPTION TO PROVISIONS LIMITING PROPERTY NOT QUALIFIED TO BE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROPERTY; TO AMEND SECTION 4-29-68, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO SPECIAL SOURCE REVENUE BONDS WHICH MAY BE ISSUED BASED ON THE RECEIPT OF CERTAIN REVENUES, SO AS TO FURTHER PROVIDE FOR WHEN AND UNDER WHAT CIRCUMSTANCES THE AMOUNT OF THE FEE IN LIEU OF TAXES DUE ON THE PERSONAL PROPERTY MUST BE DUE WHEN PERSONAL PROPERTY IS REMOVED FROM THE PROJECT; TO AMEND SECTION 12-44-30, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO DEFINITIONS IN REGARD TO THE FEE IN LIEU OF TAX SIMPLIFICATION ACT, SO AS TO REVISE CERTAIN DEFINITIONS AND ADD CERTAIN DEFINITIONS; TO AMEND SECTION 12-44-40, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE REQUIRED FEE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE SPONSOR AND THE COUNTY UNDER THE FEE IN LIEU OF TAX SIMPLIFICATION ACT, SO AS TO PROVIDE THE TIME WITHIN WHICH A SPONSOR HAS TO ENTER INTO A FEE AGREEMENT IN REGARD TO A QUALIFIED NUCLEAR PLANT FACILITY; TO AMEND SECTION 12-44-50, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE REQUIREMENT OF A FEE AGREEMENT UNDER THE FEE IN LIEU OF TAX SIMPLIFICATION ACT, SO AS TO FURTHER PROVIDE FOR THE MANNER IN WHICH THE FAIR MARKET VALUE OF THE PROPERTY MUST BE REPORTED DURING THE TERM OF THE FEE AGREEMENT; TO AMEND SECTION 12-44-110, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO PROPERTY PREVIOUSLY SUBJECT TO PROPERTY TAXES NOT QUALIFIED TO BE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROPERTY AND EXCEPTIONS TO THIS PROVISION, SO AS TO PROVIDE FOR ADDITIONAL PROPERTY WHICH IS AN EXCEPTION TO PROVISIONS LIMITING PROPERTY NOT QUALIFIED TO BE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROPERTY; TO AMEND SECTION 12-44-130, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO MINIMUM INVESTMENTS TO QUALIFY FOR A FEE AND OTHER REQUIREMENTS, SO AS TO CORRECT A REFERENCE; TO AMEND SECTION 12-43-220, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO CLASSIFICATION OF REAL PROPERTY FOR AD VALOREM TAX PURPOSES, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT REAL PROPERTY OWNED BY OR LEASED TO A MANUFACTURER AND USED PRIMARILY RATHER THAN EXCLUSIVELY FOR WAREHOUSING AND WHOLESALE DISTRIBUTION IS NOT CONSIDERED USED BY THE MANUFACTURER IN THE CONDUCT OF ITS BUSINESS FOR PROPERTY TAX CLASSIFICATION PURPOSES UNDER CERTAIN CONDITIONS; TO AMEND SECTION 12-10-85, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE PURPOSE AND USE OF STATE RURAL INFRASTRUCTURE FUNDS, SO AS TO REVISE THE PURPOSES FOR WHICH THESE FUNDS MAY BE USED AND THEIR AVAILABILITY; BY ADDING CHAPTER 18 TO TITLE 11 SO AS TO ESTABLISH MECHANISMS AND PROCEDURES FOR THE ALLOCATION, REALLOCATION, AND ISSUANCE OF FEDERAL RECOVERY ZONE BONDS; TO AMEND SECTION 4-29-10, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO DEFINITIONS IN REGARD TO INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS, SO AS TO REVISE THE DEFINITION OF "PROJECT" TO INCLUDE RECOVERY ZONE PROPERTY AS DEFINED BY FEDERAL LAW; TO AMEND SECTION 12-6-3360, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO JOB TAX CREDITS, SO AS TO REVISE THE DESIGNATION TERMINOLOGY FOR COUNTIES COMING WITHIN SPECIFIC CLASSIFICATIONS, TO FURTHER PROVIDE FOR THE CRITERIA FOR DETERMINING HOW COUNTIES FALL WITHIN CERTAIN TIERS, AND TO REVISE SPECIFIC TERMS OR DEFINITIONS USED FOR PURPOSES OF THIS SECTION; TO AMEND SECTION 12-6-3375, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO TAX CREDITS FOR PORT CARGO VOLUME INCREASES, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT THE TAX CREDIT MAY BE AN INCOME TAX CREDIT ON A CREDIT AGAINST EMPLOYEE WITHHOLDING, TO PROVIDE FOR THE AMOUNTS OF EACH TYPE OF CREDIT AND THE TYPES OF FACILITIES TO WHICH THEY MAY BE AWARDED, TO REVISE THE MANNER IN WHICH TAX CREDIT ALLOCATIONS ARE DETERMINED AND THE AMOUNT OF CREDITS WHICH MAY BE ALLOCATED TO A QUALIFYING TAXPAYER; TO AMEND SECTION 12-20-105, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO CREDITS AGAINST ITS CORPORATE LICENSE TAX LIABILITY FOR A COMPANY WHO PAYS CASH FOR INFRASTRUCTURE FOR AN ELIGIBLE PROJECT, SO AS TO FURTHER PROVIDE FOR THE ELIGIBILITY FOR THE CREDIT UNDER CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES OR THE CONTINUATION OF THE CREDIT, AND TO REQUIRE A REPORT CONCERNING THE CREDIT; TO AMEND SECTION 12-10-80, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO JOB DEVELOPMENT CREDITS UNDER THE ENTERPRISE ZONE ACT OF 1995, SO AS TO EXPAND ELIGIBLE EXPENDITURES WHICH QUALIFY FOR THE CREDIT, TO CAP THE AMOUNT OF CREDITS PER JOB PER YEAR, TO REVISE CERTAIN TERMINOLOGY TO CONFORM TO EARLIER CHANGES HEREIN, TO FURTHER PROVIDE FOR THE CIRCUMSTANCES WHEN THESE CREDITS MAY BE CLAIMED AND THE MANNER OF THE DETERMINATION OF CERTAIN FACTORS NECESSARY TO QUALIFY FOR THE CREDITS, AND TO PROVIDE FOR THE SUSPENSION OF THE CREDITS UNDER CERTAIN CONDITIONS AND FOR WHEN THE CREDITS MAY BE CLAIMED; TO AMEND SECTION 12-14-20, RELATING TO THE PURPOSES OF THE ECONOMIC IMPACT ZONE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 1995, SO AS TO REVISE THESE PURPOSES; TO AMEND SECTION 12-14-60, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO INVESTMENT TAX CREDITS UNDER THE ECONOMIC IMPACT ZONE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 1995, SO AS TO REVISE THE AMOUNT OF THE CREDITS, THE QUALIFYING CRITERIA FOR THE CREDITS, AND FOR THE APPLICABILITY OF CERTAIN PROVISIONS TO THESE CREDITS; TO AMEND SECTION 12-6-3631, RELATING TO SPECIFIED BIODIESEL EXPENDITURES, SO AS TO FURTHER PROVIDE FOR THOSE EXPENDITURES WHICH QUALIFY FOR CREDIT AND TO STIPULATE THE AMOUNT OF CREDIT FOR EXPENDITURES RELATED TO WASTE GREASE-DERIVED BIODIESEL; BY ADDING SECTION 12-6-3588 SO AS TO ESTABLISH THE SOUTH CAROLINA RENEWABLE ENERGY TAX INCENTIVE PROGRAM UNDER WHICH CERTAIN TAX CREDITS ARE ALLOWED FOR BUSINESS INVESTMENTS PERTAINING TO THE PRODUCTION AND USE OF RENEWABLE ENERGY PRODUCTS; TO AMEND SECTION 12-15-10, RELATING TO THE CITATION OF THE SOUTH CAROLINA LIFE SCIENCES ACT, SO AS TO CHANGE THE CITATION; TO AMEND SECTION 12-15-20, RELATING TO DEFINITIONS UNDER THE RENAMED LIFE SCIENCES AND RENEWABLE ENERGY MANUFACTURING ACT, SO AS TO DEFINE THE TERM "RENEWABLE ENERGY MANUFACTURING FACILITY"; TO AMEND SECTION 12-15-30, RELATING TO QUALIFICATIONS OF CERTAIN EXPENSES UNDER THE ENTERPRISE ZONE ACT, PROCEDURES FOR WAIVERS, AND THE DURATION OF THESE PROVISIONS, SO AS TO EXPAND THE TYPES OF FACILITIES THAT QUALIFY AND THE DURATION OF THESE PROVISIONS; TO AMEND SECTION 12-15-40, RELATING TO INCOME TAX ALLOCATION AND APPORTIONMENT AGREEMENTS BETWEEN THE DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE AND TAXPAYERS ESTABLISHING A LIFE SCIENCES FACILITY, SO AS TO EXPAND THE TYPES OF FACILITIES TO WHICH THIS PROVISION APPLIES; TO AMEND SECTION 12-37-930, RELATING TO VALUATION OF PROPERTY FOR PROPERTY TAX PURPOSES AND DEPRECIATION ALLOWANCES FOR MANUFACTURERS, MACHINERY, AND EQUIPMENT, SO AS TO INCLUDE MACHINERY AND EQUIPMENT OF A RENEWABLE ENERGY MANUFACTURING FACILITY WITHIN THE DEPRECIATION ALLOWANCES ALLOWED FOR MACHINERY AND EQUIPMENT OF A LIFE SCIENCES FACILITY, AND TO DEFINE WHAT IS A QUALIFYING FACILITY; TO AMEND SECTION 12-28-2910, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE SOUTH CAROLINA COORDINATING COUNCIL FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, SO AS TO AUTHORIZE THE COUNCIL TO EXPEND CERTAIN FUNDS FOR SPECIFIED PURPOSES UNDER SPECIFIED CONDITIONS; TO AMEND SECTION 2-75-30, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO RESEARCH CENTERS OF EXCELLENCE MATCHING ENDOWMENTS, SO AS TO FURTHER PROVIDE FOR THE PROCESS AND PROCEDURES FOR AWARDING ENDOWMENTS FOR QUALIFIED PROJECTS, AND FOR THE APPLICABILITY OF MATCHING REQUIREMENTS; TO AMEND SECTION 2-75-10, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE RESEARCH CENTERS OF EXCELLENCE REVIEW BOARD, SO AS TO REVISE THE DATE WHEN ITS ANNUAL REPORT IS DUE; TO AMEND SECTION 13-1-1710, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE COORDINATING COUNCIL FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, SO AS TO REVISE CERTAIN MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL; TO AMEND SECTIONS 5-37-20, 5-37-35, 5-37-40, AS AMENDED, 5-37-50, AS AMENDED, AND 5-37-100, ALL RELATING TO THE MUNICIPAL IMPROVEMENTS ACT, SO AS TO AUTHORIZE A MUNICIPAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT TO WIDEN AND DREDGE CERTAIN CANALS AND WATERWAYS BY ISSUING BONDS PAYABLE FROM ASSESSMENTS ON PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT; TO AMEND SECTION 12-10-88, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO REDEVELOPMENT FEES UNDER THE ENTERPRISE ZONE ACT OF 1995 BEING REMITTED TO THE APPLICABLE REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY FOR A SPECIFIED PERIOD OF TIME, SO AS TO REVISE THIS PERIOD OF TIME; TO AMEND SECTIONS 6-1-530 AND 6-1-730, BOTH AS AMENDED, RELATING TO USES ALLOWED FOR THE REVENUE OF THE LOCAL ACCOMMODATIONS AND LOCAL HOSPITALITY TAXES, SO AS TO INCREASE FROM TWENTY TO FIFTY PERCENT, IN COUNTIES IN WHICH LESS THAN NINE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS IN STATE ACCOMMODATIONS TAX IS COLLECTED ANNUALLY, THE AMOUNT OF THE REVENUE OF THE LOCAL TAXES THAT MAY BE USED FOR OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE; TO REPEAL SECTION 12-6-3450 RELATING TO AN INCOME TAX CREDIT FOR PERSONS TERMINATED FROM EMPLOYMENT AS A RESULT OF THE CLOSING OR REALIGNMENT OF A FEDERAL MILITARY INSTALLATION; TO REPEAL SECTIONS 12-14-30, 12-14-40, 12-14-50, AND 12-14-70 RELATING TO ECONOMIC IMPACT ZONES AND ALLOWABLE DEDUCTIONS AGAINST SOUTH CAROLINA TAXABLE INCOME IN REGARD TO THESE ECONOMIC IMPACT ZONES; AND TO REPEAL ACT 150 OF 2010 CONTAINING A REVISION OF SECTION 12-44-30(20) RELATING TO THE DEFINITION OF TERMINATION DATE UNDER THE FEE IN LIEU OF TAX SIMPLIFICATION ACT, AND ADDING SECTION 12-6-590(C) RELATING TO RETENTION AND USE OF CERTAIN INCOME TAXES PAID BY RESIDENT AND NONRESIDENT SHAREHOLDERS OF AN "S" CORPORATION.
L:\COUNCIL\ACTS\4478SD10.DOCX
(R352, H. 5047 (Word version)) -- Reps. Parks, M.A. Pitts and Pinson: AN ACT TO VEST TITLE IN GREENWOOD COUNTY OF CERTAIN PROPERTY FORMERLY BELONGING TO THE GREENWOOD RECREATION COMMISSION WHICH WAS CREATED BY ACT 338 OF 1949 AND DISSOLVED BY ACT 1352 OF 1968, AND TO DIRECT THE CLERK OF COURT FOR GREENWOOD COUNTY TO EXECUTE DEEDS OF CONVEYANCE ON BEHALF OF THE GREENWOOD RECREATION COMMISSION.
L:\COUNCIL\ACTS\5047DW10.DOCX
The following were introduced:
S. 1529 (Word version) -- Senators Knotts, Alexander, Anderson, Bright, Bryant, Campbell, Campsen, Cleary, Coleman, Courson, Cromer, Davis, Elliott, Fair, Ford, Grooms, Hayes, Hutto, Jackson, Land, Leatherman, Leventis, Lourie, Malloy, L. Martin, S. Martin, Massey, Matthews, McConnell, McGill, Mulvaney, Nicholson, O'Dell, Peeler, Pinckney, Rankin, Reese, Rose, Ryberg, Scott, Setzler, Sheheen, Shoopman, Thomas, Verdin and Williams: A SENATE RESOLUTION TO RECOGNIZE AND HONOR MASTER DEPUTY DAVID C. BRYAN III OF LEXINGTON COUNTY FOR HIS EXCEPTIONAL THIRTY-TWO YEAR CAREER WITH THE LEXINGTON COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT, AND TO WISH HIM CONTINUED HEALTH AND HAPPINESS UPON HIS RETIREMENT.
l:\council\bills\agm\18130bh10.docx
The Senate Resolution was adopted.
S. 1530 (Word version) -- Senator Scott: A SENATE RESOLUTION TO CONGRATULATE HARRISON REARDEN OF RICHLAND COUNTY ON HIS SERVICE AS A MEMBER OF THE RICHLAND-LEXINGTON COUNTY AIRPORT COMMISSION AND ON HIS RETIREMENT AND TO WISH HIM THE BEST IN HIS NEW POSITION ON THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION.
l:\council\bills\dka\4136dw10.docx
The Senate Resolution was adopted.
S. 1531 (Word version) -- Senator Alexander: A SENATE RESOLUTION TO RECOGNIZE AND HONOR THE SOUTH CAROLINA SMALL BUSINESS CHAMBER OF COMMERCE FOR ITS EFFORTS AND ACCOMPLISHMENTS IN ADVOCATING FOR AN INCREASE IN THE SOUTH CAROLINA CIGARETTE TAX.
l:\council\bills\ggs\22649sd10.docx
The Senate Resolution was adopted.
S. 1532 (Word version) -- Senator McGill: A SENATE RESOLUTION TO CONGRATULATE MRS. INEZ MAUDE KEITH CAROLINA OF GEORGETOWN COUNTY ON THE OCCASION OF HER ONE HUNDREDTH BIRTHDAY AND TO WISH HER A JOYOUS BIRTHDAY CELEBRATION AND CONTINUED HEALTH AND HAPPINESS.
l:\council\bills\ms\7890bh10.docx
The Senate Resolution was adopted.
S. 1533 (Word version) -- Senator Ford: A SENATE RESOLUTION EXPRESSING THE SYMPATHY OF THE MEMBERS OF THE SOUTH CAROLINA SENATE TO THE FAMILY AND MANY FRIENDS OF THE LATE MARJORIE AMOS-FRAZIER OF CHARLESTON.
l:\council\bills\bbm\9818htc10.docx
The Senate Resolution was adopted.
S. 1534 (Word version) -- Senator Hutto: A SENATE RESOLUTION TO RECOGNIZE EMMA MAE SMITH-PARKER OF HALLANDALE, FLORIDA, THE BELOVED MATRIARCH OF THE SMITH-TOBIN FAMILY, UPON THE OCCASION OF THEIR FAMILY REUNION JULY 24, 2010, AND TO HONOR HER FOR HER DEDICATION AND DETERMINATION TO BUILD AND MAINTAIN STRONG FAMILY TIES AMONG ALL THE SMITH-TOBIN FAMILY MEMBERS.
l:\council\bills\nbd\12441ac10.docx
The Senate Resolution was adopted.
S. 1535 (Word version) -- Senator Hutto: A SENATE RESOLUTION TO EXPRESS THE PROFOUND SORROW OF THE MEMBERS OF THE SOUTH CAROLINA SENATE UPON THE PASSING OF DEACON CLEVELAND SHIVERS, SR., AND TO EXTEND THE DEEPEST SYMPATHY TO HIS FAMILY AND MANY FRIENDS.
l:\council\bills\nbd\12440ac10.docx
On motion of Senators LAND and LEVENTIS, with unanimous consent, R 338, S. 1372 was taken up for immediate consideration.
The Honorable André Bauer
President of the Senate
State House, 1st Floor, East Wing
Columbia, South Carolina 29202
Dear Mr. President and Members of the Senate:
I am hereby vetoing and returning without my approval S. 1372, R. 338, which allows the Sumter County School Districts 2 and 17 to issue general obligation bonds to cover operating expenses.
(R338, S1372 (Word version)) -- Senator Leventis: AN ACT TO AMEND ACT 387 OF 2008, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE CONSOLIDATION OF SUMTER SCHOOL DISTRICTS 2 AND 17, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT THE CHAIRMAN AND OTHER OFFICERS OF THE BOARD OF THE CONSOLIDATED DISTRICT SHALL SERVE TWO-YEAR TERMS; TO PROVIDE THAT THE SUPERINTENDENT OF THE CONSOLIDATED SCHOOL DISTRICT SHALL SELECT AND APPOINT AN ASSISTANT SUPERINTENDENT; TO AUTHORIZE THE BOARDS OF TRUSTEES OF SUMTER SCHOOL DISTRICTS 2 AND 17 TO ISSUE GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS OF THE RESPECTIVE DISTRICTS FOR SCHOOL OPERATING PURPOSES UP TO THE CONSTITUTIONAL DEBT LIMIT OF THE RESPECTIVE DISTRICTS FOR SCHOOL OPERATING PURPOSES, TO PROVIDE CONDITIONS UNDER WHICH THE BONDS MAY BE ISSUED AND THE PURPOSES FOR WHICH THE PROCEEDS MAY BE EXPENDED, AND TO MAKE PROVISION FOR THE PAYMENT OF BONDS; AND TO PROVIDE THAT FUNDING FOR THE BOARD BEFORE THE INDIVIDUAL SCHOOL DISTRICTS ARE ABOLISHED MUST BE PROVIDED FROM OPERATING FUNDS AVAILABLE TO THE INDIVIDUAL SCHOOL DISTRICTS.
We are sympathetic to the difficulty in which this school district, and others like it, find themselves, but we are compelled to do as we have done in the past and veto this legislation. It breaks a cardinal rule of prudent finance. Bonded indebtedness should not be used by school districts to fund operating expenditures because an absolute rule of sustainable financial management is that you do not fund short-term operations with long-term debt. States like California have attempted to do so and it has come with disastrous consequences.
Doing so in this instance will invite the same consequences over time to our state.
For this reason, I am vetoing and returning without my approval S. 1372, R. 338.
Sincerely,
/s/ Mark Sanford
(R338, S1372 (Word version)) -- Senator Leventis: AN ACT TO AMEND ACT 387 OF 2008, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE CONSOLIDATION OF SUMTER SCHOOL DISTRICTS 2 AND 17, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT THE CHAIRMAN AND OTHER OFFICERS OF THE BOARD OF THE CONSOLIDATED DISTRICT SHALL SERVE TWO-YEAR TERMS; TO PROVIDE THAT THE SUPERINTENDENT OF THE CONSOLIDATED SCHOOL DISTRICT SHALL SELECT AND APPOINT AN ASSISTANT SUPERINTENDENT; TO AUTHORIZE THE BOARDS OF TRUSTEES OF SUMTER SCHOOL DISTRICTS 2 AND 17 TO ISSUE GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS OF THE RESPECTIVE DISTRICTS FOR SCHOOL OPERATING PURPOSES UP TO THE CONSTITUTIONAL DEBT LIMIT OF THE RESPECTIVE DISTRICTS FOR SCHOOL OPERATING PURPOSES, TO PROVIDE CONDITIONS UNDER WHICH THE BONDS MAY BE ISSUED AND THE PURPOSES FOR WHICH THE PROCEEDS MAY BE EXPENDED, AND TO MAKE PROVISION FOR THE PAYMENT OF BONDS; AND TO PROVIDE THAT FUNDING FOR THE BOARD BEFORE THE INDIVIDUAL SCHOOL DISTRICTS ARE ABOLISHED MUST BE PROVIDED FROM OPERATING FUNDS AVAILABLE TO THE INDIVIDUAL SCHOOL DISTRICTS.
The veto of the Governor was taken up for immediate consideration.
Senator LAND moved that the veto of the Governor be overridden.
The question was put, "Shall the Act become law, the veto of the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding?"
The "ayes" and "nays" were demanded and taken, resulting as follows:
Land Leventis
The necessary two-thirds vote having been received, the veto of the Governor was overridden, and a message was sent to the House accordingly.
Columbia, S.C., June 16, 2010
Mr. President and Senators:
The House respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has overridden the veto by the Governor on R.293, H. 4657 by a vote of 104 to 7:
Veto 64 Part IB; Section 39.15; Page 380; Parks, Recreation, and Tourism; Additional Motion Picture Bonus-Rebate
Respectfully submitted,
Speaker of the House
Received as information.
Veto 64 Part IB; Section 39.15; Page 380; Parks, Recreation, and Tourism; Additional Motion Picture Bonus-Rebate
The veto of the Governor was taken up for immediate consideration.
Senator McGILL moved that the veto of the Governor be overridden.
The question was put, "Shall the Act become law, the veto of the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding?"
The "ayes" and "nays" were demanded and taken, resulting as follows:
Alexander Anderson Campbell Campsen Davis Grooms Hayes Knotts Land Leatherman Malloy Martin, Larry Matthews McConnell McGill Nicholson O'Dell Reese Scott Setzler Verdin Williams
Bright Bryant Cleary Courson Cromer Fair Lourie Martin, Shane Massey Mulvaney Peeler Rose Ryberg Shoopman Thomas
Having failed to receive the necessary two-thirds vote, the veto of the Governor was sustained, and a message was sent to the House accordingly.
Having voted on the prevailing side, Senator LOURIE moved to reconsider the vote whereby Veto 64 was sustained.
The motion was adopted.
Veto 64 Part IB; Section 39.15; Page 380; Parks, Recreation, and Tourism; Additional Motion Picture Bonus-Rebate
Senator LOURIE spoke on the veto.
Senator LOURIE moved that the veto of the Governor be overridden.
The question was put, "Shall the Act become law, the veto of the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding?"
The "ayes" and "nays" were demanded and taken, resulting as follows:
Alexander Anderson Campbell Campsen Cleary Courson Cromer Elliott Grooms Hayes Jackson Knotts Land Leatherman Leventis Lourie Malloy Martin, Larry Matthews McGill Nicholson O'Dell Pinckney Rankin Reese Scott Setzler Williams
Bright Bryant Davis Fair Martin, Shane Massey Mulvaney Peeler Rose Ryberg Shoopman Thomas Verdin
The necessary two-thirds vote having been received, the veto of the Governor was overridden, and a message was sent to the House accordingly.
Columbia, S.C., June 16, 2010
Mr. President and Senators:
The House respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has overridden the veto by the Governor on R.293, H. 4657 by a vote of 110 to 2:
Veto 65 Part IB; Section 65.12; Page 406; Labor, Licensing, and Regulation; SC ERT/Urban Search and Rescue
Respectfully submitted,
Speaker of the House
Received as information.
Veto 65 Part IB; Section 65.12; Page 406; Labor, Licensing, and Regulation; SC ERT/Urban Search and Rescue
The veto of the Governor was taken up for immediate consideration.
Senator McGILL moved that the veto of the Governor be overridden.
Senator CLEARY spoke on the veto.
The question was put, "Shall the Act become law, the veto of the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding?"
The "ayes" and "nays" were demanded and taken, resulting as follows:
Alexander Anderson Campbell Cleary Hayes Jackson Knotts Land Leatherman Leventis Lourie Malloy Martin, Larry Martin, Shane Matthews McGill Nicholson O'Dell Reese Scott Sheheen Thomas Verdin Williams
Bright Bryant Campsen Courson Cromer Davis Fair Grooms Massey McConnell Mulvaney Peeler Rose Ryberg Setzler Shoopman
Having failed to receive the necessary two-thirds vote, the veto of the Governor was sustained, and a message was sent to the House accordingly.
I agree with the program but disagree with using professional fees from LLR to fund it. Therefore, I voted to sustain Veto 65.
Having voted on the prevailing side, Senator DAVIS moved to reconsider the vote whereby the veto was sustained.
The motion to reconsider was adopted.
The question was put, "Shall the Act become law, the veto of the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding?"
The "ayes" and "nays" were demanded and taken, resulting as follows:
Alexander Anderson Campbell Campsen Cleary Courson Cromer Davis Elliott Fair Hayes Jackson Land Leatherman Leventis Lourie Malloy Martin, Larry Martin, Shane Matthews McGill Nicholson O'Dell Peeler Pinckney Rankin Reese Scott Setzler Sheheen Shoopman Thomas Verdin Williams
Bright Bryant Grooms Knotts Massey McConnell Mulvaney Rose Ryberg
The necessary two-thirds vote having been received, the veto of the Governor was overridden, and a message was sent to the House accordingly.
Columbia, S.C., June 16, 2010
Mr. President and Senators:
The House respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has overridden the veto by the Governor on R.293, H. 4657 by a vote of 92 to 21:
Veto 71 Part IB; Section 90.16; Page 482; Statewide Revenue; Nonrecurring Revenue - Increased Enforcement Collections; Item 2; Budget and Control Board; SCEIS; $2,179,716.
Respectfully submitted,
Speaker of the House
Received as information.
Veto 71 Part IB; Section 90.16; Page 482; Statewide Revenue; Nonrecurring Revenue - Increased Enforcement Collections; Item 2; Budget and Control Board; SCEIS; $2,179,716.
The veto of the Governor was taken up for immediate consideration.
Senator THOMAS moved that the veto of the Governor be overridden.
The question was put, "Shall the Act become law, the veto of the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding?"
The "ayes" and "nays" were demanded and taken, resulting as follows:
Alexander Anderson Campbell Courson Cromer Fair Grooms Hayes Jackson Knotts Land Leatherman Leventis Lourie Malloy Martin, Larry Matthews McGill Nicholson O'Dell Peeler Pinckney Reese Ryberg Scott Setzler Sheheen Thomas Verdin Williams
Bright Bryant Campsen Cleary Davis Martin, Shane Massey McConnell Mulvaney Rose Shoopman
The necessary two-thirds vote having been received, the veto of the Governor was overridden, and a message was sent to the House accordingly.
We voted to sustain the foregoing vetoes because these items are funded out of a highly speculative revenue source: delinquent tax collections. Regardless of how meaningful the programs may be, we think it is irresponsible -- and even misleading to the agencies involved, and to the public -- to proposed spending based on such revenue sources. If the money from delinquent taxes is in fact collected, then those funds can always be allocated via a supplemental appropriation later in the year. Alternatively, savings generated by other sustained vetoes could be used to fund these items.
Columbia, S.C., June 16, 2010
Mr. President and Senators:
The House respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has overridden the veto by the Governor on R.293, H. 4657 by a vote of 87 to 26:
Veto 72 Part IB; Section 90.16; Page 482; Statewide Revenue; Nonrecurring Revenue - Increased Enforcement Collections; Item 3; Commission on Higher Education; SREB Dues; $413,929.
Respectfully submitted,
Speaker of the House
Received as information.
Veto 72 Part IB; Section 90.16; Page 482; Statewide Revenue; Nonrecurring Revenue - Increased Enforcement Collections; Item 3; Commission on Higher Education; SREB Dues; $413,929.
The veto of the Governor was taken up for immediate consideration.
Senator COURSON spoke on the veto.
Senator COURSON moved that the veto of the Governor be overridden.
The question was put, "Shall the Act become law, the veto of the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding?"
The "ayes" and "nays" were demanded and taken, resulting as follows:
Alexander Anderson Campbell Courson Cromer Fair Hayes Jackson Knotts Land Leatherman Leventis Lourie Malloy Martin, Larry Massey Matthews McGill Nicholson O'Dell Pinckney Reese Ryberg Scott Setzler Sheheen Verdin Williams
Bright Bryant Campsen Davis Grooms Martin, Shane McConnell Mulvaney Peeler Rose Shoopman
The necessary two-thirds vote having been received, the veto of the Governor was overridden, and a message was sent to the House accordingly.
We voted to sustain the foregoing vetoes because these items are funded out of a highly speculative revenue source: delinquent tax collections. Regardless of how meaningful the programs may be, we think it is irresponsible -- and even misleading to the agencies involved, and to the public -- to proposed spending based on such revenue sources. If the money from delinquent taxes is in fact collected, then those funds can always be allocated via a supplemental appropriation later in the year. Alternatively, savings generated by other sustained vetoes could be used to fund these items.
Veto 73 Part IB; Section 90.16; Page 482; Statewide Revenue; Nonrecurring Revenue - Increased Enforcement Collections; Item 6; The Senate; Reapportionment; $1,000,000.
Senator BRYANT asked unanimous consent to make a motion that he and Senator SHANE MARTIN, who both had abstained from voting on Veto 73 when it was under consideration on Thursday, June 17, 2010, be granted leave to record their votes, not changing the outcome.
Senator SHEHEEN objected.
Columbia, S.C., June 16, 2010
Mr. President and Senators:
The House respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has overridden the veto by the Governor on R.293, H. 4657 by a vote of 100 to 15:
Veto 77 Part IB; Section 90.16; Page 482; Statewide Revenue; Nonrecurring Revenue - Increased Enforcement Collections; Item 11; Department of Education; Career and Technology Education (CATE) Textbooks Resources Materials; $662,000.
Respectfully submitted,
Speaker of the House
Received as information.
Veto 77 Part IB; Section 90.16; Page 482; Statewide Revenue; Nonrecurring Revenue - Increased Enforcement Collections; Item 11; Department of Education; Career and Technology Education (CATE) Textbooks Resources Materials; $662,000.
The veto of the Governor was taken up for immediate consideration.
Senator HAYES moved that the veto of the Governor be overridden.
The question was put, "Shall the Act become law, the veto of the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding?"
The "ayes" and "nays" were demanded and taken, resulting as follows:
Alexander Anderson Campbell Cleary Courson Cromer Elliott Hayes Jackson Knotts Land Leventis Lourie Malloy Martin, Larry Massey Matthews McConnell McGill Nicholson O'Dell Pinckney Rankin Reese Scott Setzler Sheheen Williams
Bright Bryant Campsen Davis Fair Grooms Leatherman Martin, Shane Mulvaney Peeler Rose Ryberg Shoopman Thomas Verdin
Having failed to receive the necessary two-thirds vote, the veto of the Governor was sustained, and a message was sent to the House accordingly.
Having voted on the prevailing side, Senator LEATHERMAN moved to reconsider the vote whereby the motion was adopted.
The motion was adopted.
Veto 77 Part IB; Section 90.16; Page 482; Statewide Revenue; Nonrecurring Revenue - Increased Enforcement Collections; Item 11; Department of Education; Career and Technology Education (CATE) Textbooks Resources Materials; $662,000.
The question was put, "Shall the Act become law, the veto of the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding?"
The "ayes" and "nays" were demanded and taken, resulting as follows:
Alexander Anderson Campbell Cleary Courson Cromer Elliott Hayes Jackson Knotts Land Leatherman Leventis Lourie Malloy Martin, Larry Massey Matthews McGill Nicholson O'Dell Pinckney Rankin Reese Scott Setzler Sheheen Verdin Williams
Bright Bryant Campsen Davis Fair Grooms Martin, Shane Mulvaney Peeler Rose Ryberg Shoopman Thomas
The necessary two-thirds vote having been received, the veto of the Governor was overridden, and a message was sent to the House accordingly.
We voted to sustain the foregoing vetoes because these items are funded out of a highly speculative revenue source: delinquent tax collections. Regardless of how meaningful the programs may be, we think it is irresponsible -- and even misleading to the agencies involved, and to the public -- to proposed spending based on such revenue sources. If the money from delinquent taxes is in fact collected, then those funds can always be allocated via a supplemental appropriation later in the year. Alternatively, savings generated by other sustained vetoes could be used to fund these items.
Columbia, S.C., June 16, 2010
Mr. President and Senators:
The House respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has overridden the veto by the Governor on R.293, H. 4657 by a vote of 100 to 11:
Veto 78 Part IB; Section 90.16; Page 482; Statewide Revenue; Nonrecurring Revenue - Increased Enforcement Collections; Item 12; Department of Education; Transportation; $900,000.
Respectfully submitted,
Speaker of the House
Received as information.
Veto 78 Part IB; Section 90.16; Page 482; Statewide Revenue; Nonrecurring Revenue - Increased Enforcement Collections; Item 12; Department of Education; Transportation; $900,000.
The veto of the Governor was taken up for immediate consideration.
Senator HAYES moved that the veto of the Governor be overridden.
The question was put, "Shall the Act become law, the veto of the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding?"
The "ayes" and "nays" were demanded and taken, resulting as follows:
Alexander Anderson Campbell Courson Cromer Elliott Hayes Jackson Knotts Land Leatherman Leventis Lourie Malloy Martin, Larry Matthews McGill Nicholson O'Dell Pinckney Rankin Reese Scott Setzler Sheheen Williams
Bright Bryant Campsen Cleary Davis Fair Grooms Martin, Shane Massey McConnell Mulvaney Peeler Rose Ryberg Shoopman Thomas Verdin
Having failed to receive the necessary two-thirds vote, the veto of the Governor was sustained, and a message was sent to the House accordingly.
Having voted on the prevailing side, Senator FAIR moved to reconsider the vote whereby Veto 78 was sustained.
The motion to reconsider was adopted.
Veto 78 Part IB; Section 90.16; Page 482; Statewide Revenue; Nonrecurring Revenue - Increased Enforcement Collections; Item 12; Department of Education; Transportation; $900,000.
The question was put, "Shall the Act become law, the veto of the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding?"
The "ayes" and "nays" were demanded and taken, resulting as follows:
Alexander Anderson Campbell Courson Cromer Elliott Fair Ford Hayes Knotts Land Leatherman Leventis Lourie Malloy Martin, Larry Matthews McGill Nicholson O'Dell Peeler Pinckney Rankin Reese Scott Setzler Sheheen Verdin Williams
Bright Bryant Campsen Cleary Davis Grooms Martin, Shane Massey McConnell Mulvaney Rose Ryberg Shoopman Thomas
The necessary two-thirds vote having been received, the veto of the Governor was overridden, and a message was sent to the House accordingly.
We voted to sustain the foregoing vetoes because these items are funded out of a highly speculative revenue source: delinquent tax collections. Regardless of how meaningful the programs may be, we think it is irresponsible -- and even misleading to the agencies involved, and to the public -- to proposed spending based on such revenue sources. If the money from delinquent taxes is in fact collected, then those funds can always be allocated via a supplemental appropriation later in the year. Alternatively, savings generated by other sustained vetoes could be used to fund these items.
Columbia, S.C., June 16, 2010
Mr. President and Senators:
The House respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has overridden the veto by the Governor on R.293, H. 4657 by a vote of 100 to 10:
Veto 79 Part IB; Section 90.16; Page 482; Statewide Revenue; Nonrecurring Revenue - Increased Enforcement Collections; Item 14; Department of Education; Governor's School for the Arts and Humanities; $500,000.
Respectfully submitted,
Speaker of the House
Received as information.
Veto 79 Part IB; Section 90.16; Page 482; Statewide Revenue; Nonrecurring Revenue - Increased Enforcement Collections; Item 14; Department of Education; Governor's School for the Arts and Humanities; $500,000.
The veto of the Governor was taken up for immediate consideration.
Senators HAYES and MALLOY spoke on the veto.
Senator HAYES moved that the veto of the Governor be overridden.
The question was put, "Shall the Act become law, the veto of the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding?"
The "ayes" and "nays" were demanded and taken, resulting as follows:
Alexander Anderson Campbell Cleary Courson Cromer Davis Elliott Fair Ford Hayes Jackson Knotts Land Leatherman Leventis Lourie Malloy Martin, Larry Massey Matthews McGill Nicholson O'Dell Peeler Pinckney Rankin Reese Ryberg Scott Setzler Sheheen Shoopman Thomas Verdin Williams
Bright Bryant Campsen Grooms Martin, Shane McConnell Mulvaney Rose
The necessary two-thirds vote having been received, the veto of the Governor was overridden, and a message was sent to the House accordingly.
We voted to sustain the foregoing vetoes because these items are funded out of a highly speculative revenue source: delinquent tax collections. Regardless of how meaningful the programs may be, we think it is irresponsible -- and even misleading to the agencies involved, and to the public -- to proposed spending based on such revenue sources. If the money from delinquent taxes is in fact collected, then those funds can always be allocated via a supplemental appropriation later in the year. Alternatively, savings generated by other sustained vetoes could be used to fund these items.
Columbia, S.C., June 16, 2010
Mr. President and Senators:
The House respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has overridden the veto by the Governor on R.293, H. 4657 by a vote of 104 to 7:
Veto 80 Part IB; Section 90.16; Page 482; Statewide Revenue; Nonrecurring Revenue - Increased Enforcement Collections; Item 15; Department of Education; Governor's School for Math and Science; $500,000.
Respectfully submitted,
Speaker of the House
Received as information.
Veto 80 Part IB; Section 90.16; Page 482; Statewide Revenue; Nonrecurring Revenue - Increased Enforcement Collections; Item 15; Department of Education; Governor's School for Math and Science; $500,000.
The veto of the Governor was taken up for immediate consideration.
Senator HAYES moved that the veto of the Governor be overridden.
The question was put, "Shall the Act become law, the veto of the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding?"
The "ayes" and "nays" were demanded and taken, resulting as follows:
Alexander Anderson Campbell Cleary Courson Cromer Davis Elliott Fair Ford Hayes Jackson Knotts Land Leatherman Leventis Lourie Malloy Martin, Larry Massey Matthews McGill Nicholson O'Dell Peeler Pinckney Rankin Reese Ryberg Scott Setzler Sheheen Shoopman Thomas Verdin Williams
Bright Bryant Campsen Grooms Martin, Shane McConnell Mulvaney Rose
The necessary two-thirds vote having been received, the veto of the Governor was overridden, and a message was sent to the House accordingly.
We voted to sustain the foregoing vetoes because these items are funded out of a highly speculative revenue source: delinquent tax collections. Regardless of how meaningful the programs may be, we think it is irresponsible -- and even misleading to the agencies involved, and to the public -- to proposed spending based on such revenue sources. If the money from delinquent taxes is in fact collected, then those funds can always be allocated via a supplemental appropriation later in the year. Alternatively, savings generated by other sustained vetoes could be used to fund these items.
Columbia, S.C., June 16, 2010
Mr. President and Senators:
The House respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has overridden the veto by the Governor on R.293, H. 4657 by a vote of 91 to 21:
Veto 81 Part IB; Section 90.16; Page 482; Statewide Revenue; Nonrecurring Revenue - Increased Enforcement Collections; Item 16; Prosecution Coordination Commission; Operating Expenses; $1,000,000
Respectfully submitted,
Speaker of the House
Received as information.
Veto 81 Part IB; Section 90.16; Page 482; Statewide Revenue; Nonrecurring Revenue - Increased Enforcement Collections; Item 16; Prosecution Coordination Commission; Operating Expenses; $1,000,000
The veto of the Governor was taken up for immediate consideration.
Senator THOMAS moved that the veto of the Governor be overridden.
The question was put, "Shall the Act become law, the veto of the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding?"
The "ayes" and "nays" were demanded and taken, resulting as follows:
Alexander Anderson Campbell Campsen Cleary Courson Cromer Davis Elliott Fair Ford Hayes Jackson Knotts Land Leatherman Leventis Lourie Malloy Martin, Larry Massey Matthews McGill Nicholson O'Dell Peeler Pinckney Rankin Reese Rose Ryberg Scott Setzler Sheheen Shoopman Thomas Verdin Williams
Bright Bryant Grooms Martin, Shane Mulvaney
McConnell
The necessary two-thirds vote having been received, the veto of the Governor was overridden, and a message was sent to the House accordingly.
I abstained from consideration of and voting on matters pertaining to Veto 81 inasmuch as I am a member of the Prosecution Coordination Commission.
We voted to sustain the foregoing vetoes because these items are funded out of a highly speculative revenue source: delinquent tax collections. Regardless of how meaningful the programs may be, we think it is irresponsible -- and even misleading to the agencies involved, and to the public -- to proposed spending based on such revenue sources. If the money from delinquent taxes is in fact collected, then those funds can always be allocated via a supplemental appropriation later in the year. Alternatively, savings generated by other sustained vetoes could be used to fund these items.
Columbia, S.C., June 16, 2010
Mr. President and Senators:
The House respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has overridden the veto by the Governor on R.293, H. 4657 by a vote of 95 to 16:
Veto 82 Part IB; Section 90.16; Page 483; Statewide Revenue; Nonrecurring Revenue - Increased Enforcement Collections; Item 17; Commission on Indigent Defense; Operating Expenses; $1,000,000.
Respectfully submitted,
Speaker of the House
Received as information.
Veto 82 Part IB; Section 90.16; Page 483; Statewide Revenue; Nonrecurring Revenue - Increased Enforcement Collections; Item 17; Commission on Indigent Defense; Operating Expenses; $1,000,000.
The veto of the Governor was taken up for immediate consideration.
Senator THOMAS moved that the veto of the Governor be overridden.
The question was put, "Shall the Act become law, the veto of the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding?"
The "ayes" and "nays" were demanded and taken, resulting as follows:
Alexander Anderson Campbell Campsen Cleary Courson Cromer Davis Elliott Fair Ford Hayes Jackson Knotts Land Leatherman Leventis Lourie Malloy Martin, Larry Massey Matthews McGill Nicholson O'Dell Peeler Pinckney Rankin Reese Rose Ryberg Scott Setzler Sheheen Shoopman Thomas Verdin Williams
Bright Bryant Grooms Martin, Shane Mulvaney
McConnell
The necessary two-thirds vote having been received, the veto of the Governor was overridden, and a message was sent to the House accordingly.
I abstained from consideration of and voting on matters pertaining to Veto 82 inasmuch as I am a member of the Prosecution Coordination Commission.
We voted to sustain the foregoing vetoes because these items are funded out of a highly speculative revenue source: delinquent tax collections. Regardless of how meaningful the programs may be, we think it is irresponsible -- and even misleading to the agencies involved, and to the public -- to proposed spending based on such revenue sources. If the money from delinquent taxes is in fact collected, then those funds can always be allocated via a supplemental appropriation later in the year. Alternatively, savings generated by other sustained vetoes could be used to fund these items.
Columbia, S.C., June 16, 2010
Mr. President and Senators:
The House respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has overridden the veto by the Governor on R.293, H. 4657 by a vote of 78 to 38:
Veto 83 Part IB; Section 90.16; Page 483; Statewide Revenue; Nonrecurring Revenue Increased Enforcement Collections; Item 18; B&C Board, Employee Benefits; Health Plan - Employer Increase; $147,076.
Respectfully submitted,
Speaker of the House
Received as information.
Veto 83 Part IB; Section 90.16; Page 483; Statewide Revenue; Nonrecurring Revenue Increased Enforcement Collections; Item 18; B&C Board, Employee Benefits; Health Plan - Employer Increase; $147,076.
The veto of the Governor was taken up for immediate consideration.
Senator THOMAS moved that the veto of the Governor be overridden.
The question was put, "Shall the Act become law, the veto of the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding?"
The "ayes" and "nays" were demanded and taken, resulting as follows:
Alexander Anderson Campbell Cromer Ford Hayes Jackson Knotts Land Leatherman Leventis Lourie Martin, Larry McGill Nicholson O'Dell Pinckney Rankin Reese Scott Setzler Sheheen Thomas Williams
Bright Bryant Campsen Cleary Davis Elliott Fair Grooms Malloy Martin, Shane Massey McConnell Mulvaney Peeler Rose Ryberg Shoopman Verdin
Having failed to receive the necessary two-thirds vote, the veto of the Governor was sustained, and a message was sent to the House accordingly.
We voted to sustain the foregoing vetoes because these items are funded out of a highly speculative revenue source: delinquent tax collections. Regardless of how meaningful the programs may be, we think it is irresponsible -- and even misleading to the agencies involved, and to the public -- to proposed spending based on such revenue sources. If the money from delinquent taxes is in fact collected, then those funds can always be allocated via a supplemental appropriation later in the year. Alternatively, savings generated by other sustained vetoes could be used to fund these items.
Veto 73 Part IB; Section 90.16; Page 482; Statewide Revenue; Nonrecurring Revenue - Increased Enforcement Collections; Item 6; The Senate; Reapportionment; $1,000,000.
Having voted on the prevailing side, Senator MULVANEY moved to reconsider the vote whereby Veto 73 was overridden on Thursday, June 17, 2010.
Senator McCONNELL moved to table the motion to reconsider.
The "ayes" and "nays" were demanded and taken, resulting as follows:
Alexander Anderson Campbell Cleary Courson Cromer Elliott Fair Ford Grooms Hayes Jackson Knotts Land Leatherman Leventis Lourie Malloy Martin, Larry Matthews McConnell McGill Mulvaney Nicholson O'Dell Peeler Pinckney Rankin Reese Ryberg Scott Setzler Shoopman Thomas Verdin Williams
Bright Bryant Campsen Davis Martin, Shane Massey Rose Sheheen
The motion to reconsider the vote whereby Veto 73 had been overridden on June 17, 2010, was tabled.
Columbia, S.C., June 16, 2010
Mr. President and Senators:
The House respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has overridden the veto by the Governor on R.293, H. 4657 by a vote of 96 to 19:
Veto 84 Part IB; Section 90.16; Page 483; Statewide Revenue; Nonrecurring Revenue - Increased Enforcement Collections; Item 20; John de la Howe School; Operating Expenses; $308,765.
Respectfully submitted,
Speaker of the House
Received as information.
Veto 84 Part IB; Section 90.16; Page 483; Statewide Revenue; Nonrecurring Revenue - Increased Enforcement Collections; Item 20; John de la Howe School; Operating Expenses; $308,765.
The veto of the Governor was taken up for immediate consideration.
Senator ALEXANDER moved that the veto of the Governor be overridden.
The question was put, "Shall the Act become law, the veto of the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding?"
The "ayes" and "nays" were demanded and taken, resulting as follows:
Alexander Anderson Campbell Courson Elliott Fair Ford Hayes Jackson Knotts Land Leatherman Leventis Lourie Malloy Martin, Larry Massey Matthews McConnell McGill Nicholson O'Dell Peeler Pinckney Rankin Reese Ryberg Scott Setzler Sheheen Thomas Verdin Williams
Bright Bryant Campsen Cleary Davis Grooms Martin, Shane Mulvaney Rose Shoopman
The necessary two-thirds vote having been received, the veto of the Governor was overridden, and a message was sent to the House accordingly.
We voted to sustain the foregoing vetoes because these items are funded out of a highly speculative revenue source: delinquent tax collections. Regardless of how meaningful the programs may be, we think it is irresponsible -- and even misleading to the agencies involved, and to the public -- to proposed spending based on such revenue sources. If the money from delinquent taxes is in fact collected, then those funds can always be allocated via a supplemental appropriation later in the year. Alternatively, savings generated by other sustained vetoes could be used to fund these items.
Columbia, S.C., June 16, 2010
Mr. President and Senators:
The House respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has overridden the veto by the Governor on R.293, H. 4657 by a vote of 83 to 26:
Veto 85 Part IB; Section 90.16; Page 483; Statewide Revenue; Nonrecurring Revenue - Increased Enforcement Collections; Item 21; Wil Lou Gray Opportunity School; Operating Expenses; $308,764.
Respectfully submitted,
Speaker of the House
Received as information.
Veto 85 Part IB; Section 90.16; Page 483; Statewide Revenue; Nonrecurring Revenue - Increased Enforcement Collections; Item 21; Wil Lou Gray Opportunity School; Operating Expenses; $308,764.
The veto of the Governor was taken up for immediate consideration.
The question was put, "Shall the Act become law, the veto of the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding?"
The "ayes" and "nays" were demanded and taken, resulting as follows:
Alexander Anderson Campbell Courson Elliott Fair Ford Hayes Jackson Knotts Land Leatherman Leventis Lourie Malloy Martin, Larry Massey Matthews McConnell McGill Nicholson O'Dell Peeler Pinckney Rankin Reese Ryberg Scott Setzler Sheheen Thomas Verdin Williams
Bright Bryant Campsen Cleary Davis Grooms Martin, Shane Mulvaney Rose Shoopman
The necessary two-thirds vote having been received, the veto of the Governor was overridden, and a message was sent to the House accordingly.
We voted to sustain the foregoing vetoes because these items are funded out of a highly speculative revenue source: delinquent tax collections. Regardless of how meaningful the programs may be, we think it is irresponsible -- and even misleading to the agencies involved, and to the public -- to proposed spending based on such revenue sources. If the money from delinquent taxes is in fact collected, then those funds can always be allocated via a supplemental appropriation later in the year. Alternatively, savings generated by other sustained vetoes could be used to fund these items.
Columbia, S.C., June 16, 2010
Mr. President and Senators:
The House respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has overridden the veto by the Governor on R.293, H. 4657 by a vote of 73 to 33:
Veto 91 Part IB; Section 90.18; Page 484; Statewide Revenue; Health Care Maintenance of Effort Funding; Item 7; Commission for the Blind; $100,000.
Respectfully submitted,
Speaker of the House
Received as information.
Veto 91 Part IB; Section 90.18; Page 484; Statewide Revenue; Health Care Maintenance of Effort Funding; Item 7; Commission for the Blind; $100,000.
The veto of the Governor was taken up for immediate consideration.
Senator ALEXANDER moved that the veto of the Governor be overridden.
The question was put, "Shall the Act become law, the veto of the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding?"
The "ayes" and "nays" were demanded and taken, resulting as follows:
Alexander Anderson Campbell Cromer Elliott Ford Hayes Jackson Knotts Land Leatherman Lourie Malloy Martin, Larry Matthews McGill Nicholson O'Dell Peeler Pinckney Rankin Reese Scott Setzler Sheheen Thomas Verdin Williams
Bright Bryant Campsen Cleary Davis Fair Grooms Martin, Shane Massey McConnell Mulvaney Rose Ryberg Shoopman
The necessary two-thirds vote having been received, the veto of the Governor was overridden, and a message was sent to the House accordingly.
Columbia, S.C., June 16, 2010
Mr. President and Senators:
The House respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has overridden the veto by the Governor on R.293, H. 4657 by a vote of 77 to 33:
Veto 92 Part III; Section 2; Page 487; (A)(22); State Library; $1,172,758.
Respectfully submitted,
Speaker of the House
Received as information.
Veto 92 Part III; Section 2; Page 487; (A)(22); State Library; $1,172,758.
The veto of the Governor was taken up for immediate consideration.
Senator HAYES moved that the veto of the Governor be overridden.
The question was put, "Shall the Act become law, the veto of the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding?"
The "ayes" and "nays" were demanded and taken, resulting as follows:
Alexander Campbell Campsen Cleary Courson Cromer Davis Elliott Fair Ford Hayes Knotts Land Leatherman Leventis Lourie Malloy Martin, Larry Massey Matthews McConnell McGill Mulvaney Nicholson O'Dell Peeler Pinckney Rankin Reese Rose Ryberg Scott Setzler Sheheen Shoopman Thomas Verdin Williams
Bright Bryant Grooms Martin, Shane
The necessary two-thirds vote having been received, the veto of the Governor was overridden, and a message was sent to the House accordingly.
Columbia, S.C., June 16, 2010
Mr. President and Senators:
The House respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has overridden the veto by the Governor on R.293, H. 4657 by a vote of 84 to 29:
Veto 93 Part III; Section 2; Page 487; (A)(23); Forestry Commission; $500,000.
Respectfully submitted,
Speaker of the House
Received as information.
Veto 93 Part III; Section 2; Page 487; (A)(23); Forestry Commission; $500,000.
The veto of the Governor was taken up for immediate consideration.
Senator McGILL moved that the veto of the Governor be overridden.
The question was put, "Shall the Act become law, the veto of the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding?"
The "ayes" and "nays" were demanded and taken, resulting as follows:
Alexander Anderson Campbell Cleary Courson Cromer Elliott Fair Ford Grooms Hayes Jackson Knotts Land Leatherman Leventis Lourie Malloy Martin, Larry Massey Matthews McGill Nicholson O'Dell Peeler Pinckney Rankin Reese Scott Setzler Sheheen Verdin Williams
Bright Bryant Campsen Davis Martin, Shane McConnell Mulvaney Rose Ryberg Shoopman Thomas
The necessary two-thirds vote having been received, the veto of the Governor was overridden, and a message was sent to the House accordingly.
At 2:25 P.M., Senator McCONNELL assumed the Chair.
Columbia, S.C., June 16, 2010
Mr. President and Senators:
The House respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has sustained the veto by the Governor on R.293, H. 4657 by a vote of 70 to 44:
Veto 94 Part III; Section 2; Page 487; (A)(24); Department of Agriculture; $200,000.
Respectfully submitted,
Speaker of the House
Received as information.
Columbia, S.C., June 16, 2010
Mr. President and Senators:
The House respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has reconsidered the vote whereby Veto 94 was sustained and has overridden the veto by the Governor on R.293, H. 4657 by a vote of 87 to 25:
Veto 94 Part III; Section 2; Page 487; (A)(24); Department of Agriculture; $200,000.
Respectfully submitted,
Speaker of the House
Received as information.
Veto 94 Part III; Section 2; Page 487; (A)(24); Department of Agriculture; $200,000.
The veto of the Governor was taken up for immediate consideration.
Senator McGILL spoke on the veto.
Senator McGILL moved that the veto of the Governor be overridden.
The question was put, "Shall the Act become law, the veto of the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding?"
The "ayes" and "nays" were demanded and taken, resulting as follows:
Alexander Anderson Campbell Cleary Courson Cromer Elliott Ford Hayes Jackson Knotts Land Leatherman Leventis Lourie Malloy Martin, Larry Matthews McGill Nicholson O'Dell Peeler Pinckney Rankin Reese Scott Setzler Sheheen Verdin Williams
Bright Bryant Campsen Davis Fair Grooms Martin, Shane Massey McConnell Mulvaney Rose Ryberg Shoopman Thomas
The necessary two-thirds vote having been received, the veto of the Governor was overridden, and a message was sent to the House accordingly.
Columbia, S.C., June 16, 2010
Mr. President and Senators:
The House respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has overridden the veto by the Governor on R.293, H. 4657 by a vote of 83 to 29:
Veto 95 Part III; Section 2; Page 487; (A)(25); Clemson University - PSA; $2,600,000.
Respectfully submitted,
Speaker of the House
Received as information.
Veto 95 Part III; Section 2; Page 487; (A)(25); Clemson University - PSA; $2,600,000.
The veto of the Governor was taken up for immediate consideration.
Senator McGILL spoke on the veto.
Senator McGILL moved that the veto of the Governor be overridden.
The question was put, "Shall the Act become law, the veto of the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding?"
The "ayes" and "nays" were demanded and taken, resulting as follows:
Alexander Anderson Campbell Cleary Courson Cromer Elliott Fair Ford Grooms Hayes Jackson Knotts Land Leatherman Leventis Lourie Malloy Martin, Larry Massey Matthews McConnell McGill Nicholson O'Dell Peeler Pinckney Rankin Reese Scott Setzler Sheheen Shoopman Thomas Verdin Williams
Bright Bryant Campsen Davis Martin, Shane Mulvaney Rose
The necessary two-thirds vote having been received, the veto of the Governor was overridden, and a message was sent to the House accordingly.
Columbia, S.C., June 16, 2010
Mr. President and Senators:
The House respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has overridden the veto by the Governor on R.293, H. 4657 by a vote of 80 to 30:
Veto 96 Part III; Section 2; Page 487; (A)(26); South Carolina State University - PSA; $500,000.
Respectfully submitted,
Speaker of the House
Received as information.
Veto 96 Part III; Section 2; Page 487; (A)(26); South Carolina State University - PSA; $500,000.
The veto of the Governor was taken up for immediate consideration.
Senator McGILL moved that the veto of the Governor be overridden.
The question was put, "Shall the Act become law, the veto of the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding?"
The "ayes" and "nays" were demanded and taken, resulting as follows:
Alexander Anderson Campbell Cleary Courson Cromer Elliott Fair Ford Grooms Hayes Jackson Knotts Land Leatherman Leventis Lourie Malloy Martin, Larry Massey Matthews McConnell McGill Nicholson O'Dell Peeler Pinckney Rankin Reese Scott Setzler Sheheen Shoopman Thomas Verdin Williams
Bright Bryant Campsen Davis Martin, Shane Mulvaney Rose
The necessary two-thirds vote having been received, the veto of the Governor was overridden, and a message was sent to the House accordingly.
Columbia, S.C., June 16, 2010
Mr. President and Senators:
The House respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has overridden the veto by the Governor on R.293, H. 4657 by a vote of 80 to 34:
Veto 97 Part III; Section 2; Page 487; (A)(28); Administrative Law Court; $100,000.
Respectfully submitted,
Speaker of the House
Received as information.
Veto 97 Part III; Section 2; Page 487; (A)(28); Administrative Law Court; $100,000.
The veto of the Governor was taken up for immediate consideration.
Senator THOMAS moved that the veto of the Governor be overridden.
The question was put, "Shall the Act become law, the veto of the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding?"
The "ayes" and "nays" were demanded and taken, resulting as follows:
Alexander Anderson Campbell Cleary Courson Cromer Elliott Fair Hayes Knotts Land Leatherman Leventis Lourie Malloy Martin, Larry Massey Matthews McGill Nicholson O'Dell Rankin Reese Ryberg Scott Sheheen Thomas Verdin Williams
Bright Bryant Campsen Davis Grooms Martin, Shane McConnell Mulvaney Peeler Rose Shoopman
The necessary two-thirds vote having been received, the veto of the Governor was overridden, and a message was sent to the House accordingly.
Columbia, S.C., June 16, 2010
Mr. President and Senators:
The House respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has overridden the veto by the Governor on R.293, H. 4657 by a vote of 78 to 35:
Veto 98 Part III; Section 2; Page 487; (A)(31); Prosecution Coordination Commission; $500,000.
Respectfully submitted,
Speaker of the House
Received as information.
Veto 98 Part III; Section 2; Page 487; (A)(31); Prosecution Coordination Commission; $500,000.
The veto of the Governor was taken up for immediate consideration.
Senator THOMAS moved that the veto of the Governor be overridden.
The question was put, "Shall the Act become law, the veto of the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding?"
The "ayes" and "nays" were demanded and taken, resulting as follows:
Alexander Anderson Campbell Cleary Cromer Elliott Fair Ford Hayes Jackson Knotts Land Leatherman Leventis Lourie Malloy Martin, Larry Massey Matthews McGill Nicholson O'Dell Pinckney Rankin Reese Ryberg Scott Sheheen Thomas Verdin Williams
Bright Bryant Campsen Courson Davis Grooms Martin, Shane Mulvaney Peeler Rose Shoopman
McConnell
The necessary two-thirds vote having been received, the veto of the Governor was overridden, and a message was sent to the House accordingly.
I abstained from consideration of and voting on matters pertaining to Veto 98 inasmuch as I am a member of the Prosecution Coordination Commission.
Columbia, S.C., June 16, 2010
Mr. President and Senators:
The House respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has overridden the veto by the Governor on R.293, H. 4657 by a vote of 88 to 24:
Veto 99 Part III; Section 2; Page 487; (A)(32); Commission on Indigent Defense; $700,000.
Respectfully submitted,
Speaker of the House
Received as information.
Veto 99 Part III; Section 2; Page 487; (A)(32); Commission on Indigent Defense; $700,000.
The veto of the Governor was taken up for immediate consideration.
Senator THOMAS moved that the veto of the Governor be overridden.
The question was put, "Shall the Act become law, the veto of the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding?"
The "ayes" and "nays" were demanded and taken, resulting as follows:
Alexander Anderson Campbell Cleary Cromer Elliott Fair Ford Hayes Jackson Knotts Land Leatherman Leventis Lourie Malloy Martin, Larry Massey Matthews McGill Nicholson O'Dell Pinckney Rankin Reese Ryberg Scott Sheheen Thomas Verdin Williams
Bright Bryant Campsen Courson Davis Grooms Martin, Shane Mulvaney Peeler Rose Shoopman
McConnell
The necessary two-thirds vote having been received, the veto of the Governor was overridden, and a message was sent to the House accordingly.
I abstained from consideration of and voting on matters pertaining to Veto 99 inasmuch as I am a member of the Prosecution Coordination Commission.
Columbia, S.C., June 16, 2010
Mr. President and Senators:
The House respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has overridden the veto by the Governor on R.293, H. 4657 by a vote of 74 to 36:
Veto 100 Part III; Section 2; Page 488; (A)(34); Law Enforcement Training Council; $120,000.
Respectfully submitted,
Speaker of the House
Received as information.
Veto 100 Part III; Section 2; Page 488; (A)(34); Law Enforcement Training Council; $120,000.
The veto of the Governor was taken up for immediate consideration.
Senator FAIR moved that the veto of the Governor be overridden.
The question was put, "Shall the Act become law, the veto of the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding?"
The "ayes" and "nays" were demanded and taken, resulting as follows:
Alexander Anderson Campbell Cleary Courson Cromer Elliott Fair Ford Hayes Knotts Land Leatherman Leventis Lourie Malloy Martin, Larry Massey Matthews McConnell McGill Nicholson O'Dell Peeler Pinckney Rankin Reese Ryberg Scott Sheheen Verdin Williams
Bright Bryant Campsen Davis Grooms Martin, Shane Mulvaney Rose Shoopman
The necessary two-thirds vote having been received, the veto of the Governor was overridden, and a message was sent to the House accordingly.
Columbia, S.C., June 16, 2010
Mr. President and Senators:
The House respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has overridden the veto by the Governor on R.293, H. 4657 by a vote of 84 to 30:
Veto 102 Part III; Section 2; Page 488; (A)(37); Leg Dept. - Codification of Law and Legislative Council; $100,000.
Respectfully submitted,
Speaker of the House
Received as information.
Veto 102 Part III; Section 2; Page 488; (A)(37); Leg Dept. - Codification of Law and Legislative Council; $100,000.
The veto of the Governor was taken up for immediate consideration.
Senator THOMAS spoke on the veto.
Senator THOMAS moved that the veto of the Governor be overridden.
The question was put, "Shall the Act become law, the veto of the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding?"
The "ayes" and "nays" were demanded and taken, resulting as follows:
Anderson Campbell Ford Jackson Land Leventis Lourie Martin, Larry Matthews McConnell McGill Nicholson O'Dell Pinckney Reese Scott Verdin Williams
Alexander Bright Bryant Campsen Cleary Courson Cromer Davis Elliott Fair Grooms Hayes Knotts Leatherman Malloy Martin, Shane Massey Mulvaney Peeler Rankin Rose Ryberg Sheheen Shoopman Thomas
Having failed to receive the necessary two-thirds vote, the veto of the Governor was sustained, and a message was sent to the House accordingly.
Columbia, S.C., June 16, 2010
Mr. President and Senators:
The House respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has overridden the veto by the Governor on R.293, H. 4657 by a vote of 88 to 20:
Veto 105 Part III; Section 2; Page 488; (A)(40); Arts Commission; $250,000.
Respectfully submitted,
Speaker of the House
Received as information.
Veto 105 Part III; Section 2; Page 488; (A)(40); Arts Commission; $250,000.
The veto of the Governor was taken up for immediate consideration.
Senator HAYES spoke on the veto.
Senator HAYES moved that the veto of the Governor be overridden.
The question was put, "Shall the Act become law, the veto of the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding?"
The "ayes" and "nays" were demanded and taken, resulting as follows:
Alexander Anderson Campbell Cleary Courson Cromer Davis Elliott Fair Ford Hayes Jackson Knotts Land Leatherman Leventis Lourie Malloy Martin, Larry Massey Matthews McConnell McGill Nicholson O'Dell Pinckney Rankin Reese Rose Ryberg Scott Sheheen Verdin Williams
Bright Bryant Campsen Grooms Martin, Shane Mulvaney Peeler Shoopman Thomas
The necessary two-thirds vote having been received, the veto of the Governor was overridden, and a message was sent to the House accordingly.
I voted to override Veto 105 in error based on incorrect information. Based on what I now understand, I would vote to sustain Veto 105 and should have done so.
Columbia, S.C., June 16, 2010
Mr. President and Senators:
The House respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has overridden the veto by the Governor on R.293, H. 4657 by a vote of 81 to 33:
Veto 60 Part IB; Section 37.16; Page 377; Department of Natural Resources; County Funds
Respectfully submitted,
Speaker of the House
Received as information.
Veto 60 Part IB; Section 37.16; Page 377; Department of Natural Resources; County Funds
The veto of the Governor was taken up for immediate consideration.
Senator McGILL moved that the veto of the Governor be overridden.
Senator DAVIS argued in favor of sustaining the veto.
The question was put, "Shall the Act become law, the veto of the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding?"
The "ayes" and "nays" were demanded and taken, resulting as follows:
Land Leventis Reese
Alexander Anderson Bright Bryant Campbell Campsen Cleary Courson Cromer Davis Elliott Fair Ford Grooms Hayes Knotts Leatherman Lourie Malloy Martin, Larry Martin, Shane Massey Matthews McConnell McGill Mulvaney Nicholson O'Dell Peeler Pinckney Rankin Rose Ryberg Scott Sheheen Shoopman Thomas Verdin Williams
Having failed to receive the necessary two-thirds vote, the veto of the Governor was sustained, and a message was sent to the House accordingly.
Columbia, S.C., June 16, 2010
Mr. President and Senators:
The House respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has overridden the veto by the Governor on R.293, H. 4657 by a vote of 76 to 32:
Veto 61 Part IB; Section 37.17; Page 377; Department of Natural Resources; County Game Funds/Equipment Purchase
Respectfully submitted,
Speaker of the House
Received as information.
Veto 61 Part IB; Section 37.17; Page 377; Department of Natural Resources; County Game Funds/Equipment Purchase
The veto of the Governor was taken up for immediate consideration.
Senator McGILL moved that the veto of the Governor be overridden.
Senator DAVIS spoke on the veto.
The question was put, "Shall the Act become law, the veto of the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding?"
The "ayes" and "nays" were demanded and taken, resulting as follows:
Land Leventis Reese
Alexander Anderson Bright Bryant Campbell Campsen Cleary Courson Cromer Davis Elliott Fair Ford Grooms Hayes Knotts Leatherman Lourie Malloy Martin, Larry Martin, Shane Massey Matthews McConnell McGill Mulvaney Nicholson O'Dell Peeler Pinckney Rankin Rose Ryberg Scott Sheheen Shoopman Thomas Verdin Williams
Having failed to receive the necessary two-thirds vote, the veto of the Governor was sustained, and a message was sent to the House accordingly.
Senator RYBERG rose for an Expression of Personal Interest.
Columbia, S.C., June 15, 2010
Mr. President and Senators:
The House respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has overridden the veto by the Governor on R.272, H. 3790 by a vote of 103 to 4:
(R272, H3790 (Word version)) -- Rep. Sandifer: AN ACT TO AMEND SECTION 40-58-20, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO CERTAIN DEFINITIONS PERTAINING TO THE LICENSURE OF MORTGAGE BROKERS, SO AS TO DEFINE A "QUALIFIED LOAN ORIGINATOR"; TO AMEND SECTION 40-58-50, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO QUALIFIED LOAN ORIGINATORS, SO AS TO REQUIRE LICENSURE FOR A QUALIFIED LOAN ORIGINATOR, TO PROVIDE APPLICATIONS PROCEDURES AND QUALIFICATION REQUIREMENTS; TO AMEND SECTION 37-3-501, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE DEFINITION OF A SUPERVISED LOAN, SO AS TO PROVIDE EXCEPTIONS TO THIS DEFINITION; AND TO AMEND SECTION 37-3-503, RELATING TO A LICENSE TO MAKE A SUPERVISED LOAN, SO AS TO PROHIBIT A PERSON LICENSED TO MAKE A SUPERVISED LOAN FROM ENGAGING IN CERTAIN CLOSED-END CREDIT TRANSACTIONS, AND TO PROVIDE GRADUATED PENALTIES FOR VIOLATIONS.
Very respectfully,
Speaker of the House
Received as information.
(R272, H3790 (Word version)) -- Rep. Sandifer: AN ACT TO AMEND SECTION 40-58-20, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO CERTAIN DEFINITIONS PERTAINING TO THE LICENSURE OF MORTGAGE BROKERS, SO AS TO DEFINE A "QUALIFIED LOAN ORIGINATOR"; TO AMEND SECTION 40-58-50, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO QUALIFIED LOAN ORIGINATORS, SO AS TO REQUIRE LICENSURE FOR A QUALIFIED LOAN ORIGINATOR, TO PROVIDE APPLICATIONS PROCEDURES AND QUALIFICATION REQUIREMENTS; TO AMEND SECTION 37-3-501, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE DEFINITION OF A SUPERVISED LOAN, SO AS TO PROVIDE EXCEPTIONS TO THIS DEFINITION; AND TO AMEND SECTION 37-3-503, RELATING TO A LICENSE TO MAKE A SUPERVISED LOAN, SO AS TO PROHIBIT A PERSON LICENSED TO MAKE A SUPERVISED LOAN FROM ENGAGING IN CERTAIN CLOSED-END CREDIT TRANSACTIONS, AND TO PROVIDE GRADUATED PENALTIES FOR VIOLATIONS.
The veto of the Governor was taken up for immediate consideration.
Senator HAYES moved that the veto of the Governor be overridden.
The question was put, "Shall the Act become law, the veto of the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding?"
The "ayes" and "nays" were demanded and taken, resulting as follows:
Alexander Campbell Cleary Courson Elliott Fair Ford Grooms Jackson Knotts Land Leatherman Leventis Lourie Martin, Larry Martin, Shane Massey Matthews McGill O'Dell Peeler Rankin Reese Ryberg Scott Sheheen Williams
Bright Bryant Campsen Cromer Davis Malloy McConnell Rose Shoopman Verdin
The necessary two-thirds vote having been received, the veto of the Governor was overridden, and a message was sent to the House accordingly.
Senator MALLOY rose for an Expression of Personal Interest.
Columbia, S.C., June 15, 2010
Mr. President and Senators:
The House respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has overridden the veto by the Governor on R.323, H. 4187 by a vote of 105 to 1:
(R323, H4187 (Word version)) -- Reps. White and Kirsh: AN ACT TO AMEND SECTION 55-9-190, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE POWERS THAT AN ENTITY HAS TO ESTABLISH AN AIRPORT OR LANDING FIELD OR TO ACQUIRE, LEASE, OR SET APART PROPERTY FOR THAT PURPOSE, SO AS TO DELETE A PROVISION THAT LIMITS THE TERM OF A LEASE OF AIRPORTS OR LANDING FIELDS TO PRIVATE PARTIES FOR OPERATION AND A PROVISION THAT LIMITS THE TERM THAT AN ENTITY MAY ASSIGN TO PRIVATE PARTIES THE OPERATION SPACE, AREA, IMPROVEMENTS AND EQUIPMENT ON AN AIRPORT OR LANDING FIELD.
Very respectfully,
Speaker of the House
Received as information.
(R323, H4187 (Word version)) -- Reps. White and Kirsh: AN ACT TO AMEND SECTION 55-9-190, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE POWERS THAT AN ENTITY HAS TO ESTABLISH AN AIRPORT OR LANDING FIELD OR TO ACQUIRE, LEASE, OR SET APART PROPERTY FOR THAT PURPOSE, SO AS TO DELETE A PROVISION THAT LIMITS THE TERM OF A LEASE OF AIRPORTS OR LANDING FIELDS TO PRIVATE PARTIES FOR OPERATION AND A PROVISION THAT LIMITS THE TERM THAT AN ENTITY MAY ASSIGN TO PRIVATE PARTIES THE OPERATION SPACE, AREA, IMPROVEMENTS AND EQUIPMENT ON AN AIRPORT OR LANDING FIELD.
The veto of the Governor was taken up for immediate consideration.
Senator GROOMS spoke on the veto.
Senator GROOMS moved that the veto of the Governor be overridden.
The question was put, "Shall the Act become law, the veto of the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding?"
The "ayes" and "nays" were demanded and taken, resulting as follows:
Alexander Bright Bryant Campbell Campsen Cleary Courson Cromer Davis Elliott Fair Ford Grooms Hayes Jackson Knotts Land Leatherman Leventis Lourie Malloy Martin, Larry Martin, Shane Massey Matthews McConnell McGill Mulvaney O'Dell Peeler Rankin Reese Rose Ryberg Scott Sheheen Shoopman Verdin Williams
Thomas
The necessary two-thirds vote having been received, the veto of the Governor was overridden, and a message was sent to the House accordingly.
(R329, H4542 (Word version)) -- Reps. Harrison, Weeks and McLeod: AN ACT TO AMEND SECTION 8-13-320, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO DUTIES AND POWERS OF THE STATE ETHICS COMMISSION, SO AS TO DELETE THE PROHIBITION OF THE RELEASE OF INFORMATION UNTIL FINAL DISPOSITION OF AN ETHICS INVESTIGATION AND REQUIRE THAT THE INFORMATION MAY NOT BE RELEASED UNTIL A FINDING OF PROBABLE CAUSE HAS BEEN MADE; AND TO AMEND SECTION 8-13-1372, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE AUTHORITY OF STATE ETHICS COMMISSION TO DETERMINE THAT ERRORS OR OMISSIONS ON CAMPAIGN REPORTS ARE INADVERTENT AND MAY BE HANDLED AS TECHNICAL VIOLATIONS, SO AS TO CHANGE REFERENCES OF THE STATE ETHICS COMMISSION TO THE APPROPRIATE SUPERVISORY OFFICE.
The veto of the Governor was taken up for immediate consideration.
On motion of Senator HAYES, the veto was carried over.
Columbia, S.C., June 15, 2010
Mr. President and Senators:
The House respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has overridden the veto by the Governor on R.283, H. 4715 by a vote of 3 to 0:
(R283, H4715 (Word version)) -- Rep. Vick: A JOINT RESOLUTION TO AUTHORIZE THE STATE BUDGET AND CONTROL BOARD TO TRANSFER OWNERSHIP OF JEFFERSON NATIONAL GUARD ARMORY IN JEFFERSON, SOUTH CAROLINA, TO THE COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD.
Very respectfully,
Speaker of the House
Received as information.
(R283, H4715 (Word version)) -- Rep. Vick: A JOINT RESOLUTION TO AUTHORIZE THE STATE BUDGET AND CONTROL BOARD TO TRANSFER OWNERSHIP OF JEFFERSON NATIONAL GUARD ARMORY IN JEFFERSON, SOUTH CAROLINA, TO THE COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD.
The veto of the Governor was taken up for immediate consideration.
Senators SHEHEEN and McGILL spoke on the veto.
Senator SHEHEEN moved that the veto of the Governor be overridden.
The question was put, "Shall the Act become law, the veto of the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding?"
The "ayes" and "nays" were demanded and taken, resulting as follows:
Alexander Campbell Cleary Courson Cromer Davis Elliott Ford Grooms Hayes Jackson Knotts Land Leventis Lourie Malloy Martin, Larry Martin, Shane Massey Matthews McConnell McGill Mulvaney Peeler Rankin Reese Rose Ryberg Scott Sheheen Shoopman Williams
Bright Bryant Campsen Fair Thomas
The necessary two-thirds vote having been received, the veto of the Governor was overridden, and a message was sent to the House accordingly.
The Honorable André Bauer
President of the Senate
State House, First Floor, East Wing
Columbia, South Carolina 29201
Dear Mr. President and Members of the Senate:
I am hereby vetoing and returning without my approval S. 1392, R. 344, which creates special license plates imprinted with the following 16 messages: "Distinguished Service Medal," "Historic," Second Amendment," "Distinguished Service Cross," "Department of the Navy," "Parents and Spouses of Active Duty Overseas Veterans," "South Carolina Highway Patrol-Retired," "Boy Scouts of America," "Eagle Scouts of America," "I Support Libraries," "South Carolina Educator," "Coon Hunters," "Beach Music," "Citadel Alumni Association 'Big Red'," "Largemouth Bass, and "South Carolina Wildlife Federation."
(R344, S1392 (Word version)) -- Transportation Committee: AN ACT TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING ARTICLES 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, AND 123 TO CHAPTER 3, TITLE 56 SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT THE DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES MAY ISSUE "DISTINGUISHED SERVICE MEDAL" SPECIAL LICENSE PLATES, "SECOND AMENDMENT" SPECIAL LICENSE PLATES, "DISTINGUISHED SERVICE CROSS" SPECIAL LICENSE PLATES, "DEPARTMENT OF NAVY" SPECIAL LICENSE PLATES, "PARENTS AND SPOUSES OF ACTIVE DUTY OVERSEAS VETERANS" SPECIAL LICENSE PLATES, "STATE FLAG" SPECIAL LICENSE PLATES, "SOUTH CAROLINA HIGHWAY PATROL-RETIRED" LICENSE PLATES, "I SUPPORT LIBRARIES" SPECIAL LICENSE PLATES, "SOUTH CAROLINA EDUCATOR" SPECIAL LICENSE PLATES, "COON HUNTERS" LICENSE PLATES, "BEACH MUSIC" SPECIAL LICENSE PLATES, "CITADEL ALUMNI ASSOCIATION 'BIG RED'" SPECIAL LICENSE PLATES, "LARGEMOUTH BASS" SPECIAL LICENSE PLATES, "HIGH SCHOOL" SPECIAL LICENSE PLATES, AND "SOUTH CAROLINA WILDLIFE FEDERATION" SPECIAL LICENSE PLATES; BY ADDING SECTIONS 56-3-2240, 56-3-2241, 56-3-2242, 56-3-2243, 56-3-2244, AND 56-3-2245 SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT THE DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES MAY ISSUE "HISTORIC" SPECIAL LICENSE PLATES; TO AMEND SECTION 56-3-7330, RELATING TO THE ISSUANCE OF "BOY SCOUTS OF AMERICA" SPECIAL LICENSE PLATES, SO AS TO MAKE TECHNICAL CHANGES AND TO PROVIDE FOR THE ISSUANCE OF "EAGLE SCOUTS OF AMERICA" SPECIAL LICENSE PLATES; TO AMEND SECTION 56-3-2150, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE ISSUANCE OF SPECIAL LICENSE PLATES TO CERTAIN CURRENT AND FORMER ELECTED OFFICIALS AND JUDICIAL OFFICERS, SO AS TO INCREASE THE NUMBER OF SPECIAL LICENSE PLATES THAT A CORONER MAY BE ISSUED FROM ONE TO TWO; TO AMEND SECTION 56-3-1240, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE DISPLAY OF A LICENSE PLATE, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT A FRAME MAY BE PLACED ON A LICENSE PLATE UNDER CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES; TO AMEND SECTION 56-3-10410, RELATING TO THE ISSUANCE OF "VETERAN" SPECIAL LICENSE PLATES, SO AS TO PROVIDE FOR THE PLACEMENT OF THE WHEELCHAIR SYMBOL ON CERTAIN "VETERAN" LICENSE PLATES; TO AMEND SECTION 56-3-3310, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE ISSUANCE OF "PURPLE HEART" SPECIAL LICENSE PLATES, SO AS TO INCREASE THE NUMBER OF LICENSE PLATES THAT MAY BE ISSUED TO A PERSON FROM ONE TO THREE AND TO PROVIDE A FEE FOR THE THIRD LICENSE PLATE; TO AMEND SECTION 56-3-8000, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE ISSUANCE OF SPECIAL LICENSE PLATES THAT CONTAIN THE EMBLEM OF A TAX EXEMPT ORGANIZATION, SO AS TO SPECIFY THEIR SIZE, GENERAL DESIGN, AND PERIOD OF VALIDITY, TO REVISE THEIR COSTS AND DISTRIBUTION OF FEES COLLECTED FROM THEIR SALE, TO REVISE THE MINIMUM NUMBER OF PREPAID APPLICATIONS AND MINIMUM PAYMENT THAT THE DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES MUST RECEIVE BEFORE A SPECIAL LICENSE PLATE MAY BE ISSUED, AND TO PROVIDE THAT THE ORGANIZATION MUST GIVE ITS LEGAL AUTHORITY TO THE DEPARTMENT FOR THE DEPARTMENT'S USE OF THE ORGANIZATION'S LOGO, TRADE MARK, OR DESIGN; AND TO AMEND SECTION 56-3-8100, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE ISSUANCE OF SPECIAL LICENSE PLATES CREATED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY, SO AS TO REVISE THE MINIMUM NUMBER OF PREPAID APPLICATIONS AND MINIMUM PAYMENT THAT THE DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES MUST RECEIVE BEFORE A SPECIAL LICENSE PLATE MAY BE ISSUED AND TO REVISE THE COSTS AND THE DISTRIBUTION OF FEES COLLECTED FROM THEIR SALES.
Additionally, this bill creates a "state flag" license plate and allows over 367 public and private high schools across the state to create their own license plates.
Let me be clear up front that our veto of this legislation is in no way based on the merit of any of the groups represented by these new license plates; however, we continue to be concerned with the General Assembly's desire to be involved in the license plate creation business. We believe it is more appropriate to allow the South Carolina Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) to issue license plates through the administrative process that is currently in place and has proven effective. For this very reason, two years ago we included in a letter that accompanied S. 1050, Act 297 of 2008, a signal that we would be vetoing any more legislation that created new license plates. A copy of that letter is attached to this veto message.
Currently our DMV issues 385 different classifications of license plates - an increase of 14 since this time last year (and 33 in the last two years), counting legislatively-mandated tags. By contrast, North Carolina issues 176 different license plates, Georgia issues 136 different license plates and Florida issues 114 different license plates. Recognizing the growing popularity of special license plates and the need for each group to seek approval in the form of legislation, in 2006, the General Assembly passed legislation (S. 613, Act 398) providing rules that certain nonprofit groups could utilize when seeking approval from the DMV for a new organization license plate. Our primary reason for supporting that legislation was to make it unnecessary to pass legislation every time a group of citizens desired a special license plate. This framework has proven very successful as 25 groups have utilized this process since 2006, with 20 new tags having been approved. Seven new tags have been approved using this process over the last year - demonstrating that the DMV is capable of administering the creation of new license plates.
We believe that the successful framework that was established for nonprofit organizations should apply to all license plate applications. Ultimately, we do not believe that these are the types of policies the people of our state expect the General Assembly to be debating. The following is a sampling of special license plates created by the General Assembly: "In God We Trust," "In Reason We Trust," "Heritage Classic Golf," "First in Golf," "Surfrider Foundation," "S.C. Elks Foundation," "Lions International," "NASCAR-Jeff Gordon," "NASCAR-Rusty Wallace," "No More Homeless Pets," and "Gone Fishing." My point with this list is not to diminish any group or its cause, but to make the point that we do not think the General Assembly needs to be spending its time approving license plates when the DMV can effectively administer this process. We believe the license tag creation process should be streamlined to charge the DMV with approving all license plates, thus allowing the General Assembly to focus on the more pressing issues facing South Carolina. This is particularly the case when the General Assembly's time could be better spent addressing the $1 billion general fund shortfall that the state faces next year and the long-term $20 billion shortfall relating to the state's retirement system.
We understand S. 1392 also gives the DMV the ability to place a wheelchair symbol on the "Veteran" license plates for handicapped veterans who do not qualify for the "Disabled Veteran" license plate. We would sign legislation that grants the DMV this authority if it were not attached to legislation that has the potential to bring the total of special plates offered by the DMV to more than 750.
Again, our concerns with S. 1392 are not with the substantive content of the special license plates created in this legislation, but instead with an unnecessarily complicated process that involves the General Assembly passing legislation designating evermore license plates. Given that the political process has accelerated on designating license plates again, we are going to ask that the General Assembly refrain from passing any more of these bills and instead allow the process to work through the DMV.
For these reasons, I am vetoing and returning without my approval S. 1392, R. 344.
Sincerely,
/s/ Mark Sanford
(R344, S1392 (Word version)) -- Transportation Committee: AN ACT TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING ARTICLES 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, AND 123 TO CHAPTER 3, TITLE 56 SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT THE DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES MAY ISSUE "DISTINGUISHED SERVICE MEDAL" SPECIAL LICENSE PLATES, "SECOND AMENDMENT" SPECIAL LICENSE PLATES, "DISTINGUISHED SERVICE CROSS" SPECIAL LICENSE PLATES, "DEPARTMENT OF NAVY" SPECIAL LICENSE PLATES, "PARENTS AND SPOUSES OF ACTIVE DUTY OVERSEAS VETERANS" SPECIAL LICENSE PLATES, "STATE FLAG" SPECIAL LICENSE PLATES, "SOUTH CAROLINA HIGHWAY PATROL-RETIRED" LICENSE PLATES, "I SUPPORT LIBRARIES" SPECIAL LICENSE PLATES, "SOUTH CAROLINA EDUCATOR" SPECIAL LICENSE PLATES, "COON HUNTERS" LICENSE PLATES, "BEACH MUSIC" SPECIAL LICENSE PLATES, "CITADEL ALUMNI ASSOCIATION 'BIG RED'" SPECIAL LICENSE PLATES, "LARGEMOUTH BASS" SPECIAL LICENSE PLATES, "HIGH SCHOOL" SPECIAL LICENSE PLATES, AND "SOUTH CAROLINA WILDLIFE FEDERATION" SPECIAL LICENSE PLATES; BY ADDING SECTIONS 56-3-2240, 56-3-2241, 56-3-2242, 56-3-2243, 56-3-2244, AND 56-3-2245 SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT THE DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES MAY ISSUE "HISTORIC" SPECIAL LICENSE PLATES; TO AMEND SECTION 56-3-7330, RELATING TO THE ISSUANCE OF "BOY SCOUTS OF AMERICA" SPECIAL LICENSE PLATES, SO AS TO MAKE TECHNICAL CHANGES AND TO PROVIDE FOR THE ISSUANCE OF "EAGLE SCOUTS OF AMERICA" SPECIAL LICENSE PLATES; TO AMEND SECTION 56-3-2150, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE ISSUANCE OF SPECIAL LICENSE PLATES TO CERTAIN CURRENT AND FORMER ELECTED OFFICIALS AND JUDICIAL OFFICERS, SO AS TO INCREASE THE NUMBER OF SPECIAL LICENSE PLATES THAT A CORONER MAY BE ISSUED FROM ONE TO TWO; TO AMEND SECTION 56-3-1240, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE DISPLAY OF A LICENSE PLATE, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT A FRAME MAY BE PLACED ON A LICENSE PLATE UNDER CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES; TO AMEND SECTION 56-3-10410, RELATING TO THE ISSUANCE OF "VETERAN" SPECIAL LICENSE PLATES, SO AS TO PROVIDE FOR THE PLACEMENT OF THE WHEELCHAIR SYMBOL ON CERTAIN "VETERAN" LICENSE PLATES; TO AMEND SECTION 56-3-3310, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE ISSUANCE OF "PURPLE HEART" SPECIAL LICENSE PLATES, SO AS TO INCREASE THE NUMBER OF LICENSE PLATES THAT MAY BE ISSUED TO A PERSON FROM ONE TO THREE AND TO PROVIDE A FEE FOR THE THIRD LICENSE PLATE; TO AMEND SECTION 56-3-8000, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE ISSUANCE OF SPECIAL LICENSE PLATES THAT CONTAIN THE EMBLEM OF A TAX EXEMPT ORGANIZATION, SO AS TO SPECIFY THEIR SIZE, GENERAL DESIGN, AND PERIOD OF VALIDITY, TO REVISE THEIR COSTS AND DISTRIBUTION OF FEES COLLECTED FROM THEIR SALE, TO REVISE THE MINIMUM NUMBER OF PREPAID APPLICATIONS AND MINIMUM PAYMENT THAT THE DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES MUST RECEIVE BEFORE A SPECIAL LICENSE PLATE MAY BE ISSUED, AND TO PROVIDE THAT THE ORGANIZATION MUST GIVE ITS LEGAL AUTHORITY TO THE DEPARTMENT FOR THE DEPARTMENT'S USE OF THE ORGANIZATION'S LOGO, TRADE MARK, OR DESIGN; AND TO AMEND SECTION 56-3-8100, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE ISSUANCE OF SPECIAL LICENSE PLATES CREATED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY, SO AS TO REVISE THE MINIMUM NUMBER OF PREPAID APPLICATIONS AND MINIMUM PAYMENT THAT THE DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES MUST RECEIVE BEFORE A SPECIAL LICENSE PLATE MAY BE ISSUED AND TO REVISE THE COSTS AND THE DISTRIBUTION OF FEES COLLECTED FROM THEIR SALES.
The veto of the Governor was taken up for immediate consideration.
The question was put, "Shall the Act become law, the veto of the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding?"
The "ayes" and "nays" were demanded and taken, resulting as follows:
Alexander Bright Campbell Campsen Cleary Courson Cromer Davis Elliott Fair Ford Grooms Hayes Jackson Knotts Land Leatherman Leventis Malloy Martin, Larry Martin, Shane Massey Matthews McGill Mulvaney Peeler Rankin Reese Rose Ryberg Scott Sheheen Shoopman Thomas Verdin Williams
Bryant McConnell
The necessary two-thirds vote having been received, the veto of the Governor was overridden, and a message was sent to the House accordingly.
Columbia, S.C., June 29, 2010
Mr. President and Senators:
The House respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has overridden the veto by the Governor on R.346, H. 3541 by a vote of 108 to 2:
(R346, H3541 (Word version)) -- Reps. Hiott, Frye, Duncan, M.A. Pitts, Whitmire and Rice: AN ACT TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING SECTION 50-9-665 SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT A HUNTER MUST OBTAIN A BEAR TAG IN ORDER TO TAKE A BEAR AND TO PROVIDE THE PROCEDURES AND FEES FOR OBTAINING THESE TAGS; BY ADDING SECTION 50-11-435 SO AS TO PROHIBIT TAKING OR ATTEMPTING TO TAKE A BEAR WEIGHING LESS THAN ONE HUNDRED POUNDS AND PROVIDE CRIMINAL PENALTIES; TO AMEND SECTION 50-9-920, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO REVENUE FROM THE SALE OF LIFETIME LICENSES, SO AS TO DESIGNATE THE USES FOR REVENUE GENERATED FROM THE SALE OF BEAR TAGS; TO AMEND SECTION 50-11-310, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE OPEN SEASON FOR ANTLERED DEER, SO AS TO DESIGNATE WHEN ARCHERY AND FIREARMS MAY BE USED IN GAME ZONE 1; TO AMEND SECTION 50-11-430, RELATING TO THE OPEN SEASON FOR TAKING BEAR IN GAME ZONE ONE AND PENALTIES FOR VIOLATIONS, SO AS TO REVISE THE DATES OF THIS SEASON AND PROVIDE REQUIREMENTS FOR PARTY HUNTS; TO AUTHORIZE THE DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES TO ESTABLISH REQUIREMENTS FOR THE TAKING AND HUNTING OF BEAR IN ALL OTHER GAME ZONES; TO REQUIRE BEAR TAGS; AND TO REVISE VARIOUS BEAR TAKING REQUIREMENTS AND PROHIBITIONS; AND TO REPEAL SECTION 50-11-380 RELATING TO THE TAKING OF ANTLERLESS DEER.
Very respectfully,
Speaker of the House
Received as information.
(R346, H3541 (Word version)) -- Reps. Hiott, Frye, Duncan, M.A. Pitts, Whitmire and Rice: AN ACT TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING SECTION 50-9-665 SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT A HUNTER MUST OBTAIN A BEAR TAG IN ORDER TO TAKE A BEAR AND TO PROVIDE THE PROCEDURES AND FEES FOR OBTAINING THESE TAGS; BY ADDING SECTION 50-11-435 SO AS TO PROHIBIT TAKING OR ATTEMPTING TO TAKE A BEAR WEIGHING LESS THAN ONE HUNDRED POUNDS AND PROVIDE CRIMINAL PENALTIES; TO AMEND SECTION 50-9-920, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO REVENUE FROM THE SALE OF LIFETIME LICENSES, SO AS TO DESIGNATE THE USES FOR REVENUE GENERATED FROM THE SALE OF BEAR TAGS; TO AMEND SECTION 50-11-310, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE OPEN SEASON FOR ANTLERED DEER, SO AS TO DESIGNATE WHEN ARCHERY AND FIREARMS MAY BE USED IN GAME ZONE 1; TO AMEND SECTION 50-11-430, RELATING TO THE OPEN SEASON FOR TAKING BEAR IN GAME ZONE ONE AND PENALTIES FOR VIOLATIONS, SO AS TO REVISE THE DATES OF THIS SEASON AND PROVIDE REQUIREMENTS FOR PARTY HUNTS; TO AUTHORIZE THE DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES TO ESTABLISH REQUIREMENTS FOR THE TAKING AND HUNTING OF BEAR IN ALL OTHER GAME ZONES; TO REQUIRE BEAR TAGS; AND TO REVISE VARIOUS BEAR TAKING REQUIREMENTS AND PROHIBITIONS; AND TO REPEAL SECTION 50-11-380 RELATING TO THE TAKING OF ANTLERLESS DEER.
The veto of the Governor was taken up for immediate consideration.
Senator GROOMS moved that the veto of the Governor be overridden.
The question was put, "Shall the Act become law, the veto of the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding?"
The "ayes" and "nays" were demanded and taken, resulting as follows:
Alexander Campbell Campsen Cleary Courson Cromer Elliott Fair Ford Grooms Hayes Knotts Land Leatherman Leventis Lourie Malloy Martin, Larry Matthews McGill Peeler Rankin Reese Scott Sheheen Shoopman Verdin Williams
Bright Bryant Davis Martin, Shane Massey McConnell Mulvaney Rose Thomas
The necessary two-thirds vote having been received, the veto of the Governor was overridden, and a message was sent to the House accordingly.
Columbia, S.C., June 29, 2010
Mr. President and Senators:
The House respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has overridden the veto by the Governor on R.296, S. 288 by a vote of 78 to 33:
(R296, S288 (Word version)) -- Senator L. Martin: AN ACT TO AMEND ARTICLE 1, CHAPTER 1, TITLE 56, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING SECTION 56-1-146 SO AS TO REQUIRE A CLERK OF COURT TO NOTIFY THE DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES OF A PERSON WHO IS CONVICTED OF A VIOLENT CRIME; TO REQUIRE THE DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES TO NOTIFY THE CONVICTED PERSON THAT HE SHALL SURRENDER HIS DRIVER'S LICENSE OR SPECIAL IDENTIFICATION CARD TO THE DEPARTMENT; BY ADDING SECTION 56-1-148 SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT A PERSON CONVICTED OF A VIOLENT CRIME SHALL HAVE A SPECIAL CODE AFFIXED TO THE REVERSE SIDE OF HIS DRIVER'S LICENSE OR SPECIAL IDENTIFICATION CARD THAT IDENTIFIES THE PERSON AS HAVING BEEN CONVICTED OF A VIOLENT CRIME, TO PROVIDE A FEE TO BE CHARGED FOR AFFIXING THE CODE AND FOR ITS DISTRIBUTION, AND TO PROVIDE A PROCESS FOR REMOVING THE CODE; TO AMEND SECTION 56-1-80, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE CONTENTS OF A DRIVER'S LICENSE APPLICATION, SO AS TO MAKE TECHNICAL CHANGES; TO AMEND SECTION 56-1-3350, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE ISSUANCE OF A SPECIAL IDENTIFICATION CARD BY THE DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES, SO AS TO MAKE TECHNICAL CHANGES; AND TO PROVIDE THAT THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 56-1-80 MUST BE MET UPON THE RENEWAL OF AN EXISTING DRIVER'S LICENSE OR SPECIAL IDENTIFICATION CARD.
Very respectfully,
Speaker of the House
Received as information.
Columbia, S.C., June 29, 2010
Mr. President and Senators:
The House respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has overridden the veto by the Governor on R.338, S. 1372 by a vote of 3 to 1:
(R338, S1372 (Word version)) -- Senator Leventis: AN ACT TO AMEND ACT 387 OF 2008, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE CONSOLIDATION OF SUMTER SCHOOL DISTRICTS 2 AND 17, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT THE CHAIRMAN AND OTHER OFFICERS OF THE BOARD OF THE CONSOLIDATED DISTRICT SHALL SERVE TWO-YEAR TERMS; TO PROVIDE THAT THE SUPERINTENDENT OF THE CONSOLIDATED SCHOOL DISTRICT SHALL SELECT AND APPOINT AN ASSISTANT SUPERINTENDENT; TO AUTHORIZE THE BOARDS OF TRUSTEES OF SUMTER SCHOOL DISTRICTS 2 AND 17 TO ISSUE GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS OF THE RESPECTIVE DISTRICTS FOR SCHOOL OPERATING PURPOSES UP TO THE CONSTITUTIONAL DEBT LIMIT OF THE RESPECTIVE DISTRICTS FOR SCHOOL OPERATING PURPOSES, TO PROVIDE CONDITIONS UNDER WHICH THE BONDS MAY BE ISSUED AND THE PURPOSES FOR WHICH THE PROCEEDS MAY BE EXPENDED, AND TO MAKE PROVISION FOR THE PAYMENT OF BONDS; AND TO PROVIDE THAT FUNDING FOR THE BOARD BEFORE THE INDIVIDUAL SCHOOL DISTRICTS ARE ABOLISHED MUST BE PROVIDED FROM OPERATING FUNDS AVAILABLE TO THE INDIVIDUAL SCHOOL DISTRICTS.
Very respectfully,
Speaker of the House
Received as information.
Columbia, S.C., June 29, 2010
Mr. President and Senators:
The House respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has sustained the veto by the Governor on R.337, H. 3975 by a vote of 1 to 104:
(R337, H3975 (Word version)) -- Rep. G.M. Smith: AN ACT TO AMEND SECTION 50-9-320, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE REQUIREMENT THAT CERTAIN PERSONS SUCCESSFULLY MUST COMPLETE A HUNTER'S EDUCATION PROGRAM BEFORE THEY ARE ELIGIBLE TO RECEIVE A SOUTH CAROLINA HUNTING LICENSE, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT THIS REQUIREMENT DOES NOT APPLY TO NONRESIDENT ACTIVE DUTY, HONORABLY DISCHARGED OR RETIRED MEMBERS OF THE UNITED STATES ARMED SERVICES WHO CAN DEMONSTRATE TO THE DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES THAT THEY SUCCESSFULLY COMPLETED RIFLE MARKSMANSHIP DURING THEIR MILITARY CAREER; AND TO PROVIDE THAT A NONRESIDENT DURING A SPECIFIED PERIOD MAY OBTAIN A LIFETIME COMBINATION LICENSE UNDER CERTAIN CONDITIONS WHICH GRANTS THE SAME PRIVILEGES AS A STATEWIDE COMBINATION LICENSE.
Very respectfully,
Speaker of the House
Received as information.
On motion of Senator LARRY MARTIN, with unanimous consent, the Senate agreed that any local magisterial appointments received by the Senate, which have the unanimous agreement of the affected delegation and have met the necessary Senate requirements, would be confirmed and entered in a Journal under the provisions of Rule 1B.
Having received a favorable report from the Senate, the following appointment was confirmed in open session:
Initial Appointment, Anderson County Magistrate, with the term to commence April 30, 2010, and to expire April 30, 2011
Samuel Thompson Tucker, III, 230 Grace Lane, Piedmont, SC 29673 VICE William P. Steele, Jr.
On motion of Senator SETZLER, with unanimous consent, the Senate stood adjourned out of respect to the memory of Ms. Carrie Lee Jones of Greenwood, S.C., beloved sister of our colleague and friend, Senator Floyd Nicholson.
At 4:15 P.M., on motion of Senator LARRY MARTIN, the Senate adjourned pursuant to S. 1502, the Sine Die Resolution.
This web page was last updated on Wednesday, June 30, 2010 at 1:56 P.M.