NO. 48

Indicates Matter Stricken
Indicates New Matter

The Senate assembled at 11:00 A.M., the hour to which it stood adjourned, and was called to order by the ACTING PRESIDENT, Senator JACKSON.

The following remarks by Senator MATTHEWS were ordered printed in the Journal of February 7, 2023:

Thank you, Mr. PRESIDENT. For those of you who wondered why I am making this as a Point of Personal Privilege, I draw your attention to Rule 13, Points of Personal Privilege. This is not an Expression of Personal Interest. I had to think hard and long about this. I wrote down my statement so that it would be clear on why I am making this a Point of Personal Privilege.

I read with much interest last week and over the weekend about Rule 15. This bothered me in last year's session when we took up the rule change. I thought about how I felt as a new Senator -- only the second female Senator -- coming into this Chamber in 2015. I thought about the role and how I felt about the democratic process and what we were able to accomplish. We had a lot of failures, but we did have the opportunity to have our voices heard. And so why is this a Point of Personal Privilege? Because I had the sinking feeling last year when the rules were changed as to why they were changed. But I could not grasp it. I didn't get a full grasp of it until I heard it during the medical marijuana debate. I heard it again during the abortion debate. I remember us filibustering on the issue and I remember standing at this podium until my ankles swelled on the issue of women's rights in the abortion issue. I remember some of the Senators being so tired -- we took shifts. But I remember how we worked together. That wasn't Republican, it wasn't Democrat-- we were working together in a democratic process on a particular issue.

Now, why am I offended by Rule 15? Because this last voting cycle, our numbers went down to 16. What else happened? In Washington, we had the Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell -- complaining and going on the air waves about the issue of filibuster in preserving the democratic process. In this State, though we didn't call it stripping of the filibuster, Rule 15 did that when you got the numbers. So, what do you get? We get what we had last week and with the Voucher Bill -- that we don't have to listen to the other side. We don't have to worry about the democracy and diversity. Why is it offensive? Because we live in the United States of America. The first thing I remember as a young Senator when I came here because I was taking over the spot of Senator Clemente Pinckney -- I remember meeting with folks and they said, "The Senate is not like other bodies, we are a deliberative body." I am offended that deliberation has left the door. And the irony is -- I read it last night and in high school -- the 1957 Civil Rights Act was argued by Senator Strom Thurmond, the late Strom Thurmond. He was once a Republican and a Democrat. He was against the Civil Rights Act. He was called the segregationist at the time. But you know what, Senator Strom Thurmond filibustered, and they allowed him to filibuster for twenty-four hours and nineteen or seventeen minutes -- or something like that. They allowed him to filibuster for twenty-four hours and eighteen minutes. Senator Thurmond -- when I read the story and you can do likewise -- prepared his body for that filibuster. That's how much he believed in the democratic process and that's how much he prepared for that filibuster. And they listened to him. They had the votes, but they listened to him. I will not get into what he ate beforehand, but he didn't leave that Chamber for twenty-four hours. He only had one break to use the restroom and at that time, he had to keep his foot on the floor. They talked about him having to use bottles. Now, why is that important? Because the irony is -- and I'm just going to be honest -- I sit in my chair and I look at our State Senator, Senator MASSEY, because he's the leader and gets to call, pursuant to Rule 15, to sit you down. Not this Body, generally, but he gets to invoke Rule 15. I want you to read it and you tell me. It doesn't say we strip the Senate of filibuster. It just says fixing of time. Fixing of time certainly is fixing to take your democratic rights away. It's fixing to take away the deliberation of this Senate. I ask you to read it and you tell me if this rule conforms to the Jeffersonian Rules -- that some of them, I do not understand. Tell me whether or not it continues to keep this Body as a deliberative Body; or should we remove that label? And I submit to my brothers and sisters on both sides just because you can do something, just because you have the votes and the power, that doesn't make it right. I sat back there, and it didn't feel very deliberative when Senator FANNING would basically be ignored when he knows more about education than all of us. He's trying to forget some of the stuff we need to learn. But we don't want to listen to him because we have the numbers to do what we want. I remember serving this Body as a law clerk in the 80's. This is when Democrats had the majority. I find it interesting that committee chairs were determined by seniority, not by party seniority. This changed when Republicans took majority. And I've always heard that the pendulum, though you may not feel it, swings both ways. What do we have here? When the numbers in the majority went down to sixteen, then the filibuster in the Senate left. Twenty-six is the magic number -- read Rule 15.

Why is this message a personal privilege? This S. 374 on Wednesday was contemplated and calculated well in advance to be on the Calendar this week. You remember we sat in perfunctory on Friday and you remember I asked questions about it. This Bill is titled and labeled many things, but let's not mistake, it is reaction by this Body to our Supreme Court's decision to protect a woman's rights to privacy. It's a reaction to rein another body in. What about the democracy we are supposed to be in? Let's ponder the title of the Fetal Heartbeat Bill. How many committee meetings or testimonies from doctors have we heard during this legislative session? None. No doctors have come before us to tell us when a fetal heartbeat can be detected, none. Why?

Other issues that have been rushed, and I get it -- a School Voucher Bill personally concerned me because it essentially stole from poor school districts and gave the middle class and private and parochial schools their money. I wondered, in my concern, is this really caring for our children? Then we move to the next measure taken up by the Senate, the CON Bill. The irony of this State passing a CON Bill is that South Carolina is only one of five states with high poverty levels that has not expanded Medicare. If we are going to be honest about the fetal mortality rates in our State, our rural hospitals that are closing, and the mass exodus of OBGYNs from this State, we must first deal with Medicare expansion. It's not right that our mothers have to die trying to have a baby.

"The heavy hand of government" kept being said last week. I heard this statement over and over as it relates to non-compete clauses in business dealings. Well, that sounded good, and I get it Senator BENNETT, that the heavy hand of government is not good. It will be present in this State when the Senate takes up a Bill that will decide how a woman and her family deals with her pregnancies in her household. It sickens me to hear, "We're tired of you women using abortion as birth control." Really? I dare one of you men to have a menstrual cycle. Who would willingly subject themselves to Misoprostol? It causes cramps; it makes the stomach feel like you have an ulcer. Yet we hear, "We don't understand why you would have an abortion when birth control cost you $25 to $50. Misoprostol and going in the hospital will cost you $500 to $3,000."

The other shocking statements I have heard as a Legislator and to the 100,000 constituents that I represent, "A woman should know she is pregnant at six weeks." The other shocking statement that I have felt personally offended by is -- I am going to repeat because I wrote it down when it was said -- "A woman should know she's pregnant at six weeks." I've had four children and didn't know I was pregnant at six weeks with any of them. Doctors tell a different story about it, that it varies -- it is usually somewhere around seven and a half weeks. That tells me that ill-informed men that are speaking know nothing about a woman's body. Nor does he know that all women do not have menstrual cycles. Yes, I said it, menstrual cycles. The same folks that want to control the abortion issues don't want us to say those womanly words -- the things that bring babies into the world like menstrual cycle. They don't want to us say the word vagina. Get over it. I and several other Senators have filed statewide Bills to make sure that we have a statewide referendum on this issue. Why? Because statistics show Republican and Democratic women do not support this Bill. Why are the men pushing it through? Because they can and because they have the votes. They have the power and control. I reject the idea that women are killing babies. Women are nurturers. We support those around us, and we love our babies. I find it quiet striking that the same people that are promoting fleecing of women's privacy Bills are the same ones that will not support other issues.

And finally, women, I plan to stand with you for you. Even those women that have been made to believe that you should listen -- that this is a human rights issue. I am standing here because of the process. I believe that this process that has been presented to us as it relates to such a critical issue to me and to my four children is flawed. It's undemocratic and it has stripped the filibuster rights from this Senate, and it no longer makes us a deliberative Body. Women, we represent 51.4% of this State -- we must let our voices be heard. There should be a referendum. This Senate should stand on its ability to deliberate in a democratic way. The heavy hand of government exists but only as it relates to my body. Thank you.

The following remarks by Senator HARPOOTLIAN were ordered printed in the Journal of March 7, 2023:

Thank you. I originally got up here to say that I received a number of emails and texts. Especially from Senator SHEALY who wanted to know how I was. She always wants to know, if I am eating well. Am I sleeping well? I really appreciate those who reached out to me in this maelstrom of a trial. It was hard to focus on anything except for the trial. We stayed in Walterboro, South Carolina -- for six weeks we stayed down there. We pretty much did not go anywhere, or do anything, except for work on this case and I want to say a couple of things about this process.

First, my personal observations are that I have been doing this for almost half a century, and it is still as enjoyable today for me as it was almost fifty years ago when I first began this process of trying cases. I have tried hundreds and hundreds of them -- big cases, little cases. I have won cases. I have lost cases, but that process -- if it operates correctly -- can be so satisfying to the lawyers. If the client loses, they are not satisfied. If they win, typically they feel like they should have won anyway. So, it is really not particularly fun or satisfying for them.

The second point I make is this, Senator CAMPSEN has questions about the integrity of the system. I disagree with Judge Newman on some of the rulings he made. He ruled. We objected. It is in the record. The Supreme Court of Appeals has a chance to look at it, and so does the federal court. That is not based on bias, he just had a different view of the law than I had.

Now, the third thing I want to say is this: of course, people feel compelled to express their opinion on things through the internet. I guess it is on my website, my email. Some people said, I really wanted that big case you had, but that is not what they chose to send me. Most of the emails and messages were very positive. A lot of them were people that were watching the trial in Germany, England, or the Netherlands. Many people here also gave me suggestions, on a daily basis, on what we should do or how we screwed up yesterday. But to the people that sent me the -- you are a rotten piece of scum and I hope you die of rectal cancer -- you know what? They have a misapprehension of the system. They have a misapprehension of our justice system. While they are very familiar with the second amendment apparently, they have not read the fourth, fifth, sixth, or eighth amendment that guarantees us freedom. We are guaranteed freedom of ourselves and our property. John Adams was the 2nd President of the United States. Eight British soldiers were charged with murdering colonial activist demonstrators who charged them. Eight of them were indicted and charged with murder. John Adams represented them in 1770. Six were acquitted. Two were convicted of manslaughter. None of them were hung. John Adams said that everybody deserves the presumption of innocence and the benefit of counsel. What I do not understand is why this presumption of innocence is such an alien concept. But trust me, there are literally hundreds, if not thousands of emails, that my co-counsel and I received. Not all of them wished rectal cancer on me, but most of them were fairly critical. These are people that do not understand the Constitution. They do not understand one thing: I took an oath forty-nine years ago and I pull it out from time to time and read it as a lawyer because oath matters. Your word matters. I will maintain the respect and courtesy due to the courts of justice, judicial officials and those who system to my clients. I pledge faithfulness, competence, diligence, good judgment, and prompt communication. To opposing parties and their counsel, I pledge fairness, integrity, and civility, not only in court but also in all written and oral communications. I have not always upheld that particular oath promise there, but God knows I have tried. I will maintain the dignity of the legal system and advance no fact prejudicial to the honor and reputation of a party or witness unless required by the justice of the cause of which I am charged. I will assist the defenseless or oppressed by ensuring that justice is available to all citizens that will not delay any person's cause for profit or malice, so help me God. This is an oath I took forty-nine years ago, and I take it seriously. And by the way, you do not have to convince me that you are innocent for me to represent you. That is not the issue. The issue is, can the State prove your guilt beyond a reasonable doubt? When you decide that position, once you decide on that position, you are free to do what is in your client's best interest. If your mind is muddled with, "Is he innocent or guilty," then you cannot do your job. I have prosecuted. I put a man in the electric chair. I have defended a man who went to the electric chair. I have done both sides. I am not a Red Soxs fan or Yankees fan. That is not what this is about. This is doing your job. So, to those out there -- this may appear on YouTube somewhere -- who do not understand that, go read a book. Abraham Lincoln represented twenty murder defendants. Not all of them were acquitted but he fought for every one of them. This is about a system. By the way, that system does not exist in this State without us. That is the attractiveness of being in this Body. We shape how that system works. So, I have come back from six weeks overseas (Walterboro, SC) and Margie is not here. Margie Matthews was very kind in letting us use her office to have lunch every day to avoid the -- I know this sounds so vain -- paparazzi who surrounded the Walterboro Colleton County Courthouse. By the way, people that slept outside for nights to get into the courtroom -- get some help, please.

So, thank you for being nice to me while I was gone. You took care of abortion. You have not taken care of guns, Majority Leader. You could have done it all, brought me back without having to deal with that kind of stuff. But I appreciate you at least getting some of the stuff cleared out. Thank you.

The following remarks by Senator HARPOOTLIAN were ordered printed in the Journal of March 14, 2023:

A few years ago, I developed a reputation of questioning and opposing certain big projects that were developed by the Department of Commerce. You all remember the word "Panthers," I suppose. Since then, I have sued the Department of Commerce on their application -- how they applied the Freedom of Information Act information and litigated that for a year or so. It was on appeal when Secretary Lightsey took over, and he and I resolved that case by them being more transparent. He has furnished literally thousands of pages of past deals for me to look at for the specific cost benefit analysis. And I have got to tell you, these are deals before the Lightsey administration, and many of them raise huge questions. So, when this deal was initially announced, I had some skepticism and immediately asked Secretary Lightsey for a meeting to review my primary concern, the claw-back provision. Senator MICHAEL JOHNSON and I were granted a meeting. Secretary Lightsey brought his staff and lawyers, and we reviewed that claw-back provision. And I can tell you as someone who was a skeptic, as someone who was opposed to other economic development projects, that this claw-back provision is the belt and suspenders -- a billion dollars we get back if they abandon this project, and we end up with a site. Most of this money is going into the development of a site and we get the site, too. Volkswagen AG has guaranteed, if they own less than 50%, they have to come up with somebody else to guarantee the project. Senator JOHNSON and I reviewed it in great detail and again, we believe it could not be any better.
I want to thank and give credit to Senator PEELER for driving a hard bargain. My understanding is this is not where you started, this is where you ended up. A number of folks that participated in that from this Body were on Senate Finance. The PRESIDENT of the Senate also participated. I also want to commend -- and I never thought I would say this -- Governor McMaster for his involvement in this process. Of course, Harry Lightsey has gone out of his way to make the details available to anybody that could impact that decision. In terms of the scope of it -- I am from Richland County -- our number one industry in Richland County is government. That is the biggest employer we have; state, local, federal, fort, and that is not diversified enough. This would be the first major manufacturing plant we have had in this area ever. So, Chairman PEELER, I want to thank you on behalf of the people of Richland County and those who worked with you to make this a great deal. I believe it's going to be transformative. I am voting for it. It is not anything like what we have seen in the past. This administration and Secretary Lightsey have done a tremendous job of getting you the tools to get that done. So, I encourage all of you to vote for this. I mean, some of you have philosophical problems with picking winners and losers, but I tell you who is going to be the winner on this -- South Carolina, Richland County and the Midlands.

The following remarks by Senator KIMPSON were ordered printed in the Journal of March 16, 2023:

Thank you, Mr. PRESIDENT. I just got back from the White House, just kidding. In all seriousness, I was traveling in New York City on law firm business. I want you to know that this in not my farewell speech but I certainly want my colleagues to know about developments which occurred last Friday. The Honorable Joseph R. Biden, President of this Country, nominated me to the Advisory Committee for Trade, Policy, and Negotiations. And I'm sure you're saying, "What do you know about trade policy?" And I would respond, "Not much." But I am the Senator of what I've always respectfully referred to as the epicenter of the ports -- the seventh largest port in the world, second largest on the east coast. Senate District 42 also has a multinational operation -- Boeing.

This is not a full-time job. This is a committee appointment. There will be regular meetings -- and I did not take this matter lightly -- there were many factors that went into my decision to accept this appointment. I have two small children -- Marleigh and Marlon -- these children have great names. I have a robust international law practice -- I have lead class actions representing millions of people around the country. Balancing my responsibilities -- first to my family, then to my full-time employment -- I needed to make some decisions so that someone could have a single-minded focus on the district. I'll come back at a later time to make my farewell speech, but I wanted to speak to the members of this Body because there have been a number of you who have congratulated me and expressed interest in knowing more about my appointment. Mr. PRESIDENT, I look forward to continuing to engage and fight for the downtrodden, those considered to be the backwash of systemic exploitation and oppression, and those who make this country great. You have a fighter in me, and I'll keep fighting until I leave.

The following remarks by Senator McLEOD were ordered printed in the Journal of March 23, 2023:

Thank you, Mr. PRESIDENT. I didn't think I'd be up here today but, I just wanted to take a quick minute to say thank you to Senator DAVIS. This has been his fight for longer than I've served in this Chamber, and it's been my fight for as long as I've served in this Chamber, but it was also my fight when I served in the South Carolina House.

To see the amount of time, energy, effort and resources that have been expended just to try and pass a Bill that would help so many people across South Carolina. A Bill that would help me. As I look around, I see every day that I'm still the only one in this Chamber who lives with a chronic health condition and wears my mask faithfully even when it's hot -- even when I'm tired -- even when I don't feel like it.

When I was elected in 2016 to this Body, I often talked about having to relearn so many of the things that I had to -- I'm sorry, to unlearn so many of the things I had to learn when I was in the House for six years. But what I appreciated most about serving in this Body seemed to be when I got here not just the consideration for each other but the deliberation that Senator MATTHEWS mentioned. It was the fact that I got to leave the chaos of the House. Some of it I missed, a lot of it I didn't. When I got here, everybody seemed intentional about the work that we're supposed to do. They seemed to be considerate and respectful of each other's opinions, perspectives and politics.

So, to now witness what I did when this Bill was brought up for Special Order -- knowing that I have voted against many Bills that have been set for Special Order over my objection -- even after putting my name on a Bill or Bills in opposition to those Bills. I still sat. I still stood respectfully and did the work and asked the questions and voted against it if I was opposed to it. But to have an issue like this that not only impacts me personally but a lot of us in here who suffer with chronic health conditions -- or to have family members and constituents who suffer from chronic health conditions. In fact, I believe next week I'll be meeting with a family that I met with a few weeks ago right in the room next door. A mom who cried and talked about losing her son to an opioid overdose. Those are the discussions -- those are the voices that need to be represented in this debate.

It can't just be about politics. It can't just be about whether we would use marijuana or whether we would have a family member who needs medical marijuana. It has to be bigger than that. Aren't we bigger than that?

To see and hear the passion, frustration, and anger in Senator DAVIS's voice earlier -- it took me back. It took me back to when I stood here, and I have co-sponsored that Bill and worked with him every year, every time he's introduced it and I did the same thing in the House. I served on 3M in the House and tried to get it through. I served on Medical Affairs here in the Senate and worked with all of you to try and just think outside of yourself. Think about those who suffer with cancer. Think about those who suffer from PTSD, epilepsy, lupus, sickle cell -- all the chronic health conditions that we either have or we know somebody who has and who suffers daily. And because this is an option, why would we stand in the way of getting people the help and the support they need? I'm not going to, I know I'm probably at my five minutes. I just want you to think about that, and to think about doing things differently for the right reasons for all of us. Thank you.

The following Bills were read the third time and ordered sent to the House:

S. 146 (Word version) -- Senators Shealy, Goldfinch and Campsen: A BILL TO AMEND THE SOUTH CAROLINA CODE OF LAWS BY AMENDING SECTION 44-48-30, RELATING TO DEFINITIONS, SO AS TO DEFINE A QUALIFIED EVALUATOR AND A RESIDENT, AS WELL AS TO CHANGE THE DEFINITION OF "LIKELY TO ENGAGE IN ACTS OF SEXUAL VIOLENCE" TO MEAN THAT A PERSON IS PREDISPOSED TO ENGAGE IN ACTS OF SEXUAL VIOLENCE AND MORE PROBABLY THAN NOT WILL ENGAGE IN SUCH ACTS; BY AMENDING SECTION 44-48-40, RELATING TO THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF PAROLE OR RELEASE, SO AS TO PROVIDE AN EFFECTIVE DATE FOR SUPERVISED REENTRY FOR A PERSON CONVICTED OF A SEXUALLY VIOLENT OFFENSE; BY AMENDING SECTION 44-48-50, RELATING TO THE MULTIDISCIPLINARY TEAM, APPOINTMENTS, THE REVIEW OF RECORDS, AND THE MEMBERSHIP OF THE MULTIDISCIPLINARY TEAM, SO AS TO PROVIDE FOR AN ASSESSMENT OF WHETHER OR NOT THERE IS PROBABLE CAUSE TO BELIEVE THAT A PERSON SATISFIES THE DEFINITION OF A SEXUALLY VIOLENT PREDATOR, TO PROVIDE REPORTING REQUIREMENTS, AND TO PROVIDE FOR THE MEMBERSHIP OF THE MULTIDISCIPLINARY TEAM; BY AMENDING SECTION 44-48-80, RELATING TO TAKING A PERSON INTO CUSTODY, HEARINGS, AND EVALUATIONS, SO AS TO PROVIDE FOR AN EVALUATION BY A COURT-APPOINTED QUALIFIED EVALUATOR WITHIN A CERTAIN TIME PERIOD, TO PROVIDE FOR AN INDEPENDENT EVALUATION BY AN INDEPENDENT QUALIFIED EVALUATOR WITHIN A CERTAIN TIME PERIOD, AND TO PROVIDE FOR AN EXTENSION IN EXTRAORDINARY CIRCUMSTANCES; BY AMENDING SECTION 44-48-90, RELATING TO A TRIER OF FACT, THE CONTINUATION OF A TRIAL, THE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL, THE ACCESS OF EXAMINERS TO A PERSON, AND THE PAYMENT OF EXPENSES, SO AS TO MAKE CONFORMING CHANGES, TO PROVIDE THAT CERTAIN CASES SHALL BE GIVEN PRIORITY STATUS, AND TO PROVIDE FOR COUNSEL AND THE PAYMENT AND COSTS FOR AN INDEPENDENT QUALIFIED EVALUATOR FOR AN INDIGENT PERSON; BY AMENDING SECTION 44-48-100, RELATING TO PERSONS INCOMPETENT TO STAND TRIAL, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT A COURT SHALL CONDUCT A NON-JURY HEARING FOR A PERSON CHARGED WITH A SEXUALLY VIOLENT OFFENSE WHO HAS BEEN FOUND INCOMPETENT TO STAND TRIAL, WHO IS ABOUT TO BE RELEASED, AND WHOSE COMMITMENT IS SOUGHT; BY AMENDING SECTION 44-48-110, RELATING TO THE PERIODIC MENTAL EXAMINATION OF COMMITTED PERSONS, REPORTS, PETITIONS FOR RELEASE, HEARINGS, AND TRIALS TO CONSIDER RELEASE, SO AS TO MAKE CONFORMING CHANGES, TO PROVIDE FOR AN EVALUATION BY A DEPARTMENT OF MENTAL HEALTH-DESIGNATED QUALIFIED EVALUATOR WITHIN A CERTAIN TIME PERIOD AND UNDER CERTAIN CONDITIONS, AND TO PROVIDE FOR PERIODIC REVIEW HEARINGS AND THE PRESENCE OF THE RESIDENT AND THE DEPARTMENT OF MENTAL HEALTH-DESIGNATED QUALIFIED EVALUATOR AT HEARINGS; BY ADDING SECTION 44-48-115 SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT A RESIDENT SHALL HAVE THE RIGHT TO CHALLENGE COMMITMENT UNDER CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES AND TO PROVIDE CERTAIN CONDITIONS THEREOF; BY AMENDING SECTION 44-48-120, RELATING TO HEARING ORDERED BY COURT, EXAMINATION BY QUALIFIED EXPERT, AND THE BURDEN OF PROOF, SO AS TO MAKE CONFORMING CHANGES, TO PROVIDE FOR THE PRESENCE OF A DEPARTMENT OF MENTAL HEALTH-DESIGNATED QUALIFIED EVALUATOR AT A HEARING OR TRIAL, AND TO PROVIDE THAT A RESIDENT MAY SEEK ANOTHER EVALUATION AT HIS OWN EXPENSE; BY AMENDING SECTION 44-48-150, RELATING TO EVIDENTIARY RECORDS AND A COURT ORDER TO OPEN SEALED RECORDS, SO AS TO PROVIDE FOR THE RELEASE OF RECORDS TO THE ATTORNEY GENERAL AND COUNSEL OF RECORD; BY AMENDING SECTION 24-21-32, RELATING TO REENTRY SUPERVISION AND REVOCATION, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT IF THE MULTIDISCIPLINARY TEAM FINDS PROBABLE CAUSE TO BELIEVE THAT AN INMATE IS A SEXUALLY VIOLENT PREDATOR, THEN THE INMATE IS NOT ELIGIBLE FOR THE SUPERVISED REENTRY PROGRAM; AND BY ADDING SECTION 44-48-180 SO AS TO ENSURE THAT CASES PURSUANT TO THIS CHAPTER SHALL BE GIVEN PRIORITY STATUS FOR THE PURPOSES OF SCHEDULING ANY HEARINGS OR TRIALS.

On motion of Senator HUTTO.

S. 566 (Word version) -- Senators Bennett, K. Johnson, M. Johnson, Hutto, Adams, Kimpson, Fanning, Kimbrell, Climer, Cromer, McElveen, Talley, Davis, Malloy and Grooms: A BILL TO AMEND THE SOUTH CAROLINA CODE OF LAWS BY ENACTING THE "SOUTH CAROLINA CRAFT BEER ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ACT"; BY AMENDING SECTION 61-4-1515, RELATING TO THE SALE OF BEER BY BREWERIES, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT A BREWERY IS AUTHORIZED TO SELL UP TO TWO THOUSAND BARRELS OF BEER EACH YEAR BREWED ON ONE OR MORE OF THE BREWERY'S PERMITTED PREMISES AT RETAIL, WHOLESALE, OR BOTH, AND DELIVER OR SHIP THE BEER TO LICENSED RETAILERS IN THIS STATE, TO DELETE THE CONDITION THAT SALES TO CONSUMERS MUST BE HELD IN CONJUNCTION WITH A TOUR, TO DELETE THE CONDITION THAT THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF BEER THAT MAY BE SOLD TO A CONSUMER FOR OFF-PREMISES CONSUMPTION SHALL BE EQUIVALENT TO TWO HUNDRED EIGHTY-EIGHT OUNCES, AND TO PROVIDE THAT A BREWERY IS ELIGIBLE FOR A SPECIAL PERMIT PURSUANT TO SECTION 61-4-550; AND BY ADDING SECTION 61-4-1550 SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT A BREWERY IS AUTHORIZED TO TRANSFER BEER PRODUCED ON ONE OR MORE OF THE BREWERY'S PERMITTED PREMISES TO OTHER FACILITIES WITHIN THIS STATE OWNED, LEASED, OR RENTED BY THE BREWERY WITHOUT BEING SUBJECT TO THE DISTRIBUTION AND WHOLESALE PROVISIONS OF TITLE 61 AND ANY TAXATION PROVISIONS OF THIS STATE, INCLUDING LOCAL GOVERNMENTS.

On motion of Senator BENNETT.

On motion of Senator GAMBRELL, with unanimous consent, the Senate stood adjourned out of respect to the memory of Mr. Lester Lowry Brock of Starr, S.C. Lester was a United States Air Force veteran who worked as a contractor. He was an avid gunman. He was a shotgun shooting instructor and served as the head coach of the Crescent High School Elite Shooting Team. He enjoyed hunting and spending time with his friends and family. Lester was a loving father and devoted grandfather who will be dearly missed.

At 11:07 A.M., on motion of Senator CROMER, the Senate adjourned to meet next Tuesday, April 4, 2023, at 11:00 A.M., under the provisions of Rule 1B.

This web page was last updated on Friday, March 31, 2023 at 10:56 A.M.