Indicates Matter Stricken
Indicates New Matter
The House assembled at 12:00 noon.
Deliberations were opened with prayer by Rev. Charles E. Seastrunk, Jr., as follows:
Our thought for today is from Psalm 9:10: "And those who know your name put their trust in you, for you, O Lord, have not forsaken those who seek you."
Let us pray. Ever present God, we thank You for being with us during this year and providing Your care and goodness to these Representatives. Continue Your presence with us as we continue the business of the State. Bless each as they carry out their duties. Bless our Nation, President, State, Governor, Speaker, staff, and all who contributed to the success of this year. Protect our defenders of freedom, at home and abroad, as they protect us. Heal the wounds, those seen and those hidden, of our men and women who suffer and sacrifice for our freedom. Lord, in Your mercy, hear our prayers. Amen.
Pursuant to Rule 6.3, the House of Representatives was led in the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America by the SPEAKER.
After corrections to the Journal of the proceedings of Thursday, June 2, the SPEAKER ordered it confirmed.
Rep. MACK moved that when the House adjourns, it adjourn in memory of the Emanuel 9, which was agreed to.
The House stood in silent prayer for the Emanuel 9.
The House stood in silent prayer for the victims of the Orlando massacre.
The following was received:
June 9, 2016
The Honorable Charles F. Reid
Clerk of the House
P.O. Box 11867
Columbia, South Carolina 29211
Dear Mr. Reid:
The State Election Commission has certified to this office that the Honorable Sylleste H. Davis is the winner of the State House of Representatives, District 100, Special Election originally scheduled for August 30, 2016.
The attached hereby certifies Sylleste H. Davis as a duly and properly elected member of the South Carolina House of Representatives.
Sincerely,
Mark Hammond
Secretary of State
The following was received:
June 8, 2016
The Honorable Mark Hammond
Secretary of State
1205 Pendleton Street, Suite 525
Columbia, South Carolina 29201
Dear Mr. Secretary,
Pursuant to S.C. Code of Laws Section 7-13-190(E), the State Election Commission hereby certifies Sylleste H. Davis as the winner of the State House of Representatives District 100 Special Election originally scheduled for August 30, 2016.
Sincerely,
Marci Andino
Executive Director
Whereas, a Special Election for State House of Representatives District 100 was ordered to be held on August 30, 2016; and
Whereas, the candidate filing period for the Special Election opened at noon on May 13, 2016, and closed at noon on May 23, 2016; and
Whereas, only one candidate, Sylleste H. Davis, filed as a candidate during the filing period; and
Whereas, more than fourteen calendar days have elapsed since the close of the filing period, and no person has filed a declaration to be a write-in candidate with the S.C. State Election Commission nor with the Berkeley County Board of Voter Registration and Elections; and
Whereas, S.C. Code of Laws Section 7-13-190(E), requires that when fourteen days have elapsed since the close of the filing period and only one person has filed for the office and no person has filed a declaration to be a write-in candidate, with the authority charged by law with conducting the election, the candidate who filed for the office must be deemed elected.
Therefore, the S.C. State Board of Canvassers, hereby certifies Sylleste H. Davis the winner of the State House of Representatives District 100 Special Election originally scheduled for August 30, 2016.
Billy Way, Jr., Chairman
Dated this 8th day of June 2016
Sylleste H. Davis, Member-elect from District No. 100 presented her credentials and the oath of office was administered to her by the SPEAKER.
The following was received:
Columbia, S.C., June 2, 2016
Mr. Speaker and Members of the House:
The Senate respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has adopted the report of the Committee of Conference on H. 4765:
H. 4765 (Word version) -- Reps. G. R. Smith, Parks, D. C. Moss, Cobb-Hunter, Jefferson, Duckworth, Daning, Kirby, R. L. Brown, Burns, Douglas, Brannon, Anthony, Mitchell, Ridgeway, Robinson-Simpson, Clyburn, Ryhal, Johnson, Yow, G. A. Brown, Riley, Taylor, Limehouse, Williams, Simrill, Bedingfield, Chumley, Dillard, Herbkersman, Hicks, Hill, Loftis, Long, V. S. Moss, Pope, Rivers, Thayer, Wells, Crosby and King: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 12-6-5060, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO VOLUNTARY CONTRIBUTIONS MADE BY AN INDIVIDUAL BY MEANS OF THE INCOME TAX RETURN CHECK OFF, SO AS TO ADD HABITAT FOR HUMANITY.
Very respectfully,
President
Received as information.
The following was introduced:
H. 5475 (Word version) -- Reps. Allison, Brannon, Chumley, Cole, Forrester, Mitchell, Tallon, Alexander, Anderson, Anthony, Atwater, Bales, Ballentine, Bamberg, Bannister, Bedingfield, Bernstein, Bingham, Bowers, Bradley, G. A. Brown, R. L. Brown, Burns, Clary, Clemmons, Clyburn, Cobb-Hunter, Collins, Corley, H. A. Crawford, Crosby, Daning, Davis, Delleney, Dillard, Douglas, Duckworth, Erickson, Felder, Finlay, Fry, Funderburk, Gagnon, George, Gilliard, Goldfinch, Govan, Hamilton, Hardee, Hart, Hayes, Henderson, Henegan, Herbkersman, Hill, Hiott, Hixon, Hodges, Horne, Hosey, Howard, Huggins, Jefferson, Johnson, Jordan, Kennedy, King, Kirby, Knight, Limehouse, Loftis, Long, Lowe, Lucas, Mack, McCoy, McEachern, McKnight, M. S. McLeod, W. J. McLeod, Merrill, D. C. Moss, V. S. Moss, Murphy, Nanney, Neal, Newton, Norman, Norrell, Ott, Parks, Pitts, Pope, Putnam, Quinn, Ridgeway, Riley, Rivers, Robinson-Simpson, Rutherford, Ryhal, Sandifer, Simrill, G. M. Smith, G. R. Smith, J. E. Smith, Sottile, Spires, Stavrinakis, Stringer, Taylor, Thayer, Tinkler, Toole, Weeks, Wells, Whipper, White, Whitmire, Williams, Willis and Yow: A HOUSE RESOLUTION TO CONGRATULATE THE HONORABLE DONNA C. HICKS OF SPARTANBURG COUNTY FOR HER MERITORIOUS AND DEDICATED SERVICE IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OVER THE LAST FOUR YEARS ON BEHALF OF HER CONSTITUENTS AND THE CITIZENS OF SOUTH CAROLINA AND TO WISH HER MUCH SUCCESS AND HAPPINESS IN ALL HER FUTURE ENDEAVORS.
Whereas, the members of the South Carolina House of Representatives learned with sincere regret that the Honorable Donna C. Hicks will depart from the House of Representatives at the conclusion of her current term; and
Whereas, born in Spartanburg, she is the daughter of Nancy B. and John W. Hicks, Jr., and she earned a bachelor's degree from the University of South Carolina in 1998; and
Whereas, Representative Hicks earned a master of divinity degree in 2002 and a master of theology degree in 2006, both from New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary, and earned certification in non-profit management from Duke University in 2009; and
Whereas, she served as a Greek reference editor and contributor for the 2005-2006 edition of the Women's Evangelical Commentary on the New Testament published by Holman Bible Publishers; and
Whereas, when away from her duties in the House of Representatives, Representative Hicks resides in Boiling Springs where she owns her own business; and
Whereas, deeply involved in her community, she served from 1982 to 1986 as the president and regional director for the Jaycees and as the Soil and Water Commissioner from 2011 to 2012; and
Whereas, a graduate of 2012 Leadership Spartanburg and 2014 Leadership South Carolina, Representative Hicks serves on the board of directors for the Upstate Family Resource Center (UFRS) and as a member of the Boiling Springs Lions Club and the Boiling Springs Business Association; and
Whereas, she has faithfully served the citizens of District 37 in the House of Representatives since 2013, during which time she has served on the Judiciary Committee; and
Whereas, with a strong desire to protect the lives of our citizens, Representative Hicks ardently supported the naming of April as "Move Over Awareness Month", legislation which provides for public education about the importance of approaching a highway work zone, emergency scene, or traffic accident by changing lanes away from those situations; and
Whereas, in all of her service, she has provided support for her constituents, born and unborn, in the effort to defund Planned Parenthood and in her collaboration on the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act, enacted at the end of May 2016; and
Whereas, the members of the House of Representatives will miss the keen and impassioned service that Donna Hicks, their friend and colleague, has given to the House of Representatives, and hope that she will enjoy deep fulfillment in the years to come. Now, therefore,
Be it resolved by the House of Representatives:
That the members of the South Carolina House of Representatives, by this resolution, congratulate the Honorable Donna C. Hicks of Spartanburg County for her meritorious and dedicated service in the House of Representatives over the past four years on behalf of her constituents and the citizens of South Carolina and wish her much success and happiness in all her future endeavors.
Be it further resolved that a copy of this resolution be presented to the Honorable Donna C. Hicks.
The Resolution was adopted.
The following was introduced:
H. 5476 (Word version) -- Reps. Erickson, Allison, Bannister, Bedingfield, Burns, Chumley, Dillard, Hamilton, Henderson, Loftis, Putnam, Robinson-Simpson, G. R. Smith, Stringer, Willis, Alexander, Anderson, Anthony, Atwater, Bales, Ballentine, Bamberg, Bernstein, Bingham, Bowers, Bradley, Brannon, G. A. Brown, R. L. Brown, Clary, Clemmons, Clyburn, Cobb-Hunter, Cole, Collins, Corley, H. A. Crawford, Crosby, Daning, Davis, Delleney, Douglas, Duckworth, Felder, Finlay, Forrester, Fry, Funderburk, Gagnon, George, Gilliard, Goldfinch, Govan, Hardee, Hart, Hayes, Henegan, Herbkersman, Hicks, Hill, Hiott, Hixon, Hodges, Horne, Hosey, Howard, Huggins, Jefferson, Johnson, Jordan, Kennedy, King, Kirby, Knight, Limehouse, Long, Lowe, Lucas, Mack, McCoy, McEachern, McKnight, M. S. McLeod, W. J. McLeod, Merrill, Mitchell, D. C. Moss, V. S. Moss, Murphy, Neal, Newton, Norman, Norrell, Ott, Parks, Pitts, Pope, Quinn, Ridgeway, Riley, Rivers, Rutherford, Ryhal, Sandifer, Simrill, G. M. Smith, J. E. Smith, Sottile, Spires, Stavrinakis, Tallon, Taylor, Thayer, Tinkler, Toole, Weeks, Wells, Whipper, White, Whitmire, Williams and Yow: A HOUSE RESOLUTION TO CONGRATULATE THE HONORABLE WENDY K. NANNEY OF GREENVILLE COUNTY FOR HER COMMENDABLE AND STEADFAST SERVICE IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ON BEHALF OF HER CONSTITUENTS AND THE CITIZENS OF SOUTH CAROLINA AND TO WISH HER MUCH SUCCESS AND HAPPINESS IN ALL HER FUTURE ENDEAVORS.
Whereas, the members of the South Carolina House of Representatives learned with sincere regret that the Honorable Wendy K. Nanney will depart from the House of Representatives at the conclusion of her current term; and
Whereas, born in Greenville, she is the daughter of Bob and Barb Taylor and earned a bachelor's degree from Bob Jones University in 1987; and
Whereas, in 1986, Representative Nanney married her beloved husband, Timothy Lee Nanney, and together they have reared five fine children: Meredith, Taylor, Kacey, Travis, and Maggie. When away from her duties in the House of Representatives, she serves as an account executive; and
Whereas, she is an active and faithful member of Morningside Park Baptist Church; and
Whereas, deeply involved in her community, Representative Nanney served as chairman of the Greenville County Republican Party from 2006 to 2007 and as a former staff member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee; and
Whereas, she has faithfully served the citizens of District 22 in the House of Representatives since 2009, during which time she has served on the Judiciary and on the Regulations and Administrative Procedures committees and as chairman of the Greenville County Legislative Delegation and chairman of the South Carolina Republican Women's Caucus; and
Whereas, in all of her service, she has provided impassioned momentum for the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act, which she originally sponsored in 2013 and for which she was the primary sponsor. It was finally enacted in May 2016; and
Whereas, in her strong desire to protect the lives of our citizens, both the born and unborn, she co-sponsored legislation that delays an abortion from being performed for at least twenty-four hours after the patient receives informational material as required by law; and
Whereas, the members of the House of Representatives will miss the insightful and ardent service that Wendy Nanney, their friend and colleague, has given to the House of Representatives and hope that she will enjoy deep fulfillment in the years to come. Now, therefore,
Be it resolved by the House of Representatives:
That the members of the South Carolina House of Representatives, by this resolution, congratulate the Honorable Wendy K. Nanney of Greenville County for her commendable and steadfast service in the House of Representatives on behalf of her constituents and the citizens of South Carolina and wish her much success and happiness in all her future endeavors.
Be it further resolved that a copy of this resolution be presented to the Honorable Wendy K. Nanney.
The Resolution was adopted.
The following was introduced:
H. 5477 (Word version) -- Reps. R. L. Brown, Alexander, Allison, Anderson, Anthony, Atwater, Bales, Ballentine, Bamberg, Bannister, Bedingfield, Bernstein, Bingham, Bowers, Bradley, Brannon, G. A. Brown, Burns, Chumley, Clary, Clemmons, Clyburn, Cobb-Hunter, Cole, Collins, Corley, H. A. Crawford, Crosby, Daning, Davis, Delleney, Dillard, Douglas, Duckworth, Erickson, Felder, Finlay, Forrester, Fry, Funderburk, Gagnon, George, Gilliard, Goldfinch, Govan, Hamilton, Hardee, Hart, Hayes, Henderson, Henegan, Herbkersman, Hicks, Hill, Hiott, Hixon, Hodges, Horne, Hosey, Howard, Huggins, Jefferson, Johnson, Jordan, Kennedy, King, Kirby, Knight, Limehouse, Loftis, Long, Lowe, Lucas, Mack, McCoy, McEachern, McKnight, M. S. McLeod, W. J. McLeod, Merrill, Mitchell, D. C. Moss, V. S. Moss, Murphy, Nanney, Neal, Newton, Norman, Norrell, Ott, Parks, Pitts, Pope, Putnam, Quinn, Ridgeway, Riley, Rivers, Robinson-Simpson, Rutherford, Ryhal, Sandifer, Simrill, G. M. Smith, G. R. Smith, J. E. Smith, Sottile, Spires, Stavrinakis, Stringer, Tallon, Taylor, Thayer, Tinkler, Toole, Weeks, Wells, Whipper, White, Whitmire, Williams, Willis and Yow: A HOUSE RESOLUTION TO CONGRATULATE REVEREND WILLIAM R. JONES FOR HIS DEDICATED AND MERITORIOUS COMMUNITY SERVICE TO WADMALAW ISLAND AND COMMEND HIM FOR HIS SIGNIFICANT CONTRIBUTIONS TO IMPROVE THE QUALITY OF LIFE THERE.
The Resolution was adopted.
The following was introduced:
H. 5478 (Word version) -- Reps. R. L. Brown, Alexander, Allison, Anderson, Anthony, Atwater, Bales, Ballentine, Bamberg, Bannister, Bedingfield, Bernstein, Bingham, Bowers, Bradley, Brannon, G. A. Brown, Burns, Chumley, Clary, Clemmons, Clyburn, Cobb-Hunter, Cole, Collins, Corley, H. A. Crawford, Crosby, Daning, Davis, Delleney, Dillard, Douglas, Duckworth, Erickson, Felder, Finlay, Forrester, Fry, Funderburk, Gagnon, George, Gilliard, Goldfinch, Govan, Hamilton, Hardee, Hart, Hayes, Henderson, Henegan, Herbkersman, Hicks, Hill, Hiott, Hixon, Hodges, Horne, Hosey, Howard, Huggins, Jefferson, Johnson, Jordan, Kennedy, King, Kirby, Knight, Limehouse, Loftis, Long, Lowe, Lucas, Mack, McCoy, McEachern, McKnight, M. S. McLeod, W. J. McLeod, Merrill, Mitchell, D. C. Moss, V. S. Moss, Murphy, Nanney, Neal, Newton, Norman, Norrell, Ott, Parks, Pitts, Pope, Putnam, Quinn, Ridgeway, Riley, Rivers, Robinson-Simpson, Rutherford, Ryhal, Sandifer, Simrill, G. M. Smith, G. R. Smith, J. E. Smith, Sottile, Spires, Stavrinakis, Stringer, Tallon, Taylor, Thayer, Tinkler, Toole, Weeks, Wells, Whipper, White, Whitmire, Williams, Willis and Yow: A HOUSE RESOLUTION TO CONGRATULATE THE BROWN AND HEYWARD FAMILY MEMBERS ON THEIR FAITHFULNESS IN RENEWING FAMILY TIES IN HOLDING THEIR FOURTEENTH FAMILY REUNION.
The Resolution was adopted.
The following was introduced:
H. 5479 (Word version) -- Reps. Burns, Alexander, Allison, Anderson, Anthony, Atwater, Bales, Ballentine, Bamberg, Bannister, Bedingfield, Bernstein, Bingham, Bowers, Bradley, Brannon, G. A. Brown, R. L. Brown, Chumley, Clary, Clemmons, Clyburn, Cobb-Hunter, Cole, Collins, Corley, H. A. Crawford, Crosby, Daning, Davis, Delleney, Dillard, Douglas, Duckworth, Erickson, Felder, Finlay, Forrester, Fry, Funderburk, Gagnon, George, Gilliard, Goldfinch, Govan, Hamilton, Hardee, Hart, Hayes, Henderson, Henegan, Herbkersman, Hicks, Hill, Hiott, Hixon, Hodges, Horne, Hosey, Howard, Huggins, Jefferson, Johnson, Jordan, Kennedy, King, Kirby, Knight, Limehouse, Loftis, Long, Lowe, Lucas, Mack, McCoy, McEachern, McKnight, M. S. McLeod, W. J. McLeod, Merrill, Mitchell, D. C. Moss, V. S. Moss, Murphy, Nanney, Neal, Newton, Norman, Norrell, Ott, Parks, Pitts, Pope, Putnam, Quinn, Ridgeway, Riley, Rivers, Robinson-Simpson, Rutherford, Ryhal, Sandifer, Simrill, G. M. Smith, G. R. Smith, J. E. Smith, Sottile, Spires, Stavrinakis, Stringer, Tallon, Taylor, Thayer, Tinkler, Toole, Weeks, Wells, Whipper, White, Whitmire, Williams, Willis and Yow: A HOUSE RESOLUTION TO CONGRATULATE AND HONOR BOB MENDEL DILL, FOUNDER, EDITOR, AND PUBLISHER OF THE TIMES EXAMINER IN GREENVILLE, FOR HIS COMMENDABLE SERVICE TO THE CITIZENS OF THE UPSTATE AND FOR HIS SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ON JOURNALISM IN THE PALMETTO STATE.
The Resolution was adopted.
The following was introduced:
H. 5480 (Word version) -- Reps. Spires, Alexander, Allison, Anderson, Anthony, Atwater, Bales, Ballentine, Bamberg, Bannister, Bedingfield, Bernstein, Bingham, Bowers, Bradley, Brannon, G. A. Brown, R. L. Brown, Burns, Chumley, Clary, Clemmons, Clyburn, Cobb-Hunter, Cole, Collins, Corley, H. A. Crawford, Crosby, Daning, Davis, Delleney, Dillard, Douglas, Duckworth, Erickson, Felder, Finlay, Forrester, Fry, Funderburk, Gagnon, George, Gilliard, Goldfinch, Govan, Hamilton, Hardee, Hart, Hayes, Henderson, Henegan, Herbkersman, Hicks, Hill, Hiott, Hixon, Hodges, Horne, Hosey, Howard, Huggins, Jefferson, Johnson, Jordan, Kennedy, King, Kirby, Knight, Limehouse, Loftis, Long, Lowe, Lucas, Mack, McCoy, McEachern, McKnight, M. S. McLeod, W. J. McLeod, Merrill, Mitchell, D. C. Moss, V. S. Moss, Murphy, Nanney, Neal, Newton, Norman, Norrell, Ott, Parks, Pitts, Pope, Putnam, Quinn, Ridgeway, Riley, Rivers, Robinson-Simpson, Rutherford, Ryhal, Sandifer, Simrill, G. M. Smith, G. R. Smith, J. E. Smith, Sottile, Stavrinakis, Stringer, Tallon, Taylor, Thayer, Tinkler, Toole, Weeks, Wells, Whipper, White, Whitmire, Williams, Willis and Yow: A HOUSE RESOLUTION TO CONGRATULATE THE RUCKER FAMILY OF RUCKER FARMS IN PELION ON THE MANY DESERVING YOUNG PEOPLE THEY HAVE ASSISTED THROUGH THEIR DEDICATED SPONSORSHIP OF THE LISA RUCKER MEMORIAL SCHOLARSHIP, AWARDED ANNUALLY TO STUDENTS AT PELION HIGH SCHOOL.
The Resolution was adopted.
The following was introduced:
H. 5481 (Word version) -- Reps. Spires, Alexander, Allison, Anderson, Anthony, Atwater, Bales, Ballentine, Bamberg, Bannister, Bedingfield, Bernstein, Bingham, Bowers, Bradley, Brannon, G. A. Brown, R. L. Brown, Burns, Chumley, Clary, Clemmons, Clyburn, Cobb-Hunter, Cole, Collins, Corley, H. A. Crawford, Crosby, Daning, Davis, Delleney, Dillard, Douglas, Duckworth, Erickson, Felder, Finlay, Forrester, Fry, Funderburk, Gagnon, George, Gilliard, Goldfinch, Govan, Hamilton, Hardee, Hart, Hayes, Henderson, Henegan, Herbkersman, Hicks, Hill, Hiott, Hixon, Hodges, Horne, Hosey, Howard, Huggins, Jefferson, Johnson, Jordan, Kennedy, King, Kirby, Knight, Limehouse, Loftis, Long, Lowe, Lucas, Mack, McCoy, McEachern, McKnight, M. S. McLeod, W. J. McLeod, Merrill, Mitchell, D. C. Moss, V. S. Moss, Murphy, Nanney, Neal, Newton, Norman, Norrell, Ott, Parks, Pitts, Pope, Putnam, Quinn, Ridgeway, Riley, Rivers, Robinson-Simpson, Rutherford, Ryhal, Sandifer, Simrill, G. M. Smith, G. R. Smith, J. E. Smith, Sottile, Stavrinakis, Stringer, Tallon, Taylor, Thayer, Tinkler, Toole, Weeks, Wells, Whipper, White, Whitmire, Williams, Willis and Yow: A HOUSE RESOLUTION TO CONGRATULATE AND COMMEND THE LEXINGTON SCHOOL DISTRICT ONE EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION ON THIRTY-FIVE YEARS OF ASSISTING MANY DESERVING YOUNG PEOPLE THROUGH SPONSORSHIP OF THE NOAH KNEECE MEMORIAL SCHOLARSHIP, AWARDED ANNUALLY TO STUDENTS AT PELION HIGH SCHOOL.
The Resolution was adopted.
The following was introduced:
H. 5482 (Word version) -- Reps. Anderson, Alexander, Allison, Anthony, Atwater, Bales, Ballentine, Bamberg, Bannister, Bedingfield, Bernstein, Bingham, Bowers, Bradley, Brannon, G. A. Brown, R. L. Brown, Burns, Chumley, Clary, Clemmons, Clyburn, Cobb-Hunter, Cole, Collins, Corley, H. A. Crawford, Crosby, Daning, Davis, Delleney, Dillard, Douglas, Duckworth, Erickson, Felder, Finlay, Forrester, Fry, Funderburk, Gagnon, George, Gilliard, Goldfinch, Govan, Hamilton, Hardee, Hart, Hayes, Henderson, Henegan, Herbkersman, Hicks, Hill, Hiott, Hixon, Hodges, Horne, Hosey, Howard, Huggins, Jefferson, Johnson, Jordan, Kennedy, King, Kirby, Knight, Limehouse, Loftis, Long, Lowe, Lucas, Mack, McCoy, McEachern, McKnight, M. S. McLeod, W. J. McLeod, Merrill, Mitchell, D. C. Moss, V. S. Moss, Murphy, Nanney, Neal, Newton, Norman, Norrell, Ott, Parks, Pitts, Pope, Putnam, Quinn, Ridgeway, Riley, Rivers, Robinson-Simpson, Rutherford, Ryhal, Sandifer, Simrill, G. M. Smith, G. R. Smith, J. E. Smith, Sottile, Spires, Stavrinakis, Stringer, Tallon, Taylor, Thayer, Tinkler, Toole, Weeks, Wells, Whipper, White, Whitmire, Williams, Willis and Yow: A HOUSE RESOLUTION TO CONGRATULATE AND HONOR REVEREND ROBERT B. COOPER, SR., ELDER OF THE FLORENCE-DILLON DISTRICT OF THE SEVENTH EPISCOPAL DISTRICT OF THE AFRICAN METHODIST EPISCOPAL CHURCH, UPON THE OCCASION OF HIS RETIREMENT AFTER FORTY-FIVE YEARS OF DEVOTED SERVICE, AND TO WISH HIM CONTINUED SUCCESS AND HAPPINESS IN ALL HIS FUTURE ENDEAVORS.
The Resolution was adopted.
The following was introduced:
H. 5483 (Word version) -- Reps. Ott, Jefferson, George, J. E. Smith, Bales, Funderburk, Henegan, King, Kirby, W. J. McLeod, Ridgeway, Rutherford, Tinkler and Williams: A HOUSE RESOLUTION TO EXPRESS THE DEEPEST SYMPATHY TO THE CITY OF ORLANDO FOLLOWING THE TRAGIC SHOOTING AT THE PULSE NIGHTCLUB AND TO REQUEST THAT THE SOUTH CAROLINA LAW ENFORCEMENT DIVISION CREATE A PLAN OR REEVALUATE THE CURRENT PLAN TO DEAL WITH POTENTIAL MASS SHOOTING AND HOSTAGE SITUATIONS IN SOUTH CAROLINA.
The Resolution was adopted.
The following was introduced:
H. 5484 (Word version) -- Reps. Funderburk, J. E. Smith, Alexander, Allison, Anderson, Anthony, Atwater, Bales, Ballentine, Bamberg, Bannister, Bedingfield, Bernstein, Bingham, Bowers, Bradley, Brannon, G. A. Brown, R. L. Brown, Burns, Chumley, Clary, Clemmons, Clyburn, Cobb-Hunter, Cole, Collins, Corley, H. A. Crawford, Crosby, Daning, Davis, Delleney, Dillard, Douglas, Duckworth, Erickson, Felder, Finlay, Forrester, Fry, Gagnon, George, Gilliard, Goldfinch, Govan, Hamilton, Hardee, Hart, Hayes, Henderson, Henegan, Herbkersman, Hicks, Hill, Hiott, Hixon, Hodges, Horne, Hosey, Howard, Huggins, Jefferson, Johnson, Jordan, Kennedy, King, Kirby, Knight, Limehouse, Loftis, Long, Lowe, Lucas, Mack, McCoy, McEachern, McKnight, M. S. McLeod, W. J. McLeod, Merrill, Mitchell, D. C. Moss, V. S. Moss, Murphy, Nanney, Neal, Newton, Norman, Norrell, Ott, Parks, Pitts, Pope, Putnam, Quinn, Ridgeway, Riley, Rivers, Robinson-Simpson, Rutherford, Ryhal, Sandifer, Simrill, G. M. Smith, G. R. Smith, Sottile, Spires, Stavrinakis, Stringer, Tallon, Taylor, Thayer, Tinkler, Toole, Weeks, Wells, Whipper, White, Whitmire, Williams, Willis and Yow: A HOUSE RESOLUTION TO EXPRESS THE PROFOUND SORROW OF THE MEMBERS OF THE SOUTH CAROLINA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES UPON THE DEATH OF FRED R. SHEHEEN OF CAMDEN AND TO EXTEND THE DEEPEST SYMPATHY TO HIS FAMILY AND MANY FRIENDS.
The Resolution was adopted.
The following was introduced:
H. 5485 (Word version) -- Reps. Taylor, Clyburn, Hixon, Wells and Huggins: A HOUSE RESOLUTION TO CONGRATULATE AND HONOR PAMELA JEAN "PAM" ROBERTSON, A LEGISLATIVE AIDE FOR THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, FOR HER MORE THAN FORTY YEARS OF MERITORIOUS SERVICE TO THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY.
The Resolution was adopted.
The following was introduced:
H. 5486 (Word version) -- Reps. Huggins, Alexander, Allison, Anderson, Anthony, Atwater, Bales, Ballentine, Bamberg, Bannister, Bedingfield, Bernstein, Bingham, Bowers, Bradley, Brannon, G. A. Brown, R. L. Brown, Burns, Chumley, Clary, Clemmons, Clyburn, Cobb-Hunter, Cole, Collins, Corley, H. A. Crawford, Crosby, Daning, Davis, Delleney, Dillard, Douglas, Duckworth, Erickson, Felder, Finlay, Forrester, Fry, Funderburk, Gagnon, George, Gilliard, Goldfinch, Govan, Hamilton, Hardee, Hart, Hayes, Henderson, Henegan, Herbkersman, Hicks, Hill, Hiott, Hixon, Hodges, Horne, Hosey, Howard, Jefferson, Johnson, Jordan, Kennedy, King, Kirby, Knight, Limehouse, Loftis, Long, Lowe, Lucas, Mack, McCoy, McEachern, McKnight, M. S. McLeod, W. J. McLeod, Merrill, Mitchell, D. C. Moss, V. S. Moss, Murphy, Nanney, Neal, Newton, Norman, Norrell, Ott, Parks, Pitts, Pope, Putnam, Quinn, Ridgeway, Riley, Rivers, Robinson-Simpson, Rutherford, Ryhal, Sandifer, Simrill, G. M. Smith, G. R. Smith, J. E. Smith, Sottile, Spires, Stavrinakis, Stringer, Tallon, Taylor, Thayer, Tinkler, Toole, Weeks, Wells, Whipper, White, Whitmire, Williams, Willis and Yow: A HOUSE RESOLUTION TO CONGRATULATE HENRY PAUL ELIAS, JR., OF LEXINGTON COUNTY ON THE OCCASION OF HIS FIFTIETH BIRTHDAY AND TO WISH HIM A JOYOUS BIRTHDAY CELEBRATION AND MANY MORE YEARS OF HEALTH AND HAPPINESS.
The Resolution was adopted.
The following was introduced:
H. 5487 (Word version) -- Reps. Huggins, Alexander, Allison, Anderson, Anthony, Atwater, Bales, Ballentine, Bamberg, Bannister, Bedingfield, Bernstein, Bingham, Bowers, Bradley, Brannon, G. A. Brown, R. L. Brown, Burns, Chumley, Clary, Clemmons, Clyburn, Cobb-Hunter, Cole, Collins, Corley, H. A. Crawford, Crosby, Daning, Davis, Delleney, Dillard, Douglas, Duckworth, Erickson, Felder, Finlay, Forrester, Fry, Funderburk, Gagnon, George, Gilliard, Goldfinch, Govan, Hamilton, Hardee, Hart, Hayes, Henderson, Henegan, Herbkersman, Hicks, Hill, Hiott, Hixon, Hodges, Horne, Hosey, Howard, Jefferson, Johnson, Jordan, Kennedy, King, Kirby, Knight, Limehouse, Loftis, Long, Lowe, Lucas, Mack, McCoy, McEachern, McKnight, M. S. McLeod, W. J. McLeod, Merrill, Mitchell, D. C. Moss, V. S. Moss, Murphy, Nanney, Neal, Newton, Norman, Norrell, Ott, Parks, Pitts, Pope, Putnam, Quinn, Ridgeway, Riley, Rivers, Robinson-Simpson, Rutherford, Ryhal, Sandifer, Simrill, G. M. Smith, G. R. Smith, J. E. Smith, Sottile, Spires, Stavrinakis, Stringer, Tallon, Taylor, Thayer, Tinkler, Toole, Weeks, Wells, Whipper, White, Whitmire, Williams, Willis and Yow: A HOUSE RESOLUTION TO CONGRATULATE AND RECOGNIZE MAJOR GENERAL ROGER L. CLOUTIER, THE FORTY-EIGHTH COMMANDING GENERAL OF FORT JACKSON IN COLUMBIA, SOUTH CAROLINA, UPON HIS REASSIGNMENT TO THE UNITED STATES AFRICA COMMAND IN STUTTGART, GERMANY, AND TO WISH HIM CONTINUED SUCCESS IN ALL HIS FUTURE ENDEAVORS.
The Resolution was adopted.
The following was introduced:
H. 5488 (Word version) -- Reps. Thayer, Gagnon, Hill, Putnam, White, Alexander, Allison, Anderson, Anthony, Atwater, Bales, Ballentine, Bamberg, Bannister, Bedingfield, Bernstein, Bingham, Bowers, Bradley, Brannon, G. A. Brown, R. L. Brown, Burns, Chumley, Clary, Clemmons, Clyburn, Cobb-Hunter, Cole, Collins, Corley, H. A. Crawford, Crosby, Daning, Davis, Delleney, Dillard, Douglas, Duckworth, Erickson, Felder, Finlay, Forrester, Fry, Funderburk, George, Gilliard, Goldfinch, Govan, Hamilton, Hardee, Hart, Hayes, Henderson, Henegan, Herbkersman, Hicks, Hiott, Hixon, Hodges, Horne, Hosey, Howard, Huggins, Jefferson, Johnson, Jordan, Kennedy, King, Kirby, Knight, Limehouse, Loftis, Long, Lowe, Lucas, Mack, McCoy, McEachern, McKnight, M. S. McLeod, W. J. McLeod, Merrill, Mitchell, D. C. Moss, V. S. Moss, Murphy, Nanney, Neal, Newton, Norman, Norrell, Ott, Parks, Pitts, Pope, Quinn, Ridgeway, Riley, Rivers, Robinson-Simpson, Rutherford, Ryhal, Sandifer, Simrill, G. M. Smith, G. R. Smith, J. E. Smith, Sottile, Spires, Stavrinakis, Stringer, Tallon, Taylor, Tinkler, Toole, Weeks, Wells, Whipper, Whitmire, Williams, Willis and Yow: A HOUSE RESOLUTION TO CONGRATULATE AND COMMEND RAJEEV MALIK, M.D., AND RAVINDER MALIK, M.D., OF ANDERSON, ON THEIR JOINT LIFETIME OF DEDICATED SERVICE AS MEDICAL PROFESSIONALS AND TO WISH THEM MUCH HAPPINESS AND FULFILLMENT IN ALL THEIR FUTURE ENDEAVORS.
The Resolution was adopted.
The following was introduced:
H. 5489 (Word version) -- Reps. Allison, Bannister, Bedingfield, Burns, Chumley, Dillard, Hamilton, Henderson, Loftis, Nanney, Putnam, Robinson-Simpson, G. R. Smith, Stringer, Willis, Alexander, Anderson, Anthony, Atwater, Bales, Ballentine, Bamberg, Bernstein, Bingham, Bowers, Bradley, G. A. Brown, R. L. Brown, Clary, Clemmons, Clyburn, Cobb-Hunter, Cole, Collins, Corley, H. A. Crawford, Crosby, Daning, Davis, Delleney, Douglas, Duckworth, Erickson, Felder, Finlay, Forrester, Fry, Funderburk, Gagnon, George, Gilliard, Goldfinch, Govan, Hardee, Hart, Hayes, Henegan, Herbkersman, Hicks, Hill, Hiott, Hixon, Hodges, Horne, Hosey, Howard, Huggins, Jefferson, Johnson, Jordan, Kennedy, King, Kirby, Knight, Limehouse, Long, Lowe, Lucas, Mack, McCoy, McEachern, McKnight, M. S. McLeod, W. J. McLeod, Merrill, Mitchell, D. C. Moss, V. S. Moss, Murphy, Neal, Newton, Norman, Norrell, Ott, Parks, Pitts, Pope, Quinn, Ridgeway, Riley, Rivers, Rutherford, Ryhal, Sandifer, Simrill, G. M. Smith, J. E. Smith, Sottile, Spires, Stavrinakis, Tallon, Taylor, Thayer, Tinkler, Toole, Weeks, Wells, Whipper, White, Whitmire, Williams and Yow: A HOUSE RESOLUTION TO CONGRATULATE AND COMMEND THE HONORABLE NORMAN D. "DOUG" BRANNON ON HIS MERITORIOUS SERVICE IN THE SOUTH CAROLINA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OVER THE PAST SIX YEARS AND TO WISH HIM CONTENTMENT AND SUCCESS IN ALL HIS FUTURE ENDEAVORS.
Whereas, for six years, the Honorable Norman D. "Doug" Brannon with faithful integrity has represented the citizens of Spartanburg County's District 38 in the House of Representatives of this great State; and
Whereas, this native of Detroit, Michigan, was born on April 22, 1961, to Norman and Marion E. Brannon; and
Whereas, in preparation for his career and future public service, the young Doug earned his bachelor's degree at the University of South Carolina in 1996, followed by a juris doctor in 2000 from the University of South Carolina School of Law; and
Whereas, presently residing in Landrum, Doug serves his fellow citizens as an attorney with the Kennedy|Brannon, PA, law firm. He was elected to serve in the South Carolina House of Representatives and in 2011 began his first term as a member of that body; and
Whereas, on the occasion of his election to the House, Doug Brannon had already proven his worth as a public servant, having previously served on Landrum City Council (1991-1993) and as mayor of the City of Landrum (1993-1997); and
Whereas, during his years in the House, Doug Brannon has used his experience for the benefit of his constituents and other citizens of our State as a member of the Judiciary Committee and Election Laws Subcommittee. After the tragic events of June 17, 2015, at Charleston's Mother Emanuel Church, he was the first in his party to call publicly for the removal of the Confederate flag from the grounds of the South Carolina State House. Known as somewhat of a "maverick," Representative Brannon has rendered service marked by his choice always to do what he feels is right for all the people of South Carolina, rather than what is perhaps politically expedient; and
Whereas, as a proud husband and father, Doug Brannon finds his strongest support in his lovely wife, Tracey, and his four delightful children, Spike, Chris, Lexi, and Cody; and
Whereas, Doug Brannon's colleagues in the House of Representatives thank him for his dedication to the people of District 38 and extend best wishes for all the best life has to offer in the coming years. Now, therefore,
Be it resolved by the House of Representatives:
That the members of the South Carolina House of Representatives, by this resolution, congratulate and commend the Honorable Norman D. "Doug" Brannon on his meritorious service in the South Carolina House of Representatives over the past six years and wish him contentment and success in all his future endeavors.
Be it further resolved that a copy of this resolution be presented to our distinguished colleague, the Honorable Norman D. "Doug" Brannon.
The Resolution was adopted.
The following was introduced:
H. 5490 (Word version) -- Reps. Huggins, Atwater, Ballentine, Bingham, Ott, Quinn, Spires, Toole, Alexander, Allison, Anderson, Anthony, Bales, Bamberg, Bannister, Bedingfield, Bernstein, Bowers, Bradley, Brannon, G. A. Brown, R. L. Brown, Burns, Chumley, Clary, Clemmons, Clyburn, Cobb-Hunter, Cole, Collins, Corley, H. A. Crawford, Crosby, Daning, Davis, Delleney, Dillard, Douglas, Duckworth, Erickson, Felder, Finlay, Forrester, Fry, Funderburk, Gagnon, George, Gilliard, Goldfinch, Govan, Hamilton, Hardee, Hart, Hayes, Henderson, Henegan, Herbkersman, Hicks, Hill, Hiott, Hixon, Hodges, Horne, Hosey, Howard, Jefferson, Johnson, Jordan, King, Kirby, Knight, Limehouse, Loftis, Long, Lowe, Lucas, Mack, McCoy, McEachern, McKnight, M. S. McLeod, W. J. McLeod, Merrill, Mitchell, D. C. Moss, V. S. Moss, Murphy, Nanney, Neal, Newton, Norman, Norrell, Parks, Pitts, Pope, Putnam, Ridgeway, Riley, Rivers, Robinson-Simpson, Rutherford, Ryhal, Sandifer, Simrill, G. M. Smith, G. R. Smith, J. E. Smith, Sottile, Stavrinakis, Stringer, Tallon, Taylor, Thayer, Tinkler, Weeks, Wells, Whipper, White, Whitmire, Williams, Willis and Yow: A HOUSE RESOLUTION TO RECOGNIZE AND COMMEND THE HONORABLE RALPH SHEALY KENNEDY, JR., FOR HIS DEDICATED SERVICE IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ON BEHALF OF HIS CONSTITUENTS IN LEXINGTON AND SALUDA COUNTIES AND THE CITIZENS OF SOUTH CAROLINA AND TO WISH HIM MUCH SUCCESS AND HAPPINESS IN ALL HIS FUTURE ENDEAVORS.
Whereas, the members of the South Carolina House of Representatives learned with sincere regret that Ralph Shealy Kennedy, Jr., will depart from the House of Representatives at the conclusion of his current term; and
Whereas, born in Columbia on October 21, 1958, he is the son of Jo-Ann Kearse Kennedy and the late Ralph Shealy Kennedy, Sr. He earned a bachelor's degree from Clemson University and a juris doctorate from the University of South Carolina School of Law; and
Whereas, after law school, Ralph served as a law clerk for the Honorable Julius H. Baggett and as the assistant solicitor of the Eleventh Judicial Circuit from 1987 to 1995. He is a member of the South Carolina Bar and is admitted to practice before the United States District Court of South Carolina and the United States Court of Appeals of the Fourth Circuit; and
Whereas, he married his beloved wife, Lisa Bucko, in 1982, and together they reared two fine children, Carlisle Evans and Lauren Elizabeth. Representative Kennedy resides in Leesville, where he practices law; and
Whereas, a faithful member of St. Johns Methodist Church in Batesburg, he enjoys membership in ALEC, the NRA, and Ducks Unlimited; and
Whereas, deeply involved in his community, Ralph Kennedy served as a member of the board of trustees for Lexington County School District 3 from 1996 to 2012, serving four terms as its chairman. He served on the board of directors of the Batesburg-Leesville Chamber of Commerce and was a former president of the Batesburg-Leesville Lions International and the Batesburg-Leesville Rotary Club where he was named a Paul Harris Fellow; and
Whereas, as a loyal supporter of his alma mater, he served as the past chairman of the Clemson University Parent's Council and as the alumni director of ATO Fraternity; and
Whereas, Representative Kennedy has faithfully served the citizens of District 39 in the House of Representatives since 2013, during which time he has served on the Judiciary and the Regulations and Administrative Procedures committees and the Criminal Law Subcommittee. He also served as the assistant majority whip and as a member of the Sportsmen's Caucus; and
Whereas, in all of his service, Ralph Kennedy has provided reasoned advice to his colleagues and affable guidance in this chamber; and
Whereas, the members of the House will miss the keen and diligent service that Ralph Kennedy, their friend and colleague, has given to the House of Representatives and hope that he will enjoy deep fulfillment in the years to come. Now, therefore,
Be it resolved by the House of Representatives:
That the members of the South Carolina House of Representatives, by this resolution, recognize and commend the Honorable Ralph Shealy Kennedy, Jr., for his dedicated service in the House of Representatives on behalf of his constituents in Lexington and Saluda counties and the citizens of South Carolina and wish him much success and happiness in all his future endeavors.
Be it further resolved that a copy of this resolution be presented to the Honorable Ralph Shealy Kennedy, Jr.
The Resolution was adopted.
The following was introduced:
H. 5491 (Word version) -- Reps. Henegan, Alexander, Allison, Anderson, Anthony, Atwater, Bales, Ballentine, Bamberg, Bannister, Bedingfield, Bernstein, Bingham, Bowers, Bradley, Brannon, G. A. Brown, R. L. Brown, Burns, Chumley, Clary, Clemmons, Clyburn, Cobb-Hunter, Cole, Collins, Corley, H. A. Crawford, Crosby, Daning, Davis, Delleney, Dillard, Douglas, Duckworth, Erickson, Felder, Finlay, Forrester, Fry, Funderburk, Gagnon, George, Gilliard, Goldfinch, Govan, Hamilton, Hardee, Hart, Hayes, Henderson, Herbkersman, Hicks, Hill, Hiott, Hixon, Hodges, Horne, Hosey, Howard, Huggins, Jefferson, Johnson, Jordan, Kennedy, King, Kirby, Knight, Limehouse, Loftis, Long, Lowe, Lucas, Mack, McCoy, McEachern, McKnight, M. S. McLeod, W. J. McLeod, Merrill, Mitchell, D. C. Moss, V. S. Moss, Murphy, Nanney, Neal, Newton, Norman, Norrell, Ott, Parks, Pitts, Pope, Putnam, Quinn, Ridgeway, Riley, Rivers, Robinson-Simpson, Rutherford, Ryhal, Sandifer, Simrill, G. M. Smith, G. R. Smith, J. E. Smith, Sottile, Spires, Stavrinakis, Stringer, Tallon, Taylor, Thayer, Tinkler, Toole, Weeks, Wells, Whipper, White, Whitmire, Williams, Willis and Yow: A HOUSE RESOLUTION TO CONGRATULATE THE CONGREGATION AND PASTOR OF GREATER ST. JAMES MISSIONARY BAPTIST CHURCH AS THEY CELEBRATE THE MILESTONE OF THE CHURCH'S ONE HUNDREDTH ANNIVERSARY AND TO COMMEND THEM FOR THEIR MEANINGFUL IMPACT ON THE BENNETTSVILLE COMMUNITY.
The Resolution was adopted.
The following was introduced:
H. 5492 (Word version) -- Reps. Ott, Alexander, Allison, Anderson, Anthony, Atwater, Bales, Ballentine, Bamberg, Bannister, Bedingfield, Bernstein, Bingham, Bowers, Bradley, Brannon, G. A. Brown, R. L. Brown, Burns, Chumley, Clary, Clemmons, Clyburn, Cobb-Hunter, Cole, Collins, Corley, H. A. Crawford, Crosby, Daning, Davis, Delleney, Dillard, Douglas, Duckworth, Erickson, Felder, Finlay, Forrester, Fry, Funderburk, Gagnon, George, Gilliard, Goldfinch, Govan, Hamilton, Hardee, Hart, Hayes, Henderson, Henegan, Herbkersman, Hicks, Hill, Hiott, Hixon, Hodges, Horne, Hosey, Howard, Huggins, Jefferson, Johnson, Jordan, Kennedy, King, Kirby, Knight, Limehouse, Loftis, Long, Lowe, Lucas, Mack, McCoy, McEachern, McKnight, M. S. McLeod, W. J. McLeod, Merrill, Mitchell, D. C. Moss, V. S. Moss, Murphy, Nanney, Neal, Newton, Norman, Norrell, Parks, Pitts, Pope, Putnam, Quinn, Ridgeway, Riley, Rivers, Robinson-Simpson, Rutherford, Ryhal, Sandifer, Simrill, G. M. Smith, G. R. Smith, J. E. Smith, Sottile, Spires, Stavrinakis, Stringer, Tallon, Taylor, Thayer, Tinkler, Toole, Weeks, Wells, Whipper, White, Whitmire, Williams, Willis and Yow: A HOUSE RESOLUTION TO EXPRESS THE DEEPEST SORROW OF THE MEMBERS OF THE SOUTH CAROLINA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES UPON THE DEATH OF FREEMAN GLADDEN OF CALHOUN COUNTY, AND TO OFFER THEIR SINCERE CONDOLENCES TO HIS LOVING FAMILY AND HIS MANY FRIENDS.
The Resolution was adopted.
The following was introduced:
H. 5493 (Word version) -- Reps. Hardee, Anderson, Clemmons, H. A. Crawford, Duckworth, Fry, George, Hayes, Johnson and Ryhal: A HOUSE RESOLUTION TO CONGRATULATE THE COASTAL CAROLINA UNIVERSITY BASEBALL TEAM AND COACHES ON AN OUTSTANDING SEASON AND TO WISH THEM SUCCESS IN THEIR FIRST APPEARANCE IN THE COLLEGE WORLD SERIES.
The Resolution was adopted.
The following was introduced:
H. 5494 (Word version) -- Reps. Anderson, Alexander, Allison, Anthony, Atwater, Bales, Ballentine, Bamberg, Bannister, Bedingfield, Bernstein, Bingham, Bowers, Bradley, Brannon, G. A. Brown, R. L. Brown, Burns, Chumley, Clary, Clemmons, Clyburn, Cobb-Hunter, Cole, Collins, Corley, H. A. Crawford, Crosby, Daning, Davis, Delleney, Dillard, Douglas, Duckworth, Erickson, Felder, Finlay, Forrester, Fry, Funderburk, Gagnon, George, Gilliard, Goldfinch, Govan, Hamilton, Hardee, Hart, Hayes, Henderson, Henegan, Herbkersman, Hicks, Hill, Hiott, Hixon, Hodges, Horne, Hosey, Howard, Huggins, Jefferson, Johnson, Jordan, Kennedy, King, Kirby, Knight, Limehouse, Loftis, Long, Lowe, Lucas, Mack, McCoy, McEachern, McKnight, M. S. McLeod, W. J. McLeod, Merrill, Mitchell, D. C. Moss, V. S. Moss, Murphy, Nanney, Neal, Newton, Norman, Norrell, Ott, Parks, Pitts, Pope, Putnam, Quinn, Ridgeway, Riley, Rivers, Robinson-Simpson, Rutherford, Ryhal, Sandifer, Simrill, G. M. Smith, G. R. Smith, J. E. Smith, Sottile, Spires, Stavrinakis, Stringer, Tallon, Taylor, Thayer, Tinkler, Toole, Weeks, Wells, Whipper, White, Whitmire, Williams, Willis and Yow: A HOUSE RESOLUTION TO CONGRATULATE BISHOP RICHARD FRANKLIN NORRIS, MOTHER MARY ANN NORRIS, AND THE PRESIDING ELDERS, PASTORS, AND LAITY OF THE SEVENTH EPISCOPAL DISTRICT OF THE AFRICAN METHODIST EPISCOPAL CHURCH FOR THEIR SIGNIFICANT WORK TO RESTORE THE HISTORIC CHAPPELLE AUDITORIUM ON THE CAMPUS OF ALLEN UNIVERSITY.
The Resolution was adopted.
The following was introduced:
H. 5495 (Word version) -- Reps. Mack, Alexander, Allison, Anderson, Anthony, Atwater, Bales, Ballentine, Bamberg, Bannister, Bedingfield, Bernstein, Bingham, Bowers, Bradley, Brannon, G. A. Brown, R. L. Brown, Burns, Chumley, Clary, Clemmons, Clyburn, Cobb-Hunter, Cole, Collins, Corley, H. A. Crawford, Crosby, Daning, Davis, Delleney, Dillard, Douglas, Duckworth, Erickson, Felder, Finlay, Forrester, Fry, Funderburk, Gagnon, George, Gilliard, Goldfinch, Govan, Hamilton, Hardee, Hart, Hayes, Henderson, Henegan, Herbkersman, Hicks, Hill, Hiott, Hixon, Hodges, Horne, Hosey, Howard, Huggins, Jefferson, Johnson, Jordan, Kennedy, King, Kirby, Knight, Limehouse, Loftis, Long, Lowe, Lucas, McCoy, McEachern, McKnight, M. S. McLeod, W. J. McLeod, Merrill, Mitchell, D. C. Moss, V. S. Moss, Murphy, Nanney, Neal, Newton, Norman, Norrell, Ott, Parks, Pitts, Pope, Putnam, Quinn, Ridgeway, Riley, Rivers, Robinson-Simpson, Rutherford, Ryhal, Sandifer, Simrill, G. M. Smith, G. R. Smith, J. E. Smith, Sottile, Spires, Stavrinakis, Stringer, Tallon, Taylor, Thayer, Tinkler, Toole, Weeks, Wells, Whipper, White, Whitmire, Williams, Willis and Yow: A HOUSE RESOLUTION TO CONGRATULATE AND HONOR ERIC FLOWERS, A FORMER SOUTH CAROLINA STATE TROOPER, WHO RETIRED AFTER TWENTY-SIX YEARS OF OUTSTANDING SERVICE, AND TO WISH HIM CONTINUED SUCCESS AND HAPPINESS IN ALL HIS FUTURE ENDEAVORS.
The Resolution was adopted.
The following was introduced:
H. 5496 (Word version) -- Reps. Mack, Alexander, Allison, Anderson, Anthony, Atwater, Bales, Ballentine, Bamberg, Bannister, Bedingfield, Bernstein, Bingham, Bowers, Bradley, Brannon, G. A. Brown, R. L. Brown, Burns, Chumley, Clary, Clemmons, Clyburn, Cobb-Hunter, Cole, Collins, Corley, H. A. Crawford, Crosby, Daning, Davis, Delleney, Dillard, Douglas, Duckworth, Erickson, Felder, Finlay, Forrester, Fry, Funderburk, Gagnon, George, Gilliard, Goldfinch, Govan, Hamilton, Hardee, Hart, Hayes, Henderson, Henegan, Herbkersman, Hicks, Hill, Hiott, Hixon, Hodges, Horne, Hosey, Howard, Huggins, Jefferson, Johnson, Jordan, Kennedy, King, Kirby, Knight, Limehouse, Loftis, Long, Lowe, Lucas, McCoy, McEachern, McKnight, M. S. McLeod, W. J. McLeod, Merrill, Mitchell, D. C. Moss, V. S. Moss, Murphy, Nanney, Neal, Newton, Norman, Norrell, Ott, Parks, Pitts, Pope, Putnam, Quinn, Ridgeway, Riley, Rivers, Robinson-Simpson, Rutherford, Ryhal, Sandifer, Simrill, G. M. Smith, G. R. Smith, J. E. Smith, Sottile, Spires, Stavrinakis, Stringer, Tallon, Taylor, Thayer, Tinkler, Toole, Weeks, Wells, Whipper, White, Whitmire, Williams, Willis and Yow: A HOUSE RESOLUTION TO CONGRATULATE AND RECOGNIZE, TOLBERT SMALLS, JR., EDITOR AND GENERAL MANAGER OF THE CHARLESTON CHRONICLE, FOR HIS SIGNIFICANT CONTRIBUTIONS IN BRINGING INDISPENSABLE NEWS TO THE AFRICAN-AMERICAN COMMUNITY IN CHARLESTON, DORCHESTER, AND BERKELEY COUNTIES.
The Resolution was adopted.
The roll call of the House of Representatives was taken resulting as follows:
Allison Anderson Bales Ballentine Bannister Bedingfield Bingham Bowers Bradley G. A. Brown R. L. Brown Burns Clary Clemmons Clyburn Cobb-Hunter Cole Collins Corley Crosby Daning Delleney Dillard Douglas Duckworth Erickson Felder Forrester Funderburk Gagnon George Gilliard Goldfinch Govan Hardee Hart Hayes Henegan Herbkersman Hicks Hill Hiott Hixon Horne Hosey Howard Jefferson Jordan King Kirby Knight Long Lucas Mack McCoy McEachern McKnight M. S. McLeod D. C. Moss V. S. Moss Murphy Neal Newton Norman Norrell Ott Parks Pitts Pope Putnam Ridgeway Riley Rivers Rutherford Ryhal Sandifer Simrill G. M. Smith G. R. Smith J. E. Smith Sottile Spires Stringer Tallon Taylor Thayer Tinkler Toole Weeks Wells Whipper Whitmire Williams Willis Yow
I came in after the roll call and was present for the Session on Wednesday, June 15.
Terry Alexander Todd Atwater Justin Bamberg Beth Bernstein Bill Chumley Heather Crawford Sylleste H. Davis Kirkman Finlay Russell W. Fry Phyllis Henderson Kenneth F. Hodges Chip Huggins Jeffrey Johnson H. B. "Chip" Limehouse Dwight Loftis Phillip Lowe Walt J. McLeod James Merrill Harold Mitchell Richard "Rick" Quinn Leola Robinson-Simpson Leon Stavrinakis Brian White Ralph Kennedy
The SPEAKER granted Rep. ANTHONY a leave of absence for the day due to an anniversary celebration.
The SPEAKER granted Rep. ATWATER a temporary leave of absence.
The SPEAKER granted Rep. HUGGINS a temporary leave of absence.
CONFERENCE REPORT
H. 4765 (Word version)
The General Assembly, Columbia, S.C., June 1, 2016
The COMMITTEE OF CONFERENCE, to whom was referred (Doc. No. H:\LEGWORK\CONFREPORTS\DKA\4765C001.DKA.SA16.
DOCX):
H. 4765 (Word version) -- Reps. G.R. Smith, Parks, D.C. Moss, Cobb-Hunter, Jefferson, Duckworth, Daning, Kirby, R.L. Brown, Burns, Douglas, Brannon, Anthony, Mitchell, Ridgeway, Robinson-Simpson, Clyburn, Ryhal, Johnson, Yow, G.A. Brown, Riley, Taylor, Limehouse, Williams, Simrill, Bedingfield, Chumley, Dillard, Herbkersman, Hicks, Hill, Loftis, Long, V.S. Moss, Pope, Rivers, Thayer, Wells, Crosby and King: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 12-6-5060, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO VOLUNTARY CONTRIBUTIONS MADE BY AN INDIVIDUAL BY MEANS OF THE INCOME TAX RETURN CHECK OFF, SO AS TO ADD HABITAT FOR HUMANITY.
Beg leave to report that they have duly and carefully considered the same and recommend:
That the same do pass with the following amendments:
Amend the bill, as and if amended, by striking all after the enacting words and inserting:
/ SECTION 1. Section 12-6-5060(A) of the 1976 Code is amended to read:
"(A) Each taxpayer required to file a state individual income tax return may contribute to the War Between the States Heritage Trust Fund established pursuant to Section 51-18-115, the Nongame Wildlife and Natural Areas Program Fund established pursuant to Section 50-1-280, the Children's Trust Fund of South Carolina established pursuant to Section 63-11-910, the Eldercare Trust Fund of South Carolina established pursuant to Section 43-21-160, or the First Steps to School Readiness Fund established pursuant to Section 63-11-1750, the South Carolina Military Family Relief Fund established pursuant to Article 3, Chapter 11, Title 25, the Donate Life South Carolina established pursuant to Section 44-43-1310, the Veterans' Trust Fund of South Carolina established pursuant to Chapter 21, of Title 25, the South Carolina Litter Control Enforcement Program (SCLCEP) and used by the Governor's Task Force on Litter only for the SCLCEP Program, the South Carolina Law Enforcement Assistance Program (SCLEAP) and used as provided in Section 23-3-65, the South Carolina Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism for use in the South Carolina State Park Service in the manner the General Assembly provides, the South Carolina Forestry Commission for use in the state forest system, the South Carolina Department of Natural Resources for use in its programs and operations, K-12 public education for use in the manner the General Assembly provides by law, South Carolina Conservation Bank Trust Fund established pursuant to Section 48-59-60, or the Financial Literacy Trust Fund as established pursuant to Section 59-29-510, or the South Carolina Association of Habitat for Humanity Affiliates, by designating the contribution on the return. The contribution may be made by reducing the income tax refund or by remitting additional payment by the amount designated."
SECTION 2. A. Section 12-6-3750(A) of the 1976 Code is amended to read:
"(A) Beginning with the year 2008, There shall be is allowed a nonrefundable credit against taxes imposed by this chapter for a meat packer, butcher, or processing plant licensed or permitted by this State or the United States Department of Agriculture that, during the tax year for which the credit is claimed, had a valid contract with any nonprofit organization to process deer for donation to any charitable organization engaged in distributing food to the needy. No portion of the donated deer shall may be used by a commercial enterprise. The amount of the credit shall be fifty is seventy-five dollars for each carcass processed and donated. The credit must be claimed in the year earned and may not be carried to any other taxable year."
B. This section applies to income tax years beginning after 2015.
SECTION 3. This act takes effect upon approval by the Governor. /
Amend title to conform.
Senator Ronnie W. Cromer Representative Garry R. Smith Senator Shane R. Martin Representative Chip Huggins Senator Floyd Nicholson Representative Russell L. Ott On Part of the Senate. On Part of the House.
Rep. G. R. SMITH explained the Conference Report.
The yeas and nays were taken resulting as follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Allison Bales Ballentine Bannister Bedingfield Bingham Bowers Bradley G. A. Brown R. L. Brown Burns Clary Clemmons Clyburn Cobb-Hunter Cole Collins Crosby Daning Davis Delleney Dillard Douglas Duckworth Erickson Felder Forrester Funderburk Gagnon George Gilliard Goldfinch Govan Hardee Hart Hayes Henegan Herbkersman Hicks Hill Hiott Hixon Horne Hosey Howard Jefferson Jordan King Kirby Knight Limehouse Loftis Long Lowe Lucas Mack McCoy McEachern M. S. McLeod W. J. McLeod D. C. Moss V. S. Moss Murphy Neal Newton Norman Norrell Ott Parks Pitts Pope Putnam Quinn Ridgeway Riley Rivers Ryhal Sandifer Simrill G. R. Smith J. E. Smith Sottile Spires Stringer Tallon Taylor Thayer Tinkler Toole Weeks Wells White Whitmire Williams Willis Yow
Those who voted in the negative are:
The Conference Report was adopted and a message was ordered sent to the Senate accordingly.
CONFERENCE REPORT
H. 4492 (Word version)
The General Assembly, Columbia, S.C., June 2, 2016
The COMMITTEE OF CONFERENCE, to whom was referred: (Doc. No. L:\S-JUD\AMEND\CRJUD4492.DOCX):
H. 4492 (Word version) -- Reps. Putnam, Clyburn, Collins, Clary, Erickson, Long, Ryhal, Herbkersman, Newton, Tinkler, Jordan, Hicks, McCoy, M.S. McLeod, Douglas, Henegan, Allison, G.M. Smith, Funderburk, Finlay and Pitts: TO AMEND SECTION 63-7-1630, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO NOTICE OF CHILD ABUSE AND NEGLECT HEARINGS, SO AS TO REQUIRE THE DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES TO PROVIDE TEN DAYS NOTICE OF A HEARING TO, AMONG OTHERS, FOSTER PARENTS AND TO REQUIRE THE NOTICE TO INFORM FOSTER PARENTS OF THE RIGHT TO SUBMIT A REPORT TO THE COURT; TO AMEND SECTION 63-7-1700, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO PERMANENCY PLANNING FOR CHILDREN IN FOSTER CARE, SO AS TO REQUIRE THE DEPARTMENT TO PROVIDE NOTICE OF A PERMANENCY PLANNING HEARING TO FOSTER PARENTS AND OTHER PERSONS PROVIDING CARE FOR A CHILD; AND TO AMEND SECTION 63-11-720, RELATING TO FUNCTIONS OF THE FOSTER CARE REVIEW BOARD, SO AS TO REQUIRE THE FOSTER CARE REVIEW BOARD TO ADVISE FOSTER PARENTS ABOUT THE RIGHT TO SUBMIT A REPORT TO AND BE HEARD BY THE COURT AT A HEARING CONCERNING THE CHILD.
Beg leave to report that they have duly and carefully considered the same and recommend:
That the same do pass with the following amendments:
Amend the bill, as and if amended, by striking all after the enacting words and inserting:
/ SECTION 1. Section 63-7-1630 of the 1976 Code is amended to read:
"Section 63-7-1630. The department shall provide notice of a hearing held in connection with an action filed or pursued under pursuant to subarticle 3, Article 3, Chapter 7, Title 63 or Section 63-7-1650, 63-7-1660, 63-7-1670, 63-7-1680, 63-7-1700, or 63-7-2550 to the foster parent, the preadoptive parent, or the relative who is providing care for a child. The department shall send notice pursuant to this section at least ten days prior to the hearing, except where the parties to the action receive less than ten days' notice. The notice must be in writing and may be delivered in person or by regular mail. The notice shall inform the foster parent, preadoptive parent, or relative of the date, place, and time of the hearing and of, the right to attend the hearing, and the right to submit a report to and address the court concerning the child. Notice provided pursuant to this section does not confer on the foster parent, preadoptive parent, or relative the status of a party to the action. Notice provided pursuant to this section does not confer on the foster parent, preadoptive parent, or relative the status of a party to the action."
SECTION 2. Section 63-7-1700(A) of the 1976 Code, as last amended by Act 160 of 2010, is further amended to read:
"(A) The family court shall review the status of a child placed in foster care upon motion filed by the department to determine a permanent plan for the child. The permanency planning hearing must be held no later than one year after the date the child was first placed in foster care. At the initial permanency planning hearing, the court shall review the status of the child and the progress being made toward the child's return home or toward any other permanent plan approved at the removal hearing. The court's order shall make specific findings in accordance with this section. An action for permanency planning must be brought for a child who enters the custody of the department by any mechanism, including subarticle 3 or Section 63-7-1660 or 63-9-330. If the child enters the custody of the department pursuant to Section 63-9-330 and no action is pending in the family court concerning the child, the department may initiate the permanency planning hearing with a summons and petition for review. All parties must be served with the motion or the summons and petition at least ten days before the hearing, and no responsive pleading is required. The foster parent, the preadoptive parent, or the relative who is providing care for the child must receive the motion or the summons and petition, delivered in person or sent by regular mail, at least ten days before the hearing, except where the parties to the action receive less than ten days' notice of the hearing."
SECTION 3. Section 63-11-720(A)(6)-(7) of the 1976 Code is amended to read:
"(6) to advise foster parents of the right to submit a report to and be heard by the court at a hearing concerning the child;
(7) to recommend that a child caring facility or agency exert all possible efforts to make arrangements for permanent foster care or guardianship for children for whom return to natural parents or adoption is not feasible or possible as determined during a case review by the local review board; and
(7)(8) to report to the state office of the Department of Social Services and other adoptive or foster care agencies any deficiencies in these agencies' efforts to secure permanent homes for children discovered in the local board's review of these cases as provided for in items (1) and (2) of this section."
SECTION 4. This act takes effect upon approval by the Governor. /
Amend title to conform.
Senator Tom Young, Jr. Representative Joshua A. Putman Senator Katrina Frye Shealy Representative Peter McCoy, Jr. Senator J. Thomas McElveen III Representative Mandy Norrell On Part of the Senate. On Part of the House.
Rep. PUTNAM explained the Conference Report.
The yeas and nays were taken resulting as follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Allison Anderson Bales Ballentine Bamberg Bannister Bedingfield Bingham Bowers Bradley G. A. Brown R. L. Brown Burns Chumley Clary Clemmons Clyburn Cobb-Hunter Collins Corley Crosby Daning Davis Delleney Douglas Duckworth Erickson Felder Finlay Forrester Funderburk Gagnon George Gilliard Goldfinch Govan Hardee Hart Hayes Henegan Herbkersman Hicks Hill Hiott Hixon Horne Hosey Howard Jefferson Johnson Jordan Kennedy King Kirby Knight Limehouse Loftis Long Lucas Mack McCoy McEachern McKnight M. S. McLeod W. J. McLeod D. C. Moss V. S. Moss Murphy Neal Newton Norman Norrell Ott Parks Pitts Pope Putnam Quinn Ridgeway Riley Rivers Ryhal Simrill G. R. Smith J. E. Smith Sottile Spires Stringer Tallon Taylor Thayer Tinkler Toole Weeks Wells Whipper White Whitmire Williams Willis Yow
Those who voted in the negative are:
The Conference Report was adopted and a message was ordered sent to the Senate accordingly.
Rep. STRINGER moved that the Committee of Conference on the following Bill be resolved into a Committee of Free Conference and briefly explained the Conference Committee's reasons for this request:
H. 5140 (Word version) -- Reps. Pope, Felder, King, Gambrell, Gagnon, Erickson, Clary, Tallon and Henderson: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 59-1-425, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE OPENING DATE FOR THE PUBLIC SCHOOL YEAR, SO AS TO PROVIDE THE OPENING DATE FOR STUDENTS MUST NOT BE BEFORE AUGUST FIFTEENTH BEGINNING WITH THE 2017-2018 SCHOOL YEAR; TO AMEND SECTION 59-18-325, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO CERTAIN ASSESSMENTS OF VARIOUS PUBLIC SCHOOL STUDENTS BASED ON GRADE LEVEL, SO AS TO REVISE THE MANNER OF PROCUREMENT AND ADMINISTRATION OF THESE ASSESSMENTS, AMONG OTHER THINGS; AND TO AMEND SECTION 59-25-410, RELATING TO THE DATE BY WHICH PUBLIC SCHOOL TEACHERS MUST BE NOTIFIED OF THEIR TENTATIVE ASSIGNMENTS FOR THE UPCOMING SCHOOL YEAR, SO AS TO CHANGE THIS DATE FROM AUGUST FIFTEENTH TO AUGUST EIGHTH.
The yeas and nays were taken resulting as follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Allison Anderson Bales Ballentine Bamberg Bannister Bedingfield Bernstein Bingham Bowers Bradley G. A. Brown R. L. Brown Burns Chumley Clary Clemmons Clyburn Cobb-Hunter Cole Collins Corley Crosby Daning Davis Delleney Douglas Duckworth Erickson Felder Finlay Forrester Funderburk Gagnon George Gilliard Goldfinch Govan Hardee Hart Hayes Henderson Henegan Hicks Hiott Hixon Horne Hosey Jefferson Johnson Jordan Kennedy King Kirby Knight Limehouse Loftis Long Lowe Lucas Mack McCoy McEachern McKnight M. S. McLeod D. C. Moss V. S. Moss Murphy Neal Newton Norman Norrell Ott Parks Pitts Pope Putnam Quinn Ridgeway Riley Rivers Ryhal Sandifer Simrill G. M. Smith G. R. Smith J. E. Smith Sottile Spires Stavrinakis Stringer Tallon Taylor Thayer Tinkler Toole Wells Whipper White Whitmire Williams Willis Yow
Those who voted in the negative are:
So, the motion to resolve the Committee of Conference into a Committee of Free Conference was agreed to.
The Committee of Conference was thereby resolved into a Committee of Free Conference. The SPEAKER appointed Reps. STRINGER, FELDER and R. L. BROWN to the Committee of Free Conference and a message was ordered sent to the Senate accordingly.
The SPEAKER ordered the following Veto printed in the Journal:
June 8, 2016
The Honorable James H. Lucas
Speaker of the House of Representatives
Statehouse, Second Floor
Columbia, South Carolina 29201
Dear Speaker Lucas and Members of the House of Representatives,
Today, I am vetoing and returning without my approval R. 287, H. 5270 (Word version) because the government should not serve as a dues collector for private organizations.
Undoubtedly, the Society of Former Agents of the State Law Enforcement Division - established less than two months ago and only one day before this bill was filed - will provide some benefit to those individuals who choose to become members. Therefore, this group should have no issue collecting dues through private means like the overwhelming majority of other private advocacy organizations. Some will argue that state law provides for this service for three other long-standing organizations and therefore it is only equitable to add another. Such an argument would support an unfunded and state-run collections agency for all manner of non-profits.
For these reasons, I ask that you sustain my veto and require private organizations to use private means to collect membership dues used to bestow private benefits to its members.
My very best,
Nikki R. Haley
Governor
The Veto on the following Act was taken up:
(R. 287, H. 5270 (Word version)) -- Reps. Tallon, Bernstein and Pope: AN ACT TO AMEND SECTION 8-11-83, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE PAYROLL DEDUCTION FOR STATE EMPLOYEES' ASSOCIATION DUES, SO AS TO ALLOW MEMBERSHIP DUES FOR THE SOCIETY OF FORMER AGENTS OF THE STATE LAW ENFORCEMENT DIVISION TO BE DEDUCTED FROM THE COMPENSATION OF STATE RETIREES AND PAID OVER TO THE ASSOCIATION IN THE SAME MANNER OTHER MEMBERSHIP DUES ARE DEDUCTED AND PAID.
Rep. TALLON explained the Veto.
The question was put, shall the Act become a part of the law, the Veto of her Excellency, the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding, the yeas and nays were taken resulting as follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Allison Anderson Bales Ballentine Bamberg Bannister Bernstein Bingham Bowers Bradley G. A. Brown R. L. Brown Burns Chumley Clary Clemmons Clyburn Cobb-Hunter Cole Collins Corley Crosby Daning Davis Delleney Dillard Douglas Duckworth Erickson Felder Finlay Forrester Funderburk Gagnon George Gilliard Goldfinch Govan Hardee Hart Hayes Henderson Henegan Hicks Hiott Hixon Horne Hosey Howard Jefferson Johnson Jordan Kennedy King Kirby Knight Limehouse Loftis Long Lowe Lucas Mack McCoy McEachern McKnight M. S. McLeod W. J. McLeod D. C. Moss V. S. Moss Murphy Neal Newton Norrell Ott Parks Pitts Pope Putnam Quinn Ridgeway Riley Rivers Rutherford Ryhal Sandifer Simrill G. M. Smith G. R. Smith J. E. Smith Sottile Spires Stavrinakis Tallon Taylor Thayer Tinkler Toole Weeks Wells Whipper White Whitmire Williams Willis Yow
Those who voted in the negative are:
Bedingfield Hill Norman
So, the Veto of the Governor was overridden and a message was ordered sent to the Senate accordingly.
The SPEAKER ordered the following Veto printed in the Journal:
June 6, 2016
The Honorable James H. Lucas
Speaker of the House of Representatives
Statehouse, Second Floor
Columbia, South Carolina 29201
Dear Speaker Lucas and Members of the House of Representatives,
Today, I am vetoing and returning without my approval R. 268, H. 4762 (Word version), a bill that allows county and local governments to increase taxes above existing statutory millage caps if it contains a significant amount of federally-owned forestland. I am vetoing this bill because it expands the ability of local governments to increase taxes on citizens without a public vote.
It is my belief that the people of this state deserve the right to vote on any local tax increases, whether they are fees, local option taxes, or property millage. Advocates argue that federally-owned forests reduce the tax base of local governments, but such arguments ignore the fact that the area of responsibility of the local government is reduced by a corresponding amount and that counties receive offsetting payments from the federal government in lieu of taxes.
I have vetoed this bill because it is an invitation for local governments to raise taxes on families and businesses. Sustaining this veto would show your constituents you believe in citizen participation in local tax policy.
My very best,
Nikki R. Haley
Governor
The Veto on the following Act was taken up:
(R. 268, H. 4762 (Word version)) -- Reps. Anthony, Yow and W. J. McLeod: AN ACT TO AMEND SECTION 6-1-320, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE LIMITATION ON MILLAGE RATE INCREASES AND EXCEPTIONS TO THIS LIMITATION, SO AS TO REVISE THE EXCEPTION TO THIS LIMITATION FOR THE PURCHASE OF CAPITAL EQUIPMENT AND OTHER EXPENDITURES IN A COUNTY HAVING A POPULATION OF LESS THAN ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND PERSONS AND HAVING AT LEAST FORTY THOUSAND ACRES OF STATE FOREST LAND BY CHANGING THE TERM "STATE FOREST LAND" IN THIS EXCEPTION TO THE TERM "STATE OR NATIONAL FOREST LAND".
Rep. G. R. SMITH explained the Veto.
The question was put, shall the Item become a part of the law, the veto of her Excellency, the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding, the yeas and nays were taken resulting as follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Allison Anderson Bales Bamberg Bannister Bernstein Bowers G. A. Brown R. L. Brown Burns Clary Clemmons Clyburn Cobb-Hunter Cole Collins Corley Crosby Davis Delleney Dillard Douglas Duckworth Erickson Felder Finlay Funderburk Gagnon George Gilliard Goldfinch Govan Hardee Hart Hayes Henderson Henegan Herbkersman Hicks Hiott Hixon Horne Hosey Jefferson Johnson Jordan Kennedy King Kirby Loftis Long Lowe Lucas Mack McEachern M. S. McLeod W. J. McLeod D. C. Moss V. S. Moss Murphy Neal Newton Norrell Ott Parks Pitts Pope Putnam Quinn Ridgeway Riley Rivers Robinson-Simpson Rutherford Ryhal Sandifer Simrill G. M. Smith G. R. Smith J. E. Smith Sottile Spires Tallon Taylor Thayer Tinkler Toole Weeks Wells Whipper White Whitmire Williams Willis Yow
Those who voted in the negative are:
Bedingfield Hill Norman
So, the Veto of the Governor was overridden and a message was ordered sent to the Senate accordingly.
I was temporarily out of the Chamber and missed the vote on the Governor's Veto on H. 4762. I would have voted in favor of overriding the Governor's Veto on R. 268, H. 4762.
Rep. Patsy Knight
Rep. PITTS made a statement relative to Rep. RILEY'S service in the House.
Rep. RILEY made a statement relative to his service in the House.
The SPEAKER ordered the following Veto printed in the Journal:
June 10, 2016
The Honorable James H. Lucas
Speaker of the House of Representatives
Statehouse, Second Floor
Columbia, South Carolina 29201
Dear Mr. Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives,
Today, I am vetoing and returning without my approval R. 298, H. 3440 (Word version), a bill that imposes new regulations for adult moped drivers.
Among other things, this bill requires all adult moped drivers to wear reflective vests at night and requires all drivers - including adults ages 18-20 - to wear helmets at all times. These new regulations exceed those for motorcycles and are inconsistent with laws for bicycles and other low-speed vehicles, such as golf carts.
While I support safety laws for children and support certain provisions in this bill that define mopeds and require mopeds to have working lights at night, other provisions go too far in regulating the behavior of adults. I believe that adults over the age of 18 - who are allowed to vote and serve our military - should decide for themselves what they should wear for their personal safety.
Many mopeds are used by adults who cannot afford a car to get to and from work, while many other mopeds are used by adults in and around college campuses. State moped laws should continue to allow for this kind of inexpensive, reliable transportation for citizens, but this bill goes too far. Mandating that adults must wear helmets or safety vests is government overreach.
I commit to working with the General Assembly next year to adopt a bill that defines mopeds, provides consistent regulations, and balances public safety with personal responsibility. For these reasons, I ask that you sustain my veto.
My very best,
Nikki R. Haley
Governor
The Veto on the following Act was taken up:
(R. 298, H. 3440 (Word version)) -- Reps. Crosby, Daning, George and Clemmons: AN ACT TO AMEND SECTION 56-1-10, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO TERMS AND THEIR DEFINITIONS REGARDING THE ISSUANCE OF DRIVER'S LICENSES, SO AS TO REVISE THE DEFINITION OF CERTAIN TERMS AND TO ADD THE TERMS "MOPED", "DAYLIGHT HOURS", AND "VEHICLE" AND THEIR DEFINITIONS; TO AMEND SECTION 56-1-30, RELATING TO PERSONS EXEMPT FROM OBTAINING A DRIVER'S LICENSE, SO AS TO DELETE THE TERM "ARTICLE" AND REPLACE IT WITH THE TERM "CHAPTER"; TO AMEND SECTION 56-1-50, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE ISSUANCE OF A BEGINNER'S PERMIT, SO AS TO MAKE TECHNICAL CHANGES, TO DELETE THE PROVISION THAT RELATES TO THE OPERATION OF MOTOR SCOOTERS, LIGHT MOTOR-DRIVEN CYCLES AND MOPEDS, TO PROVIDE THAT A PERMITTEE MUST BE ACCOMPANIED BY A MOTORCYCLE-LICENSED DRIVER WHEN DRIVING A MOTORCYCLE DURING CERTAIN HOURS, TO PROVIDE THE LOCATION THAT AN ACCOMPANYING DRIVER MUST BE POSITIONED, AND TO DELETE AN OBSOLETE PROVISION; TO AMEND SECTION 56-1-175, RELATING TO THE ISSUANCE OF A CONDITIONAL DRIVER'S LICENSE, SO AS TO DELETE THE PROVISION THAT ALLOWS A LICENSEE TO OPERATE A MOTOR SCOOTER OR LIGHT MOTOR-DRIVEN CYCLE, AND THE PROVISION THAT DEFINES THE TERM "DAYLIGHT HOURS"; TO AMEND SECTION 56-1-180, RELATING TO THE ISSUANCE OF A SPECIAL RESTRICTED DRIVER'S LICENSE, SO AS TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL LOCATIONS WHERE A LICENSEE MAY OPERATE A MOTOR VEHICLE, TO MAKE A TECHNICAL CHANGE, TO DELETE THE PROVISION THAT ALLOWS A LICENSEE TO OPERATE A MOTOR SCOOTER OR LIGHT MOTOR-DRIVEN CYCLE, AND TO DELETE THE PROVISION THAT DEFINES THE TERM "DAYLIGHT HOURS"; TO AMEND SECTION 56-1-185, RELATING TO THE REMOVAL OF THE RESTRICTIONS PLACED ON A CONDITIONAL OR SPECIAL RESTRICTED DRIVER'S LICENSE, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT A BEGINNER'S PERMIT, CONDITIONAL LICENSE, OR SPECIAL RESTRICTED LICENSE MAY NOT BE ISSUED TO A PERSON CONVICTED OF CERTAIN VIOLATIONS OF OPERATING A MOPED WHILE UNDER AGE OR WITHOUT A LICENSE FOR A CERTAIN PERIOD OF TIME; TO AMEND SECTION 56-1-1710, RELATING TO THE DEFINITION OF THE TERM MOPED, SO AS TO DELETE THIS PROVISION; TO AMEND SECTION 56-1-1720, RELATING TO THE OPERATION OF A MOPED, SO AS TO REVISE THE FORM OF LICENSURE A PERSON MUST POSSESS TO OPERATE A MOPED, TO REVISE THE AGE OF A PERSON WHO MAY OBTAIN A MOPED OPERATOR'S LICENSE, TO REVISE THE TIME PERIOD WHEN CERTAIN PERSONS MAY OPERATE A MOPED, TO REVISE THE PENALTIES FOR A VIOLATION OF THIS PROVISION, AND TO DELETE THE PROVISION THAT PROHIBITS THE DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES FROM ISSUING A BEGINNER'S PERMIT OR A SPECIAL RESTRICTED LICENSE TO CERTAIN PERSONS CONVICTED OF A MOPED VIOLATION FOR A CERTAIN PERIOD OF TIME; TO AMEND SECTION 56-1-1730, RELATING TO THE ELIGIBILITY TO OBTAIN, SUSPENSION OF, AND REVOCATION OF A MOPED OPERATOR'S LICENSE, SO AS TO MAKE A TECHNICAL CHANGE; TO AMEND SECTION 56-2-2740, RELATING TO MOTOR VEHICLE REGISTRATION AND PROPERTY TAXES, SO AS TO PROVIDE FOR THE ISSUANCE OF MOPED VALIDATION DECALS, TO PROVIDE THE COST OF THE DECALS, AND TO PROVIDE THAT THE FEES COLLECTED FOR THE DECALS MUST BE USED TO DEFRAY THE COSTS OF THE DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES; BY ADDING ARTICLE 3 TO CHAPTER 2, TITLE 56 SO AS TO PROVIDE FOR THE REGISTRATION, TITLING, AND LICENSING OF MOPEDS, TO PROVIDE PENALTIES FOR A VIOLATION OF THIS ARTICLE, TO REGULATE THE OPERATION OF A MOPED, AND TO REGULATE THE SALE OF A MOPED; BY ADDING SECTION 56-2-4000 SO AS TO PROVIDE A PENALTY FOR A VIOLATION OF CHAPTER 2, TITLE 56; TO AMEND SECTION 56-3-20, RELATING TO CERTAIN TERMS AND THEIR DEFINITIONS REGARDING THE REGISTRATION AND LICENSING OF MOTOR VEHICLES, SO AS TO DELETE CERTAIN TERMS AND THEIR DEFINITIONS; TO AMEND SECTION 56-3-200, RELATING TO THE REGISTRATION OF A VEHICLE, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT A CERTIFICATE OF TITLE IS NOT REQUIRED TO REGISTER A MOPED; TO AMEND SECTION 56-3-250, RELATING TO THE REGISTRATION AND LICENSING OF A MOTOR VEHICLE ONCE ALL LOCAL PROPERTY TAXES ARE PAID, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT THIS PROVISION DOES NOT APPLY TO A MOPED, AND TO MAKE A TECHNICAL CHANGE; TO AMEND SECTIONS 56-3-630, AS AMENDED, AND SECTION 56-3-760, RELATING TO VEHICLES, CLASSIFIED AS PRIVATE PASSENGER MOTOR VEHICLES AND THE REGISTRATION FEE FOR CERTAIN VEHICLES, SO AS TO DELETE THE TERM "MOTOR-DRIVEN CYCLE" AND REPLACE IT WITH THE TERM "MOPED", AND TO MAKE A TECHNICAL CHANGE; TO AMEND SECTIONS 56-5-120 AND 56-5-130, RELATING TO THE TERMS "VEHICLE" AND "MOTOR VEHICLE" AND THEIR DEFINITIONS, SO AS TO DELETE BOTH SECTIONS; TO AMEND SECTION 56-5-140, RELATING TO THE TERM "MOTORCYCLE" AND ITS DEFINITION, SO AS TO DELETE THIS SECTION; TO AMEND SECTION 56-5-150, RELATING TO THE TERM "MOTOR-DRIVEN CYCLE" AND ITS DEFINITION, SO AS TO DELETE THIS SECTION; TO AMEND SECTION 56-5-155, RELATING TO THE TERM "MOTORCYCLE THREE-WHEEL VEHICLE" AND ITS DEFINITION, SO AS TO DELETE THIS SECTION; TO AMEND SECTION 56-5-165, RELATING TO THE TERM "MOPED" AND ITS DEFINITION, SO AS TO DELETE THIS SECTION; TO AMEND SECTION 56-5-361, RELATING TO THE TERM "PASSENGER CAR" AND ITS DEFINITION, SO AS TO DELETE THE TERM "MOTOR-DRIVEN CYCLES" AND ADD THE TERM "MOPEDS"; TO AMEND SECTION 56-5-410, RELATING TO THE TERM "OWNER" AND ITS DEFINITION, SO AS TO DELETE THIS SECTION; TO AMEND SECTION 56-5-1550, RELATING TO THE OPERATION OF A MOTOR-DRIVEN CYCLE, SO AS TO DELETE THIS SECTION; TO AMEND SECTION 56-5-1555, RELATING TO THE OPERATION OF A MOPED, SO AS TO RAISE THE MAXIMUM SPEED AT WHICH A MOPED MAY BE OPERATED; TO AMEND SECTION 56-4-4450, RELATING TO DISPLAY OF LIGHTS BY A VEHICLE DURING CERTAIN TIMES OF DAY, SO AS TO DELETE AN OBSOLETE PROVISION AND MAKE A TECHNICAL CHANGE; TO AMEND SECTION 56-9-20, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO CERTAIN TERMS AND THEIR DEFINITIONS CONTAINED IN THE MOTOR VEHICLE FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY ACT, SO AS TO DELETE AND REVISE CERTAIN TERMS AND THEIR DEFINITIONS; TO AMEND SECTION 56-9-110, RELATING TO THE APPLICABILITY OF THE MOTOR VEHICLE FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY ACT TO CERTAIN ACCIDENTS OR JUDGMENTS, SO AS TO DELETE THIS SECTION; TO AMEND SECTION 56-10-520, RELATING TO THE OFFENSE OF OPERATING AN UNINSURED MOTOR VEHICLE, SO AS TO MAKE A TECHNICAL CHANGE AND PROVIDE THAT THIS SECTION APPLIES TO AN OPERATOR OF AN UNINSURED MOPED, WHO IS NOT THE REGISTERED OWNER OF THE MOPED, UNDER CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES; TO AMEND SECTION 56-10-535, RELATING TO THE DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES REQUIRING A PERSON TO PROVIDE PROOF OF FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY AFTER A CONVICTION OF CERTAIN TRAFFIC OFFENSES, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT THIS SECTION APPLIES TO A REGISTERED OWNER OF A MOPED; TO AMEND SECTION 56-15-10, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO CERTAIN TERMS AND THEIR DEFINITIONS REGARDING THE REGULATION OF MOTOR VEHICLE MANUFACTURERS, DISTRIBUTORS, AND DEALERS, SO AS TO REVISE THE DEFINITIONS OF THE TERMS "MOTOR VEHICLE" AND "MOTORCYCLE"; TO AMEND SECTION 56-16-10, RELATING TO TERMS AND THEIR DEFINITIONS REGARDING THE REGULATION OF MOTORCYCLE MANUFACTURES, DISTRIBUTORS, DEALERS, AND WHOLESALERS, SO AS TO REVISE THE DEFINITION OF THE TERM "MOTORCYCLE" AND REVISE THE TYPE OF VEHICLES REGULATED BY THIS CHAPTER; TO AMEND SECTION 56-19-10, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO TERMS AND THEIR DEFINITIONS REGARDING THE PROTECTION OF TITLES TO AND INTERESTS IN MOTOR VEHICLES, SO AS TO DELETE CERTAIN TERMS AND THEIR DEFINITIONS; TO AMEND SECTION 56-19-220, RELATING TO VEHICLES THAT ARE EXEMPTED FROM THE REQUIREMENT TO OBTAIN A CERTIFICATE OF TITLE, SO AS TO MAKE A TECHNICAL CHANGE AND TO ADD MOPEDS TO THE LIST OF EXEMPTED VEHICLES; TO AMEND SECTION 38-77-30, RELATING TO TERMS AND THEIR DEFINITIONS REGARDING AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE, SO AS TO DELETE THE TERMS "MOTOR-DRIVEN CYCLES", "MOTOR SCOOTERS", AND "MOPEDS"; TO PROVIDE THAT A PERSON WHO SELLS, SOLICITS, OR ADVERTISES TO SELL CERTAIN MOPEDS PRIOR TO JULY 1, 2017, MUST LABEL THE MOPEDS WITH THEIR SPECIFICATIONS AND PROVIDE A METAL PLATE THAT IDENTIFIES THE VEHICLE, TO PROVIDE A PENALTY FOR FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THIS PROVISION, TO PROVIDE THAT IT IS UNLAWFUL TO OPERATE CERTAIN MOPEDS WITHOUT THE METAL IDENTIFICATION PLATE, AND TO PROVIDE A PENALTY FOR FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THIS PROVISION; TO AMEND SECTION 56-5-2941, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES REQUIRING A PERSON WHO VIOLATES CERTAIN PROVISIONS TO HAVE INSTALLED ON CERTAIN VEHICLES AN IGNITION INTERLOCK DEVICE, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT THIS PROVISION DOES NOT REQUIRE THE INSTALLATION OF AN IGNITION INTERLOCK DEVICE ON A MOPED; AND TO REPEAL ARTICLE 3, CHAPTER 5, TITLE 56 RELATING TO MOPED REGULATIONS.
Rep. DANING explained the Veto.
Rep. RUTHERFORD spoke in favor of the Veto.
Rep. COLE spoke against the Veto.
Rep. COLLINS spoke against the Veto.
Rep. HILL spoke in favor of the Veto.
Rep. RYHAL spoke against the Veto.
The question was put, shall the Act become a part of the law, the Veto of her Excellency, the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding, the yeas and nays were taken resulting as follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Allison Bales Bannister Bowers Bradley Burns Clary Clemmons Cobb-Hunter Cole Collins H. A. Crawford Crosby Daning Davis Delleney Dillard Douglas Duckworth Felder Finlay Funderburk George Gilliard Goldfinch Hardee Hayes Henderson Hicks Hiott Hixon Horne Jefferson Johnson Jordan Knight Limehouse Loftis Long Lucas Mack McCoy McEachern Mitchell D. C. Moss V. S. Moss Murphy Neal Norman Norrell Ott Pitts Pope Riley Rivers Ryhal Sandifer G. M. Smith Sottile Spires Stavrinakis Tallon Taylor Toole Whitmire
Those who voted in the negative are:
Alexander Anderson Ballentine Bamberg Bedingfield Bernstein Bingham Chumley Clyburn Corley Erickson Forrester Gagnon Govan Hart Henegan Hill Hosey Howard Huggins Kennedy King Kirby Lowe M. S. McLeod W. J. McLeod Merrill Newton Parks Putnam Quinn Ridgeway Robinson-Simpson Rutherford Simrill G. R. Smith J. E. Smith Stringer Thayer Tinkler Weeks Wells Whipper White Williams Willis Yow
So, the Veto of the Governor was sustained and a message was ordered sent to the Senate accordingly.
Rep. HIXON moved that the House recede until 3:30 p.m., which was agreed to.
At 3:30 p.m. the House resumed, the SPEAKER in the Chair.
The question of a quorum was raised.
A quorum was later present.
Rep. ALLISON made a statement relative to Rep. HICKS' service in the House.
Rep. HICKS made a statement relative to her service in the House.
Reps. WEEKS and G. M. SMITH made statements relative to Rep. G. A. BROWN'S service in the House.
Rep. G. A. BROWN made a statement relative to his service in the House.
The SPEAKER granted Rep. YOW a leave of absence for the remainder of the day.
CONFERENCE REPORT
H. 3186 (Word version)
The General Assembly, Columbia, S.C., June 14, 2016
The COMMITTEE OF CONFERENCE, to whom was referred (Doc. No. L:\S-JUD\AMEND\CRJUD3186.DOCX):
H. 3186 (Word version) -- Reps. Finlay, Cole, Anderson, Bales, G.A. Brown, R.L. Brown, Felder, Funderburk, Hart, Knight, Lucas, Murphy, Newton, Norman, Norrell, Pope, Putnam, Rivers, Southard, Spires, Tallon, Taylor, Wells, Williams, Willis, Long, Henderson, G.R. Smith, G.M. Smith, McCoy, Clary, J.E. Smith, W.J. McLeod, Weeks, Whipper, Hicks, Atwater, Ballentine and Stavrinakis: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 8-13-100, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO DEFINITIONS IN REGARD TO ETHICS AND GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY, SO AS TO REVISE THE DEFINITION OF "BUSINESS WITH WHICH HE IS ASSOCIATED"; AND TO AMEND SECTION 8-13-1120, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO CONTENTS OF STATEMENTS OF ECONOMIC INTERESTS, SO AS TO REVISE THE FORM AND REQUIRED CONTENTS OF STATEMENTS OF ECONOMIC INTERESTS.
Beg leave to report that they have duly and carefully considered the same and recommend:
That the same do pass with the following amendments: Amend the bill, as and if amended, by striking all after the enacting words and inserting:
/ SECTION 1. Section 8-13-1120(A) of the 1976 Code of Laws is amended by adding:
"(10) a listing of the private source and type of any income received in the previous year by the filer or a member of his immediate family. This item does not include income received pursuant to:
(a) a court order;
(b) a savings, checking, or brokerage account with a bank, savings and loan, or other licensed financial institution which offers savings, checking, or brokerage accounts in the ordinary course of its business and on terms and interest rates generally available to a member of the general public without regard to status as a public official, public member, or public employee;
(c) a mutual fund or similar fund in which an investment company invests its shareholders' money in a diversified selection of securities."
SECTION 2. To further amend Section 8-13-1120 of the 1976 Code of Laws by adding:
"(C) For purposes of this section, income means anything of value received, which must be reported on a form used by the Internal Revenue Service for the reporting or disclosure of income received by an individual or a business. Income does not include retirement, annuity, pension, IRA, disability, or deferred compensation payments received by the filer or filer's immediate family member."
SECTION 3. The provisions of this act take effect on January 1, 2017. /
Amend title to conform.
Senator Larry A. Martin Rep. George Murrell Smith, Jr. Senator George E. "Chip" Campsen III Rep. Kirkman Finlay III Senator C. Bradley Hutto Rep. Beth E. Bernstein On Part of the Senate. On Part of the House.
Rep. G. M. SMITH explained the Conference Report.
The yeas and nays were taken resulting as follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Alexander Allison Bales Ballentine Bamberg Bannister Bedingfield Bernstein Bingham Bowers Bradley G. A. Brown Burns Clary Clemmons Clyburn Cobb-Hunter Cole Collins Corley Crosby Daning Davis Delleney Dillard Douglas Duckworth Erickson Felder Finlay Forrester Fry Funderburk Gagnon George Gilliard Goldfinch Govan Hardee Hayes Henderson Herbkersman Hicks Hiott Hixon Hosey Howard Huggins Jefferson Johnson Jordan Kennedy King Limehouse Loftis Long Lowe Lucas Mack McCoy McEachern W. J. McLeod Merrill D. C. Moss V. S. Moss Murphy Neal Newton Norman Norrell Ott Parks Pope Putnam Quinn Ridgeway Riley Rivers Ryhal Sandifer Simrill G. M. Smith G. R. Smith J. E. Smith Sottile Spires Stavrinakis Stringer Tallon Taylor Thayer Tinkler Toole Wells Whipper White Whitmire Williams Willis
Those who voted in the negative are:
Hart Henegan Kirby McKnight M. S. McLeod Mitchell Pitts Robinson-Simpson Rutherford Weeks
The Conference Report was adopted and a message was ordered sent to the Senate accordingly.
Rep. CLEMMONS made a statement relative to Rep. GOLDFINCH'S service in the House.
Rep. GOLDFINCH made a statement relative to his service in the House.
Rep. SOTTILE made a statement relative to Rep. LIMEHOUSE'S service in the House.
Rep. LIMEHOUSE made a statement relative to his service in the House.
The SPEAKER ordered the following Veto printed in the Journal:
June 8, 2016
The Honorable James H. Lucas
Speaker of the House of Representatives
Statehouse, Second Floor
Columbia, South Carolina 29201
Dear Mr. Speaker and Members of the General Assembly,
Today, I am vetoing and returning without my approval certain items contained within R. 275, H. 5001 (Word version), the Fiscal Year 2016-17 General Appropriations Act. While I have vetoed a number of items in this budget, I believe that we should first highlight what this budget is accomplishing for our citizens.
For the third year in a row, South Carolina has produced an education budget, one focused on investing in our students because they are our future workforce. It funds, in a sustainable way, health services and law enforcement agencies. It begins to address the new realities of our pension liabilities and acknowledges that mental health and substance abuse are best treated in the community and not in prison. It funds domestic violence prosecutors and shows survivors that we have their backs.
In spite of this progress, some items in the budget represent the worst kind of legislative deal-making - pork, pet projects, earmarks, and micromanagement of state agencies. These items do not serve our citizens of South Carolina but rather serve the entrenched few who believe tax dollars exist to bring home pork projects. In addition to the most obvious examples of pork projects, even more have been hidden in budget lines with vague names and little explanation of an ultimate use or destination of these funds. Beyond earmarks, the fight to micromanage agencies through proviso is a perennial exercise that slows our government down, casts doubt and confusion over the responsibility and authority of public officials, and ultimately compromises the quality of services we provide to South Carolinians.
While I believe that provisos should not be used to micromanage state agencies, the recent ruling of the South Carolina Supreme Court has generated much debate this year about the appropriate role of provisos in budgets. Like you, I am well aware that this decision struck a proviso the Court interpreted to not reasonably and inherently relate to the raising and spending of revenue. During my Administration, each of my Executive Budgets has recommended that dozens of provisos become permanent law, and even the Rules of the Senate require that a proviso codification bill precede the budget. While these efforts have borne little fruit over the years, I look forward to working with the General Assembly to comprehensively rectify any potential issues that might be contained in provisos for the next budget cycle beginning later this year.
I ask that each member of the General Assembly carefully consider each of the vetoes presented below. I believe that this budget should be one that all of the people of South Carolina should be proud of and you should do your part by sustaining the veto of each pork project, local earmark, and short-sighted proviso that have no place in our budget or our government.
Housekeeping
VETO 1 Part 1B, Page 329, Section 19, South Carolina State University - Proviso 19.1, SCSU: Loan Funds
VETO 2 Part 1B, Page 330, Section 19, South Carolina State University - Proviso 19.3, SCSU: State Fiscal Accountability Authority Loan Funds
Yesterday, June 7, 2016, I signed S. 1166, a bill that provides for loan repayment terms, debt relief, and furlough authority for South Carolina State University. Both of these provisos are now unnecessary.
VETO 3 Part 1B, Page 442, Section 109, Department of Revenue - Proviso 109.14, DOR: Redevelopment Fees
This week, I signed S. 227, a bill that both caps and extends this provision for an additional five years, rendering this proviso unnecessary.
VETO 4 Part 1B, Page 492, Section 117, General Provisions - Proviso 117.149, GP: Unused Textile Credits
On Tuesday, I signed H. 3147, a bill that exempts military retirement income from state taxation - the second income tax cut signed into law during this administration. This bill also contains a provision relating to textile mill revitalization that is duplicative of this proviso, rendering it unnecessary.
VETO 5 Part 1B, Page 495, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.14, SR: Motor Vehicle Sales Tax Revenue
Today, I signed S. 1258, a bill that codifies this motor vehicle sales tax transfer, making this proviso unnecessary.
Micromanagement
VETO 6 Part 1B, Page 286, Section 1, Department of Education - Proviso 1.87, SDE: Moving Cost Study
This proviso requires the Department of Education to conduct a study on the costs of moving out of the Rutledge Building. Last year, I announced that the Facilities Management Study, commissioned pursuant to Executive Order 2013-09, found the Rutledge Building to be one of the most expensive and least efficient pieces of property in the state inventory, given its potential value on the open market. While I understand concerns that the Department of Education may have regarding the short-term expense of relocating, I am certain that the long-term benefits of such a move would return value to the taxpayers far in excess of those expenses.
I commit to assisting the Department of Education with such a move, and I assure the General Assembly that a robust cost-benefit analysis will be performed during the financial analysis of any surplus sale. Given that this proviso would require a duplicative cost analysis, I ask that you sustain this veto.
VETO 7 Part 1B, Page 422, Section 93, Department of Administration - Proviso 93.33, DOA: Confederate Relic Room Relocation Analysis
This proviso requires the Department of Administration to perform a feasibility study on the relocation of the Confederate Relic Room to the Charleston area. The Columbia Mills Building has been taken into account in the Facilities Management Study I ordered under Executive Order 2013-09, and the Department of Administration will consider value-based relocation of the Confederate Relic Room under that framework. Unfortunately, this veiled attempt to justify the co-location of the H.L. Hunley and Confederate Relic Room is nothing more than a legislative pet project and should not become law.
VETO 8 Part 1B, Page 372, Section 49, Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism - Proviso 49.15, PRT: Welcome Center Complex Mowing
In 2014, I supported the transfer of Welcome Center operations from the Department of Transportation to the Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism to refresh the look of our state's Welcome Centers which are, for some travelers, the gateway to our state.
This proviso dictates the exact manner in which PRT must maintain the landscaping in and around the Welcome Centers. While I agree with the aim of this proviso, the process set forth is unworkable, given the maze of safety, federal, and state requirements associated with maintaining facilities along highway right-of-way. If this veto is sustained, I will direct the affected departments to implement a landscaping and mowing agreement that will operate within the constraints of federal regulations and worker safety but will also keep our Welcome Centers presentable.
VETO 9 Part 1B, Page 372, Section 49, Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism - Proviso 49.16, PRT: Beach Access
This proviso mandates that the Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism establish access to Myrtle Beach State Park for golf carts at a single intersection across Highway 17 in Horry County. This proviso is troubling because decisions made by one of my Cabinet agencies to effectively balance patron access and safety are being overruled at the whim of a few legislators. Beyond potential traffic and safety disruptions along a very busy Highway 17, this proviso sets an unfortunate precedent of legislative micromanagement of both our roads and state parks system.
VETO 10 Part 1B, Page 344, Section 33, Department of Health and Human Services - Proviso 33.29, DHHS: Notice of Proposed Rate Reductions, Fee Increases, Policy Decisions
This proviso attempts to solve a problem that does not currently exist, and in so doing, creates two new ones. The Department of Health and Human Services has already adopted public notice practices that exceed federal requirements, where permissible. For instance, even though states are only obligated to submit a final public notice the day before the effective date of a rate change for non-institutional providers, the Department has offered the same 30-day comment period for these providers as it has for their institutional counterparts.
First, this proviso starts moving us back to the way things were prior to Act 77 of 2011. Before that law was passed, Proviso 89.87 (FY 2010-11) prevented the Department from reducing provider rates under any circumstance. This kind of micromanagement impairs the Department's ability to manage its finances and increases the risk that the Department will run a deficit if the economy softens mid-year and more individuals become eligible for Medicaid, driving up costs.
Second, this proviso is also dangerous because there are cases when changes in federal law and/or policy issuances from the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) mandate that states change provider rates on specific dates that are beyond the Department's control. Although this proviso offers exceptions for "the annual updating of cost base rates and those rates which are indexed to methodologies provided for in the Medicaid State Plan," this is not sufficient, since late-breaking federal changes may change the methodologies themselves, meaning that the methodologies described in State Plan for Medical Assistance may also have to be changed on short notice. This is not a hypothetical situation; CMS imposed such a change in states' hospice rates and methodologies just a few months ago.
I ask that you sustain my veto of this distorted restatement of existing policy, so that we don't create new federal compliance problems while increasing the risk of an agency deficit.
VETO 11 Part 1B, Page 370, Section 47, Department of Natural Resources - Proviso 47.10, DNR: Predator Control Program
This proviso establishes a capture, tag, and release program for coyotes. If a Department of Natural Resources officer is expending the energy to take a coyote, then that coyote should not be returned back to the wild. While I believe that there is still much work to do, tagging coyotes and releasing them to be tracked by bounty hunters under the promise of lifetime hunting privileges is not the answer to our deer population problems. I ask that you sustain this veto in the interest of common sense and public safety.
Local Earmarks
VETO 12 Part 1B, Page 277, Section 1, Department of Education - Proviso 1.56, SDE: Lee County Bus Shop
This proviso mandates the Department of Education maintain staffing levels at a single bus maintenance facility in Lee County without regard to the needs of that facility or the district it serves. This sort of agency micromanagement serves only to increase the costs of providing educational services in one of our most rural and underserved districts. In a year where we are focused on providing flexibility to districts and promoting innovation in education, this proviso stands in stark contrast to these fundamental principles.
VETO 13 Part 1B, Page 496, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 7, State Library, Colleton County Bookmobile: $200,000
VETO 14 Part 1B, Page 500, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16, Item 39(h), Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism, Sumter Environmental Center: $300,000
Both of these items represent a local project sponsored by local governments supported by existing state aid to subdivisions. While each community in South Carolina is unique, the goals of our support systems are not - each library, workforce program, and public school should be resourced objectively and held accountable for its performance. Earmarking is not a responsible way to address local educational services.
VETO 15 Part 1B, Page 497, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 10(d), Commission on Higher Education, Greenwood Promise Scholarship Program: $50,000
The Greenwood Promise Scholarship is a brand-new program supported by a regional economic development organization to promote enrollment in our technical college system. While I am an advocate for our state's technical colleges - with over $100 million in capital investment in our system in this budget alone - I believe that we should provide consistent and equitable support for students in the system. Piedmont Technical College has become a leader in distance learning and progressive matriculation without these funds and will not need them to continue to succeed.
Hidden Earmarks
VETO 16 Part 1B, Page 499, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 25(h), Department of Health and Environmental Control, Air Quality Improvements: $300,000
VETO 17 Part 1B, Page 501, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 41, Department of Labor, Licensing and Regulation, Fire Suppression: $25,000
VETO 18 Part 1B, Page 502, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 50(d), Division of Aeronautics, Airline Recruitment and Retention: $150,000
VETO 19 Part 1B, Page 496, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 6(b), Department of Archives and History, Architectural Heritage Preservation: $2,300,000
VETO 20 Part 1B, Page 499, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 27(c), Department of Social Services, After School and Summer Reading Programs: $500,000
VETO 21 Part 1B, Page 500, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 38(i), Department of Natural Resources, Outreach Education: $1,600,000
VETO 22 Part 1B, Page 499, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 29(i), Department of Commerce, Economic Development: $100,000
Unlike the local earmarks in the previous section of this message, Vetoes 16 through 22 represent an unsettling practice of legislative earmarking - one where earmarks are bundled, given ambiguous names, and passed through to private entities in the budget. Days after the budget passes, agency heads and staff receive phone calls expressing the "legislative intent" of these earmarks - pork for legislative districts. This is the least transparent process for allocating funds to private entities - one that should not be tolerated in government generally and one that I will not tolerate in my Cabinet specifically.
Those fighting for these earmarks will make compelling, but ultimately misleading, claims on the floor of the General Assembly for the funding contained in each - everything from benefits for wounded warriors to preservation of priceless historical sites. Sustaining these vetoes reflects a commitment to transparent budgeting and public finance, while any vote to override is affirmative support for the backroom deals that erode public trust in our government.
Health and Social Services Earmarks
VETO 23 Part 1B, Page 499, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 29(h), Department of Commerce, Community Development Corporations: $100,000
Last year, I signed legislation reauthorizing Community Development Corporations for an additional five years, so that they could exhaust the full extent of $5 million in tax benefits available to fund local CDCs. At that time, I made it clear to the bill's sponsor and representatives of the CDC community that I would not support additional taxpayer funding through the annual appropriations process. Accordingly, I ask that you sustain this veto and allow these CDCs to come to their logical conclusion once their tax-expenditure funding is exhausted.
VETO 24 Part 1B, Page 501, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 49, Human Affairs Commission, Community Relations Councils: $75,000
This earmark provides funding for the Human Affairs Commission to establish additional Community Relations Councils in local governments around the state. These duties are programmed into the Agency's underlying mission and can be supported by its existing appropriations and the communities served by these Councils.
VETO 25 Part 1B, Page 499, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 24(d), Department of Health and Human Services, Osprey Village: $200,000
Currently, the operations of Osprey Village are limited to local fundraising and outreach efforts through a website and thrift store. While it is the hope of the organization's founders that it will become a sprawling community for adults with disabilities, the organization has not yet established the facilities necessary to serve citizens.
Last year, the justification for funding Osprey Village was seed money for an executive director to assist the organization in start-up and to become a Medicaid provider. This task has not been completed, and yet they are again receiving an earmark in this budget. Instead of providing earmarks to establish entirely new service organizations, we would be better served allocating resources to strengthen and expand the capacity of existing partners.
Good Government
VETO 26 Part 1B, Page 497, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 14.1, Coastal Carolina University (Football Stadium Expansion)
VETO 27 Part 1B, Page 497, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 14(c), Coastal Carolina University, Brooks Stadium Engineering: $100,000
Charting a new course in higher education governance has been a topic of debate during my entire administration. After years of proposals - accountability-based funding, consolidation of governance into a board of regents, and even privatizing many of the components of our state's college and university complex - nothing has changed.
We need a globally competitive educational system now more than ever, so we have to get serious about coordination and oversight. I appointed a new Chair to the Commission on Higher Education last year and recommended additional resources for the commission to vet capital projects and budgets.
Coastal Carolina University is proposing a stadium expansion to meet the demands of a new athletic conference. The project, primarily funded by tuition-backed debt, nearly doubled in cost since its original proposal just last fall. Even after revising the cost down to a 50% increase, the numbers simply do not work.
Coastal Carolina University deployed an aggressive lobbying effort to bypass CHE's statutory responsibility to review and consider higher education capital projects, resulting in this proviso. To make matters worse, a nominal amount of funding was attached to the offending language to guarantee it would survive a legal challenge based on the Supreme Court's ruling in SC Public Interest Foundation v. Lucas.
Such actions by a public institution are disappointing, and the fact that legislators have chosen to go along is even more so. In a year where our communities, schools, and businesses are crying out for a better educated and prepared workforce, this veto represents a clear choice between the best interests of students and runaway higher education spending.
VETO 28 Part 1B, Page 405, Section 83, Department of Employment and Workforce - Proviso 83.5, DEW: SUTA Contingency Assessment Funds
South Carolina law establishes the conditions for eligibility to receive unemployment benefits, including the requirement that an unemployed insured worker be "actively seeking work" with certain limited exceptions. Since 2013, a proviso has required that at least one of the four required weekly job search contacts be conducted though the SC Works Online System (SCWOS), so that it can be electronically verified by the Department of Employment and Workforce. This anti-fraud provision helped provide an objective verification method of an unemployment beneficiary's job searches.
Unfortunately this year, the proviso was amended to remove the requirement that at least one job search be conducted online, now allowing individuals to perform job searches in any manner they choose. Because verification of these searches is extremely difficult, the effect of this amendment will be to make the job search process less accountable and more open to fraud.
This is a step backward and one that will result in greater administrative costs to DEW and greater fraud in the unemployment system. If you sustain this veto, DEW will administratively reinstate the provisions of Proviso 83.5 as it read in the FY 2015-16 General Appropriations Act, complying with the contingency assessment distribution provisions and requiring no more than one job search be conducted in SCWOS for that fiscal year.
VETO 29 Part 1B, Page 502, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 50(b), Division of Aeronautics, State Aviation Fund: $7,000,000
This week, I signed into law H. 4577, a bill that establishes a recurring funding source of more than $2 million to the State Aviation Fund. Further, the Division of Aeronautics only requested a $5 million supplement for the Fund, highlighting the excess contained in this earmark.
While I support efforts to improve and maintain airport infrastructure across the state, I do not support adding an additional $7 million earmark to a fund that has just received a recurring funding source through other legislation. Taking into account the passage of H. 4577 and the agency's own budget request, I request that you sustain this veto.
VETO 30 Part 1B, Page 500, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 38(g), Department of Natural Resources, Upper Coastal Waterfowl Project Maintenance and Repair: $1,600,000
The Department of Natural Resources is responsible for 1.1 million acres in public lands owned or managed by the state, including Wildlife Management Areas that preserve the state's rural aesthetic and where South Carolinians hunt, hike, and fish. That is why in this budget, I have allowed $6 million to move forward, including $3 million diverted from the Conservation Bank that would assist DNR in maintaining and preserving these lands.
Unfortunately, the Upper Coastal Waterfowl Project represents an earmark that is simply too much money in this budget for lower-priority work. Should the needs arise in this region, then there are sufficient funds available to address that work. I ask that you sustain this veto to control government spending and prioritize DNR's resources on statewide land management.
Old Fashioned Pork
VETO 31 Part 1B, Page 355-56, Section 34, Department of Health and Environmental Control - Proviso 35.56, DHEC: Indoor Aquatic and Community Center Match Requirement
The FY 2015-16 General Appropriations Act contained a $100,000 earmark for a pork-funded swimming pool managed by the Richland County Recreation Commission, which was sold as "good government" because the earmark required a 2:1 local to state match. This proviso would reduce that match rate to 1:1, further demonstrating the true nature of this earmark. Although these funds are still available to Richland County over my objection, they should be held to the commitment made last year to match state dollars with local funds.
VETO 32 Part 1B, Page 501, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 46(c), Department of Administration, State Human Resources, Leadership South Carolina: $150,000
Leadership South Carolina is a private organization focused on networking and professional development for a selected number of public and private employees, a number of whom are legislators and lobbyists. With some generous donors - including prominent program alumni, local companies, and civic organizations - Leadership South Carolina should function without direct government support.
VETO 33 Part 1B, Page 496, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 8, Arts Commission, SC Artisans Center: $500,000
Through the years, the South Carolina Artisans Center has received support from a number of state and federal programs, including rural development grants from the U.S. Department of Agriculture, funding from the South Carolina Arts Commission, and promotional contracts with the Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism. Although the Center has gained notoriety within the state, it is a private organization that, like other established museums and cultural sites in this budget, should be able to maintain their operations with private funds and admissions fees.
VETO 34 Part 1B, Page 500, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 39(f), Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism, Sports Development Marketing Program: $3,000,000
Advocates for this earmark will tout South Carolina's successes in recruiting sports events in golf, tennis, racing, and others as the need for this funding. Such claims are false - this is nothing more than a bundled group of earmarks designed to pass through the Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism's budget to hand-selected private entities. This year, we announced the SEC Women's Basketball Tournament is coming to Greenville in 2017, which was the direct result of hard work and negotiations, all unrelated to this earmark.
VETO 35 Part 1B, Page 500, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 39(k), Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism, Parks and Recreation Development Fund: $5,000,000
Every year, the Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism, much like other culturally-focused state agencies, is targeted as a clearing house for legislative earmarks, outdoor festivals, neighborhood parks, and other pork. In fact, the 2007 pre-recession budget that famously proposed state funds for a green bean museum in Lake City also contained funding for a dozen and a half such local parks and projects in PRT's budget alone. We are returning to those irresponsible ways of budgeting in an unfortunate and non-transparent manner. I urge you to sustain this veto and help me drive the pork out of this budget.
Education Earmarks
VETO 36 Part 1B, Page 496, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 6(c), Department of Archives and History, Driving Tours Historic African American Sites: $100,000
While arguably a worthwhile project, instead of an additional earmark, the development of these tours could be accomplished using existing resources by developing partnerships with our Higher Education institutions and the Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism.
VETO 37 Part 1B, Page 499, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 29(c), Department of Commerce, IT-oLogy Coursepower: $400,000
For the third year in a row, the leadership of IT-oLogy has opted to pursue an unaccountable earmark for a project started and should have ostensibly been completed three years ago.
The Coursepower initiative was originally developed in FY 2013-14 to provide a six-hour minor in Applied Computing at four colleges and universities without state support. I have urged the organization to enter into sustainable funding contracts with the now expanded list of universities, school districts, and the Department of Education. These service agreements would ultimately benefit South Carolina students. Unfortunately, the political expediency of an earmark seems to be IT-oLogy's preferred course of action.
I ask that you sustain this veto in the interest of ending "pilot" programs and forcing this organization's client institutions to demonstrate Coursepower's worth to them with their checkbooks. Earmarks should not be easier to obtain than service contracts.
Museums and Cultural Earmarks
VETO 38 Part 1B, Page 497, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16, Item 13(b), University of Charleston, Gibbs Museum of Art: $350,000
VETO 39 Part 1B, Page 501, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 47(g), Office of Adjutant General, SC Military Museum: $380,000
VETO 40 Part 1B, Page 500, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 39(g), Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism, Medal of Honor Museum: $3,000,000
VETO 41 Part 1B, Page 500, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 39(j), Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism, Children's Museum of the Upstate: $1,000,000
VETO 42 Part 1B, Page 497, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 9(b), State Museum Commission, Collections and Content: $5,000
VETO 43 Part 1A, Page 497, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16, Item 9(b), State Museum Commission, Collections and Content: $5,000
In each of our communities we have historic sites, museums, and cultural centers that could benefit from renovations, refreshed exhibits, or new artifacts. The right way to finance these undertakings is by selling memberships, collecting admissions fees, and soliciting philanthropic support. The wrong way to do it is by earmarking state funds to choose one site over another to support.
Economic Development Earmarks
VETO 44 Part 1A, Page 143, Section 50, Department of Commerce, Item II.B, Programs and Services, Small Business/Existing Industry - Council on Competitiveness: $250,000 Total Funds; $250,000 General Funds
VETO 45 Part 1A, Page 143, Section 50, Department of Commerce, Item II.B, Programs and Services, Small Business/Existing Industry - SC Small Business Development Centers: $100,000 Total Funds; $100,000 General Funds
Both of these lines represent new earmark footholds in the Department of Commerce's budget for entities that already receive funding from the state. If an entity desires to increase their scope of operation or funding, then they should expand or improve the services they provide to the state instead of seeking to diversify their earmark portfolio.
VETO 46 Part 1B, Page 500, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 36(b), Department of Agriculture, Agribusiness Development: $2,500,000
This earmark is another example of the Department of Agriculture's evolution from its principal mission to maintain agriculture standards in weights, measures, and other agricultural inputs and towards marketing and economic development activities duplicated many times over in other state agencies. The Department has supported agribusiness development by directly funding a project manager in the Department of Commerce since the beginning of my administration. We should not establish new economic development programs or regimes outside of the agency charged with this mission - the Department of Commerce.
VETO 47 Part 1B, Page 499, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 29(e), Department of Commerce, Office of Innovation: $2,000,000
The Department of Commerce specifically, and the government generally, should not use taxpayer dollars to fund business incubator programs, especially if the programs have a limited record of success. Private capital is the appropriate funding source to make risky bets on start-up companies. Small businesses make up a large part of our flourishing economy, and I support finding ways to help them reduce their costs and expand their reach. I do not support using $2 million in taxpayer dollars for business investments that should be made by the private sector on the open market.
For these reasons, I have vetoed and returned without my approval the above provisions in R. 275, H. 5001.
Sincerely,
Nikki R. Haley
Governor
The Vetoes on the following Act was taken up:
(R. 275, H. 5001 (Word version)) -- Ways and Means Committee: AN ACT TO MAKE APPROPRIATIONS AND TO PROVIDE REVENUES TO MEET THE ORDINARY EXPENSES OF STATE GOVERNMENT FOR THE FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING JULY 1, 2016, TO REGULATE THE EXPENDITURE OF SUCH FUNDS, AND TO FURTHER PROVIDE FOR THE OPERATION OF STATE GOVERNMENT DURING THIS FISCAL YEAR AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES.
Veto 1 Part 1B, Page 329, Section 19, South Carolina State University - Proviso 19.1, SCSU: Loan Funds
Rep. WHITE explained the Veto.
The question was put, shall the Item become a part of the law, the veto of her Excellency, the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding, the yeas and nays were taken resulting as follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Those who voted in the negative are:
Alexander Allison Bales Ballentine Bamberg Bannister Bedingfield Bernstein Bingham G. A. Brown R. L. Brown Chumley Clary Clemmons Clyburn Cobb-Hunter Cole Collins H. A. Crawford Crosby Daning Davis Delleney Dillard Douglas Duckworth Erickson Felder Finlay Forrester Fry Funderburk George Gilliard Govan Hart Hayes Henderson Henegan Herbkersman Hicks Hill Hiott Hixon Hosey Howard Huggins Jefferson Johnson Jordan Kennedy Kirby Knight Limehouse Loftis Long Lowe Lucas Mack McCoy McEachern McKnight M. S. McLeod W. J. McLeod Merrill Mitchell D. C. Moss V. S. Moss Murphy Neal Newton Norman Norrell Ott Parks Pope Putnam Quinn Ridgeway Riley Rivers Robinson-Simpson Ryhal Sandifer Simrill G. M. Smith G. R. Smith J. E. Smith Sottile Spires Stavrinakis Stringer Tallon Taylor Thayer Tinkler Toole Wells Whipper White Whitmire Williams Willis
So, the Veto of the Governor was sustained and a message was ordered sent to the Senate accordingly.
Veto 2 Part 1B, Page 330, Section 19, South Carolina State University - Proviso 19.3, SCSU: State Fiscal Accountability Authority Loan Funds
Rep. WHITE explained the Veto.
The question was put, shall the Item become a part of the law, the veto of her Excellency, the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding, the yeas and nays were taken resulting as follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Those who voted in the negative are:
Alexander Allison Bales Ballentine Bamberg Bannister Bedingfield Bernstein Bingham Bowers G. A. Brown R. L. Brown Clary Clemmons Clyburn Cobb-Hunter Cole Collins H. A. Crawford Crosby Daning Davis Delleney Dillard Douglas Duckworth Erickson Felder Finlay Forrester Fry Funderburk Gagnon Gilliard Govan Hart Hayes Henderson Henegan Herbkersman Hicks Hiott Hixon Hosey Howard Huggins Jefferson Johnson Jordan Kennedy Kirby Knight Limehouse Loftis Long Lowe Lucas Mack McCoy McEachern McKnight M. S. McLeod W. J. McLeod Merrill Mitchell D. C. Moss V. S. Moss Murphy Neal Newton Norman Norrell Ott Parks Pope Putnam Quinn Ridgeway Riley Rivers Robinson-Simpson Ryhal Sandifer Simrill G. M. Smith G. R. Smith J. E. Smith Sottile Spires Stavrinakis Stringer Tallon Taylor Thayer Tinkler Toole Wells Whipper White Whitmire Williams Willis
So, the Veto of the Governor was sustained and a message was ordered sent to the Senate accordingly.
Veto 3 Part 1B, Page 442, Section 109, Department of Revenue - Proviso 109.14, DOR: Redevelopment Fees
Rep. WHITE explained the Veto.
The question was put, shall the Item become a part of the law, the veto of her Excellency, the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding, the yeas and nays were taken resulting as follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Those who voted in the negative are:
Alexander Allison Anderson Bales Ballentine Bannister Bedingfield Bernstein Bingham Bowers G. A. Brown R. L. Brown Chumley Clary Clemmons Clyburn Cobb-Hunter Cole Collins Corley H. A. Crawford Crosby Daning Davis Delleney Dillard Douglas Duckworth Erickson Felder Finlay Forrester Fry Funderburk Gagnon George Gilliard Govan Hart Henderson Henegan Herbkersman Hicks Hill Hiott Hixon Hodges Hosey Howard Huggins Jefferson Johnson Jordan Kennedy Kirby Knight Limehouse Loftis Long Lowe Lucas Mack McCoy McEachern McKnight M. S. McLeod W. J. McLeod Merrill Mitchell D. C. Moss V. S. Moss Murphy Neal Newton Norman Norrell Ott Parks Pope Putnam Quinn Ridgeway Riley Rivers Robinson-Simpson Ryhal Sandifer Simrill G. M. Smith G. R. Smith J. E. Smith Sottile Spires Stavrinakis Stringer Tallon Taylor Thayer Tinkler Toole Wells Whipper White Williams Willis
So, the Veto of the Governor was sustained and a message was ordered sent to the Senate accordingly.
Veto 4 Part 1B, Page 492, Section 117, General Provisions - Proviso 117.149, GP: Unused Textile Credits
Rep. WHITE explained the Veto.
The question was put, shall the Item become a part of the law, the veto of her Excellency, the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding, the yeas and nays were taken resulting as follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Those who voted in the negative are:
Alexander Allison Anderson Bales Ballentine Bamberg Bannister Bedingfield Bingham Bowers G. A. Brown R. L. Brown Clary Clemmons Clyburn Cobb-Hunter Cole Collins Corley H. A. Crawford Crosby Daning Davis Delleney Dillard Douglas Duckworth Erickson Felder Finlay Forrester Fry Funderburk Gagnon George Gilliard Govan Hart Hayes Henegan Herbkersman Hicks Hill Hiott Hixon Hodges Hosey Howard Huggins Jefferson Johnson Jordan Kennedy Kirby Knight Loftis Long Lowe Lucas Mack McCoy McEachern McKnight M. S. McLeod W. J. McLeod Merrill D. C. Moss V. S. Moss Murphy Newton Norman Norrell Ott Parks Pope Putnam Quinn Ridgeway Riley Rivers Robinson-Simpson Ryhal Sandifer Simrill G. M. Smith G. R. Smith J. E. Smith Sottile Spires Stavrinakis Stringer Tallon Taylor Thayer Tinkler Toole Weeks Wells Whipper White Whitmire Williams Willis
So, the Veto of the Governor was sustained and a message was ordered sent to the Senate accordingly.
Veto 5 Part 1B, Page 495, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.14, SR: Motor Vehicle Sales Tax Revenue
Rep. WHITE explained the Veto.
The question was put, shall the Item become a part of the law, the veto of her Excellency, the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding, the yeas and nays were taken resulting as follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Those who voted in the negative are:
Alexander Anderson Bales Ballentine Bamberg Bannister Bedingfield Bernstein Bingham Bowers G. A. Brown R. L. Brown Chumley Clary Clemmons Clyburn Cobb-Hunter Cole Collins Corley H. A. Crawford Crosby Daning Davis Dillard Douglas Duckworth Erickson Felder Finlay Forrester Fry Funderburk Gagnon George Gilliard Govan Hart Hayes Henderson Henegan Herbkersman Hicks Hill Hiott Hodges Hosey Howard Huggins Jefferson Johnson Jordan Kennedy Kirby Knight Limehouse Loftis Long Lucas Mack McCoy McEachern McKnight M. S. McLeod W. J. McLeod Merrill Mitchell D. C. Moss V. S. Moss Murphy Neal Newton Norman Norrell Ott Parks Pope Putnam Quinn Ridgeway Riley Rivers Robinson-Simpson Ryhal Sandifer Simrill G. M. Smith G. R. Smith Sottile Spires Stavrinakis Stringer Tallon Taylor Thayer Tinkler Toole Weeks Wells Whipper White Whitmire Williams Willis
So, the Veto of the Governor was sustained and a message was ordered sent to the Senate accordingly.
Veto 6 Part 1B, Page 286, Section 1, Department of Education - Proviso 1.87, SDE: Moving Cost Study
Rep. BINGHAM explained the Veto.
The question was put, shall the Item become a part of the law, the veto of her Excellency, the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding, the yeas and nays were taken resulting as follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Those who voted in the negative are:
Alexander Allison Anderson Ballentine Bamberg Bannister Bedingfield Bernstein Bingham Bowers G. A. Brown R. L. Brown Chumley Clary Clemmons Clyburn Cobb-Hunter Cole Collins Corley H. A. Crawford Crosby Daning Davis Delleney Dillard Douglas Duckworth Erickson Felder Finlay Forrester Fry Funderburk George Gilliard Govan Hayes Henderson Henegan Herbkersman Hicks Hill Hiott Hodges Hosey Howard Huggins Jefferson Johnson Jordan Kennedy Kirby Knight Limehouse Loftis Long Lowe Lucas Mack McCoy McKnight M. S. McLeod W. J. McLeod Merrill Mitchell D. C. Moss V. S. Moss Murphy Neal Newton Norman Norrell Ott Parks Putnam Quinn Ridgeway Riley Rivers Robinson-Simpson Ryhal Sandifer Simrill G. M. Smith G. R. Smith J. E. Smith Sottile Spires Stavrinakis Stringer Tallon Taylor Thayer Tinkler Toole Weeks Wells Whipper White Williams Willis
So, the Veto of the Governor was sustained and a message was ordered sent to the Senate accordingly.
Veto 7 Part 1B, Page 422, Section 93, Department of Administration - Proviso 93.33, DOA: Confederate Relic Room Relocation Analysis
Rep. LIMEHOUSE explained the Veto.
The question was put, shall the Item become a part of the law, the veto of her Excellency, the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding, the yeas and nays were taken resulting as follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Those who voted in the negative are:
Alexander Allison Anderson Bales Ballentine Bamberg Bannister Bedingfield Bernstein Bingham Bowers Bradley G. A. Brown R. L. Brown Chumley Clary Clemmons Clyburn Cobb-Hunter Cole Collins Corley H. A. Crawford Crosby Daning Davis Delleney Dillard Douglas Duckworth Erickson Felder Finlay Forrester Fry Funderburk Gagnon George Gilliard Govan Hart Hayes Henderson Henegan Herbkersman Hicks Hill Hiott Hixon Hodges Hosey Howard Huggins Jefferson Jordan Kennedy King Kirby Knight Limehouse Loftis Long Lowe Lucas Mack McCoy McEachern McKnight M. S. McLeod W. J. McLeod Merrill Mitchell D. C. Moss V. S. Moss Murphy Neal Newton Norman Norrell Ott Parks Pitts Pope Putnam Quinn Ridgeway Riley Rivers Robinson-Simpson Rutherford Simrill G. M. Smith G. R. Smith Sottile Spires Stavrinakis Stringer Tallon Taylor Thayer Tinkler Toole Weeks Wells Whipper White Williams Willis
So, the Veto of the Governor was sustained and a message was ordered sent to the Senate accordingly.
Veto 8 Part 1B, Page 372, Section 49, Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism - Proviso 49.15, PRT: Welcome Center Complex Mowing
Rep. HIXON explained the Veto.
The question was put, shall the Item become a part of the law, the veto of her Excellency, the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding, the yeas and nays were taken resulting as follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Those who voted in the negative are:
Alexander Allison Anderson Bales Ballentine Bamberg Bannister Bedingfield Bernstein Bingham Bowers G. A. Brown Chumley Clary Clemmons Clyburn Cobb-Hunter Cole Collins Corley H. A. Crawford Crosby Daning Davis Delleney Dillard Douglas Duckworth Erickson Felder Forrester Fry Funderburk Gagnon George Gilliard Govan Hart Hayes Henderson Henegan Hicks Hill Hiott Hixon Hodges Hosey Howard Huggins Jefferson Johnson Jordan Kennedy Kirby Knight Limehouse Loftis Long Lowe Lucas Mack McCoy McKnight M. S. McLeod W. J. McLeod Merrill Mitchell D. C. Moss V. S. Moss Murphy Neal Newton Norman Norrell Ott Parks Pitts Pope Putnam Ridgeway Riley Rivers Robinson-Simpson Ryhal Simrill G. M. Smith G. R. Smith J. E. Smith Sottile Spires Stavrinakis Stringer Tallon Taylor Thayer Tinkler Toole Weeks Wells Whipper White Whitmire Williams Willis
So, the Veto of the Governor was sustained and a message was ordered sent to the Senate accordingly.
I was temporarily out of the Chamber, meeting with a Conference Committee and I missed the votes on Vetoes No. 1-8. I would have voted to sustain Vetoes No. 1 through No. 8.
Rep. Mike Burns
Veto 9 Part 1B, Page 372, Section 49, Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism - Proviso 49.16, PRT: Beach Access
Rep. CLEMMONS explained the Veto.
The question was put, shall the Item become a part of the law, the veto of her Excellency, the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding, the yeas and nays were taken resulting as follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Alexander Allison Anderson Bales Ballentine Bamberg Bannister Bernstein Bingham Bowers Bradley G. A. Brown R. L. Brown Burns Clary Clemmons Clyburn Cobb-Hunter Cole Collins Corley H. A. Crawford Crosby Daning Davis Delleney Dillard Douglas Duckworth Erickson Felder Finlay Forrester Fry Funderburk Gagnon George Gilliard Govan Hart Hayes Henderson Henegan Herbkersman Hicks Hiott Hixon Hodges Hosey Howard Huggins Jefferson Johnson Jordan Kennedy King Kirby Knight Limehouse Loftis Long Lowe Lucas Mack McCoy McEachern McKnight M. S. McLeod W. J. McLeod Merrill Mitchell D. C. Moss V. S. Moss Murphy Neal Newton Norrell Ott Parks Pitts Pope Putnam Quinn Ridgeway Riley Rivers Robinson-Simpson Ryhal Sandifer Simrill G. M. Smith G. R. Smith J. E. Smith Sottile Spires Stavrinakis Stringer Tallon Taylor Thayer Tinkler Toole Weeks Wells Whipper White Whitmire Williams Willis
Those who voted in the negative are:
Norman
So, the Veto of the Governor was overridden and a message was ordered sent to the Senate accordingly.
Veto 10 Part 1B, Page 344, Section 33, Department of Health and Human Services - Proviso 33.29, DHHS: Notice of Proposed Rate Reductions, Fee Increases, Policy Decisions
Rep. G. M. SMITH explained the Veto.
The question was put, shall the Item become a part of the law, the veto of her Excellency, the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding, the yeas and nays were taken resulting as follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Those who voted in the negative are:
Alexander Allison Anderson Bales Ballentine Bamberg Bannister Bedingfield Bernstein Bingham Bowers G. A. Brown R. L. Brown Chumley Clary Clemmons Clyburn Cobb-Hunter Cole Collins Corley H. A. Crawford Crosby Daning Davis Delleney Dillard Douglas Duckworth Erickson Felder Finlay Forrester Fry Funderburk Gagnon George Gilliard Govan Hart Hayes Henderson Henegan Herbkersman Hicks Hiott Hixon Hodges Hosey Howard Huggins Jefferson Johnson Jordan Kennedy Kirby Knight Limehouse Loftis Long Lowe Lucas Mack McCoy McEachern M. S. McLeod Merrill Mitchell D. C. Moss V. S. Moss Murphy Neal Newton Norman Norrell Ott Parks Pitts Pope Putnam Quinn Ridgeway Riley Rivers Robinson-Simpson Ryhal Sandifer Simrill G. M. Smith G. R. Smith J. E. Smith Sottile Spires Stavrinakis Stringer Tallon Taylor Thayer Tinkler Toole Weeks Wells Whipper White Whitmire Williams Willis
So, the Veto of the Governor was sustained and a message was ordered sent to the Senate accordingly.
The SPEAKER granted Rep. LONG a leave of absence for the remainder of the day.
Veto 11 Part 1B, Page 370, Section 47, Department of Natural Resources - Proviso 47.10, DNR: Predator Control Program
Rep. PITTS explained the Veto.
The question was put, shall the Item become a part of the law, the veto of her Excellency, the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding, the yeas and nays were taken resulting as follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Allison Anderson Bales Ballentine Bannister Bernstein Bingham Bowers Bradley G. A. Brown R. L. Brown Burns Chumley Clary Clemmons Clyburn Cobb-Hunter H. A. Crawford Crosby Davis Delleney Dillard Douglas Duckworth Erickson Finlay Forrester Fry Funderburk Gagnon George Gilliard Govan Hart Hayes Henderson Henegan Herbkersman Hicks Hiott Hixon Hodges Hosey Howard Jefferson Johnson Jordan Kennedy King Kirby Knight Limehouse Loftis Long Lowe Lucas Mack McCoy McEachern McKnight M. S. McLeod W. J. McLeod Merrill D. C. Moss V. S. Moss Neal Newton Norrell Ott Parks Pitts Pope Putnam Ridgeway Riley Rutherford Ryhal Sandifer Simrill G. M. Smith J. E. Smith Sottile Spires Stavrinakis Stringer Tallon Taylor Tinkler Toole Weeks Wells Whipper White Whitmire Williams Willis
Those who voted in the negative are:
Bedingfield Cole Collins Daning Felder Hill Huggins Murphy Norman Quinn Rivers Robinson-Simpson G. R. Smith Thayer
So, the Veto of the Governor was overridden and a message was ordered sent to the Senate accordingly.
Veto 12 Part 1B, Page 277, Section 1, Department of Education - Proviso 1.56, SDE: Lee County Bus Shop
Rep. G. A. BROWN explained the Veto.
The question was put, shall the Item become a part of the law, the veto of her Excellency, the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding, the yeas and nays were taken resulting as follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Alexander Anderson Bales Bamberg Bannister Bernstein Bingham Bowers G. A. Brown R. L. Brown Clary Clemmons Clyburn Cobb-Hunter Cole Crosby Dillard Douglas Duckworth Erickson Finlay Funderburk Gagnon George Gilliard Govan Hart Hayes Henderson Henegan Herbkersman Hicks Hodges Hosey Jefferson Johnson Jordan King Kirby Knight Limehouse Lowe Lucas Mack McCoy McEachern McKnight M. S. McLeod W. J. McLeod Mitchell V. S. Moss Murphy Neal Norrell Ott Parks Pitts Pope Ridgeway Riley Robinson-Simpson Ryhal Sandifer Simrill G. M. Smith J. E. Smith Sottile Spires Stavrinakis Tallon Taylor Tinkler Weeks Wells White Whitmire Williams
Those who voted in the negative are:
Allison Ballentine Bedingfield Bradley Collins Daning Davis Delleney Felder Fry Hill Hiott Huggins Kennedy Merrill D. C. Moss Newton Norman Putnam Quinn Rivers G. R. Smith Stringer Thayer Toole Willis
So, the Veto of the Governor was overridden and a message was ordered sent to the Senate accordingly.
Veto 13 Part 1B, Page 496, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 7, State Library, Colleton County Bookmobile: $200,000
Rep. R. L. BROWN explained the Veto.
The question was put, shall the Item become a part of the law, the veto of her Excellency, the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding, the yeas and nays were taken resulting as follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Alexander Anderson Bales Bamberg Bannister Bernstein Bingham Bowers Bradley G. A. Brown R. L. Brown Clary Clemmons Clyburn Cobb-Hunter Cole Crosby Davis Delleney Dillard Douglas Erickson Finlay Funderburk Gagnon George Gilliard Govan Hart Hayes Henderson Henegan Herbkersman Hicks Hiott Hodges Hosey Howard Jefferson King Kirby Knight Limehouse Lowe Lucas Mack McCoy McEachern McKnight M. S. McLeod W. J. McLeod Mitchell V. S. Moss Murphy Neal Newton Norrell Ott Parks Pitts Pope Ridgeway Riley Robinson-Simpson Rutherford Ryhal Sandifer Simrill G. M. Smith J. E. Smith Sottile Spires Stavrinakis Stringer Taylor Tinkler Weeks Wells Whipper White Whitmire Williams
Those who voted in the negative are:
Allison Ballentine Bedingfield Burns Chumley Collins Corley H. A. Crawford Daning Duckworth Felder Forrester Fry Hill Johnson Jordan Kennedy Loftis D. C. Moss Norman Putnam Quinn Rivers G. R. Smith Tallon Thayer Toole Willis
So, the Veto of the Governor was overridden and a message was ordered sent to the Senate accordingly.
Veto 14 Part 1B, Page 500, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16, Item 39(h), Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism, Sumter Environmental Center: $300,000
Rep. G. M. SMITH explained the Veto.
The question was put, shall the Item become a part of the law, the veto of her Excellency, the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding, the yeas and nays were taken resulting as follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Alexander Anderson Bales Ballentine Bamberg Bannister Bernstein Bingham Bowers Bradley G. A. Brown R. L. Brown Burns Clary Clemmons Clyburn Cobb-Hunter Cole Collins Crosby Davis Delleney Dillard Douglas Erickson Finlay Funderburk Gagnon George Gilliard Govan Hart Hayes Henderson Henegan Herbkersman Hicks Hiott Hixon Hodges Hosey Howard Jefferson Jordan King Kirby Knight Limehouse Loftis Long Lowe Lucas Mack McCoy McEachern McKnight M. S. McLeod W. J. McLeod Merrill Mitchell D. C. Moss V. S. Moss Murphy Neal Newton Norrell Ott Parks Pitts Pope Quinn Ridgeway Riley Robinson-Simpson Rutherford Ryhal Sandifer Simrill G. M. Smith J. E. Smith Sottile Spires Stavrinakis Stringer Tallon Taylor Tinkler Weeks Wells Whipper White Whitmire Williams Willis
Those who voted in the negative are:
Allison Bedingfield Chumley H. A. Crawford Daning Duckworth Felder Forrester Fry Hill Huggins Johnson Kennedy Norman Putnam Rivers G. R. Smith Thayer Toole
So, the Veto of the Governor was overridden and a message was ordered sent to the Senate accordingly.
Veto 15 Part 1B, Page 497, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 10(d), Commission on Higher Education, Greenwood Promise Scholarship Program: $50,000
Rep. PARKS explained the Veto.
The question was put, shall the Item become a part of the law, the veto of her Excellency, the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding, the yeas and nays were taken resulting as follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Alexander Anderson Bamberg Bannister Bernstein Bingham Bowers Bradley G. A. Brown R. L. Brown Chumley Clary Clemmons Clyburn Cobb-Hunter Cole Collins Daning Davis Delleney Dillard Douglas Erickson Fry Funderburk Gagnon George Gilliard Govan Hart Hayes Henderson Henegan Herbkersman Hicks Hodges Hosey Howard Jefferson Johnson King Kirby Knight Limehouse Lucas Mack McCoy McEachern McKnight M. S. McLeod W. J. McLeod Merrill Mitchell D. C. Moss V. S. Moss Murphy Neal Newton Norrell Ott Parks Pitts Pope Ridgeway Riley Robinson-Simpson Rutherford Ryhal Sandifer G. M. Smith J. E. Smith Sottile Spires Stavrinakis Stringer Taylor Tinkler Weeks Wells Whipper White Whitmire Williams
Those who voted in the negative are:
Allison Ballentine Bedingfield H. A. Crawford Duckworth Felder Forrester Hill Hiott Huggins Jordan Kennedy Lowe Norman Putnam Quinn Rivers G. R. Smith Tallon Toole Willis
So, the Veto of the Governor was overridden and a message was ordered sent to the Senate accordingly.
Veto 16 Part 1B, Page 499, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 25(h), Department of Health and Environmental Control, Air Quality Improvements: $300,000
Rep. WHITE explained the Veto.
The question was put, shall the Item become a part of the law, the veto of her Excellency, the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding, the yeas and nays were taken resulting as follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Alexander Anderson Bales Bamberg Bannister Bernstein Bowers Bradley G. A. Brown R. L. Brown Burns Chumley Clary Clemmons Clyburn Cobb-Hunter Cole Collins H. A. Crawford Crosby Davis Delleney Dillard Duckworth Erickson Finlay Fry Funderburk Gagnon George Gilliard Govan Hart Hayes Henderson Henegan Herbkersman Hicks Hodges Hosey Howard Jefferson Johnson Jordan King Kirby Knight Limehouse Loftis Lucas Mack McEachern McKnight M. S. McLeod W. J. McLeod Merrill Mitchell D. C. Moss V. S. Moss Murphy Neal Newton Norrell Ott Parks Pitts Pope Ridgeway Riley Robinson-Simpson Rutherford Ryhal Sandifer Simrill G. M. Smith J. E. Smith Sottile Spires Stavrinakis Stringer Tallon Taylor Tinkler Weeks Wells Whipper White Whitmire Williams
Those who voted in the negative are:
Allison Ballentine Corley Daning Douglas Felder Forrester Hill Hiott Hixon Huggins Kennedy Lowe Norman Putnam Quinn Rivers G. R. Smith Thayer Toole Willis
So, the Veto of the Governor was overridden and a message was ordered sent to the Senate accordingly.
Veto 17 Part 1B, Page 501, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 41, Department of Labor, Licensing and Regulation, Fire Suppression: $25,000
Rep. SIMRILL explained the Veto.
The question was put, shall the Item become a part of the law, the veto of her Excellency, the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding, the yeas and nays were taken resulting as follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Alexander Anderson Bales Bannister Bernstein Bowers Bradley G. A. Brown R. L. Brown Clary Clemmons Clyburn Cobb-Hunter H. A. Crawford Crosby Davis Delleney Dillard Douglas Duckworth Erickson Felder Finlay Fry Funderburk Gagnon Gilliard Govan Hart Hayes Henderson Henegan Herbkersman Hicks Hiott Hixon Hodges Hosey Howard Jefferson Johnson Jordan King Kirby Knight Limehouse Lowe Lucas Mack McCoy McEachern M. S. McLeod W. J. McLeod Merrill Mitchell D. C. Moss V. S. Moss Neal Newton Norrell Ott Parks Pitts Pope Putnam Quinn Ridgeway Riley Robinson-Simpson Rutherford Ryhal Sandifer Simrill G. M. Smith J. E. Smith Sottile Spires Stavrinakis Stringer Taylor Tinkler Weeks Wells Whipper White Whitmire Williams
Those who voted in the negative are:
Allison Ballentine Bingham Chumley Collins Corley Daning Forrester Hill Huggins Kennedy Norman Rivers G. R. Smith Thayer Toole Willis
So, the Veto of the Governor was overridden and a message was ordered sent to the Senate accordingly.
Veto 18 Part 1B, Page 502, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 50(d), Division of Aeronautics, Airline Recruitment and Retention: $150,000
Rep. MERRILL explained the Veto.
Rep. MERRILL spoke against the Veto.
The question was put, shall the Item become a part of the law, the veto of her Excellency, the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding, the yeas and nays were taken resulting as follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Alexander Allison Anderson Bales Ballentine Bannister Bernstein Bingham Bowers Bradley G. A. Brown R. L. Brown Burns Clary Clemmons Clyburn Cobb-Hunter Cole Collins H. A. Crawford Crosby Daning Davis Delleney Dillard Douglas Duckworth Erickson Felder Finlay Forrester Fry Funderburk Gagnon George Gilliard Govan Hart Hayes Henderson Henegan Herbkersman Hicks Hiott Hodges Hosey Howard Jefferson Johnson Jordan King Kirby Knight Limehouse Loftis Lowe Lucas Mack McCoy McEachern M. S. McLeod W. J. McLeod Merrill Mitchell D. C. Moss V. S. Moss Murphy Neal Newton Norrell Ott Parks Pitts Pope Ridgeway Riley Rivers Robinson-Simpson Rutherford Ryhal Sandifer Simrill G. M. Smith G. R. Smith J. E. Smith Sottile Spires Stavrinakis Stringer Tallon Taylor Tinkler Weeks Wells Whipper White Whitmire Williams
Those who voted in the negative are:
Bedingfield Chumley Corley Hill Huggins Kennedy Norman Putnam Quinn Thayer Toole Willis
So, the Veto of the Governor was overridden and a message was ordered sent to the Senate accordingly.
Veto 19 Part 1B, Page 496, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 6(b), Department of Archives and History, Architectural Heritage Preservation: $2,300,000
Rep. LIMEHOUSE explained the Veto.
The question was put, shall the Item become a part of the law, the veto of her Excellency, the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding, the yeas and nays were taken resulting as follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Alexander Anderson Bales Bannister Bernstein Bowers Bradley G. A. Brown R. L. Brown Burns Clary Clemmons Clyburn Cobb-Hunter Cole Collins Corley H. A. Crawford Crosby Davis Delleney Dillard Douglas Erickson Finlay Funderburk Gagnon George Gilliard Govan Hart Hayes Henderson Henegan Herbkersman Hicks Hodges Hosey Howard Jefferson King Kirby Knight Limehouse Loftis Lucas Mack McCoy McEachern McKnight M. S. McLeod W. J. McLeod Merrill Mitchell D. C. Moss V. S. Moss Murphy Neal Newton Norrell Ott Parks Pitts Pope Ridgeway Riley Robinson-Simpson Ryhal Sandifer Simrill G. M. Smith J. E. Smith Sottile Spires Stavrinakis Stringer Tallon Taylor Thayer Tinkler Weeks Wells Whipper White Whitmire Williams
Those who voted in the negative are:
Allison Atwater Ballentine Bedingfield Bingham Chumley Duckworth Felder Forrester Fry Hill Hiott Huggins Johnson Jordan Kennedy Lowe Norman Putnam Quinn Rivers G. R. Smith Toole Willis
So, the Veto of the Governor was overridden and a message was ordered sent to the Senate accordingly.
Veto 20 Part 1B, Page 499, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 27(c), Department of Social Services, After School and Summer Reading Programs: $500,000
Rep. G. M. SMITH explained the Veto.
The question was put, shall the Item become a part of the law, the veto of her Excellency, the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding, the yeas and nays were taken resulting as follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Alexander Allison Anderson Bales Bannister Bedingfield Bernstein Bingham Bowers Bradley R. L. Brown Burns Clary Clemmons Clyburn Cobb-Hunter Cole Collins H. A. Crawford Crosby Davis Delleney Dillard Douglas Duckworth Erickson Felder Finlay Forrester Fry Funderburk Gagnon George Gilliard Govan Hart Hayes Henderson Henegan Herbkersman Hicks Hosey Howard Jefferson Johnson Jordan Kennedy King Kirby Knight Limehouse Loftis Lowe Lucas Mack McEachern McKnight M. S. McLeod W. J. McLeod Merrill Mitchell D. C. Moss V. S. Moss Neal Newton Norrell Ott Parks Pitts Pope Quinn Ridgeway Riley Robinson-Simpson Ryhal Sandifer Simrill G. M. Smith G. R. Smith J. E. Smith Sottile Spires Stavrinakis Stringer Tallon Taylor Tinkler Weeks Wells Whipper White Whitmire Williams Willis
Those who voted in the negative are:
Atwater Ballentine Chumley Corley Daning Hill Hiott Huggins Norman Putnam Rivers Thayer Toole
So, the Veto of the Governor was overridden and a message was ordered sent to the Senate accordingly.
Veto 21 Part 1B, Page 500, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 38(i), Department of Natural Resources, Outreach Education: $1,600,000
Rep. PITTS explained the Veto.
Rep. PITTS spoke against the Veto.
The question was put, shall the Item become a part of the law, the veto of her Excellency, the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding, the yeas and nays were taken resulting as follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Alexander Anderson Bales Bamberg Bannister Bedingfield Bernstein Bowers Bradley G. A. Brown R. L. Brown Burns Clary Clemmons Clyburn Cobb-Hunter Cole Collins Corley H. A. Crawford Crosby Davis Delleney Dillard Douglas Duckworth Erickson Finlay Fry Funderburk Gagnon George Gilliard Govan Hart Hayes Henderson Henegan Herbkersman Hicks Hiott Hixon Hosey Jefferson Johnson Jordan King Kirby Knight Limehouse Loftis Lowe Lucas Mack McEachern M. S. McLeod W. J. McLeod Merrill Mitchell D. C. Moss V. S. Moss Murphy Neal Newton Norrell Ott Parks Pitts Pope Ridgeway Riley Robinson-Simpson Rutherford Ryhal Sandifer Simrill G. M. Smith G. R. Smith J. E. Smith Sottile Spires Stavrinakis Stringer Tallon Taylor Thayer Tinkler Weeks Wells Whipper White Whitmire Williams Willis
Those who voted in the negative are:
Allison Atwater Ballentine Bingham Daning Felder Forrester Hill Huggins Kennedy Norman Putnam Quinn Rivers Toole
So, the Veto of the Governor was overridden and a message was ordered sent to the Senate accordingly.
Veto 22 Part 1B, Page 499, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 29(i), Department of Commerce, Economic Development: $100,000
Rep. BALES explained the Veto.
The question was put, shall the Item become a part of the law, the veto of her Excellency, the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding, the yeas and nays were taken resulting as follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Alexander Allison Anderson Bales Ballentine Bannister Bernstein Bowers Bradley G. A. Brown R. L. Brown Burns Clary Clemmons Clyburn Cobb-Hunter Cole H. A. Crawford Crosby Davis Delleney Dillard Douglas Duckworth Erickson Finlay Forrester Fry Funderburk Gagnon George Gilliard Hart Hayes Henderson Henegan Herbkersman Hicks Hixon Hosey Howard Jefferson Johnson Jordan King Kirby Knight Limehouse Loftis Lowe Lucas Mack McEachern M. S. McLeod W. J. McLeod Merrill Mitchell D. C. Moss V. S. Moss Murphy Neal Newton Norrell Ott Parks Pitts Pope Ridgeway Riley Robinson-Simpson Rutherford Ryhal Sandifer Simrill G. M. Smith J. E. Smith Sottile Spires Stavrinakis Stringer Tallon Taylor Tinkler Weeks Wells Whipper White Whitmire Williams
Those who voted in the negative are:
Atwater Bedingfield Collins Corley Daning Felder Hill Hiott Huggins Kennedy Norman Putnam Quinn Rivers G. R. Smith Thayer Toole Willis
So, the Veto of the Governor was overridden and a message was ordered sent to the Senate accordingly.
Veto 23 Part 1B, Page 499, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 29(h), Department of Commerce, Community Development Corporations: $100,000
Rep. SIMRILL explained the Veto.
The question was put, shall the Item become a part of the law, the veto of her Excellency, the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding, the yeas and nays were taken resulting as follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Alexander Anderson Bales Bamberg Bannister Bernstein Bowers Bradley G. A. Brown R. L. Brown Clary Clemmons Cobb-Hunter Cole Collins H. A. Crawford Crosby Davis Delleney Dillard Douglas Duckworth Erickson Felder Finlay Fry Funderburk Gagnon George Gilliard Govan Hayes Henderson Henegan Herbkersman Hicks Hiott Hodges Hosey Jefferson Johnson Jordan King Kirby Limehouse Lowe Lucas McCoy McEachern McKnight M. S. McLeod Merrill Mitchell D. C. Moss V. S. Moss Murphy Neal Newton Norrell Ott Pitts Pope Ridgeway Riley Robinson-Simpson Ryhal Sandifer Simrill G. M. Smith J. E. Smith Sottile Spires Stavrinakis Stringer Tallon Taylor Thayer Tinkler Weeks Wells Whipper White Whitmire Williams
Those who voted in the negative are:
Allison Atwater Ballentine Bedingfield Burns Chumley Forrester Hill Huggins Norman Putnam Quinn Rivers G. R. Smith Toole Willis
So, the Veto of the Governor was overridden and a message was ordered sent to the Senate accordingly.
Veto 24 Part 1B, Page 501, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 49, Human Affairs Commission, Community Relations Councils: $75,000
Rep. LIMEHOUSE explained the Veto.
The question was put, shall the Item become a part of the law, the veto of her Excellency, the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding, the yeas and nays were taken resulting as follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Alexander Anderson Bales Bamberg Bernstein Bowers G. A. Brown R. L. Brown Clemmons Clyburn Cobb-Hunter H. A. Crawford Crosby Davis Delleney Dillard Douglas Erickson Funderburk George Gilliard Hart Hayes Henderson Henegan Herbkersman Hicks Hodges Hosey Howard Jefferson King Kirby Knight Limehouse Lucas Mack McCoy McEachern McKnight M. S. McLeod W. J. McLeod Mitchell Norrell Ott Parks Pitts Ridgeway Riley Robinson-Simpson Rutherford Ryhal Sandifer J. E. Smith Spires Stavrinakis Stringer Taylor Tinkler Weeks Wells Whipper White Whitmire Williams
Those who voted in the negative are:
Allison Atwater Ballentine Bannister Bedingfield Bradley Burns Chumley Clary Cole Collins Corley Daning Duckworth Felder Forrester Fry Gagnon Hill Hiott Hixon Johnson Jordan Kennedy Loftis Lowe Merrill D. C. Moss V. S. Moss Norman Quinn Rivers Simrill G. M. Smith G. R. Smith Sottile Tallon Thayer Toole Willis
So, the Veto of the Governor was sustained and a message was ordered sent to the Senate accordingly.
Veto 25 Part 1B, Page 499, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 24(d), Department of Health and Human Services, Osprey Village: $200,000
Rep. HERBKERSMAN explained the Veto.
The question was put, shall the Item become a part of the law, the veto of her Excellency, the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding, the yeas and nays were taken resulting as follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Allison Anderson Bales Bamberg Bannister Bedingfield Bernstein Bingham Bowers Bradley G. A. Brown R. L. Brown Burns Chumley Clary Clemmons Clyburn Cobb-Hunter Cole Corley H. A. Crawford Crosby Daning Davis Delleney Dillard Douglas Duckworth Erickson Finlay Forrester Fry Funderburk Gagnon George Gilliard Hart Hayes Henderson Henegan Herbkersman Hicks Hiott Hixon Hodges Hosey Howard Jefferson Johnson Jordan Kennedy King Kirby Knight Limehouse Loftis Lowe Lucas Mack McCoy McEachern McKnight M. S. McLeod W. J. McLeod Merrill Mitchell D. C. Moss V. S. Moss Neal Newton Norrell Ott Parks Pitts Pope Quinn Ridgeway Riley Rivers Robinson-Simpson Rutherford Ryhal Sandifer Simrill G. M. Smith G. R. Smith J. E. Smith Sottile Spires Stavrinakis Stringer Tallon Taylor Thayer Tinkler Toole Weeks Wells Whipper White Whitmire Williams Willis
Those who voted in the negative are:
Atwater Ballentine Collins Felder Hill Huggins Norman
So, the Veto of the Governor was overridden and a message was ordered sent to the Senate accordingly.
Veto 26 Part 1B, Page 497, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 14.1, Coastal Carolina University (Football Stadium Expansion)
Rep. WHITE explained the Veto.
The question was put, shall the Item become a part of the law, the veto of her Excellency, the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding, the yeas and nays were taken resulting as follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Alexander Anderson Atwater Bales Ballentine Bamberg Bannister Bedingfield Bernstein Bingham Bowers Bradley G. A. Brown R. L. Brown Burns Clary Clemmons Clyburn Cobb-Hunter Cole Crosby Daning Davis Delleney Dillard Douglas Erickson Finlay Forrester Fry Funderburk Gagnon George Gilliard Hart Hayes Henderson Henegan Herbkersman Hicks Hiott Hixon Hosey Howard Huggins Jefferson Johnson Jordan King Kirby Knight Limehouse Loftis Lowe Lucas Mack McCoy McEachern McKnight M. S. McLeod W. J. McLeod Mitchell D. C. Moss V. S. Moss Murphy Neal Newton Norrell Ott Parks Pitts Pope Ridgeway Riley Rivers Robinson-Simpson Rutherford Ryhal Sandifer Simrill G. M. Smith G. R. Smith J. E. Smith Sottile Spires Stavrinakis Stringer Thayer Tinkler Toole Weeks Wells Whipper White Whitmire Williams
Those who voted in the negative are:
Allison Chumley Collins Felder Hill Kennedy Merrill Norman Putnam Quinn Taylor Willis
So, the Veto of the Governor was overridden and a message was ordered sent to the Senate accordingly.
Veto 27 Part 1B, Page 497, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 14(c), Coastal Carolina University, Brooks Stadium Engineering: $100,000
Rep. WHITE explained the Veto.
The question was put, shall the Item become a part of the law, the veto of her Excellency, the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding, the yeas and nays were taken resulting as follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Alexander Anderson Bales Bannister Bedingfield Bernstein Bowers Brannon R. L. Brown Burns Clemmons Clyburn Cobb-Hunter Cole Crosby Daning Delleney Dillard Douglas Erickson Finlay Forrester Funderburk Gagnon George Gilliard Hart Hayes Henderson Herbkersman Hicks Hixon Hosey Howard Jefferson King Knight Limehouse Loftis Lowe Lucas Mack McCoy McEachern M. S. McLeod Mitchell D. C. Moss V. S. Moss Murphy Neal Newton Norrell Ott Parks Pitts Pope Ridgeway Riley Rivers Robinson-Simpson Ryhal Sandifer Simrill G. M. Smith G. R. Smith Sottile Spires Stavrinakis Stringer Tallon Thayer Weeks Wells Whipper White Whitmire Williams
Those who voted in the negative are:
Allison Atwater Ballentine Bingham Chumley Felder Hiott Huggins Kennedy Merrill Norman Putnam Quinn Taylor Toole Willis
So, the Veto of the Governor was overridden and a message was ordered sent to the Senate accordingly.
ABSTENTION FROM VOTING
BASED ON POTENTIAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST
In accordance with Section 8-13-700(B) of the S.C. Code, I abstained from voting on the below reference Vetoes to H. 5001, R. 275, because of a potential conflict of interest and I wish to have my recusal noted for the record in the House Journal of this date:
R. 275, H. 5001, the Fiscal Year 2016-17 General Appropriations Act
Veto 26 Part 1B, Page 497, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 14.1, Coastal Carolina University (Football Stadium Expansion)
Veto 27 Part 1B, Page 497, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 14(c), Coastal Carolina University, Brooks Stadium Engineering: $100,000
A potential conflict of interest may exist in that an economic interest of myself, an immediate family member, or an individual or business with which I am associated may be affected in violation of S.C. Code Section 8-13-700(B).
A potential conflict may exist under S.C. Code Section 8-13-745(B) and (C) because a contract for goods or services may be entered into within the next year with an agency, commission, board, department, or other entity funded through the general appropriation bill by myself, an individual with whom I am associated in partnership with or a business or partnership in which I have a greater than 5% interest.
Rep. Greg D. Duckworth
ABSTENTION FROM VOTING
BASED ON POTENTIAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST
In accordance with Section 8-13-700(B) of the S.C. Code, I abstained from voting on the below reference Vetoes to H. 5001, R. 275, because of a potential conflict of interest and I wish to have my recusal noted for the record in the House Journal of this date:
R. 275, H. 5001, the Fiscal Year 2016-17 General Appropriations Act
Veto 26 Part 1B, Page 497, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 14.1, Coastal Carolina University (Football Stadium Expansion)
Veto 27 Part 1B, Page 497, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 14(c), Coastal Carolina University, Brooks Stadium Engineering: $100,000
A potential conflict of interest may exist in that an economic interest of myself, an immediate family member, or an individual or business with which I am associated may be affected in violation of S.C. Code Section 8-13-700(B).
Rep. Heather A. Crawford
During the Vote on Veto No. 27, I inadvertently voted on Desk No. 45, Rep. Doug Brannon's voting system, so my vote is incorrectly reflected under Rep. Brannon's name.
Rep. MaryGail Douglas
I was temporarily out of the Chamber and missed the vote on Veto No. 27. If I had been present, I would have voted in favor of overriding the Veto.
Rep. Gary E. Clary
I was temporarily out of the Chamber and missed the vote on Veto No. 27. If I had been present, I would have voted in favor of overriding the Veto.
Rep. Russell Fry
I was temporarily out of the Chamber and missed the vote on Veto No. 27. If I had been present, I would have voted in favor of overriding the Veto.
Rep. Jeffrey Johnson
Veto 28 Part 1B, Page 405, Section 83, Department of Employment and Workforce - Proviso 83.5, DEW: SUTA Contingency Assessment Funds
Rep. WHITE explained the Veto.
The question was put, shall the Item become a part of the law, the veto of her Excellency, the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding, the yeas and nays were taken resulting as follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Dillard Gilliard Jefferson King Neal Ott Parks Rutherford Williams
Those who voted in the negative are:
Alexander Allison Anderson Atwater Bales Ballentine Bannister Bedingfield Bernstein Bingham Bowers Bradley R. L. Brown Burns Chumley Clary Clemmons Clyburn Cobb-Hunter Cole Collins H. A. Crawford Crosby Daning Davis Delleney Douglas Duckworth Erickson Felder Finlay Forrester Fry Funderburk Gagnon George Hart Hayes Henderson Henegan Hicks Hill Hiott Hixon Hosey Huggins Johnson Jordan Kennedy Kirby Knight Limehouse Loftis Lowe Lucas Mack McCoy McEachern McKnight M. S. McLeod Merrill Mitchell D. C. Moss V. S. Moss Murphy Newton Norman Norrell Pitts Pope Putnam Quinn Ridgeway Riley Rivers Robinson-Simpson Sandifer Simrill G. M. Smith G. R. Smith J. E. Smith Sottile Spires Stavrinakis Stringer Tallon Taylor Thayer Tinkler Toole Weeks Wells White Whitmire Willis
So, the Veto of the Governor was sustained and a message was ordered sent to the Senate accordingly.
Veto 29 Part 1B, Page 502, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 50(b), Division of Aeronautics, State Aviation Fund: $7,000,000
Rep. WHITE explained the Veto.
The question was put, shall the Item become a part of the law, the veto of her Excellency, the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding, the yeas and nays were taken resulting as follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Allison Anderson Bales Bannister Bernstein Bingham Bowers Bradley Burns Clary Clemmons Clyburn Cobb-Hunter Cole Collins H. A. Crawford Crosby Daning Davis Delleney Dillard Douglas Duckworth Erickson Felder Finlay Forrester Fry Funderburk Gagnon George Gilliard Hart Hayes Henderson Henegan Herbkersman Hiott Hixon Hosey Howard Jefferson Johnson Jordan King Kirby Knight Limehouse Loftis Lowe Lucas Mack McEachern McKnight M. S. McLeod Merrill Mitchell D. C. Moss V. S. Moss Murphy Neal Newton Norrell Ott Parks Pitts Pope Putnam Ridgeway Riley Robinson-Simpson Rutherford Ryhal Sandifer Simrill G. M. Smith G. R. Smith J. E. Smith Sottile Spires Stavrinakis Stringer Tallon Taylor Thayer Tinkler Weeks Wells Whipper White Whitmire Williams Willis
Those who voted in the negative are:
Atwater Ballentine Bedingfield Chumley Corley Hill Huggins Kennedy Norman Quinn Rivers Toole
So, the Veto of the Governor was overridden and a message was ordered sent to the Senate accordingly.
Veto 30 Part 1B, Page 500, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 38(g), Department of Natural Resources, Upper Coastal Waterfowl Project Maintenance and Repair: $1,600,000
Rep. PITTS explained the Veto.
The question was put, shall the Item become a part of the law, the veto of her Excellency, the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding, the yeas and nays were taken resulting as follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Allison Anderson Atwater Bales Ballentine Bannister Bernstein Bingham Bowers Bradley R. L. Brown Burns Chumley Clary Clemmons Clyburn Cobb-Hunter Cole Collins Corley H. A. Crawford Crosby Daning Davis Delleney Dillard Douglas Duckworth Erickson Felder Finlay Forrester Fry Funderburk Gagnon George Gilliard Hart Hayes Henderson Henegan Herbkersman Hiott Hixon Hosey Howard Huggins Jefferson Johnson Jordan Kennedy King Kirby Knight Limehouse Loftis Lowe Lucas Mack McEachern McKnight M. S. McLeod Merrill D. C. Moss V. S. Moss Murphy Newton Norrell Ott Parks Pitts Pope Putnam Quinn Ridgeway Riley Rivers Robinson-Simpson Rutherford Ryhal Sandifer Simrill G. M. Smith G. R. Smith J. E. Smith Spires Stavrinakis Stringer Tallon Taylor Thayer Tinkler Toole Weeks Whipper White Whitmire Williams Willis
Those who voted in the negative are:
Bedingfield Hill Norman
So, the Veto of the Governor was overridden and a message was ordered sent to the Senate accordingly.
Veto 31 Part 1B, Page 355-56, Section 34, Department of Health and Environmental Control - Proviso 35.56, DHEC: Indoor Aquatic and Community Center Match Requirement
Rep. BALLENTINE explained the Veto.
Rep. RUTHERFORD spoke against the Veto.
Rep. BALLENTINE spoke in favor of the Veto.
The question was put, shall the Item become a part of the law, the veto of her Excellency, the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding, the yeas and nays were taken resulting as follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Alexander Anderson Bales Bernstein Bowers R. L. Brown Clyburn Douglas Funderburk George Gilliard Hart Hayes Henegan Herbkersman Hosey Howard Jefferson King Kirby Mack McEachern McKnight M. S. McLeod Neal Norrell Ott Ridgeway Riley Rutherford J. E. Smith Stavrinakis Tinkler Weeks Whipper White
Those who voted in the negative are:
Allison Atwater Ballentine Bannister Bedingfield Bingham Bradley Burns Chumley Clary Cole Collins Corley H. A. Crawford Crosby Daning Davis Delleney Duckworth Erickson Felder Finlay Forrester Fry Gagnon Henderson Hill Hiott Hixon Huggins Johnson Jordan Kennedy Limehouse Loftis Lowe Lucas McCoy Merrill D. C. Moss V. S. Moss Newton Norman Pope Putnam Quinn Rivers Robinson-Simpson Sandifer Simrill G. M. Smith G. R. Smith Sottile Stringer Tallon Taylor Thayer Toole Whitmire Willis
So, the Veto of the Governor was sustained and a message was ordered sent to the Senate accordingly.
Veto 32 Part 1B, Page 501, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 46(c), Department of Administration, State Human Resources, Leadership South Carolina: $150,000
Rep. HERBKERSMAN explained the Veto.
The question was put, shall the Item become a part of the law, the veto of her Excellency, the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding, the yeas and nays were taken resulting as follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Alexander Allison Anderson Bales Bannister Bernstein Bowers Bradley R. L. Brown Burns Clary Clemmons Clyburn Cobb-Hunter Collins H. A. Crawford Crosby Daning Davis Dillard Douglas Duckworth Erickson Finlay Forrester Funderburk George Gilliard Govan Hart Hayes Henderson Henegan Herbkersman Hiott Hosey Jefferson King Kirby Knight Limehouse Loftis Lucas Mack McEachern McKnight M. S. McLeod Mitchell D. C. Moss V. S. Moss Murphy Neal Newton Norrell Ott Parks Pope Ridgeway Riley Robinson-Simpson Ryhal Sandifer J. E. Smith Sottile Spires Stavrinakis Taylor Tinkler Weeks Whipper White Whitmire Williams
Those who voted in the negative are:
Atwater Ballentine Bedingfield Bingham Cole Corley Delleney Felder Fry Gagnon Hill Hixon Huggins Johnson Kennedy Lowe McCoy Merrill Norman Putnam Quinn Rivers Simrill G. M. Smith G. R. Smith Stringer Tallon Thayer Toole Willis
So, the Veto of the Governor was overridden and a message was ordered sent to the Senate accordingly.
ABSTENTION FROM VOTING
BASED ON POTENTIAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST
In accordance with Section 8-13-700(B) of the S.C. Code, I abstained from voting on the below reference Vetoes to H. 5001, R. 275, because of a potential conflict of interest and I wish to have my recusal noted for the record in the House Journal of this date:
R. 275, H. 5001, the Fiscal Year 2016-17 General Appropriations Act
Veto 32 Part 1B, Page 501, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 46(c), Department of Administration, State Human Resources, Leadership South Carolina: $150,000
A potential conflict of interest may exist in that an economic interest of myself, an immediate family member, or an individual or business with which I am associated may be affected in violation of S.C. Code Section 8-13-700(B).
A potential conflict may exist under S.C. Code Section 8-13-745(C) because a contract for goods or services may be entered into within the next year with an agency, commission, board, department, or other entity funded through the general appropriation bill by myself, an individual with whom I am associated in partnership with or a business or partnership in which I have a greater than 5% interest.
Rep. Jay Jordan
Veto 33 Part 1B, Page 496, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 8, Arts Commission, SC Artisans Center: $500,000
Rep. LIMEHOUSE explained the Veto.
The question was put, shall the Item become a part of the law, the veto of her Excellency, the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding, the yeas and nays were taken resulting as follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Alexander Anderson Bales Bannister Bernstein Bowers Bradley R. L. Brown Clary Clemmons Clyburn Cobb-Hunter H. A. Crawford Crosby Daning Davis Delleney Dillard Douglas Erickson Finlay Funderburk Gagnon George Gilliard Hayes Henderson Henegan Herbkersman Hosey Jefferson Johnson Jordan King Kirby Knight Limehouse Lucas Mack McCoy McEachern McKnight M. S. McLeod Merrill Mitchell D. C. Moss V. S. Moss Murphy Neal Newton Norrell Ott Parks Pitts Pope Ridgeway Riley Robinson-Simpson Ryhal Sandifer Simrill G. M. Smith J. E. Smith Sottile Spires Stavrinakis Stringer Taylor Weeks Whipper White Whitmire Williams
Those who voted in the negative are:
Allison Atwater Ballentine Bedingfield Bingham Burns Cole Duckworth Felder Forrester Fry Hill Hiott Hixon Huggins Kennedy Loftis Lowe Norman Putnam Quinn Rivers Tallon Thayer Toole Willis
So, the Veto of the Governor was overridden and a message was ordered sent to the Senate accordingly.
Veto 34 Part 1B, Page 500, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 39(f), Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism, Sports Development Marketing Program: $3,000,000
Rep. HERBKERSMAN explained the Veto.
The question was put, shall the Item become a part of the law, the veto of her Excellency, the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding, the yeas and nays were taken resulting as follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Alexander Allison Anderson Bales Bannister Bernstein Bingham Bowers Bradley R. L. Brown Burns Chumley Clary Clemmons Cobb-Hunter Cole H. A. Crawford Crosby Daning Delleney Dillard Douglas Duckworth Erickson Felder Forrester Funderburk Gagnon George Gilliard Govan Hart Hayes Henderson Henegan Herbkersman Hiott Hixon Hosey Jefferson Johnson Jordan King Kirby Knight Limehouse Loftis Lowe Lucas Mack McCoy McEachern McKnight M. S. McLeod Merrill Mitchell D. C. Moss V. S. Moss Murphy Neal Newton Norrell Ott Parks Pitts Pope Ridgeway Riley Robinson-Simpson Ryhal Sandifer Simrill G. M. Smith J. E. Smith Sottile Spires Stavrinakis Stringer Tallon Taylor Tinkler Weeks Whipper White Whitmire Williams
Those who voted in the negative are:
Atwater Ballentine Bedingfield Davis Fry Hill Huggins Kennedy Norman Putnam Quinn Rivers G. R. Smith Thayer Toole Willis
So, the Veto of the Governor was overridden and a message was ordered sent to the Senate accordingly.
Veto 35 Part 1B, Page 500, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 39(k), Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism, Parks and Recreation Development Fund: $5,000,000
Rep. HERBKERSMAN explained the Veto.
The question was put, shall the Item become a part of the law, the veto of her Excellency, the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding, the yeas and nays were taken resulting as follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Alexander Allison Anderson Atwater Bales Ballentine Bannister Bernstein Bingham Bowers Bradley R. L. Brown Burns Clary Clemmons Cobb-Hunter Cole Collins H. A. Crawford Crosby Daning Davis Delleney Dillard Douglas Duckworth Erickson Felder Finlay Forrester Fry Funderburk Gagnon George Gilliard Govan Hart Hayes Henderson Henegan Herbkersman Hiott Hixon Hosey Huggins Jefferson Johnson Jordan Kennedy King Kirby Knight Limehouse Loftis Lowe Lucas Mack McCoy McEachern McKnight M. S. McLeod Merrill Mitchell D. C. Moss V. S. Moss Murphy Neal Newton Norrell Ott Parks Pitts Pope Putnam Quinn Ridgeway Riley Rivers Robinson-Simpson Rutherford Ryhal Sandifer Simrill G. M. Smith G. R. Smith J. E. Smith Sottile Spires Stavrinakis Stringer Tallon Taylor Thayer Tinkler Toole Weeks White Whitmire Williams Willis
Those who voted in the negative are:
Hill Norman
So, the Veto of the Governor was overridden and a message was ordered sent to the Senate accordingly.
Rep. QUINN moved to reconsider the vote whereby the Veto on the following Bill was sustained:
(R. 298, H. 3440 (Word version)) -- Reps. Crosby, Daning, George and Clemmons: AN ACT TO AMEND SECTION 56-1-10, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO TERMS AND THEIR DEFINITIONS REGARDING THE ISSUANCE OF DRIVER'S LICENSES, SO AS TO REVISE THE DEFINITION OF CERTAIN TERMS AND TO ADD THE TERMS "MOPED", "DAYLIGHT HOURS", AND "VEHICLE" AND THEIR DEFINITIONS; TO AMEND SECTION 56-1-30, RELATING TO PERSONS EXEMPT FROM OBTAINING A DRIVER'S LICENSE, SO AS TO DELETE THE TERM "ARTICLE" AND REPLACE IT WITH THE TERM "CHAPTER"; TO AMEND SECTION 56-1-50, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE ISSUANCE OF A BEGINNER'S PERMIT, SO AS TO MAKE TECHNICAL CHANGES, TO DELETE THE PROVISION THAT RELATES TO THE OPERATION OF MOTOR SCOOTERS, LIGHT MOTOR-DRIVEN CYCLES AND MOPEDS, TO PROVIDE THAT A PERMITTEE MUST BE ACCOMPANIED BY A MOTORCYCLE-LICENSED DRIVER WHEN DRIVING A MOTORCYCLE DURING CERTAIN HOURS, TO PROVIDE THE LOCATION THAT AN ACCOMPANYING DRIVER MUST BE POSITIONED, AND TO DELETE AN OBSOLETE PROVISION; TO AMEND SECTION 56-1-175, RELATING TO THE ISSUANCE OF A CONDITIONAL DRIVER'S LICENSE, SO AS TO DELETE THE PROVISION THAT ALLOWS A LICENSEE TO OPERATE A MOTOR SCOOTER OR LIGHT MOTOR-DRIVEN CYCLE, AND THE PROVISION THAT DEFINES THE TERM "DAYLIGHT HOURS"; TO AMEND SECTION 56-1-180, RELATING TO THE ISSUANCE OF A SPECIAL RESTRICTED DRIVER'S LICENSE, SO AS TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL LOCATIONS WHERE A LICENSEE MAY OPERATE A MOTOR VEHICLE, TO MAKE A TECHNICAL CHANGE, TO DELETE THE PROVISION THAT ALLOWS A LICENSEE TO OPERATE A MOTOR SCOOTER OR LIGHT MOTOR-DRIVEN CYCLE, AND TO DELETE THE PROVISION THAT DEFINES THE TERM "DAYLIGHT HOURS"; TO AMEND SECTION 56-1-185, RELATING TO THE REMOVAL OF THE RESTRICTIONS PLACED ON A CONDITIONAL OR SPECIAL RESTRICTED DRIVER'S LICENSE, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT A BEGINNER'S PERMIT, CONDITIONAL LICENSE, OR SPECIAL RESTRICTED LICENSE MAY NOT BE ISSUED TO A PERSON CONVICTED OF CERTAIN VIOLATIONS OF OPERATING A MOPED WHILE UNDER AGE OR WITHOUT A LICENSE FOR A CERTAIN PERIOD OF TIME; TO AMEND SECTION 56-1-1710, RELATING TO THE DEFINITION OF THE TERM MOPED, SO AS TO DELETE THIS PROVISION; TO AMEND SECTION 56-1-1720, RELATING TO THE OPERATION OF A MOPED, SO AS TO REVISE THE FORM OF LICENSURE A PERSON MUST POSSESS TO OPERATE A MOPED, TO REVISE THE AGE OF A PERSON WHO MAY OBTAIN A MOPED OPERATOR'S LICENSE, TO REVISE THE TIME PERIOD WHEN CERTAIN PERSONS MAY OPERATE A MOPED, TO REVISE THE PENALTIES FOR A VIOLATION OF THIS PROVISION, AND TO DELETE THE PROVISION THAT PROHIBITS THE DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES FROM ISSUING A BEGINNER'S PERMIT OR A SPECIAL RESTRICTED LICENSE TO CERTAIN PERSONS CONVICTED OF A MOPED VIOLATION FOR A CERTAIN PERIOD OF TIME; TO AMEND SECTION 56-1-1730, RELATING TO THE ELIGIBILITY TO OBTAIN, SUSPENSION OF, AND REVOCATION OF A MOPED OPERATOR'S LICENSE, SO AS TO MAKE A TECHNICAL CHANGE; TO AMEND SECTION 56-2-2740, RELATING TO MOTOR VEHICLE REGISTRATION AND PROPERTY TAXES, SO AS TO PROVIDE FOR THE ISSUANCE OF MOPED VALIDATION DECALS, TO PROVIDE THE COST OF THE DECALS, AND TO PROVIDE THAT THE FEES COLLECTED FOR THE DECALS MUST BE USED TO DEFRAY THE COSTS OF THE DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES; BY ADDING ARTICLE 3 TO CHAPTER 2, TITLE 56 SO AS TO PROVIDE FOR THE REGISTRATION, TITLING, AND LICENSING OF MOPEDS, TO PROVIDE PENALTIES FOR A VIOLATION OF THIS ARTICLE, TO REGULATE THE OPERATION OF A MOPED, AND TO REGULATE THE SALE OF A MOPED; BY ADDING SECTION 56-2-4000 SO AS TO PROVIDE A PENALTY FOR A VIOLATION OF CHAPTER 2, TITLE 56; TO AMEND SECTION 56-3-20, RELATING TO CERTAIN TERMS AND THEIR DEFINITIONS REGARDING THE REGISTRATION AND LICENSING OF MOTOR VEHICLES, SO AS TO DELETE CERTAIN TERMS AND THEIR DEFINITIONS; TO AMEND SECTION 56-3-200, RELATING TO THE REGISTRATION OF A VEHICLE, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT A CERTIFICATE OF TITLE IS NOT REQUIRED TO REGISTER A MOPED; TO AMEND SECTION 56-3-250, RELATING TO THE REGISTRATION AND LICENSING OF A MOTOR VEHICLE ONCE ALL LOCAL PROPERTY TAXES ARE PAID, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT THIS PROVISION DOES NOT APPLY TO A MOPED, AND TO MAKE A TECHNICAL CHANGE; TO AMEND SECTIONS 56-3-630, AS AMENDED, AND SECTION 56-3-760, RELATING TO VEHICLES, CLASSIFIED AS PRIVATE PASSENGER MOTOR VEHICLES AND THE REGISTRATION FEE FOR CERTAIN VEHICLES, SO AS TO DELETE THE TERM "MOTOR-DRIVEN CYCLE" AND REPLACE IT WITH THE TERM "MOPED", AND TO MAKE A TECHNICAL CHANGE; TO AMEND SECTIONS 56-5-120 AND 56-5-130, RELATING TO THE TERMS "VEHICLE" AND "MOTOR VEHICLE" AND THEIR DEFINITIONS, SO AS TO DELETE BOTH SECTIONS; TO AMEND SECTION 56-5-140, RELATING TO THE TERM "MOTORCYCLE" AND ITS DEFINITION, SO AS TO DELETE THIS SECTION; TO AMEND SECTION 56-5-150, RELATING TO THE TERM "MOTOR-DRIVEN CYCLE" AND ITS DEFINITION, SO AS TO DELETE THIS SECTION; TO AMEND SECTION 56-5-155, RELATING TO THE TERM "MOTORCYCLE THREE-WHEEL VEHICLE" AND ITS DEFINITION, SO AS TO DELETE THIS SECTION; TO AMEND SECTION 56-5-165, RELATING TO THE TERM "MOPED" AND ITS DEFINITION, SO AS TO DELETE THIS SECTION; TO AMEND SECTION 56-5-361, RELATING TO THE TERM "PASSENGER CAR" AND ITS DEFINITION, SO AS TO DELETE THE TERM "MOTOR-DRIVEN CYCLES" AND ADD THE TERM "MOPEDS"; TO AMEND SECTION 56-5-410, RELATING TO THE TERM "OWNER" AND ITS DEFINITION, SO AS TO DELETE THIS SECTION; TO AMEND SECTION 56-5-1550, RELATING TO THE OPERATION OF A MOTOR-DRIVEN CYCLE, SO AS TO DELETE THIS SECTION; TO AMEND SECTION 56-5-1555, RELATING TO THE OPERATION OF A MOPED, SO AS TO RAISE THE MAXIMUM SPEED AT WHICH A MOPED MAY BE OPERATED; TO AMEND SECTION 56-4-4450, RELATING TO DISPLAY OF LIGHTS BY A VEHICLE DURING CERTAIN TIMES OF DAY, SO AS TO DELETE AN OBSOLETE PROVISION AND MAKE A TECHNICAL CHANGE; TO AMEND SECTION 56-9-20, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO CERTAIN TERMS AND THEIR DEFINITIONS CONTAINED IN THE MOTOR VEHICLE FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY ACT, SO AS TO DELETE AND REVISE CERTAIN TERMS AND THEIR DEFINITIONS; TO AMEND SECTION 56-9-110, RELATING TO THE APPLICABILITY OF THE MOTOR VEHICLE FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY ACT TO CERTAIN ACCIDENTS OR JUDGMENTS, SO AS TO DELETE THIS SECTION; TO AMEND SECTION 56-10-520, RELATING TO THE OFFENSE OF OPERATING AN UNINSURED MOTOR VEHICLE, SO AS TO MAKE A TECHNICAL CHANGE AND PROVIDE THAT THIS SECTION APPLIES TO AN OPERATOR OF AN UNINSURED MOPED, WHO IS NOT THE REGISTERED OWNER OF THE MOPED, UNDER CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES; TO AMEND SECTION 56-10-535, RELATING TO THE DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES REQUIRING A PERSON TO PROVIDE PROOF OF FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY AFTER A CONVICTION OF CERTAIN TRAFFIC OFFENSES, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT THIS SECTION APPLIES TO A REGISTERED OWNER OF A MOPED; TO AMEND SECTION 56-15-10, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO CERTAIN TERMS AND THEIR DEFINITIONS REGARDING THE REGULATION OF MOTOR VEHICLE MANUFACTURERS, DISTRIBUTORS, AND DEALERS, SO AS TO REVISE THE DEFINITIONS OF THE TERMS "MOTOR VEHICLE" AND "MOTORCYCLE"; TO AMEND SECTION 56-16-10, RELATING TO TERMS AND THEIR DEFINITIONS REGARDING THE REGULATION OF MOTORCYCLE MANUFACTURES, DISTRIBUTORS, DEALERS, AND WHOLESALERS, SO AS TO REVISE THE DEFINITION OF THE TERM "MOTORCYCLE" AND REVISE THE TYPE OF VEHICLES REGULATED BY THIS CHAPTER; TO AMEND SECTION 56-19-10, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO TERMS AND THEIR DEFINITIONS REGARDING THE PROTECTION OF TITLES TO AND INTERESTS IN MOTOR VEHICLES, SO AS TO DELETE CERTAIN TERMS AND THEIR DEFINITIONS; TO AMEND SECTION 56-19-220, RELATING TO VEHICLES THAT ARE EXEMPTED FROM THE REQUIREMENT TO OBTAIN A CERTIFICATE OF TITLE, SO AS TO MAKE A TECHNICAL CHANGE AND TO ADD MOPEDS TO THE LIST OF EXEMPTED VEHICLES; TO AMEND SECTION 38-77-30, RELATING TO TERMS AND THEIR DEFINITIONS REGARDING AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE, SO AS TO DELETE THE TERMS "MOTOR-DRIVEN CYCLES", "MOTOR SCOOTERS", AND "MOPEDS"; TO PROVIDE THAT A PERSON WHO SELLS, SOLICITS, OR ADVERTISES TO SELL CERTAIN MOPEDS PRIOR TO JULY 1, 2017, MUST LABEL THE MOPEDS WITH THEIR SPECIFICATIONS AND PROVIDE A METAL PLATE THAT IDENTIFIES THE VEHICLE, TO PROVIDE A PENALTY FOR FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THIS PROVISION, TO PROVIDE THAT IT IS UNLAWFUL TO OPERATE CERTAIN MOPEDS WITHOUT THE METAL IDENTIFICATION PLATE, AND TO PROVIDE A PENALTY FOR FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THIS PROVISION; TO AMEND SECTION 56-5-2941, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES REQUIRING A PERSON WHO VIOLATES CERTAIN PROVISIONS TO HAVE INSTALLED ON CERTAIN VEHICLES AN IGNITION INTERLOCK DEVICE, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT THIS PROVISION DOES NOT REQUIRE THE INSTALLATION OF AN IGNITION INTERLOCK DEVICE ON A MOPED; AND TO REPEAL ARTICLE 3, CHAPTER 5, TITLE 56 RELATING TO MOPED REGULATIONS.
Rep. RUTHERFORD moved to table the motion to reconsider.
Rep. DANING demanded the yeas and nays which were taken, resulting as follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Ballentine Bedingfield Bingham Hart Hill Howard Huggins McKnight M. S. McLeod Norrell Putnam Quinn Riley Rutherford Sandifer G. R. Smith J. E. Smith Thayer
Those who voted in the negative are:
Allison Anderson Bales Bannister Bernstein Bowers Bradley R. L. Brown Burns Clary Clemmons Clyburn Cobb-Hunter Cole Collins Corley H. A. Crawford Crosby Daning Davis Delleney Dillard Duckworth Felder Finlay Forrester Fry Funderburk Gagnon George Gilliard Govan Hayes Herbkersman Hiott Hixon Hosey Jefferson Johnson Jordan Kennedy Knight Limehouse Loftis Lowe Lucas Mack McCoy McEachern Merrill Mitchell D. C. Moss V. S. Moss Newton Norman Ott Parks Pitts Pope Ridgeway Rivers Robinson-Simpson Ryhal G. M. Smith Sottile Stavrinakis Tallon Taylor Tinkler Weeks Whipper Whitmire Williams Willis
So, the House refused to table the motion to reconsider.
The question then recurred to the motion to reconsider, which was agreed to.
Rep. RUTHERFORD spoke in favor of the Veto.
The question was put, shall the Act become a part of the law, the Veto of her Excellency, the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding, the yeas and nays were taken resulting as follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Allison Bales Ballentine Bannister Bowers Bradley Burns Clary Clemmons Cobb-Hunter Cole Collins Corley H. A. Crawford Crosby Daning Davis Delleney Dillard Douglas Duckworth Felder Finlay Forrester Fry Funderburk George Hayes Henderson Herbkersman Hiott Hixon Jefferson Johnson Jordan Kennedy Kirby Knight Loftis Lowe Lucas Mack McCoy McEachern Merrill Mitchell D. C. Moss V. S. Moss Murphy Norman Norrell Ott Parks Pitts Pope Riley Rivers Ryhal Sandifer Spires Stavrinakis Stringer Tallon Taylor Tinkler Toole Whipper Whitmire Willis
Those who voted in the negative are:
Alexander Anderson Atwater Bedingfield Bernstein Bingham Clyburn Gagnon Gilliard Govan Hart Henegan Hill Hosey Howard Huggins King Limehouse McKnight M. S. McLeod W. J. McLeod Newton Putnam Quinn Ridgeway Robinson-Simpson Rutherford G. M. Smith G. R. Smith J. E. Smith Thayer Weeks Williams
So, the Veto of the Governor was overridden and a message was ordered sent to the Senate accordingly.
Veto 36 Part 1B, Page 496, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 6(c), Department of Archives and History, Driving Tours Historic African American Sites: $100,000
Rep. WHITE explained the Veto.
The question was put, shall the Item become a part of the law, the veto of her Excellency, the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding, the yeas and nays were taken resulting as follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Alexander Allison Anderson Bales Ballentine Bannister Bernstein Bowers Bradley R. L. Brown Clary Clemmons Clyburn Cobb-Hunter Cole Collins H. A. Crawford Crosby Daning Davis Delleney Dillard Douglas Duckworth Erickson Finlay Funderburk Gagnon George Govan Hart Hayes Henderson Henegan Herbkersman Hosey Howard Jefferson King Kirby Knight Loftis Lowe Lucas Mack McCoy McEachern McKnight M. S. McLeod W. J. McLeod Merrill Mitchell D. C. Moss Murphy Neal Newton Norrell Ott Parks Pitts Pope Ridgeway Riley Rivers Robinson-Simpson Rutherford Ryhal Sandifer Simrill G. M. Smith J. E. Smith Spires Stavrinakis Taylor Tinkler Weeks Whipper White Whitmire Williams Willis
Those who voted in the negative are:
Atwater Bedingfield Bingham Corley Felder Forrester Fry Hill Hiott Hixon Huggins Johnson Jordan Kennedy Norman Putnam Quinn G. R. Smith Stringer Tallon Thayer Toole
So, the Veto of the Governor was overridden and a message was ordered sent to the Senate accordingly.
Veto 37 Part 1B, Page 499, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 29(c), Department of Commerce, IT-oLogy Coursepower: $400,000
Rep. SIMRILL explained the Veto.
The question was put, shall the Item become a part of the law, the veto of her Excellency, the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding, the yeas and nays were taken resulting as follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Alexander Allison Anderson Ballentine Bannister Bernstein Bingham R. L. Brown Burns Chumley Clary Clemmons Clyburn Cobb-Hunter Cole H. A. Crawford Crosby Davis Delleney Dillard Douglas Duckworth Erickson Felder Finlay Forrester Funderburk George Govan Hart Hayes Henderson Henegan Herbkersman Hiott Hixon Hosey Howard Huggins Jefferson Jordan Kennedy King Knight Loftis Lowe Lucas Mack McCoy McEachern McKnight M. S. McLeod W. J. McLeod Merrill Mitchell D. C. Moss V. S. Moss Murphy Neal Norrell Ott Parks Pitts Pope Putnam Quinn Ridgeway Riley Rivers Robinson-Simpson Rutherford Sandifer Simrill G. M. Smith J. E. Smith Spires Stavrinakis Stringer Tallon Taylor Tinkler Weeks Whipper White Whitmire Williams
Those who voted in the negative are:
Atwater Bowers Bradley Collins Daning Fry Gagnon Hill Johnson Newton Norman G. R. Smith Thayer Toole Willis
So, the Veto of the Governor was overridden and a message was ordered sent to the Senate accordingly.
Veto 38 Part 1B, Page 497, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16, Item 13(b), University of Charleston, Gibbs Museum of Art: $350,000
Rep. MERRILL explained the Veto.
The question was put, shall the Item become a part of the law, the veto of her Excellency, the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding, the yeas and nays were taken resulting as follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Alexander Anderson Bannister Bernstein Bingham Bowers Bradley G. A. Brown R. L. Brown Burns Clary Clemmons Clyburn Cobb-Hunter Cole Collins H. A. Crawford Crosby Davis Delleney Dillard Douglas Duckworth Erickson Felder Finlay Fry Funderburk Gagnon George Gilliard Govan Hart Hayes Henderson Henegan Herbkersman Hosey Howard Jefferson Jordan King Limehouse Loftis Lucas Mack McCoy McEachern McKnight M. S. McLeod W. J. McLeod Merrill Mitchell D. C. Moss V. S. Moss Murphy Neal Newton Norrell Parks Pitts Pope Ridgeway Riley Robinson-Simpson Rutherford Ryhal Sandifer Simrill G. M. Smith J. E. Smith Sottile Spires Stavrinakis Stringer Tallon Taylor Tinkler Weeks White Whitmire Williams
Those who voted in the negative are:
Allison Atwater Ballentine Corley Daning Forrester Hill Hiott Hixon Huggins Johnson Kennedy Lowe Norman Putnam Quinn Rivers G. R. Smith Thayer Toole Willis
So, the Veto of the Governor was overridden and a message was ordered sent to the Senate accordingly.
Veto 39 Part 1B, Page 501, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 47(g), Office of Adjutant General, SC Military Museum: $380,000
Rep. HERBKERSMAN explained the Veto.
The question was put, shall the Item become a part of the law, the veto of her Excellency, the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding, the yeas and nays were taken resulting as follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Alexander Allison Anderson Bales Ballentine Bannister Bernstein Bingham Bowers Bradley R. L. Brown Burns Clary Clemmons Clyburn Cobb-Hunter Cole Collins Corley H. A. Crawford Crosby Daning Davis Delleney Dillard Douglas Duckworth Erickson Felder Finlay Forrester Fry Funderburk Gagnon George Gilliard Govan Hart Hayes Henderson Henegan Herbkersman Hiott Hixon Hosey Howard Huggins Jefferson Johnson Jordan Kennedy King Knight Limehouse Loftis Lucas Mack McCoy McEachern McKnight M. S. McLeod W. J. McLeod Merrill Mitchell D. C. Moss V. S. Moss Murphy Neal Newton Norrell Ott Parks Pitts Pope Quinn Ridgeway Riley Rivers Robinson-Simpson Ryhal Sandifer Simrill G. M. Smith J. E. Smith Sottile Spires Stavrinakis Stringer Tallon Taylor Tinkler Weeks Whipper White Whitmire Williams Willis
Those who voted in the negative are:
Atwater Chumley Hill Lowe Norman Putnam G. R. Smith Thayer Toole
So, the Veto of the Governor was overridden and a message was ordered sent to the Senate accordingly.
Veto 40 Part 1B, Page 500, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 39(g), Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism, Medal of Honor Museum: $3,000,000
Rep. LIMEHOUSE explained the Veto.
The question was put, shall the Item become a part of the law, the veto of her Excellency, the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding, the yeas and nays were taken resulting as follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Alexander Allison Anderson Atwater Bales Ballentine Bannister Bernstein Bingham Bowers Bradley G. A. Brown R. L. Brown Burns Clary Clemmons Clyburn Cobb-Hunter Cole Collins Corley H. A. Crawford Crosby Daning Davis Delleney Dillard Douglas Duckworth Erickson Felder Finlay Forrester Fry Funderburk Gagnon George Gilliard Govan Hart Hayes Henderson Henegan Herbkersman Hiott Hixon Hosey Howard Huggins Jefferson Johnson Jordan Kennedy King Knight Limehouse Loftis Lowe Lucas Mack McCoy McEachern McKnight M. S. McLeod W. J. McLeod Merrill Mitchell D. C. Moss V. S. Moss Murphy Neal Newton Norrell Ott Parks Pitts Pope Putnam Quinn Ridgeway Riley Rivers Robinson-Simpson Rutherford Ryhal Sandifer Simrill G. M. Smith G. R. Smith J. E. Smith Sottile Spires Stavrinakis Stringer Tallon Taylor Thayer Tinkler Toole Weeks Whipper White Williams Willis
Those who voted in the negative are:
Hill Norman
So, the Veto of the Governor was overridden and a message was ordered sent to the Senate accordingly.
Veto 41 Part 1B, Page 500, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 39(j), Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism, Children's Museum of the Upstate: $1,000,000
Rep. HERBKERSMAN explained the Veto.
The question was put, shall the Item become a part of the law, the veto of her Excellency, the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding, the yeas and nays were taken resulting as follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Alexander Allison Anderson Atwater Bales Ballentine Bannister Bernstein Bingham Bradley G. A. Brown R. L. Brown Burns Clary Clemmons Clyburn Cobb-Hunter Cole Collins Corley H. A. Crawford Crosby Daning Davis Delleney Dillard Douglas Duckworth Erickson Felder Finlay Forrester Fry Funderburk Gagnon Gilliard Govan Hart Hayes Henderson Henegan Herbkersman Hiott Hixon Hosey Howard Huggins Jefferson Johnson Jordan Kennedy King Knight Limehouse Loftis Lucas Mack McCoy McEachern McKnight M. S. McLeod W. J. McLeod Merrill Mitchell D. C. Moss V. S. Moss Murphy Neal Norman Norrell Ott Parks Pitts Pope Putnam Quinn Ridgeway Riley Rivers Rutherford Ryhal Sandifer Simrill G. M. Smith G. R. Smith J. E. Smith Sottile Spires Stavrinakis Stringer Tallon Taylor Thayer Tinkler Toole Weeks White Whitmire Williams Willis
Those who voted in the negative are:
Chumley Lowe
So, the Veto of the Governor was overridden and a message was ordered sent to the Senate accordingly.
I inadvertently voted in favor of overriding the Governor's Veto No. 41 on H. 5001, the General Appropriation Bill. I would like the record to reflect that I intended to vote "No" on Veto No. 41.
Rep. Garry R. Smith
I inadvertently voted against the Governor's Veto No. 41 on H. 5001, the General Appropriation Bill. I would like the record to reflect that I intended to vote in favor of Veto No. 41.
Rep. Bill Chumley
Veto 42 Part 1B, Page 497, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 9(b), State Museum Commission, Collections and Content: $5,000
Rep. LIMEHOUSE explained the Veto.
The question was put, shall the Item become a part of the law, the veto of her Excellency, the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding, the yeas and nays were taken resulting as follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Alexander Anderson Bales Ballentine Bannister Bernstein Bingham Bowers Bradley G. A. Brown R. L. Brown Burns Clary Clyburn Cobb-Hunter Cole Collins Corley H. A. Crawford Crosby Davis Delleney Dillard Douglas Duckworth Erickson Finlay Funderburk Gagnon George Gilliard Govan Hart Hayes Henderson Henegan Herbkersman Hosey Howard Jefferson Jordan Kennedy King Kirby Knight Limehouse Loftis Lucas Mack McCoy McEachern McKnight M. S. McLeod W. J. McLeod Merrill Mitchell D. C. Moss V. S. Moss Murphy Neal Newton Norrell Ott Parks Pitts Pope Ridgeway Riley Rivers Robinson-Simpson Rutherford Ryhal Sandifer Simrill G. M. Smith J. E. Smith Sottile Spires Stavrinakis Stringer Tallon Taylor Tinkler Weeks Whipper White Whitmire Williams
Those who voted in the negative are:
Allison Atwater Felder Forrester Fry Hill Hiott Hixon Huggins Johnson Lowe Norman Putnam Quinn G. R. Smith Thayer Toole Willis
So, the Veto of the Governor was overridden and a message was ordered sent to the Senate accordingly.
Veto 43 Part 1A, Page 497, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16, Item 9(b), State Museum Commission, Collections and Content: $5,000
Rep. LIMEHOUSE explained the Veto.
The question was put, shall the Item become a part of the law, the veto of her Excellency, the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding, the yeas and nays were taken resulting as follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Alexander Anderson Bales Ballentine Bannister Bernstein Bingham Bowers Bradley G. A. Brown R. L. Brown Burns Clary Clemmons Clyburn Cobb-Hunter Cole Collins Corley H. A. Crawford Crosby Davis Delleney Dillard Douglas Duckworth Erickson Finlay Funderburk Gagnon George Gilliard Govan Hart Hayes Henderson Henegan Herbkersman Hixon Hosey Howard Jefferson Jordan King Kirby Knight Limehouse Lucas Mack McCoy McEachern McKnight M. S. McLeod W. J. McLeod Mitchell D. C. Moss V. S. Moss Murphy Neal Newton Norrell Ott Parks Pitts Pope Ridgeway Riley Robinson-Simpson Ryhal Sandifer Simrill G. M. Smith J. E. Smith Sottile Spires Stavrinakis Stringer Taylor Tinkler Weeks Whipper White Whitmire Williams
Those who voted in the negative are:
Allison Atwater Daning Felder Forrester Fry Hill Hiott Johnson Kennedy Lowe Merrill Norman Putnam Quinn Rivers G. R. Smith Tallon Thayer Toole Willis
So, the Veto of the Governor was overridden and a message was ordered sent to the Senate accordingly.
Veto 44 Part 1A, Page 143, Section 50, Department of Commerce, Item II.B, Programs and Services, Small Business/Existing Industry - Council on Competitiveness: $250,000 Total Funds; $250,000 General Funds
Rep. SIMRILL explained the Veto.
The question was put, shall the Item become a part of the law, the veto of her Excellency, the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding, the yeas and nays were taken resulting as follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Alexander Anderson Bales Bannister Bernstein Bingham Bowers Bradley G. A. Brown R. L. Brown Burns Clary Clemmons Clyburn Cobb-Hunter Collins H. A. Crawford Crosby Daning Davis Delleney Dillard Douglas Duckworth Erickson Felder Finlay Forrester Fry Funderburk Gagnon George Gilliard Govan Hart Hayes Henderson Henegan Herbkersman Hiott Hixon Hosey Howard Jefferson Johnson Jordan Kennedy King Kirby Knight Limehouse Loftis Lowe Lucas Mack McCoy McEachern McKnight M. S. McLeod W. J. McLeod Merrill Mitchell D. C. Moss V. S. Moss Murphy Neal Newton Norrell Ott Parks Pitts Quinn Ridgeway Riley Robinson-Simpson Rutherford Ryhal Sandifer Simrill G. R. Smith J. E. Smith Sottile Spires Stavrinakis Stringer Taylor Tinkler Weeks Whipper White Whitmire Williams
Those who voted in the negative are:
Allison Atwater Ballentine Chumley Corley Hill Huggins Norman Putnam Rivers Tallon Thayer Toole Willis
So, the Veto of the Governor was overridden and a message was ordered sent to the Senate accordingly.
Veto 45 Part 1A, Page 143, Section 50, Department of Commerce, Item II.B, Programs and Services, Small Business/Existing Industry - SC Small Business Development Centers: $100,000 Total Funds; $100,000 General Funds
Rep. SIMRILL explained the Veto.
The question was put, shall the Item become a part of the law, the veto of her Excellency, the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding, the yeas and nays were taken resulting as follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Alexander Allison Anderson Atwater Bales Ballentine Bannister Bernstein Bingham Bowers R. L. Brown Burns Clary Clemmons Clyburn Cobb-Hunter Cole Collins Corley H. A. Crawford Crosby Daning Davis Delleney Dillard Douglas Duckworth Erickson Felder Finlay Forrester Fry Funderburk Gagnon George Gilliard Govan Hart Hayes Henderson Henegan Herbkersman Hiott Hixon Hosey Howard Huggins Jefferson Johnson Jordan Kennedy King Kirby Knight Loftis Lucas Mack McCoy McEachern M. S. McLeod W. J. McLeod Merrill Mitchell D. C. Moss V. S. Moss Murphy Neal Newton Norrell Ott Parks Pitts Pope Quinn Ridgeway Riley Rivers Robinson-Simpson Rutherford Ryhal Sandifer Simrill G. M. Smith J. E. Smith Sottile Spires Stavrinakis Stringer Tallon Taylor Tinkler Weeks Whipper White Whitmire Williams Willis
Those who voted in the negative are:
Bradley Hill Lowe Norman Putnam G. R. Smith Thayer Toole
So, the Veto of the Governor was overridden and a message was ordered sent to the Senate accordingly.
Veto 46 Part 1B, Page 500, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 36(b), Department of Agriculture, Agribusiness Development: $2,500,000
Rep. WHITE explained the Veto.
The question was put, shall the Item become a part of the law, the veto of her Excellency, the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding, the yeas and nays were taken resulting as follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Alexander Allison Anderson Bales Ballentine Bannister Bernstein Bingham Bowers G. A. Brown R. L. Brown Burns Chumley Clary Clemmons Clyburn Cobb-Hunter Cole Collins Corley H. A. Crawford Crosby Davis Delleney Dillard Douglas Duckworth Erickson Finlay Forrester Fry Funderburk Gagnon George Gilliard Govan Hart Hayes Henderson Henegan Herbkersman Hiott Hixon Hosey Howard Jefferson Johnson Jordan Kennedy King Kirby Knight Limehouse Loftis Lowe Lucas Mack McCoy McEachern McKnight M. S. McLeod W. J. McLeod Merrill Mitchell D. C. Moss V. S. Moss Murphy Neal Newton Norrell Ott Parks Pitts Pope Ridgeway Riley Robinson-Simpson Rutherford Ryhal Sandifer Simrill G. M. Smith J. E. Smith Sottile Spires Stavrinakis Stringer Tallon Taylor Tinkler Weeks Whipper White Whitmire Williams Willis
Those who voted in the negative are:
Atwater Bradley Daning Felder Hill Huggins Norman Putnam Rivers G. R. Smith Thayer Toole
So, the Veto of the Governor was overridden and a message was ordered sent to the Senate accordingly.
Veto 47 Part 1B, Page 499, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 29(e), Department of Commerce, Office of Innovation: $2,000,000
Rep. SIMRILL explained the Veto.
The question was put, shall the Item become a part of the law, the veto of her Excellency, the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding, the yeas and nays were taken resulting as follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Alexander Allison Anderson Bales Bannister Bernstein Bingham Bowers Bradley R. L. Brown Burns Clary Clemmons Clyburn Cobb-Hunter Cole Collins Corley H. A. Crawford Crosby Daning Davis Delleney Dillard Douglas Duckworth Erickson Felder Finlay Forrester Fry Funderburk Gagnon George Gilliard Govan Hart Hayes Henderson Henegan Herbkersman Hiott Hixon Hosey Howard Jefferson Johnson Jordan Kennedy King Kirby Knight Limehouse Loftis Lowe Lucas Mack McCoy McEachern McKnight M. S. McLeod W. J. McLeod Mitchell D. C. Moss V. S. Moss Murphy Neal Newton Norrell Parks Pitts Pope Ridgeway Riley Robinson-Simpson Rutherford Ryhal Sandifer Simrill G. M. Smith J. E. Smith Sottile Spires Stavrinakis Stringer Tallon Taylor Tinkler Weeks Whipper White Whitmire Williams
Those who voted in the negative are:
Atwater Ballentine Hill Huggins Merrill Norman Putnam Quinn Rivers G. R. Smith Thayer Toole Willis
So, the Veto of the Governor was overridden and a message was ordered sent to the Senate accordingly.
The SPEAKER ordered the following Veto printed in the Journal:
June 8, 2016
The Honorable James H. Lucas
Speaker of the House of Representatives
Statehouse, Second Floor
Columbia, South Carolina 29201
Dear Mr. Speaker and Members of the General Assembly,
Today, I am vetoing and returning without my approval certain items in R. 276, H. 5002 (Word version), a Joint Resolution to Appropriate Monies from the Capital Reserve Fund.
Although I have vetoed individual items in this Resolution, I believe that the people of this state should acknowledge the positive it does. This Resolution contains workforce-focused resources, replenishing state-owned assets at our technical colleges and universities. Further, we demonstrate a dedication to a diverse workforce with appropriations to the Vocational Rehabilitation Department.
Despite these positives, this Resolution, much like the accompanying FY 2016-17 General Appropriations Act, contains a number of earmarks, pork, and pet projects that should neither be tolerated as an acceptable budgeting practice nor should they become law.
VETO 1 Section 1 - Item 58, Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism, State Aquarium: $270,000
VETO 2 Section 1 - Item 59, Patriot's Point Development Authority, USS Laffey: $50,000
VETO 3 Section 1 - Item 52, Clemson University PSA, T. Ed Garrison Arena Education/Conference Center: $1,000,000
Each of these items represents a local project of interest to community leaders and elected representatives, and each has merit so long as members of those communities choose to support them. Given that each responsible entity has a stable private funding stream, we should not support taxpayer funded earmarks.
VETO 4 Section 1 - Item 54, Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism, Parks, Recreational, and Tourism Revitalizations: $6,375,000
Although an outside observer may interpret this item as resources for the state parks system, it is in fact a bundling of local pork. This earmark is executed in the least transparent manner for allocating funds to private entities - one that should not be tolerated in government generally and one that I will not tolerate in my Cabinet specifically.
I ask that you sustain the veto of each of these unnecessary earmarks.
My very best,
Nikki R. Haley
Governor
The Vetoes on the following Joint Resolution were taken up:
(R. 276, H. 5002 (Word version)) -- Ways and Means Committee: A JOINT RESOLUTION TO APPROPRIATE MONIES FROM THE CAPITAL RESERVE FUND FOR FISCAL YEAR 2015-2016, AND TO ALLOW UNEXPENDED FUNDS APPROPRIATED TO BE CARRIED FORWARD TO SUCCEEDING FISCAL YEARS AND EXPENDED FOR THE SAME PURPOSES.
Veto 1 Section 1 - Item 58, Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism, State Aquarium: $270,000
Rep. STAVRINAKIS explained the Veto.
The question was put, shall the Item become a part of the law, the veto of her Excellency, the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding, the yeas and nays were taken resulting as follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Alexander Allison Anderson Bales Ballentine Bannister Bernstein Bingham Bowers Bradley G. A. Brown R. L. Brown Clary Clemmons Clyburn Cobb-Hunter Cole Collins Corley H. A. Crawford Crosby Daning Davis Delleney Dillard Douglas Duckworth Erickson Felder Finlay Forrester Fry Funderburk Gagnon Gilliard Govan Hart Hayes Henegan Herbkersman Hiott Hixon Hosey Howard Jefferson Johnson Kennedy King Kirby Knight Limehouse Lowe Lucas Mack McCoy McEachern McKnight M. S. McLeod W. J. McLeod Merrill Mitchell D. C. Moss V. S. Moss Murphy Neal Newton Norrell Ott Parks Pitts Pope Quinn Ridgeway Riley Rivers Robinson-Simpson Ryhal Sandifer Simrill G. M. Smith G. R. Smith J. E. Smith Sottile Spires Stavrinakis Stringer Tallon Taylor Tinkler Toole Weeks Whipper White Whitmire Williams
Those who voted in the negative are:
Burns Chumley Hill Jordan Norman Thayer
So, the Veto of the Governor was overridden and a message was ordered sent to the Senate accordingly.
The SPEAKER granted Rep. PARKS a leave of absence for the remainder of the day.
Veto 2 Section 1 - Item 59, Patriot's Point Development Authority, USS Laffey: $50,000
Rep. LIMEHOUSE explained the Veto.
The question was put, shall the Item become a part of the law, the veto of her Excellency, the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding, the yeas and nays were taken resulting as follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Alexander Allison Anderson Bales Ballentine Bannister Bernstein Bowers Bradley G. A. Brown R. L. Brown Burns Chumley Clary Clemmons Clyburn Cobb-Hunter Cole H. A. Crawford Crosby Daning Davis Delleney Dillard Douglas Duckworth Erickson Felder Finlay Forrester Fry Funderburk Gagnon George Gilliard Govan Hart Hayes Henderson Henegan Herbkersman Hiott Hixon Hosey Jefferson Johnson Jordan Kennedy King Kirby Knight Limehouse Loftis Lucas Mack McCoy McEachern McKnight M. S. McLeod W. J. McLeod Merrill Mitchell D. C. Moss V. S. Moss Murphy Neal Newton Norrell Pope Putnam Ridgeway Riley Rivers Robinson-Simpson Ryhal Sandifer Simrill G. M. Smith J. E. Smith Sottile Spires Stavrinakis Stringer Tallon Taylor Thayer Tinkler Toole Weeks Whipper White Whitmire Williams
Those who voted in the negative are:
Atwater Collins Hill Huggins Lowe Norman Quinn G. R. Smith Willis
So, the Veto of the Governor was overridden and a message was ordered sent to the Senate accordingly.
Veto 3 Section 1 - Item 52, Clemson University PSA, T. Ed Garrison Arena Education/Conference Center: $1,000,000
Rep. WHITE explained the Veto.
The question was put, shall the Item become a part of the law, the veto of her Excellency, the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding, the yeas and nays were taken resulting as follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Alexander Allison Anderson Bales Ballentine Bannister Bernstein Bingham Bowers G. A. Brown R. L. Brown Burns Chumley Clary Clemmons Clyburn Cobb-Hunter Cole Corley H. A. Crawford Crosby Davis Delleney Dillard Douglas Duckworth Erickson Finlay Forrester Fry Funderburk Gagnon George Gilliard Govan Hart Hayes Henderson Henegan Herbkersman Hiott Hixon Hosey Howard Huggins Jefferson Johnson Jordan Kennedy King Kirby Knight Limehouse Loftis Lowe Lucas Mack McCoy McEachern McKnight M. S. McLeod W. J. McLeod Merrill Mitchell D. C. Moss V. S. Moss Murphy Neal Newton Norrell Ott Pitts Pope Putnam Ridgeway Riley Robinson-Simpson Rutherford Ryhal Sandifer Simrill G. M. Smith Sottile Spires Stavrinakis Stringer Tallon Taylor Thayer Tinkler Weeks Whipper White Whitmire Williams Willis
Those who voted in the negative are:
Bradley Collins Daning Felder Hill Norman Rivers G. R. Smith Toole
So, the Veto of the Governor was overridden and a message was ordered sent to the Senate accordingly.
Veto 4 Section 1 - Item 54, Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism, Parks, Recreational, and Tourism Revitalizations: $6,375,000
Rep. HERBKERSMAN explained the Veto.
The question was put, shall the Item become a part of the law, the veto of her Excellency, the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding, the yeas and nays were taken resulting as follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Alexander Allison Anderson Bales Ballentine Bannister Bernstein Bingham Bowers Bradley G. A. Brown R. L. Brown Burns Clary Clyburn Cobb-Hunter Cole Collins Corley H. A. Crawford Crosby Delleney Dillard Douglas Duckworth Erickson Felder Finlay Forrester Funderburk Gagnon George Gilliard Govan Hart Hayes Henderson Henegan Herbkersman Hiott Hixon Hosey Howard Huggins Jefferson Johnson Jordan Kennedy King Kirby Knight Limehouse Loftis Lowe Lucas Mack McCoy McEachern M. S. McLeod W. J. McLeod Merrill Mitchell D. C. Moss V. S. Moss Murphy Neal Newton Norrell Ott Pitts Pope Quinn Ridgeway Riley Robinson-Simpson Rutherford Ryhal Sandifer Simrill G. M. Smith J. E. Smith Sottile Spires Stavrinakis Stringer Tallon Taylor Tinkler Weeks Whipper White Whitmire Williams
Those who voted in the negative are:
Daning Davis Hill Norman Putnam Rivers G. R. Smith Thayer Toole Willis
So, the Veto of the Governor was overridden and a message was ordered sent to the Senate accordingly.
The SPEAKER ordered the following Veto printed in the Journal:
June 10, 2016
The Honorable James H. Lucas
Speaker of the House of Representatives
Statehouse, Second Floor
Columbia, South Carolina 29201
Dear Mr. Speaker and Members of the General Assembly,
Today, I am vetoing and returning without my authority R. 302, H. 4327 (Word version), a bill relating to the licensure of hospice programs in South Carolina. I am vetoing this bill because it contains no actual changes to hospice licensure in South Carolina but does creates a government-sponsored lobbying effort for two competing hospice associations.
Most of this bill serves to memorialize current practices at the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control relating to hospice licensure. If this veto is sustained, all of these practices will remain in regulation and nothing related to licensing hospices will change. The remainder of the bill unfortunately adds a task force designed to negotiate a certificate of need style system of protecting regional hospice territories.
It is concerning to me that the task force's membership is limited to eight representatives from two different and competing hospice trade associations, mediated by two DHEC employees. Lobbying organizations are well paid by their members to influence lawmakers and regulators alike. We should not pass bills that write their influence into law. I ask you sustain this veto and to preserve the integrity and public trust in our legislative process.
My very best,
Nikki R. Haley
Governor
The Veto on the following Act was taken up:
(R. 302, H. 4327 (Word version)) -- Rep. G. M. Smith: AN ACT TO AMEND CHAPTER 71, TITLE 44, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO HOSPICE PROGRAMS, SO AS TO ADD DEFINITIONAL TERMS; TO ESTABLISH CERTAIN REQUIREMENTS FOR HOSPICE LICENSES; TO ESTABLISH A PROCESS FOR THE REGISTRATION OF MULTIPLE OFFICE LOCATIONS OF A PARENT HOSPICE ORGANIZATION AND FOR THE EXPANSION OF A HOSPICE'S OR PARENT HOSPICE ORGANIZATION'S SERVICE AREA; TO CREATE A TASK FORCE TO STUDY ISSUES RELATING TO GEOGRAPHIC LIMITATIONS ON HOSPICES LICENSED IN CERTAIN REGIONS AND TO REQUIRE A REPORT WITH RECOMMENDATIONS; AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES.
Rep. MERRILL explained the Veto.
The question was put, shall the Act become a part of the law, the Veto of her Excellency, the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding, the yeas and nays were taken resulting as follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative are:
G. A. Brown R. L. Brown Clary Cobb-Hunter Douglas Hayes Henegan Hosey Howard Kirby Knight M. S. McLeod Mitchell Neal Norrell Ott Ridgeway
Those who voted in the negative are:
Allison Anderson Atwater Bales Ballentine Bannister Bernstein Bingham Bowers Bradley Burns Chumley Clyburn Cole Collins H. A. Crawford Crosby Daning Davis Delleney Dillard Duckworth Erickson Finlay Forrester Fry Funderburk Gagnon George Gilliard Govan Hart Henderson Herbkersman Hill Hiott Hixon Huggins Jefferson Johnson Jordan Kennedy King Limehouse Loftis Lowe Lucas Mack McCoy McEachern McKnight W. J. McLeod Merrill D. C. Moss V. S. Moss Murphy Newton Norman Pitts Pope Putnam Quinn Riley Rivers Robinson-Simpson Ryhal Sandifer Simrill G. M. Smith G. R. Smith J. E. Smith Sottile Stavrinakis Stringer Tallon Taylor Thayer Tinkler Toole Weeks Whipper Whitmire Williams Willis
So, the Veto of the Governor was sustained and a message was ordered sent to the Senate accordingly.
Rep. HUGGINS made a statement relative to Rep. KENNEDY'S service in the House.
Rep. KENNEDY made a statement relative to his service in the House.
H. 5140 -- Free Conference Report
The General Assembly, Columbia, S.C., June 15, 2016
The COMMITTEE OF CONFERENCE, to whom was referred (H:\legwork\confreports\agm\5140c001.agm.ab16.docx:
H. 5140 (Word version) -- Reps. Pope, Felder, King, Gambrell, Gagnon, Erickson, Clary, Tallon and Henderson: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 59-1-425, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE OPENING DATE FOR THE PUBLIC SCHOOL YEAR, SO AS TO PROVIDE THE OPENING DATE FOR STUDENTS MUST NOT BE BEFORE AUGUST FIFTEENTH BEGINNING WITH THE 2017-2018 SCHOOL YEAR; TO AMEND SECTION 59-18-325, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO CERTAIN ASSESSMENTS OF VARIOUS PUBLIC SCHOOL STUDENTS BASED ON GRADE LEVEL, SO AS TO REVISE THE MANNER OF PROCUREMENT AND ADMINISTRATION OF THESE ASSESSMENTS, AMONG OTHER THINGS; AND TO AMEND SECTION 59-25-410, RELATING TO THE DATE BY WHICH PUBLIC SCHOOL TEACHERS MUST BE NOTIFIED OF THEIR TENTATIVE ASSIGNMENTS FOR THE UPCOMING SCHOOL YEAR, SO AS TO CHANGE THIS DATE FROM AUGUST FIFTEENTH TO AUGUST EIGHTH.
Beg leave to report that they have duly and carefully considered the same and recommend:
That the same do pass with the following amendments:
Amend the bill, as and if amended, by striking all after the enacting words and inserting:
/ SECTION 1. Section 59-1-425(A) of the 1976 Code, as added by Act 260 of 2006, is amended to read:
"(A) Each A local school district board of trustees of the State shall have has the authority to establish an annual school calendar for teachers, staff, and students. The statutory school term is one hundred ninety days annually and shall must consist of a minimum of one hundred eighty days of instruction covering at least nine calendar months. However, beginning with the 2007-2008 school year, the opening date for students must not be before the third Monday in August, except for schools operating on a year-round modified school calendar. Three days must be used for collegial professional development based upon the educational standards as required by Section 59-18-300. The professional development shall must address, at a minimum, academic achievement standards including strengthening teachers' knowledge in their content area, teaching techniques, and assessment. No more than two days may be used for preparation of opening of schools and the remaining five days may be used for teacher planning, academic plans, and parent conferences. The number of instructional hours in an instructional day may vary according to local board policy and does not have to be uniform among the schools in the district."
SECTION 2. Section 59-18-325(C) of the 1976 Code, as added by Act 200 of 2014, is amended to read:
"(C)(1) To maintain a comprehensive and cohesive assessment system that signals a student's preparedness for the next educational level and ultimately culminates in a clear indication of a student's preparedness for postsecondary success in a college or career and to satisfy federal and state accountability purposes, the Executive Director of the State Fiscal Accountability Authority, with the advice and consent of the special assessment panel, shall direct the procurement of a summative assessment system for the 2014-2015 school year, and subsequent years as provided in item (3). The procurement must be completed before September 30, 2014. State Department of Education shall procure and maintain a summative assessment system.
(1) The summative assessment must be administered to all students in grades three through eight, and if funds are available, administered to students in grades nine and ten. The summative assessment must assess students in English/language arts and mathematics, including those students as required by the federal Individuals with Disabilities Education Act and by Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. For purposes of this subsection, 'English/language arts' includes English, reading, and writing skills as required by existing state standards. The assessment must be a rigorous, achievement assessment that measures student mastery of the state standards, that provides timely reporting of results to educators, parents, and students, and that measures each student's progress toward college and career readiness. Therefore, the assessment or assessments must meet all of the following minimum requirements:
(a) compares performance of students in South Carolina to other students' performance on comparable standards in other states with the ability to link the scales of the South Carolina assessment to the scales from other assessments measuring those comparable standards;
(b) be a vertically scaled, benchmarked, standards-based system of summative assessments;
(c) measures a student's preparedness for the next level of their educational matriculation and individual student performance against the state standards in English/language arts, reading, writing, and mathematics and student growth;
(d) documents student progress toward national college and career readiness benchmarks derived from empirical research and state standards;
(e) establishes at least four student achievement levels;
(f) includes various test questions including, but not limited to, multiple choice, constructed response, and selected response, that require students to demonstrate their understanding of the content;
(g) be administered to all students in a paper-based computer-based format in 2014-2015, in either a paper-based form or computer-based format in 2015-2016, and to all students in a computer-based format by school year 2016-2017 except for students with disabilities as specified in the student's IEP or 504 plan, and unless the use of a computer by these students is prohibited due to the vendor's restrictions on computer-based test security, in which case the paper version must be made available; and
(h) assists school districts and schools in aligning assessment, curriculum, and instruction.
(2)(a) Additionally, the Executive Director of the State Fiscal Accountability Authority, with the advice and consent of the special assessment panel, also must direct the procurement of a college and career readiness assessment that meets the requirements of subsection (A). The procurement must be completed before September 30, 2014. In addition to WorkKeys, the assessment must be administered to all students entering the eleventh grade for the first time in the 2014-2015 school year. Beginning in the 2017-2018 school year, each school district shall administer the statewide summative assessment, with the exception of alternate assessments, for grades three through eight during the last twenty days of school as determined by the district's regular instructional calendar, not including make-up days. If an extension to the twenty-day time period is needed, the school district or charter school may submit a request for an extension to the State Board of Education before December first of the school year for which the waiver is requested. The request must clearly document the scope and rationale for the extension. The request also must be accompanied by an action plan showing how the district or charter school will be able to comply with the twenty-day time frame for the following school year.
(b) Statewide summative testing for each student may not exceed eight days each school year, with the exception of students with disabilities as specified in their IEPs or 504 plans.
(c) The State Board of Education shall promulgate regulations outlining the procedures to be used during the testing process to ensure test security, including procedures for make-up days, and to comply with federal and state assessment requirements where necessary.
(d) In the event of school closure due to extreme weather or other disruptions, or significant school or district technology disruptions that impede computer-based assessment administration, the school district or charter school may submit a request to the department to provide a paper-based administration to complete testing within the last twenty days of school. The request must clearly document the scope and cause of the disruption.
(3) In school years 2014-2015, 2015-2016, and 2016-2017, The department must procure and administer the assessments procured by the State Fiscal Accountability Authority in English/language arts and mathematics in grades three through eight, and if funds are available, in grades nine and ten. The department also must administer the state-developed and adopted administer assessments in science and social studies to all students in grades four through eight, and the college readiness assessment and WorkKeys assessment to all students in grade eleven. If the Education Oversight Committee approves of the assessments pursuant to Section 59-18-320 after the 2016-2017 assessment, the assessments also may be administered in 2017-2018 and 2018-2019. Formative assessments must continue to be adopted, selected, and administered pursuant to Section 59-18-310.
(4)(a) The special assessment panel must be composed of the following individuals or their designee:
(i) the Chairman of the State Board of Education;
(ii) the Chairman of the Education Oversight Committee;
(iii) the Chairman of the Board of Directors for the South Carolina Chamber of Commerce;
(iv) the Chairman of the South Carolina Commission on Higher Education;
(v) the Chairman of the South Carolina Technical College System Board; and
(vi) the State Superintendent of Education.
(b) A panel member who is authorized to designate a person to serve on the board in his stead only may make the designation if he intends for the designee to serve continuously instead of intermittently with himself or another designee.
(c) The assessment panel must receive input from educators, parents, higher education officials, and business and community leaders on the components of a comprehensive and cohesive assessment system. The assessment panel must convene within two weeks of the effective date of this act, at the request of the Executive Director of the State Fiscal Accountability Authority. The panel must complete its duties in a timely manner which enables the Executive Director of the State Fiscal Accountability Authority to procure the assessments by September 30, 2014. Upon the procurement of a summative assessment system, the special assessment panel is dissolved.
(4)(a) For the 2016-2017, 2017-2018, and 2018-2019 school years, the department is responsible for ensuring the procurement and administration of the ACT Plus Writing assessment. Following the 2018-2019 school year, the department shall procure and administer a standardized national test that meets the requirements of subsection (A) that documents student progress toward national college and career readiness benchmarks derived from empirical research, and is widely accepted by higher education institutions for admissions purposes. The department is responsible for continuing to procure and administer the WorkKeys assessments.
(b) For the 2016-2017, 2017-2018, and 2018-2019 school years, all public high schools and, where necessary, career centers, annually shall administer the WorkKeys assessment and the ACT Plus Writing college readiness assessment procured by the department to all eleventh grade students. Following the 2018-2019 school year, all public high schools and, where necessary, career centers, annually shall administer the college readiness and WorkKeys assessments procured by the department to all eleventh grade students. For the purposes of this section, 'eleventh grade students' means students in the third year of high school after their initial enrollment in the ninth grade.
(c) Valid accommodations must be provided according to the students' IEP/504 plan. If a student also chooses to use the results of the college readiness assessment for post secondary admission or placement, the student, his parent, or his guardian must indicate that choice in compliance with the testing vendor's deadline to ensure that the student may receive allowable accommodations consistent with the IEP or 504 plan that may yield a college reportable score.
(5)(a) The cost of procuring the assessments pursuant to items (1) and (2), and any costs associated with the performance of the special assessment panel's duties must be borne by the Department of Education.
(b) Staff support to the Executive Director of the State Fiscal Accountability Authority and the special assessment panel must be provided by the Department of Education, Division of Accountability, Office of Assessment. In addition, if requested by the Executive Director of the State Fiscal Accountability Authority or the special assessment panel, the Department of Education, the Education Oversight Committee, the State Board for Technical and Comprehensive Education, and the Commission on Higher Education, must provide assistance to implement the provisions of this subsection.
(5) If funds are available, the State shall provide a two-year college or four-year college readiness assessment or the WorkKeys assessment to twelfth grade students who did not meet benchmarks on the eleventh grade assessment for college and career readiness at no cost to the students.
(6) Formative assessments must continue to be adopted, selected, and administered pursuant to Section 59-18-310.
(6)(7) Within thirty days after providing student performance data to the school districts as required by law, the department must provide to the Education Oversight Committee student performance results on assessments authorized in this subsection and end-of-course assessments in a format agreed upon by the department and the Oversight Committee. The Education Oversight Committee must use the results of these assessments in school years 2014-2015 and, 2015-2016, and 2016-2017 to report on student academic performance in each school and district pursuant to Section 59-18-900. The committee may not determine state ratings for schools or districts, pursuant to Section 59-18-900, using the results of the assessments required by this subsection until after the conclusion of the 2015-2016 2016-2017 school year; provided, however, state ratings must be determined by the results of these assessments beginning in the 2016-2017 2017-2018 school year. The Oversight Committee also must develop and recommend a single accountability system that meets federal and state accountability requirements by the Fall of 2016 2017. While developing the single accountability system that will be implemented in the 2017-2018 school year, the Education Oversight Committee shall determine the format of a transitional report card released to the public in the fall of 2016 and 2017 that will also identify underperforming schools and districts. These transitional reports will, at a minimum, include the following: (1) school, district and statewide student assessment results in reading and mathematics in grades 3 through 8; (2) high school and district graduation rates; and (3) measures of student college and career readiness at the school, district, and statewide level. These transitional reports will inform schools and districts, the public, and the Department of Education of school and district general academic performance and assist in identifying potentially underperforming schools and districts and in targeting technical assistance support and interventions in the interim before ratings are issued.
(7) The Department of Education must submit a plan for approval and implementation to the Board of Education to mitigate the impact that changes in assessments are projected to have on teacher evaluation systems. If such an impact can be reasonably mitigated by delaying evaluations, the department shall seek a waiver if necessary for federal approval.
(8) When standards are subsequently revised, the Department of Education, the State Board of Education, and the Education Oversight Committee shall approve assessments pursuant to Section 59-18-320."
SECTION 3. This act takes effect upon approval by the Governor. /
Amend title to conform.
Sen. Robert W. Hayes, Jr. Rep. Tommy M. Stringer Sen. Luke A. Rankin Rep. R. Raye Felder Sen. John W. Matthews, Jr. Rep. Robert L. Brown On Part of the Senate. On Part of the House.
Rep. STRINGER explained the Free Conference Report.
The yeas and nays were taken resulting as follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Atwater Bales Ballentine Bannister Bernstein Bingham Bowers Bradley R. L. Brown Burns Chumley Clary Clemmons Clyburn Cobb-Hunter Cole Collins Corley H. A. Crawford Crosby Daning Davis Delleney Dillard Douglas Duckworth Erickson Felder Finlay Forrester Fry Funderburk Gagnon George Gilliard Govan Hart Hayes Henderson Henegan Herbkersman Hiott Hixon Hosey Howard Huggins Jefferson Johnson Jordan King Kirby Knight Limehouse Loftis Lowe Lucas Mack McCoy McEachern M. S. McLeod Merrill Mitchell D. C. Moss V. S. Moss Murphy Neal Newton Norman Norrell Ott Pitts Pope Putnam Quinn Ridgeway Riley Rivers Robinson-Simpson Rutherford Ryhal Sandifer Simrill G. M. Smith G. R. Smith J. E. Smith Sottile Spires Stavrinakis Stringer Tallon Taylor Thayer Tinkler Toole Weeks Whipper White Whitmire Williams Willis
Those who voted in the negative are:
Allison
The Free Conference Report was adopted and a message was ordered sent to the Senate accordingly.
I inadvertently voted "No" on H. 5140. I would like the record to reflect that I intended to vote in favor of H. 5140.
Rep. Rita Allison
The following was received:
Columbia, S.C., June 15, 2016
Mr. Speaker and Members of the House:
The Senate respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has overridden the Veto by the Governor on R. 268, H. 4762 by a vote of 33 to 7:
(R. 268, H. 4762 (Word version)) -- Reps. Anthony, Yow and W. J. McLeod: AN ACT TO AMEND SECTION 6-1-320, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE LIMITATION ON MILLAGE RATE INCREASES AND EXCEPTIONS TO THIS LIMITATION, SO AS TO REVISE THE EXCEPTION TO THIS LIMITATION FOR THE PURCHASE OF CAPITAL EQUIPMENT AND OTHER EXPENDITURES IN A COUNTY HAVING A POPULATION OF LESS THAN ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND PERSONS AND HAVING AT LEAST FORTY THOUSAND ACRES OF STATE FOREST LAND BY CHANGING THE TERM "STATE FOREST LAND" IN THIS EXCEPTION TO THE TERM "STATE OR NATIONAL FOREST LAND".
Very respectfully,
President
Received as information.
The following was received:
Columbia, S.C., June 15, 2016
Mr. Speaker and Members of the House:
The Senate respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has overridden the Veto by the Governor on R. 287, H. 5270 by a vote of 29 to 10:
(R. 287, H. 5270 (Word version)) -- Reps. Tallon, Bernstein and Pope: AN ACT TO AMEND SECTION 8-11-83, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE PAYROLL DEDUCTION FOR STATE EMPLOYEES' ASSOCIATION DUES, SO AS TO ALLOW MEMBERSHIP DUES FOR THE SOCIETY OF FORMER AGENTS OF THE STATE LAW ENFORCEMENT DIVISION TO BE DEDUCTED FROM THE COMPENSATION OF STATE RETIREES AND PAID OVER TO THE ASSOCIATION IN THE SAME MANNER OTHER MEMBERSHIP DUES ARE DEDUCTED AND PAID.
Very respectfully,
President
Received as information.
The following was received:
Columbia, S.C., June 15, 2016
Mr. Speaker and Members of the House:
The Senate respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has adopted the report of the Committee of Conference on H. 4765. The Report of the Committee of Conference, having been adopted by both Houses, it was ordered that the title be changed to that of an Act and the Act enrolled for ratification.
H. 4765 (Word version) -- Reps. G. R. Smith, Parks, D. C. Moss, Cobb-Hunter, Jefferson, Duckworth, Daning, Kirby, R. L. Brown, Burns, Douglas, Brannon, Anthony, Mitchell, Ridgeway, Robinson-Simpson, Clyburn, Ryhal, Johnson, Yow, G. A. Brown, Riley, Taylor, Limehouse, Williams, Simrill, Bedingfield, Chumley, Dillard, Herbkersman, Hicks, Hill, Loftis, Long, V. S. Moss, Pope, Rivers, Thayer, Wells, Crosby and King: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 12-6-5060, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO VOLUNTARY CONTRIBUTIONS MADE BY AN INDIVIDUAL BY MEANS OF THE INCOME TAX RETURN CHECK OFF, SO AS TO ADD HABITAT FOR HUMANITY.
Very respectfully,
President
Received as information.
The following was received:
Columbia, S.C., June 15, 2016
Mr. Speaker and Members of the House:
The Senate respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has adopted the Report of the Committee of Free Conference on H. 5140. The Report of the Committee of Free Conference, having been adopted by both Houses, it was ordered that the title be changed to that of an Act and the Act enrolled for ratification.
H. 5140 (Word version) -- Reps. Pope, Felder, King, Gambrell, Gagnon, Erickson, Clary, Tallon and Henderson: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 59-1-425, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE OPENING DATE FOR THE PUBLIC SCHOOL YEAR, SO AS TO PROVIDE THE OPENING DATE FOR STUDENTS MUST NOT BE BEFORE AUGUST FIFTEENTH BEGINNING WITH THE 2017-2018 SCHOOL YEAR; TO AMEND SECTION 59-18-325, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO CERTAIN ASSESSMENTS OF VARIOUS PUBLIC SCHOOL STUDENTS BASED ON GRADE LEVEL, SO AS TO REVISE THE MANNER OF PROCUREMENT AND ADMINISTRATION OF THESE ASSESSMENTS, AMONG OTHER THINGS; AND TO AMEND SECTION 59-25-410, RELATING TO THE DATE BY WHICH PUBLIC SCHOOL TEACHERS MUST BE NOTIFIED OF THEIR TENTATIVE ASSIGNMENTS FOR THE UPCOMING SCHOOL YEAR, SO AS TO CHANGE THIS DATE FROM AUGUST FIFTEENTH TO AUGUST EIGHTH.
Very respectfully,
President
Received as information.
CONFERENCE REPORT
H. 4391 (Word version)
The General Assembly, Columbia, S.C., June 15, 2016
The COMMITTEE OF CONFERENCE, to whom was referred: (Doc. No. H:\legwork\confreports\bh\4391c002.bh.vr16. docx):
H. 4391 (Word version) -- Reps. Burns, Yow, Chumley, Felder, Loftis, Bradley and Collins: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 44-43-305, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO TERMS DEFINED IN THE REVISED UNIFORM ANATOMICAL GIFT ACT, SO AS TO CHANGE THE DEFINITION OF "TISSUE" TO INCLUDE BRAIN TISSUE IN CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES; AND TO AMEND SECTION 44-43-350, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO AUTHORIZED RECIPIENTS OF ANATOMICAL GIFTS, SO AS TO CLARIFY THAT GIFTS OF BRAIN TISSUE MAY BE USED ONLY FOR RESEARCH OR EDUCATION.
Beg leave to report that they have duly and carefully considered the same and recommend:
That the same do pass with the following amendments
Amend the bill, as and if amended, by striking the bill in its entirety and inserting:
/ TO CREATE THE "BRAIN TISSUE DONOR STUDY COMMITTEE" TO PROVIDE A PROCESS AND PROCEDURE FOR CITIZENS OF THIS STATE TO DONATE THEIR BRAIN TISSUE UPON THEIR DEATH FOR RESEARCH AND EDUCATION, TO PROVIDE FOR MEMBERSHIP OF THE STUDY COMMITTEE, TO REQUIRE THE STUDY COMMITTEE TO PREPARE A REPORT FOR THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY, AND TO INCLUDE A SUNSET PROVISION FOR THE STUDY COMMITTEE.
Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the State of South Carolina:
SECTION 1. There is created the Brain Tissue Donor Study Committee charged with providing a process and procedure for citizens of this State to designate that upon his or her death, the person's brain tissue be donated for the purpose of research and education. Membership of the study committee shall be comprised of seven members as follows:
(1) one researcher from Clemson University
(2) one researcher from the University of South Carolina
(3) one researcher from the Medical University of South Carolina
(4) one representative from the SC Department of Motor Vehicles
(5) one representative from Donate Life South Carolina
(6) one representative from LifePoint, Inc.
(7) one representative from the National Alliance on Mental Illness South Carolina.
Staff from the Senate and the House of Representatives shall assist the study committee. The study committee shall provide a report to the General Assembly by December 31, 2016, at which time the study committee shall dissolve. Members of the study committee shall serve without mileage, per diem, or subsistence.
SECTION 2. This act takes effect upon approval by the Governor. /
/s/Senator Thomas C. Alexander /s/Representative Mike Burns /s/Senator Raymond E. Cleary /s/Representative Jeff Bradley /s/Senator John L. Scott, Jr. Representative John R. King On Part of the Senate. On Part of the House.
Rep. BURNS explained the Conference Report.
The yeas and nays were taken resulting as follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Allison Atwater Bales Ballentine Bannister Bernstein Bowers Bradley Burns Clary Clemmons Clyburn Cobb-Hunter Cole Collins Corley H. A. Crawford Crosby Daning Davis Delleney Dillard Douglas Duckworth Erickson Finlay Forrester Fry Funderburk Gagnon George Gilliard Govan Hayes Henderson Henegan Herbkersman Hill Hiott Hixon Hosey Howard Huggins Jefferson Johnson Jordan Kirby Knight Limehouse Loftis Lowe Lucas McCoy McEachern M. S. McLeod Merrill Mitchell D. C. Moss V. S. Moss Neal Newton Norman Norrell Ott Pitts Pope Quinn Ridgeway Riley Rivers Robinson-Simpson Rutherford Ryhal Sandifer Simrill G. M. Smith G. R. Smith J. E. Smith Sottile Spires Tallon Taylor Thayer Tinkler Toole Weeks Whipper White Whitmire Williams Willis
Those who voted in the negative are:
The Conference Report was adopted and a message was ordered sent to the Senate accordingly.
The following was received:
Columbia, S.C., June 15, 2016
Mr. Speaker and Members of the House:
The Senate respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has adopted the report of the Committee of Free Conference on H. 3186. The Report of the Committee of Free Conference, having been adopted by both Houses, it was ordered that the title be changed to that of an Act and the Act enrolled for ratification.
H. 3186 (Word version) -- Reps. Finlay, Cole, Anderson, Bales, G. A. Brown, R. L. Brown, Felder, Funderburk, Hart, Knight, Lucas, Murphy, Newton, Norman, Norrell, Pope, Putnam, Rivers, Southard, Spires, Tallon, Taylor, Wells, Williams, Willis, Long, Henderson, G. R. Smith, G. M. Smith, McCoy, Clary, J. E. Smith, W. J. McLeod, Weeks, Whipper, Hicks, Atwater, Ballentine and Stavrinakis: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 8-13-100, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO DEFINITIONS IN REGARD TO ETHICS AND GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY, SO AS TO REVISE THE DEFINITION OF "BUSINESS WITH WHICH HE IS ASSOCIATED"; AND TO AMEND SECTION 8-13-1120, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO CONTENTS OF STATEMENTS OF ECONOMIC INTERESTS, SO AS TO REVISE THE FORM AND REQUIRED CONTENTS OF STATEMENTS OF ECONOMIC INTERESTS.
Very respectfully,
President
Received as information.
Rep. PITTS moved that the Committee of Conference on the following Bill be resolved into a Committee of Free Conference and briefly explained the Conference Committee's reasons for this request:
H. 4763 (Word version) -- Reps. Pope, D. C. Moss, Yow, Hardee, Duckworth, Johnson, Goldfinch, Southard, Long, Felder, Taylor, George, Simrill, Jordan, Chumley, Clemmons, Sandifer, Wells, Whitmire, Funderburk and Tallon: A BILL TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING SECTION 1-7-180 SO AS TO CREATE THE INTERNET CRIMES AGAINST CHILDREN FUND TO INVESTIGATE, PROSECUTE, AND PREVENT INTERNET CRIMES AGAINST CHILDREN; AND TO AMEND SECTIONS 14-1-206, 14-1-207, AND 14-1-208, ALL AS AMENDED, ALL RELATING TO ADDITIONAL ASSESSMENTS IMPOSED BY CERTAIN COURTS, SO AS TO REVISE THE AMOUNT OF AN ASSESSMENT THAT A PERSON MUST PAY.
The yeas and nays were taken resulting as follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Atwater Bales Ballentine Bannister Bernstein Bingham Bowers Bradley R. L. Brown Burns Chumley Clary Clemmons Clyburn Cobb-Hunter Cole Collins Corley Crosby Daning Davis Delleney Dillard Douglas Duckworth Felder Finlay Forrester Fry Funderburk Gagnon George Gilliard Govan Hayes Henegan Herbkersman Hill Hiott Hixon Hosey Howard Huggins Jefferson Johnson Kennedy King Kirby Knight Limehouse Loftis Lucas Mack McCoy McEachern M. S. McLeod Merrill Mitchell D. C. Moss V. S. Moss Neal Newton Norman Norrell Ott Pitts Pope Quinn Ridgeway Riley Rivers Robinson-Simpson Rutherford Ryhal Sandifer Simrill G. M. Smith G. R. Smith J. E. Smith Sottile Spires Tallon Tinkler Toole Weeks Whipper White Whitmire Williams Willis
Those who voted in the negative are:
The Committee of Conference was thereby resolved into a Committee of Free Conference. The SPEAKER appointed Reps. PITTS, POPE and WEEKS to the Committee of Free Conference and a message was ordered sent to the Senate accordingly.
FREE CONFERENCE REPORT
H. 4763 (Word version)
The General Assembly, Columbia, S.C., June 15, 2016
The COMMITTEE OF FREE CONFERENCE, to whom was referred: (Doc. No. L:\S-JUD\AMEND\CRJUD4763.DOCX):
H. 4763 (Word version) -- Reps. Pope, D.C. Moss, Yow, Hardee, Duckworth, Johnson, Goldfinch, Southard, Long, Felder, Taylor, George, Simrill, Jordan, Chumley, Clemmons, Sandifer, Wells, Whitmire, Funderburk and Tallon: A BILL TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING SECTION 1-7-180 SO AS TO CREATE THE INTERNET CRIMES AGAINST CHILDREN FUND TO INVESTIGATE, PROSECUTE, AND PREVENT INTERNET CRIMES AGAINST CHILDREN; AND TO AMEND SECTIONS 14-1-206, 14-1-207, AND 14-1-208, ALL AS AMENDED, ALL RELATING TO ADDITIONAL ASSESSMENTS IMPOSED BY CERTAIN COURTS, SO AS TO REVISE THE AMOUNT OF AN ASSESSMENT THAT A PERSON MUST PAY.
Beg leave to report that they have duly and carefully considered the same and recommend:
That the same do pass with the following amendments:
Amend the bill, as and if amended, by striking all after the enacting words and inserting:
/ SECTION 1. This act may be cited as "Alicia's Law".
SECTION 2. Article 1, Chapter 7, Title 1 of the 1976 Code is amended by adding:
"Section 1-7-180. There is created in the State Treasury the Internet Crimes Against Children Fund. This fund is separate and distinct from the general fund of the State and all other funds. Earnings and interest on this fund, and any subfund to which its funds are credited, must be credited to the fund and any balance in the fund at the end of a fiscal year carries forward in the fund in the succeeding fiscal year. The funds only may be used to investigate, prosecute, and prevent Internet crimes against children, such as cyberenticement and child pornography, including the necessary staffing, training, and equipment. Of the revenue credited to the fund each year, sixty percent must be allocated to a subfund for the Attorney General to operate the Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force, and the remaining forty percent must be transferred to a subfund of the Department of Public Safety to provide grants to local law enforcement agencies to be expended in accordance with the purpose of the fund."
SECTION 3. A. Section 14-1-206(A), (B), and (C) of the 1976 Code, as last amended by Act 353 of 2008, is further amended to read:
"(A) A person who is convicted of, pleads guilty or nolo contendere to, or forfeits bond for an offense occurring after June 30, 2008, tried in general sessions court must pay an amount equal to 107.5 110.5 percent of the fine imposed as an assessment. This assessment must be paid to the clerk of court in the county in which the criminal judgment is rendered for remittance to the State Treasurer by the county treasurer. The assessment is based upon that portion of the fine that is not suspended and assessments must not be waived, reduced, or suspended.
(B) The county treasurer must remit 35.35 34.39 percent of the revenue generated by the assessment imposed in subsection (A) to the county to be used for the purposes set forth in subsection (D) and remit the balance of the assessment revenue to the State Treasurer on a monthly basis by the fifteenth day of each month and make reports on a form and in a manner prescribed by the State Treasurer. Assessments paid in installments must be remitted as received.
(C) After deducting amounts provided pursuant to Section 14-1-210, the State Treasurer shall deposit the balance of assessments received as follows:
(1) 42.08 40.94 percent for programs established pursuant to Chapter 21, of Title 24 and the Shock Incarceration Program as provided in Article 13, Chapter 13, of Title 24;
(2) 14.74 14.34 percent to the Law Enforcement Training Council for training in the fields of law enforcement and criminal justice;
(3) .45 .44 percent to the Department of Public Safety to defray the cost of erecting and maintaining the South Carolina Law Enforcement Officers Hall of Fame. When funds collected pursuant to this item exceed the necessary costs and expenses of the South Carolina Law Enforcement Officers Hall of Fame operation and maintenance as determined by the Department of Public Safety, the department may retain, carry forward, and expend the surplus to defray the costs of maintaining and operating the Hall of Fame;
(4) 14.46 14.07 percent to the Office of Indigent Defense for the defense of indigents;
(5) 11.83 11.51 percent for the State Office of Victim Assistance;
(6) 15.39 14.97 percent to the general fund;
(7) .89 .87 percent to the Office of the Attorney General for a fund to provide support for counties involved in complex criminal litigation. For the purposes of this item, 'complex criminal litigation' means criminal cases in which the State is seeking the death penalty and has served notice as required by law upon the defendant's counsel, and the county involved has expended more than two hundred fifty thousand dollars for a particular case in direct support of operating the court of general sessions and for prosecution related expenses. The Attorney General shall develop guidelines for determining what expenses are reimbursable from the fund and shall approve all disbursements from the fund. Funds must be paid to a county for all expenditures authorized for reimbursement under this item except for the first one hundred thousand dollars the county expended in satisfying the requirements for reimbursement from the fund; however, money disbursed from this fund must be disbursed on a 'first received, first paid' basis. When revenue in the fund reaches five hundred thousand dollars, all revenue in excess of five hundred thousand dollars must be credited to the general fund of the State. Unexpended revenue in the fund at the end of the fiscal year carries over and may be expended in the next fiscal year; and
(8) .16 percent to the Office of the State Treasurer to defray the administrative expenses associated with collecting and distributing the revenue of these assessments; and
(9) 2.71 percent to the Internet Crimes Against Children Fund established pursuant to Section 1-7-180."
B. Section 14-1-207(A),(B), and (C) of the 1976 Code, as last amended by Act 353 of 2008, is further amended to read:
"(A) A person who is convicted of, pleads guilty or nolo contendere to, or forfeits bond for an offense occurring after June 30, 2008, tried in magistrates court must pay an amount equal to 107.5 110.5 percent of the fine imposed as an assessment. This assessment must be paid to the magistrate and deposited as required by Section 22-1-70 in the county in which the criminal judgment is rendered for remittance to the State Treasurer by the county treasurer. The assessment is based upon that portion of the fine that is not suspended and assessments must not be waived, reduced, or suspended. The assessment may not be imposed on convictions for violations of Sections 56-3-1970, 56-5-2510, and 56-5-2530, or another state law, municipal ordinance, or county ordinance restricting parking in a prohibited zone or in a parking place clearly designated for handicapped persons.
(B) The county treasurer must remit 11.16 10.86 percent of the revenue generated by the assessment imposed in subsection (A) to the county to be used for the purposes set forth in subsection (D) and remit the balance of the assessment revenue to the State Treasurer on a monthly basis by the fifteenth day of each month and make reports on a form and in a manner prescribed by the State Treasurer. Assessments paid in installments must be remitted as received.
(C) After deducting amounts provided pursuant to Section 14-1-210, the State Treasurer shall deposit the balance of the assessments received as follows:
(1) 32.36 31.48 percent for programs established pursuant to Chapter 21, of Title 24 and the Shock Incarceration Program as provided in Article 13, Chapter 13, of Title 24;
(2) 20.72 20.16 percent to the Law Enforcement Training Council for training in the fields of law enforcement and criminal justice;
(3) .60 .58 percent to the Department of Public Safety to defray the cost of erecting and maintaining the South Carolina Law Enforcement Officers Hall of Fame. When funds collected pursuant to this item exceed the necessary costs and expenses of the South Carolina Law Enforcement Officers Hall of Fame operation and maintenance as determined by the Department of Public Safety, the department may retain, carry forward, and expend the surplus to defray the costs of maintaining and operating the Hall of Fame;
(4) 18.82 18.31 percent for the State Office of Victim Assistance;
(5) 15.93 15.50 percent to the general fund;
(6) 10.49 10.21 percent to the Office of Indigent Defense for the defense of indigents;
(7) .92 .90 percent to the Office of the Attorney General for a fund to provide support for counties involved in complex criminal litigation. For the purposes of this item, 'complex criminal litigation' means criminal cases in which the State is seeking the death penalty and has served notice as required by law upon the defendant's counsel and the county involved has expended more than two hundred fifty thousand dollars for a particular case in direct support of operating the court of general sessions and for prosecution related expenses. The Attorney General shall develop guidelines for determining what expenses are reimbursable from the fund and shall approve all disbursements from the fund. Funds must be paid to a county for all expenditures authorized for reimbursement under this item except for the first one hundred thousand dollars the county expended in satisfying the requirements for reimbursement from the fund; however, money disbursed from this fund must be disbursed on a 'first received, first paid' basis. When revenue in the fund reaches five hundred thousand dollars, all revenue in excess of five hundred thousand dollars must be credited to the general fund of the State. Unexpended revenue in the fund at the end of the fiscal year carries over and may be expended in the next fiscal year; and
(8) .16 percent to the Office of the State Treasurer to defray the administrative expenses associated with collecting and distributing the revenue of these assessments; and
(9) 2.71 percent to the Internet Crimes Against Children Fund established pursuant to Section 1-7-180."
C. Section 14-1-208(A), (B), and (C) of the 1976 Code, as last amended by Act 353 of 2008, is further amended to read:
"(A) A person who is convicted of, or pleads guilty or nolo contendere to, or forfeits bond for an offense occurring after June 30, 2008, tried in municipal court must pay an amount equal to 107.5 110.5 percent of the fine imposed as an assessment. This assessment must be paid to the municipal clerk of court and deposited with the city treasurer for remittance to the State Treasurer. The assessment is based upon that portion of the fine that is not suspended, and assessments must not be waived, reduced, or suspended. The assessment may not be imposed on convictions for violations of Sections 56-3-1970, 56-5-2510, and 56-5-2530, or another state law, municipal ordinance, or county ordinance restricting parking in a prohibited zone or in a parking place clearly designated for handicapped persons.
(B) The city treasurer must remit 11.16 10.86 percent of the revenue generated by the assessment imposed in subsection (A) to the municipality to be used for the purposes set forth in subsection (D) and remit the balance of the assessment revenue to the State Treasurer on a monthly basis by the fifteenth day of each month and make reports on a form and in a manner prescribed by the State Treasurer. Assessments paid in installments must be remitted as received.
(C) After deducting amounts provided pursuant to Section 14-1-210, the State Treasurer shall deposit the balance of the assessments received as follows:
(1) 14.04 13.66 percent for programs established pursuant to Chapter 21, of Title 24 and the Shock Incarceration Program as provided in Article 13, Chapter 13, of Title 24;
(2) 13.89 13.51 percent to the Law Enforcement Training Council for training in the fields of law enforcement and criminal justice;
(3) .36 .35 percent to the Department of Public Safety to defray the cost of erecting and maintaining the South Carolina Law Enforcement Officers Hall of Fame. When funds collected pursuant to this item exceed the necessary costs and expenses of the South Carolina Law Enforcement Officers Hall of Fame operation and maintenance as determined by the Department of Public Safety, the department may retain, carry forward, and expend the surplus for the purpose of defraying the costs of maintaining and operating the Hall of Fame;
(4) 10.38 10.10 percent for the State Office of Victim Assistance;
(5) 11.53 11.22 percent to the general fund;
(6) 10.56 10.27 percent to the Office of Indigent Defense for the defense of indigents;
(7) .89 .87 percent to the Department of Mental Health to be used exclusively for the treatment and rehabilitation of drug addicts within the department's addiction center facilities;
(8) .54 .53 percent to the Office of the Attorney General for a fund to provide support for counties involved in complex criminal litigation. For the purposes of this item, 'complex criminal litigation' means criminal cases in which the State is seeking the death penalty and has served notice as required by law upon the defendant's counsel and the county involved has expended more than one hundred thousand dollars for a particular case in direct support of operating the court of general sessions and for prosecution related expenses. The Attorney General shall develop guidelines for determining what expenses are reimbursable from the fund and shall approve all disbursements from the fund. Funds must be paid to a county for all expenditures authorized for reimbursement under this item except for the first one hundred thousand dollars the county expended in satisfying the requirements for reimbursement from the fund; however, money disbursed from this fund must be disbursed on a 'first received, first paid' basis. When revenue in the fund reaches five hundred thousand dollars, all revenue in excess of five hundred thousand dollars must be credited to the general fund of the State. Unexpended revenue in the fund at the end of the fiscal year carries over and may be expended in the next fiscal year;
(9)(a) 9.16 8.91 percent to the Department of Public Safety for the programs established pursuant to Section 56-5-2953(E); and
(b) 1.31 1.27 percent to SLED for the programs established pursuant to Section 56-5-2953(E);
(10) 13.61 13.24 percent to the Governor's Task Force on Litter and in the expenditure of these funds, the provisions of Chapter 35, of Title 11 do not apply;
(11) 13.61 13.24 percent to the Department of Juvenile Justice. The Department of Juvenile Justice must apply the funds generated by this item to offset the nonstate share of allowable costs of operating juvenile detention centers so that per diem costs charged to local governments utilizing the juvenile detention centers do not exceed twenty-five dollars a day. Notwithstanding this provision of law, the director of the department may waive, reduce, defer, or reimburse the charges paid by local governments for juvenile detention placements. The department may apply the remainder of the funds generated by this item, if any, to operational or capital expenses associated with regional evaluation centers; and
(12) .12 percent to the Office of the State Treasurer to defray the administrative expenses associated with collecting and distributing the revenue of these assessments; and
(13) 2.71 percent to the Internet Crimes Against Children Fund established pursuant to Section 1-7-180."
SECTION 4. This act takes effect July 1, 2016. The provisions of SECTION 3 of this act are repealed two years from the act's effective date, or upon the funding of the Internet Crimes Against Children Fund by the General Assembly in the General Appropriations Act, whichever occurs first, unless reenacted or otherwise extended by the General Assembly. /
Amend title to conform.
Senator Greg Hembree Representative Thomas E. Pope Senator Tom Young, Jr. Representative Michael A. Pitts Senator Ronnie A. Sabb Representative J. David Weeks On Part of the Senate. On Part of the House.
Rep. PITTS explained the Free Conference Report.
The yeas and nays were taken resulting as follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Allison Atwater Bales Ballentine Bannister Bernstein Bingham Bowers Bradley G. A. Brown R. L. Brown Burns Chumley Clary Clemmons Clyburn Cobb-Hunter Cole Collins Corley H. A. Crawford Crosby Daning Davis Delleney Dillard Douglas Duckworth Erickson Felder Finlay Forrester Fry Funderburk Gagnon Gilliard Govan Hayes Henderson Henegan Herbkersman Hill Hiott Hixon Hosey Howard Huggins Jefferson Johnson Jordan Kennedy Kirby Knight Limehouse Loftis Lowe Lucas Mack McCoy McEachern M. S. McLeod Merrill Mitchell D. C. Moss V. S. Moss Neal Newton Norman Norrell Ott Pitts Pope Quinn Ridgeway Riley Rivers Robinson-Simpson Ryhal Sandifer Simrill G. M. Smith G. R. Smith J. E. Smith Sottile Spires Tallon Taylor Thayer Tinkler Toole Weeks Whipper White Whitmire Williams Willis
Those who voted in the negative are:
The Free Conference Report was adopted and a message was ordered sent to the Senate accordingly.
The following was received:
Columbia, S.C., June 15, 2016
Mr. Speaker and Members of the House:
The Senate respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has overridden the Veto by the Governor on R. 230, S. 973 by a vote of 36 to 0:
(R. 230, S. 973 (Word version)) -- Senators Cromer and Alexander: AN ACT TO AMEND SECTION 38-7-20, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO INSURANCE PREMIUM TAXES, SO AS TO EXTEND THE DATE THAT CERTAIN REVENUE MUST BE SENT TO THE SOUTH CAROLINA FORESTRY COMMISSION, TO REQUIRE ONE PERCENT OF PREMIUM TAXES COLLECTED TO BE TRANSFERRED TO THE AID TO FIRE DISTRICTS ACCOUNT WITHIN THE STATE TREASURY, AND TO REQUIRE ONE QUARTER OF ONE PERCENT OF PREMIUM TAXES TO THE AID TO EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES REGIONAL COUNCILS WITHIN THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL.
Very respectfully,
President
The SPEAKER ordered the following Veto printed in the Journal:
June 6, 2016
The Honorable Henry D. McMaster
President of the Senate
Statehouse, Second Floor
Columbia, South Carolina 29201
Dear Mr. President and Members of the Senate,
Today, I am vetoing and returning without my approval R. 230, S. 973 (Word version), a bill that earmarks 2.25 percent of insurance premium tax receipts for Forestry Commission and other local functions.
This year, as in past years, my FY 2016-17 Executive Budget has supported the Forestry Commission's firefighting efforts with $1.3 million in recommendations for capital replenishment and front line personnel. Additionally, my budget recommended $113,117,380 to meet our legally mandated support for local government functions, including first responders.
I understand that every agency in state and local government would prefer dedicated funding streams for their operations. Unfortunately, dedicating General Fund revenues to specific uses commits us to spending, limiting our ability to react during to revenue downturns and recessions. It further makes the appropriations process less transparent and accountable. The responsible approach to resourcing the core functions of government is to do so annually though the General Appropriation Act.
I will continue to fight for our firefighters and emergency medical professionals, but I believe that we should take a hard look at how we prioritize and fund our essential services each year. I have vetoed this bill because those decisions should not be on autopilot.
My very best,
Nikki R. Haley
Governor
The Veto on the following Act was taken up:
(R. 230, S. 973 (Word version)) -- Senators Cromer and Alexander: AN ACT TO AMEND SECTION 38-7-20, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO INSURANCE PREMIUM TAXES, SO AS TO EXTEND THE DATE THAT CERTAIN REVENUE MUST BE SENT TO THE SOUTH CAROLINA FORESTRY COMMISSION, TO REQUIRE ONE PERCENT OF PREMIUM TAXES COLLECTED TO BE TRANSFERRED TO THE AID TO FIRE DISTRICTS ACCOUNT WITHIN THE STATE TREASURY, AND TO REQUIRE ONE QUARTER OF ONE PERCENT OF PREMIUM TAXES TO THE AID TO EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES REGIONAL COUNCILS WITHIN THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL.
Rep. WHITE explained the Veto.
The question was put, shall the Act become a part of the law, the Veto of her Excellency, the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding, the yeas and nays were taken resulting as follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Atwater Bales Ballentine Bannister Bernstein Bingham Bowers Bradley R. L. Brown Burns Clary Clemmons Clyburn Cobb-Hunter Cole Collins Corley H. A. Crawford Crosby Daning Davis Delleney Dillard Douglas Duckworth Erickson Finlay Forrester Fry Funderburk Gagnon George Gilliard Govan Hayes Henegan Hill Hiott Hixon Hosey Howard Huggins Jefferson Johnson Jordan Kennedy King Kirby Knight Limehouse Loftis Lowe Lucas Mack McCoy McEachern McKnight M. S. McLeod Merrill D. C. Moss V. S. Moss Neal Newton Norman Norrell Pitts Quinn Ridgeway Riley Rivers Robinson-Simpson Ryhal Sandifer Simrill G. R. Smith J. E. Smith Sottile Spires Tallon Taylor Thayer Tinkler Toole Weeks Whipper White Whitmire Williams Willis
Those who voted in the negative are:
So, the Veto of the Governor was overridden and a message was ordered sent to the Senate accordingly.
The following was received:
Columbia, S.C., June 15, 2016
Mr. Speaker and Members of the House:
The Senate respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has overridden the Veto by the Governor on R. 231, S. 980 by a vote of 37 to 4:
(R. 231, S. 980 (Word version)) -- Senators Sheheen and McElveen: AN ACT TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING SECTION 40-69-300 SO AS TO PROVIDE ALL ANIMAL SHELTERS THAT PROVIDE VETERINARY SERVICES IN THIS STATE ARE SUBJECT TO SUPERVISION AND REGULATION BY THE BOARD OF VETERINARY MEDICAL EXAMINERS, TO REQUIRE ANIMAL SHELTERS AND VETERINARIANS WHO PROVIDE VETERINARY SERVICES IN ANIMAL SHELTERS TO MAINTAIN AND REPORT CERTAIN DATA TO THE DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, LICENSING AND REGULATION, TO REQUIRE THE DEPARTMENT MAKE THESE REPORTS AVAILABLE ON ITS INTERNET WEBSITE, TO PROVIDE THE RANGE OF VETERINARY SERVICES ALLOWED IN ANIMAL SHELTERS, TO PROVIDE CERTAIN RECORD-KEEPING REQUIREMENTS, AND TO PROVIDE NECESSARY DEFINITIONS; BY ADDING SECTION 40-69-305 SO AS TO PROHIBIT DISPENSING PRESCRIPTION DRUGS TO OWNERS OF END-USERS FOR THE TREATMENT OF BODILY INJURIES OR DISEASES OF ANIMALS IN SPECIFIC CIRCUMSTANCES AND TO PROVIDE PENALTIES FOR VIOLATIONS; TO AMEND SECTION 40-69-295, RELATING TO MOBILE VETERINARY FACILITIES, SO AS TO REQUIRE THESE FACILITIES MUST IDENTIFY THE CLOSEST LOCAL EMERGENCY VETERINARY SERVICES FACILITY AND COMMUNICATE IT IN A CERTAIN MANNER, TO PROHIBIT THE OPERATION OF MOBILE VETERINARY FACILITIES WITHIN SPECIFIC DISTANCES OF PRIVATELY OWNED VETERINARY PRACTICES, AND TO DEFINE NECESSARY TERMS; TO AMEND SECTION 56-3-9600, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO "NO MORE HOMELESS PETS" LICENSE PLATES AND A RELATED FUND ESTABLISHED TO SUPPORT LOCAL ANIMAL SPAYING AND NEUTERING EFFORTS, SO AS TO PROVIDE FOR THE OPERATION OF A RELATED GRANTS PROGRAM BY THE SOUTH CAROLINA ANIMAL CARE AND CONTROL ASSOCIATION OR ITS SUCCESSOR, TO REQUIRE THE DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE SHALL PROVIDE AN ANNUAL ACCOUNTING AND SUMMARY OF THIS PROGRAM TO THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY, AND TO PROVIDE LOCAL NONPROFIT SPAYING AND NEUTERING PROGRAMS MUST PROVIDE CERTAIN INFORMATION TO THE ASSOCIATION BEFORE THEY MAY RECEIVE REIMBURSEMENTS FOR SERVICES FROM THE FUND, AND TO PROVIDE THE ASSOCIATION SHALL PROVIDE THE DEPARTMENT WITH CERTAIN INFORMATION ABOUT THE NUMBER OF INDIVIDUALS WHO BRING IN ANIMALS FOR SPAYING OR NEUTERING AND THE NUMBER OF ANIMALS BROUGHT IN BY EACH OF THESE INDIVIDUALS; AND TO CREATE THE PET CARE AND HUMANE TREATMENT STUDY COMMITTEE, AND TO PROVIDE THE PURPOSES, DUTIES, COMPOSITION, AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS OF THE COMMITTEE.
Very respectfully,
President
The SPEAKER ordered the following Veto printed in the Journal:
June 8, 2016
The Honorable Henry D. McMaster
President of the Senate
Statehouse, Second Floor
Columbia, South Carolina 29201
Dear Mr. President and Members of the Senate,
Today, I am vetoing and returning without my approval, R. 231, S. 980 (Word version), a bill that would prohibit a nonprofit mobile veterinary practice from operating within "eyesight" of a privately owned veterinarian practice. I am vetoing this bill because it places an unnecessary restriction on low-cost and convenient animal-care options offered to pet owners.
South Carolina is a state that encourages homeless pet adoption, and this bill makes some attempts to clarify practice standards for individuals working in animal shelters and standardize medication labeling. It is unfortunate, then that pro-veterinary groups tacked this arbitrary and obstructionist provision onto an otherwise inoffensive bill. Allowing it to become law would be an undue economic protection measure for private veterinarians and a disservice to homeless pets and would-be pet owners.
I am aware this bill contains some reforms that are admirable, but while this occupational protection provision remains in the bill, I cannot support it. I urge you to support my veto of this bill and the South Carolinians that dedicate their time and resources to responsible pet ownership.
My very best,
Nikki R. Haley
Governor
The Veto on the following Act was taken up:
(R. 231, S. 980 (Word version)) -- Senators Sheheen and McElveen: AN ACT TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING SECTION 40-69-300 SO AS TO PROVIDE ALL ANIMAL SHELTERS THAT PROVIDE VETERINARY SERVICES IN THIS STATE ARE SUBJECT TO SUPERVISION AND REGULATION BY THE BOARD OF VETERINARY MEDICAL EXAMINERS, TO REQUIRE ANIMAL SHELTERS AND VETERINARIANS WHO PROVIDE VETERINARY SERVICES IN ANIMAL SHELTERS TO MAINTAIN AND REPORT CERTAIN DATA TO THE DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, LICENSING AND REGULATION, TO REQUIRE THE DEPARTMENT MAKE THESE REPORTS AVAILABLE ON ITS INTERNET WEBSITE, TO PROVIDE THE RANGE OF VETERINARY SERVICES ALLOWED IN ANIMAL SHELTERS, TO PROVIDE CERTAIN RECORD-KEEPING REQUIREMENTS, AND TO PROVIDE NECESSARY DEFINITIONS; BY ADDING SECTION 40-69-305 SO AS TO PROHIBIT DISPENSING PRESCRIPTION DRUGS TO OWNERS OF END-USERS FOR THE TREATMENT OF BODILY INJURIES OR DISEASES OF ANIMALS IN SPECIFIC CIRCUMSTANCES AND TO PROVIDE PENALTIES FOR VIOLATIONS; TO AMEND SECTION 40-69-295, RELATING TO MOBILE VETERINARY FACILITIES, SO AS TO REQUIRE THESE FACILITIES MUST IDENTIFY THE CLOSEST LOCAL EMERGENCY VETERINARY SERVICES FACILITY AND COMMUNICATE IT IN A CERTAIN MANNER, TO PROHIBIT THE OPERATION OF MOBILE VETERINARY FACILITIES WITHIN SPECIFIC DISTANCES OF PRIVATELY OWNED VETERINARY PRACTICES, AND TO DEFINE NECESSARY TERMS; TO AMEND SECTION 56-3-9600, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO "NO MORE HOMELESS PETS" LICENSE PLATES AND A RELATED FUND ESTABLISHED TO SUPPORT LOCAL ANIMAL SPAYING AND NEUTERING EFFORTS, SO AS TO PROVIDE FOR THE OPERATION OF A RELATED GRANTS PROGRAM BY THE SOUTH CAROLINA ANIMAL CARE AND CONTROL ASSOCIATION OR ITS SUCCESSOR, TO REQUIRE THE DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE SHALL PROVIDE AN ANNUAL ACCOUNTING AND SUMMARY OF THIS PROGRAM TO THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY, AND TO PROVIDE LOCAL NONPROFIT SPAYING AND NEUTERING PROGRAMS MUST PROVIDE CERTAIN INFORMATION TO THE ASSOCIATION BEFORE THEY MAY RECEIVE REIMBURSEMENTS FOR SERVICES FROM THE FUND, AND TO PROVIDE THE ASSOCIATION SHALL PROVIDE THE DEPARTMENT WITH CERTAIN INFORMATION ABOUT THE NUMBER OF INDIVIDUALS WHO BRING IN ANIMALS FOR SPAYING OR NEUTERING AND THE NUMBER OF ANIMALS BROUGHT IN BY EACH OF THESE INDIVIDUALS; AND TO CREATE THE PET CARE AND HUMANE TREATMENT STUDY COMMITTEE, AND TO PROVIDE THE PURPOSES, DUTIES, COMPOSITION, AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS OF THE COMMITTEE.
Rep. HIOTT explained the Veto.
The question was put, shall the Act become a part of the law, the Veto of her Excellency, the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding, the yeas and nays were taken resulting as follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Allison Atwater Bales Ballentine Bannister Bernstein Bingham Bowers R. L. Brown Burns Chumley Clary Clemmons Clyburn Cobb-Hunter Cole Collins Corley H. A. Crawford Crosby Daning Davis Delleney Dillard Douglas Duckworth Felder Finlay Forrester Fry Funderburk Gagnon George Gilliard Govan Hayes Henderson Henegan Herbkersman Hiott Hixon Hosey Huggins Jefferson Johnson Jordan Kennedy King Kirby Knight Limehouse Loftis Lowe Lucas Mack McCoy McEachern McKnight M. S. McLeod Merrill Mitchell D. C. Moss V. S. Moss Neal Newton Norrell Ott Pitts Quinn Ridgeway Riley Rivers Robinson-Simpson Rutherford Ryhal Sandifer Simrill G. M. Smith G. R. Smith J. E. Smith Sottile Spires Tallon Taylor Tinkler Toole Weeks Whipper White Whitmire Williams Willis
Those who voted in the negative are:
Hill Norman Thayer
So, the Veto of the Governor was overridden and a message was ordered sent to the Senate accordingly.
The following was received:
Columbia, S.C., June 15, 2016
Mr. Speaker and Members of the House:
The Senate respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has overridden the Veto by the Governor on R. 249, S. 1297 by a vote of 34 to 3:
(R. 249, S. 1297 (Word version)) -- Senator Sheheen: AN ACT TO AMEND ACT 185 OF 1999, RELATING TO PER DIEM PAYMENTS FOR MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF THE CHESTERFIELD COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT, TO PROVIDE THAT THE BOARD MAY ADJUST THE AMOUNT OF THE PER DIEM PAYMENTS AND TO PROVIDE FOR THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE ADJUSTED RATES.
Very respectfully,
President
The SPEAKER ordered the following Veto printed in the Journal:
June 6, 2016
The Honorable Henry D. McMaster
President of the Senate
Statehouse, Second Floor
Columbia, South Carolina 29201
Dear Mr. President and Members of the Senate,
I am vetoing and returning without my signature R. 249, S. 1297 (Word version), a bill that unconstitutionally sets forth how the members of the Chesterfield County School District Board receive per diem.
Our state's Constitution prohibits special laws from being enacted where a general law is applicable. In this case, a longstanding statute authorizes school boards to set their own per diem pursuant to Section 59-1-350 of the South Carolina Code of Laws. Because the General Assembly has already passed a statewide law declaring how school boards set per diem, this bill is unconstitutional special legislation in violation of Section 34, Article III.
In the past, I have signed a bill that simply restated a school board's existing statutory authority to set per diem, but this bill goes beyond that - this bill actually limits the school board's authority by postponing the effective date for when a new per diem amount is authorized. If it is important enough that adjusted per diem amounts are delayed for all school boards, then the General Assembly should amend the general statute rather than passing unconstitutional special legislation for a single school board.
Every member of the General Assembly is expected to vote on all legislation, including local bills. Members who fail to vote are supporting the violation of our Constitution, which we have all sworn to uphold. Therefore, I ask that you protect the provisions of our State Constitution that prohibit special legislation and sustain my veto.
My very best,
Nikki R. Haley
Governor
The Veto on the following Act was taken up:
(R. 249, S. 1297 (Word version)) -- Senator Sheheen: AN ACT TO AMEND ACT 185 OF 1999, RELATING TO PER DIEM PAYMENTS FOR MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF THE CHESTERFIELD COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT, TO PROVIDE THAT THE BOARD MAY ADJUST THE AMOUNT OF THE PER DIEM PAYMENTS AND TO PROVIDE FOR THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE ADJUSTED RATES.
Rep. HENEGAN explained the Veto.
The question was put, shall the Act become a part of the law, the Veto of her Excellency, the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding, the yeas and nays were taken resulting as follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Bales Bannister Bernstein Bingham Bowers Bradley R. L. Brown Burns Chumley Clary Clemmons Clyburn Cobb-Hunter Cole Collins Corley H. A. Crawford Crosby Daning Davis Delleney Dillard Douglas Duckworth Felder Finlay Funderburk Gagnon George Gilliard Govan Hayes Henderson Henegan Herbkersman Hosey Howard Jefferson Johnson Jordan Kennedy King Kirby Knight Loftis Lowe Lucas Mack McCoy McEachern M. S. McLeod Merrill Mitchell D. C. Moss Neal Newton Norman Ott Pitts Riley Robinson-Simpson Sandifer Simrill G. M. Smith J. E. Smith Sottile Tallon Taylor Tinkler Weeks Whitmire Williams
Those who voted in the negative are:
So, the Veto of the Governor was overridden and a message was ordered sent to the Senate accordingly.
Rep. POPE moved that the Committee of Conference on the following Bill be resolved into a Committee of Free Conference and briefly explained the Conference Committee's reasons for this request:
(R. 306, H. 3184 (Word version)) -- Reps. Pope, Cole, Anderson, Bales, G.A. Brown, Burns, Finlay, Funderburk, Hart, Knight, Lucas, Murphy, Newton, Norman, Norrell, Putnam, Rivers, Southard, Spires, Tallon, Taylor, Wells, Williams, Willis, Bernstein, Long, Douglas, Henderson, G.M. Smith, G.R. Smith, McCoy, McKnight, Clary, M.S. McLeod, Thayer, W.J. McLeod, Weeks, J.E. Smith and Stavrinakis: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 8-13-130, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE STATE ETHICS COMMISSION'S AUTHORITY TO LEVY ENFORCEMENT AND ADMINISTRATIVE FEES, SO AS TO AUTHORIZE THE LEGISLATIVE ETHICS COMMITTEES TO LEVY ENFORCEMENT AND ADMINISTRATIVE FEES; TO AMEND SECTION 8-13-310, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE COMPOSITION OF THE STATE ETHICS COMMISSION, SO AS TO RECONSTITUTE THE STATE ETHICS COMMISSION; TO AMEND SECTION 8-13-320, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE DUTIES AND POWERS OF THE STATE ETHICS COMMISSION, SO AS TO CITE ADDITIONAL LEGAL AUTHORITY AUTHORIZING THE STATE ETHICS COMMISSION TO INITIATE AND RECEIVE COMPLAINTS AND TO PROVIDE THAT THE FILER OF A GROUNDLESS COMPLAINT MAY BE ORDERED TO REIMBURSE THE COMMISSION FOR COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE INVESTIGATION AND DISPOSITION OF THE COMPLAINT, TO AUTHORIZE COMMISSION STAFF TO PARTICIPATE IN FACTS SUFFICIENCY DETERMINATIONS, TO REVISE THE PROCEDURES BY WHICH THE COMMISSION, UPON ITS OWN MOTION, MAY FILE A VERIFIED ETHICS COMPLAINT, TO REVISE THE COMMISSION'S REQUIRED ACTIONS AND TREATMENT OF COMPLAINT INFORMATION FOLLOWING A DISMISSAL OR A FINDING OF PROBABLE CAUSE, TO REVISE THE PROCEDURES BY WHICH THE COMMISSION DETERMINES PROBABLE CAUSE; TO PROVIDE THAT COMMISSION HEARINGS MUST BE OPEN TO THE PUBLIC, AND TO REVISE THE PROCEDURES BY WHICH THE COMMISSION ISSUES FORMAL ADVISORY OPINIONS; BY ADDING SECTION 8-13-322 SO AS TO PROHIBIT ANYONE WHO IS THE SUBJECT OF A PENDING ETHICS INVESTIGATION OR OPEN COMPLAINT FROM CONTACTING OR ATTEMPTING TO CONTACT, EITHER DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY, A MEMBER OF THE STATE ETHICS COMMISSION OR A LEGISLATIVE ETHICS COMMITTEE; TO AMEND SECTION 8-13-530, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE POWERS AND DUTIES OF THE LEGISLATIVE ETHICS COMMITTEES, SO AS TO REVISE THE COMMITTEES' FUNCTIONS AND RESPONSIBILITIES AND TO REQUIRE THE LEGISLATIVE ETHICS COMMITTEES TO REFER CERTAIN ETHICS COMPLAINTS TO THE STATE ETHICS COMMISSION FOR INVESTIGATION; BY ADDING SECTION 8-13-535 SO AS TO ESTABLISH PROCEDURES FOR THE LEGISLATIVE ETHICS COMMITTEES TO ISSUE FORMAL ADVISORY OPINIONS; TO AMEND SECTION 8-13-540, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE MANNER IN WHICH THE LEGISLATIVE ETHICS COMMITTEES CONDUCT INVESTIGATIONS AND HEARINGS, SO AS TO ESTABLISH PROCEDURES FOR FORWARDING CERTAIN ETHICS COMPLAINTS TO THE STATE ETHICS COMMISSION FOR DISPOSITION AND TO MAKE OTHER CONFORMING CHANGES; AND TO AMEND SECTION 8-13-550, RELATING TO THE CONSIDERATION OF AN ETHICS COMMITTEE REPORT BY THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OR SENATE, SO AS TO ELIMINATE THE CONFIDENTIALITY EXCEPTION FOR PRIVATE REPRIMANDS.
The yeas and nays were taken resulting as follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Alexander Allison Atwater Bales Ballentine Bannister Bingham Bowers Bradley R. L. Brown Burns Chumley Clary Clemmons Clyburn Cobb-Hunter Cole Collins Corley H. A. Crawford Crosby Daning Davis Delleney Dillard Douglas Duckworth Erickson Felder Finlay Forrester Fry Funderburk Gagnon George Gilliard Govan Hayes Henegan Herbkersman Hiott Hixon Hosey Howard Huggins Jefferson Johnson Jordan Kennedy King Kirby Knight Limehouse Loftis Lowe Lucas McCoy McEachern McKnight M. S. McLeod Merrill Mitchell D. C. Moss V. S. Moss Neal Newton Norman Norrell Ott Pitts Pope Quinn Ridgeway Riley Robinson-Simpson Rutherford Ryhal Sandifer Simrill G. R. Smith J. E. Smith Sottile Spires Tallon Taylor Thayer Tinkler Toole Weeks Whipper Williams Willis
Those who voted in the negative are:
The Committee of Conference was thereby resolved into a Committee of Free Conference. The SPEAKER appointed Reps. POPE, G. M. SMITH and NORRELL to the Committee of Free Conference and a message was ordered sent to the Senate accordingly.
Rep. HIOTT moved to reconsider the vote whereby the Veto on the following Bill was sustained, which was agreed to:
(R. 302, H. 4327 (Word version)) -- Rep. G. M. Smith: AN ACT TO AMEND CHAPTER 71, TITLE 44, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO HOSPICE PROGRAMS, SO AS TO ADD DEFINITIONAL TERMS; TO ESTABLISH CERTAIN REQUIREMENTS FOR HOSPICE LICENSES; TO ESTABLISH A PROCESS FOR THE REGISTRATION OF MULTIPLE OFFICE LOCATIONS OF A PARENT HOSPICE ORGANIZATION AND FOR THE EXPANSION OF A HOSPICE'S OR PARENT HOSPICE ORGANIZATION'S SERVICE AREA; TO CREATE A TASK FORCE TO STUDY ISSUES RELATING TO GEOGRAPHIC LIMITATIONS ON HOSPICES LICENSED IN CERTAIN REGIONS AND TO REQUIRE A REPORT WITH RECOMMENDATIONS; AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES.
Rep. G. M. SMITH spoke against the Veto.
Rep. OTT spoke against the Veto.
The question was put, shall the Act become a part of the law, the Veto of her Excellency, the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding, the yeas and nays were taken resulting as follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Alexander Bales Bernstein Bowers R. L. Brown Clary Clemmons Clyburn Cobb-Hunter Collins Corley H. A. Crawford Crosby Daning Dillard Douglas Fry Funderburk Gilliard Govan Hart Hayes Henderson Henegan Herbkersman Hiott Hixon Hosey Howard Jefferson Jordan King Kirby Knight Lucas McEachern McKnight M. S. McLeod Mitchell Neal Norrell Ott Pitts Pope Ridgeway Riley Robinson-Simpson Rutherford J. E. Smith Spires Taylor Tinkler Weeks White Williams
Those who voted in the negative are:
Allison Atwater Ballentine Bannister Bingham Bradley Burns Chumley Cole Davis Delleney Duckworth Erickson Felder Finlay Forrester Gagnon Huggins Johnson Kennedy Limehouse Loftis Lowe McCoy Merrill D. C. Moss V. S. Moss Newton Norman Quinn Rivers Ryhal Sandifer Simrill G. M. Smith G. R. Smith Sottile Thayer Toole Whitmire Willis
So, the Veto of the Governor was sustained and a message was ordered sent to the Senate accordingly.
The following was received:
Columbia, S.C., June 15, 2016
Mr. Speaker and Members of the House:
The Senate respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has adopted the report of the Committee of Conference on H. 4391:
H. 4391 (Word version) -- Reps. Burns, Yow, Chumley, Felder, Loftis, Bradley and Collins: A BILL TO CREATE THE "BRAIN TISSUE DONOR STUDY COMMITTEE" TO PROVIDE A PROCESS AND PROCEDURE FOR CITIZENS OF THIS STATE TO DONATE THEIR BRAIN TISSUE UPON THEIR DEATH FOR RESEARCH AND EDUCATION, TO PROVIDE FOR MEMBERSHIP OF THE STUDY COMMITTEE, TO REQUIRE THE STUDY COMMITTEE TO PREPARE A REPORT FOR THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY, AND TO INCLUDE A SUNSET PROVISION FOR THE STUDY COMMITTEE.
Very respectfully,
President
The Report of the Committee of Conference, having been adopted by both bodies and having received three readings in both Houses, it was ordered that the title be changed to that of an Act, and that it be enrolled for ratification.
H. 3184 -- Free Conference Report
The General Assembly, Columbia, S.C., June 15, 2016
The COMMITTEE OF FREE CONFERENCE, to whom was referred:
H. 3184 (Word version) -- Reps. Pope, Cole, Anderson, Bales, G.A. Brown, Burns, Finlay, Funderburk, Hart, Knight, Lucas, Murphy, Newton, Norman, Norrell, Putnam, Rivers, Southard, Spires, Tallon, Taylor, Wells, Williams, Willis, Bernstein, Long, Douglas, Henderson, G.M. Smith, G.R. Smith, McCoy, McKnight, Clary, M.S. McLeod, Thayer, W.J. McLeod, Weeks, J.E. Smith and Stavrinakis: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 8-13-310, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE STATE ETHICS COMMISSION AND ITS MEMBERSHIP, SO AS TO RECONSTITUTE THE MEMBERSHIP OF THE COMMISSION EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2015, TO CONSIST OF FOUR MEMBERS APPOINTED BY THE GOVERNOR, FOUR MEMBERS ELECTED BY THE SUPREME COURT, TWO MEMBERS ELECTED BY THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, AND TWO MEMBERS ELECTED BY THE SENATE, RESPECTIVELY, TO PROVIDE FOR THE QUALIFICATIONS OF THESE MEMBERS, TO PROVIDE FOR OFFICERS OF THE COMMISSION, AND TO PROVIDE FOR THE MEMBERS' TERMS OF OFFICE AND MANNER OF THEIR REMOVAL UNDER CERTAIN CONDITIONS; TO AMEND SECTION 8-13-320, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE DUTIES, POWERS, AND PROCEDURES OF THE STATE ETHICS COMMISSION, SO AS TO REVISE THESE DUTIES, POWERS, AND PROCEDURES INCLUDING PROVISIONS TO VEST WITH THE COMMISSION THE ADDITIONAL RESPONSIBILITY TO INITIATE OR RECEIVE COMPLAINTS AGAINST MEMBERS OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY, ITS STAFF, AND CANDIDATES FOR ELECTION TO THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY, TO INITIATE OR RECEIVE COMPLAINTS AGAINST JUDGES AND OTHER JUDICIAL OFFICIALS OF THE UNIFIED JUDICIAL SYSTEM AND THEIR STAFFS, TO PROVIDE FOR THE INVESTIGATION AND PROCESSING OF COMPLAINTS AGAINST GENERAL ASSEMBLY MEMBERS, STAFF, AND CANDIDATES PURSUANT TO SPECIFIED PROCEDURES AND FOR THE REFERRAL OF SUBSTANTIVE COMPLAINTS TO THE APPROPRIATE HOUSE OR SENATE ETHICS COMMITTEES FOR DISPOSITION TOGETHER WITH THE ETHICS COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATION AS TO WHETHER OR NOT THERE IS PROBABLE CAUSE TO BELIEVE A VIOLATION HAS OCCURRED, TO PROVIDE FOR THE INVESTIGATION AND PROCESSING OF COMPLAINTS AGAINST JUDGES AND OTHER JUDICIAL OFFICIALS OR THEIR STAFF PURSUANT TO SPECIFIED PROCEDURES AND, AFTER INVESTIGATION, FOR THE REFERRAL OF SUBSTANTIVE COMPLAINTS TO THE COMMISSION ON JUDICIAL CONDUCT AND THE SUPREME COURT FOR DISPOSITION TOGETHER WITH THE ETHICS COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATION AS TO WHETHER OR NOT THERE IS PROBABLE CAUSE TO BELIEVE A VIOLATION HAS OCCURRED; TO AMEND SECTIONS 8-13-530 AND 8-13-540, BOTH AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE DUTIES, FUNCTIONS, AND PROCEDURES OF THE HOUSE AND SENATE ETHICS COMMITTEES, SO AS TO REVISE THESE DUTIES, FUNCTIONS, AND PROCEDURES IN ORDER TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE ABOVE PROVISIONS AND TO MAKE OTHER CHANGES; BY ADDING SECTION 8-13-545 SO AS TO AUTHORIZE THE HOUSE OR SENATE ETHICS COMMITTEES TO ISSUE FORMAL ADVISORY OPINIONS AND PROVIDE FOR THEIR EFFECT AND APPLICABILITY; AND BY ADDING ARTICLE 6 TO CHAPTER 13, TITLE 8 SO AS TO PROVIDE FOR JUDICIAL COMPLAINT PROCEDURES IN REGARD TO THE ABOVE PROVISIONS.
Beg leave to report that they have duly and carefully considered the same and recommend:
That the same do pass with the following amendments: / Amend the bill, as and if amended, by striking all after the enacting words and inserting:
/ SECTION 1. Section 8-13-130 of the 1976 Code, as added by Act 353 of 2008, is further amended to read:
"Section 8-13-130 (A) The State Ethics Commission, Senate Ethics Committee, and House of Representatives Ethics Committee may levy an enforcement or administrative fee on a person who is found in violation, or who admits to a violation, of the "Ethics, Government Accountability and Campaign Reform Act of 1991" pursuant to Title 2 or Title 8. The fee must be used to reimburse the commission, the appropriate legislative Ethics Committee, or combination thereof, for costs associated with the investigation and hearing of a violation. The costs associated include:
(1) the investigator's time;
(2) mileage, meals, and lodging;
(3) the prosecutor's time;
(4) the hearing panel's travel, per diem, and meals;
(5) administrative time;
(6) subpoena costs to include witness fees and mileage; and
(7) miscellaneous costs such as postage and supplies.
This fee is These fees and costs are in addition to any fines as otherwise provided by law."
SECTION 2. Section 8-13-310 of the 1976 Code, as last amended by Act 279 of 2012, is further amended to read:
"Section 8-13-310. (A) The State Ethics Commission as constituted under law in effect before July 1, 1992, is reconstituted to continue in existence with the appointment and qualification of the at-large members as prescribed in this section and with the changes in duties and powers as prescribed in this chapter. On July 1, 1993, when the duties and powers given to the Secretary of State in Chapter 17 of Title 2 are transferred to the State Ethics Commission, the Code Commissioner is directed to change all references to 'this chapter' in Article 3 of Chapter 13 of Title 8 to 'this chapter and Chapter 17 of Title 2'.
(B)(A)(1) There is created the State Ethics Commission composed of nine eight members who must be appointed in the following manner:
(a) four members must be appointed by the Governor, upon the advice and consent of the General Assembly. no more than two of whom are members of the appointing Governor's political party;
(b) two members must be selected by the Senate, one upon the recommendation of the members of the majority political party in the Senate and one upon the recommendation of the members of the largest minority political party in the Senate;
(c) two members must be selected by the House of Representatives, one upon the recommendation of the members of the majority political party in the House and one upon the recommendation of the members of the largest minority political party in the House.
Each member must be appointed with the advice and consent of the General Assembly. One member shall represent each of the seven congressional districts, and two members must be appointed from the State at large.
(2) The terms of the members serving on the State Ethics Commission as of March 30, 2017, shall end on March 31, 2017. A member who is serving at that time and who has not completed a full five-year term may be reappointed pursuant to this subsection. The initial appointments for service to begin on April 1, 2017, must be made as follows:
(a) two members appointed by the Governor must be appointed for a three-year term;
(b) two members appointed by the Governor must be appointed for a five-year term;
(c) one member appointed by the Senate upon the recommendation of the members of the majority political party in the Senate shall serve a three-year term;
(d) one member appointed by the Senate upon the recommendation of the members of the largest minority political party of the Senate must be appointed for a five-year term;
(e) one member appointed by the House upon the recommendation of the members of the majority political party of the House of Representatives must be appointed for a five-year term; and
(f) one member appointed by the House upon the recommendation of the members of the largest minority political party of the House of Representatives must be appointed for a three-year term.
The initial members who have served terms that are less than five years are eligible to be reappointed for one full five-year term.
(B) The qualifications the appointing authorities shall consider for the appointees include, but are not limited to:
(a) constitutional qualifications;
(b) ethical fitness;
(c) character;
(d) mental stability;
(e) experience; and
(f) judicial temperament.
(C)(1) In addition to other information that may be requested, candidates for appointment must provide the following information to the appointing authority, which must be shared with the General Assembly during the confirmation process:
(a) The candidate's membership in any civic, charitable, or social groups within the previous four years;
(b) A contribution made by the candidate to a candidate for Governor, the Lieutenant Governor, or a member of the General Assembly within the previous four years; and
(c) A contribution, as defined in 8-13-1300(7), made by the candidate within the previous four years to a candidate as defined in 8-13-100(5).
(2) The appointing authorities shall make their appointments based on merit. However, in making appointments to the commission, the appointing authorities shall ensure that race, color, gender, national origin, and other demographic factors are considered to ensure the geographic and political balance of the appointments, and shall strive to assure that the membership of the commission will represent, to the greatest extent possible, all segments of the population of the State.
(3) The following are not eligible to serve on the State Ethics Commission:
(a) a member of the General Assembly;
(b) a former member of the General Assembly within eight years following the termination of his service in the General Assembly;
(c) a family member, as defined by Section 8-13-100(15), of a member of the General Assembly or the Governor, Lieutenant Governor or other statewide elected official;
(d) a person who made a campaign contribution, as defined by Section 8-13-1300(7), within the previous four years to the Governor who appointed the person to serve on the State Ethics Commission, as well as that Governor's Lieutenant Governor;
(e) a person who registered as a lobbyist within four years of being appointed to the State Ethics Commission;
(f) a person who is under the jurisdiction of the State Ethics Commission, House of Representatives Ethics Committee, or Senate Ethics Committee.
No member of the General Assembly or other public official must be eligible to serve on the State Ethics Commission.
The Governor shall make the appointments based on merit regardless of race, color, creed, or gender and shall strive to assure that the membership of the commission is representative of all citizens of the State of South Carolina.
(C)(D) The terms of the members are for five years and until their successors are appointed and qualify. The members of the State Ethics Commission serving on this chapter's effective date may continue to serve until the expiration of their terms. These members may then be appointed to serve one full five-year term under the provisions of this chapter. Members representing the first, third, and sixth congressional districts on this chapter's effective date are eligible to be appointed for a full five-year term in or after 1991. Members currently representing the second, fourth, and fifth congressional districts on this chapter's effective date are eligible to be appointed for a full five-year term in or after 1993. The initial appointments for the at large members of the commission created by this chapter must be for a one-, two-, or three-year term, but these at-large members are eligible subsequently for a full five-year term. Under this section, the at-large members of the commission are to be appointed to begin service on or after July 1, 1992. Vacancies must be filled in the manner of the original appointment for the unexpired portion of the term only. Members of the commission who serve less than a full five-year term may be reappointed for one full five-year term. Members of the commission who have completed a full five-year term are not eligible for reappointment. A member shall not serve on the commission in hold-over status after the member's term expires. An appointee shall not serve on the commission, even in interim capacity, until he has been confirmed by the General Assembly.
(D)(E) The commission shall elect a chairman, vice-chairman, and such other officers as it considers necessary. Five members of the commission shall constitute a quorum. The commission must adopt a policy concerning the attendance of its members at commission meetings. The commission meets at the call of the chairman or a majority of its members. Members of the commission, while serving on business of the commission, receive per diem, mileage, and subsistence as provided by law for members of state boards, committees, and commissions.
(F)(1) A commission member appointed by the Governor may be removed from office by the Governor for malfeasance, misfeasance, incompetency, absenteeism, conflicts of interest, misconduct, persistent neglect of duty in office, or incapacity pursuant to Section 1-3-240.
(2) A commission member appointed by the Senate may be removed for malfeasance, misfeasance, incompetency, absenteeism, conflicts of interest, misconduct, persistent neglect of duty in office, or incapacity upon a vote of two-thirds of the membership of the Senate.
(3) A commission member appointed by the House of Representatives may be removed for malfeasance, misfeasance, incompetency, absenteeism, conflicts of interest, misconduct, persistent neglect of duty in office, or incapacity upon a vote of two-thirds of the membership of the House of Representatives."
SECTION 3. Section 8-13-320(9) of the 1976 Code is amended to read:
"(9) to initiate or receive complaints and make investigations, as provided in item (10), or as provided in Section 8-13-540, as appropriate, of statements filed or allegedly failed to be filed under the provisions of this chapter and Chapter 17 of Title 2 and, upon complaint by an individual, of an alleged violation of this chapter or Chapter 17 of Title 2 by a public official, public member, or public employee except members or staff, including staff elected to serve as officers of or candidates for the General Assembly unless otherwise provided for under House or Senate rules. Any person charged with a violation of this chapter or Chapter 17 of Title 2 is entitled to the administrative hearing process contained in this section or in Article 5 of this chapter, as appropriate.
(a) The commission may commence an investigation on the filing of a complaint by an individual or by the commission, as provided in item (10)(d), upon a majority vote of the total membership of the commission.
(b)(1) No complaint may be accepted by the commission concerning a candidate for elective office during the fifty-day period before an election in which he is a candidate. During this fifty-day period, any person may petition the court of common pleas alleging the violations complained of and praying for appropriate relief by way of mandamus or injunction, or both. Within ten days, a rule to show cause hearing must be held, and the court must either dismiss the petition or direct that a mandamus order or an injunction, or both, be issued. A violation of this chapter by a candidate during this fifty-day period must be considered to be an irreparable injury for which no adequate remedy at law exists. The institution of an action for injunctive relief does not relieve any party to the proceeding from any penalty prescribed for violations of this chapter. The court must award reasonable attorneys fees and costs to the nonpetitioning party if a petition for mandamus or injunctive relief is dismissed based upon a finding that the:
(i) petition is being presented for an improper purpose such as harassment or to cause delay;
(ii) claims, defenses, and other legal contentions are not warranted by existing law or are based upon a frivolous argument for the extension, modification, or reversal of existing law or the establishment of new law; and
(iii) allegations and other factual contentions do not have evidentiary support or, if specifically so identified, are not likely to have evidentiary support after reasonable opportunity for further investigation or discovery.
(2) Action on a complaint filed against a candidate which was received more than fifty days before the election but which cannot be disposed of or dismissed by the commission at least thirty days before the election must be postponed until after the election.
(c) If an alleged violation is found to be groundless by the commission, the entire matter must be stricken from public record. If the commission finds that the complaining party wilfully filed a groundless complaint, the finding must be reported to the Attorney General. The wilful filing of a groundless complaint is a misdemeanor and, upon conviction, a person must be fined not more than one thousand dollars or imprisoned not more than one year. In lieu of the criminal penalty provided by this item, a civil penalty of not more than one thousand dollars may be assessed against the complainant upon proof, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the filing of the complaint was wilful and without just cause or with malice. In addition to any civil or criminal penalties, the filer of the groundless complaint may be ordered to reimburse the commission for the commission's costs associated with the investigation and disposition of the complaint.
(d) Action may not be taken on a complaint filed more than four years after the violation is alleged to have occurred unless a person, by fraud or other device, prevents discovery of the violation. The Attorney General may initiate an action to recover a fee, compensation, gift, or profit received by a person as a result of a violation of the chapter no later than one year after a determination by the commission that a violation of this chapter has occurred;"
SECTION 4. Section 8-13-320(10)(b) of the 1976 Code is amended to read:
"(b) If the commission, or its executive director, or staff designated by the commission, determines that the complaint does not allege facts sufficient to constitute a violation, the commission must dismiss the complaint and notify the complainant and respondent. The entire matter must be stricken from public record unless the respondent, by written authorization to the State Ethics Commission, waives the confidentiality of the existence of the complaint and authorizes the release of information about the disposition of the complaint."
SECTION 5. Section 8-13-320(10)(c) of the 1976 Code is amended to read:
"(c) If the commission, or its executive director, or staff designated by the commission determines that the complaint alleges facts sufficient to constitute a violation, an investigation may be conducted of the alleged violation."
SECTION 6. Section 8-13-320(10)(d) of the 1976 Code is amended to read:
"(d) If the commission, upon the receipt of any information, finds probable cause to believe that a violation of the chapter has occurred, it may, upon its own motion and an affirmative vote of the majority of the total membership six or more members of the commission, file a verified complaint, in writing, that states the name of the person alleged to have committed a violation of this chapter and the particulars of the violation. The commission shall forward a copy of the complaint, a general statement of the applicable law with respect to the complaint, and a statement explaining the due process rights of the respondent including, but not limited to, the right to counsel to the respondent within ten days of the filing of the complaint."
SECTION 7. Section 8-13-320(10)(g) of the 1976 Code, as last amended by Act 1 of 2011, is further amended to read:
"(g) All investigations, inquiries, hearings, and accompanying documents must remain are confidential and may only be released pursuant to this section until a finding of probable cause or dismissal unless the respondent waives the right to confidentiality.
(i) After a dismissal following a finding of probable cause, except for dismissal pursuant to item (10)(b) or a technical violation pursuant to Section 8-13-1170 or 8-13-1372, the following documents become public record: the complaint, the response by the respondent, and the notice of dismissal.
(ii) After a finding of probable cause, except for a technical violation pursuant to Section 8-13-1170 or 8-13-1372, the following documents become public record: the complaint, the response by the respondent, and the notice of hearing. If a hearing is held on the matter, the final order and all exhibits introduced at the hearing shall become public record upon issuance of the final order by the commission. Exhibits introduced must be redacted prior to release to exclude personal information where the public disclosure would constitute an unreasonable invasion of personal privacy. In the event a hearing is not held on a matter after a finding of probable cause, the final disposition of the matter becomes public record.
The respondent or his counsel, by written notice, may waive the confidentiality requirement. The commission shall not accept any partial waivers. The wilful release of confidential information is a misdemeanor, and any a person releasing such confidential information, upon conviction, must be fined not more than one thousand dollars or imprisoned not more than one year."
SECTION 8. Section 8-13-320(10)(i) of the 1976 Code is amended to read:
"(i) At the conclusion of its investigation, the commission staff, in a preliminary written decision with findings of fact and conclusions of law, must make a recommendation whether probable cause exists to believe that a violation of this chapter has occurred. If the commission determines that probable cause does not exist, it shall send a written decision with findings of fact and conclusions of law to the respondent and the complainant. If the commission determines, by an affirmative vote of six or more commission members, that there is probable cause to believe that a violation has been committed, its preliminary decision may contain an order setting forth a date for a hearing before a panel of three commissioners, selected at random, to determine whether a violation of the chapter has occurred. If the commission finds probable cause, by an affirmative vote of six or more commission members, to believe that a violation of this chapter has occurred, the commission may waive further proceedings if the respondent takes action to remedy or correct the alleged violation. Probable cause is a finding that the allegations contained in the complaint are more likely than not to have occurred and constitute a violation of this chapter or chapter 17, Title 2."
SECTION 9. Section 8-13-320(10)(j) of the 1976 Code is amended to read:
"(j) If a hearing is to be held, the respondent must be allowed to examine and make copies of all evidence in the commission's possession relating to the charges. The same discovery techniques which are available to the commission must be equally available to the respondent, including the right to request the commission to subpoena witnesses or materials and the right to conduct depositions as prescribed by subitem (f). A panel of three commissioners must conduct a hearing in accordance with Chapter 23, of Title 1 (Administrative Procedures Act), except as otherwise expressly provided. Panel action requires the participation of the three panel members. During a commission panel hearing conducted to determine whether a violation of the chapter has occurred, the respondent must be afforded appropriate due process protections, including the right to be represented by counsel, the right to call and examine witnesses, the right to introduce exhibits, and the right to cross-examine opposing witnesses. All evidence, including records the commission considers, must be offered fully and made a part of the record in the proceedings. The hearings must be held in executive session unless the respondent requests an open hearing open to the public."
SECTION 10. Section 8-13-320(11) of the 1976 Code is amended to read:
"(11) to issue, upon request from persons covered by this chapter, and publish advisory opinions on the requirements of this chapter, based on real or hypothetical sets of circumstances; provided, that an opinion rendered by the commission, until amended or revoked, is binding on the commission in any subsequent charges concerning the person who requested the opinion and who acted in reliance on it in good faith unless material facts were omitted or misstated by the person in the request for the opinion. Advisory opinions must be in writing and are considered rendered when approved by five or more commission members subscribing to the advisory opinion. Advisory opinions must be made available to the public unless the commission, by majority vote of the total membership of the commission, requires an opinion to remain confidential. However, the identities of the parties involved must be withheld upon request;
(a) The commission may issue a formal advisory opinion, based on real or hypothetical sets of circumstances. In considering and formulating an advisory opinion, the commission shall consider its previous opinions as well as relevant opinions issued by either legislative ethics committee in an attempt to create uniformity among the bodies. A formal advisory opinion issued by the commission is binding on the commission, until amended or revoked, in any subsequent charges concerning the person who requested the formal opinion and any other person who acted in reliance upon it in good faith, unless material facts were omitted or misstated by the person in the request for the opinion. A formal advisory opinion must be in writing and is considered rendered when approved by a majority of the commission members subscribing to the advisory opinion. Advisory opinions must be made available to the public unless the commission, by majority vote of the total membership of the commission, requires an opinion to remain confidential. However, the identities of the parties involved must be withheld upon request.
(b) The commission only may issue formal advisory opinions for public officials, public members, and public employees for which it has proper jurisdiction to make findings of fact and impose penalties pursuant to this chapter.
(c) The commission must consider whether a person relied in good faith upon a formal advisory opinion or written informal staff opinion when considering a determination of probable cause and when considering a finding of misconduct."
SECTION 11. Article 3, Chapter 13, Title 8 of the 1976 Code is amended by adding:
"Section 8-13-322. It is unlawful for the Governor, a member of the General Assembly, or anyone who is the subject of a pending investigation or open complaint, to contact or attempt to contact, either directly or indirectly, a member of the commission or a legislative ethics committee to influence or attempt to influence the outcome of a pending investigation or open complaint."
SECTION 12. Section 8-13-530 of the 1976 Code is amended to read:
"Section 8-13-530. Each ethics committee shall:
(1) ascertain whether a person has failed to comply fully and accurately with the disclosure requirements of this chapter, which may include, but is not limited to, an audit of filed reports and applicable campaign bank statements, and to promptly notify the person to file the necessary notices and reports to satisfy the requirements of this chapter;
(2) receive complaints filed by individuals and, upon a majority vote of the total membership of the committee, file complaints when alleged violations are identified;
(3) upon the filing of a complaint, investigate possible violations of breach of a privilege governing a member or staff of the appropriate house, the alleged breach of a rule governing a member of, legislative caucus committees for, or a candidate, or staff for the appropriate house, misconduct of a member or staff of, legislative caucus committees for, or a candidate for the appropriate house, or a violation of this chapter or Chapter 17 of Title 2 alleging a violation by a member or staff of the appropriate house, or a member or staff of a legislative caucus committee, or a candidate for the appropriate house, for a violation of this chapter or Chapter 17, Title 2, other than a violation of a rule of the appropriate house, the ethics committee shall refer the complaint to the State Ethics Commission for an investigation pursuant to Section 8-13-540;
(4) receive, investigate, and hear a complaint which alleges a possible violation of a breach of a privilege or a rule governing a member or staff of the appropriate house or legislative caucus committee, or candidate for the appropriate house, the alleged breach of a rule governing a member or staff of or candidate for the appropriate house, misconduct of a member or staff of or candidate for the appropriate house, or a violation of this chapter or Chapter 17 of Title 2.;
(5) no a complaint may not be accepted by the ethics committee concerning a member of or candidate for the appropriate house during the fifty-day period before an election in which the member or candidate is a candidate. During this fifty-day period, any person may petition the court of common pleas alleging the violations complained of and praying for appropriate relief by way of mandamus or injunction, or both. Within ten days, a rule to show cause hearing must be held, and the court must either dismiss the petition or direct that a mandamus order or an injunction, or both, be issued. A violation of this chapter by a candidate during this fifty-day period must be considered to be an irreparable injury for which no adequate remedy at law exists. The institution of an action for injunctive relief does not relieve any party to the proceeding from any penalty prescribed for violations of this chapter. The court must award reasonable attorney's fees and costs to the nonpetitioning party if a petition for mandamus or injunctive relief is dismissed based upon a finding that the:
(i) petition is being presented for an improper purpose such as harassment or to cause delay;
(ii) claims, defenses, and other legal contentions are not warranted by existing law or are based upon a frivolous argument for the extension, modification, or reversal of existing law or the establishment of new law; and
(iii) allegations and other factual contentions do not have evidentiary support or, if specifically so identified, are not likely to have evidentiary support after reasonable opportunity for further investigation or discovery.
Action on a complaint filed against a member or candidate which was received more than fifty days before the election but which cannot be disposed of or dismissed by the ethics committee at least thirty days before the election must be postponed until after the election;
(5)(6) obtain information, and investigate technical violation complaints, and hear complaints as provided in Section 8-13-540 with respect to any complaint filed pursuant to this chapter or Chapter 17, of Title 2 and to that end may compel by subpoena issued by a majority vote of the committee the attendance and testimony of witnesses and the production of pertinent books and papers;
(6)(7) administer or recommend sanctions appropriate to a particular member, or staff of, or candidate for, the appropriate house pursuant to Section 8-13-540, including the recovery of the value of anything transferred or received in breach of the ethical standards, or dismiss the charges; and
(7)(8) act as an advisory body to the General Assembly and to individual members of or candidates for the appropriate house on questions pertaining to the disclosure and filing requirements of members of or candidates for the appropriate house, and may issue, upon request from a member or staff of the appropriate house, or legislative caucus committee, or candidate for the appropriate house, and publish advisory opinions on the requirements of these chapters."
SECTION 13. Article 5, Chapter 13, title 8 of the 1976 Code is amended by adding:
"Section 8-13-535. (A) The committee, may issue a formal advisory opinion, based on real or hypothetical sets of circumstances. In considering and formulating an advisory opinion either legislative ethics committee shall consider its previous opinions, the relevant opinions of the other legislative ethics committee, as well as relevant opinions issued by the commission in an attempt to create uniformity among the bodies. A formal advisory opinion issued by the committee is binding on the committee, until amended or revoked, in any subsequent charges concerning the person who requested the formal opinion and any other person who acted in reliance upon it in good faith, unless material facts were omitted or misstated by the person in the request for the opinion. A formal advisory opinion must be in writing and is considered rendered when approved by a majority of the committee members subscribing to the advisory opinion. Advisory opinions must be made available to the public unless the committee, by majority vote of the total membership of the committee, requires an opinion to remain confidential. However, the identities of the parties involved must be withheld upon request.
(B) The appropriate ethics committee only may issue formal advisory opinions for public officials, public members, and public employees for which it has proper jurisdiction to make findings of fact and impose penalties pursuant to this chapter.
(C) The appropriate ethics committee must consider whether a person relied in good faith upon a formal advisory opinion or written informal staff opinion when considering a finding of misconduct."
SECTION 14. Section 8-13-540 of the 1976 Code, as last amended by Act 184 of 1993, is further amended to read:
"Section 8-13-540. Unless otherwise provided for by House or Senate rule, as appropriate, each ethics committee must conduct its investigation of a complaint filed pursuant to this chapter or Chapter 17 of Title 2 in accordance with this section.
(1) When a complaint is filed with or by the ethics committee, a copy must promptly be sent to the person alleged to have committed the violation. If the ethics committee determines the complaint does not allege facts sufficient to constitute a violation, the complaint must be dismissed and the complainant and respondent notified. If the ethics committee finds that the complaining party wilfully filed a groundless complaint, the finding must be reported to appropriate law enforcement authorities. The wilful filing of a groundless complaint is a misdemeanor and, upon conviction, a person must be fined not more than one thousand dollars or imprisoned not more than one year. In lieu of the criminal penalty provided by this subsection, a civil penalty of not more than one thousand dollars may be assessed against the complainant upon proof, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the filing of the complaint was wilful and without just cause or with malice. If the ethics committee determines the complaint alleges facts sufficient to constitute a violation, it shall promptly investigate the alleged violation and may compel by subpoena the attendance and testimony of witnesses and the production of pertinent books and papers.
If after such preliminary investigation, the ethics committee finds that probable cause exists to support an alleged violation, it shall, as appropriate:
(a) render an advisory opinion to the respondent and require the respondent's compliance within a reasonable time; or
(b) convene a formal hearing on the matter within thirty days of the respondent's failure to comply with the advisory opinion. All ethics committee investigations and records relating to the preliminary investigation are confidential. No complaint shall be accepted which is filed later than four years after the alleged violation occurred.
(2) If a hearing is to be held, the respondent must be allowed to examine and make copies of all evidence in the ethics committee's possession relating to the charges. At the hearing the charged party must be afforded appropriate due process protections, including the right to be represented by counsel, the right to call and examine witnesses, the right to introduce exhibits, and the right to cross-examine opposing witnesses. All hearings must be conducted in executive session.
(3) After the hearing, the ethics committee shall determine its findings of fact. If the ethics committee, based on competent and substantial evidence, finds the respondent has violated this chapter or Chapter 17 of Title 2, it shall:
(a) administer a public or private reprimand;
(b) determine that a technical violation as provided for in Section 8-13-1170 has occurred;
(c) recommend expulsion of the member; and/or,
(d) in the case of an alleged criminal violation, refer the matter to the Attorney General for investigation. The ethics committee shall report its findings in writing to the Speaker of the House or President Pro Tempore of the Senate, as appropriate. The report must be accompanied by an order of punishment and supported and signed by a majority of the ethics committee members. If the ethics committee finds the respondent has not violated a code or statutory provision, it shall dismiss the charges.
(4) An individual has ten days from the date of the notification of the ethics committee's action to appeal the action to the full legislative body.
(5) No ethics committee member may participate in any matter in which he is involved.
(6) The ethics committee shall establish procedures which afford respondents appropriate due process protections, including the right to be represented by counsel, the right to call and examine witnesses, the right to introduce exhibits, and the right to cross-examine opposing witnesses.
(A)(1) A complaint alleging a member of the General Assembly, legislative caucus committees, candidates for the General Assembly, or staff of the General Assembly or legislative caucus committee has committed a violation of this chapter or Chapter 17, Title 2 must be a verified complaint in writing and state the name of the person alleged to have committed the violation and the particulars of the violation.
(2) When a complaint is filed with or by the ethics committee alleging a violation of this chapter or Chapter 17, Title 2, a copy must be sent to the person alleged to have committed the violation and to the State Ethics Commission, hereinafter referred to as 'the commission' within thirty days from the date the complaint was filed, for an investigation as provided in this section. However, if the complaint only alleges a violation of a rule of the House of Representatives or of the Senate, the appropriate ethics committee must forward a copy of the complaint to the person alleged to have committed the violation, and the appropriate ethics committee shall investigate and make a determination for a complaint.
(3)(a) The commission, upon receipt of information, may initiate and file a complaint upon an affirmative vote of six or more members of the commission. The commission shall accept complaints referred by the ethics committees and verified complaints from individuals, whether personally or on behalf of an organization or governmental body.
(b) The commission shall forward a copy of the complaint, a general statement of the applicable law with respect to the complaint, and a statement explaining the due process rights of the respondent including, but not limited to, the right to counsel to the respondent within ten days of the filing of the complaint. Unless the complaint was referred by an ethics committee, the commission shall send a copy of the complaint to the appropriate ethics committee.
(4) Action may not be taken on a complaint filed more than four years after the violation is alleged to have occurred unless the person alleged to have committed the violation, by fraud or other device, prevents discovery of the violation.
(B)(1) Upon receiving a complaint filed pursuant to subsection (A), the commission, its executive director, or other staff as designated by the commission, must determine whether the complaint alleges facts sufficient to constitute a violation of this chapter or Chapter 17, Title 2. If the commission, its executive director, or its other designated staff determines the complaint does not allege facts sufficient to constitute a violation of this chapter or Chapter 17, Title 2, the complaint must be dismissed. If the commission, its executive director, or its designated staff determines the complaint alleges facts sufficient to constitute a violation, an investigation may be conducted of the alleged violation.
(2)(a) In conducting the investigation into the allegations contained in a complaint, the Commission shall request a response from the respondent to the complaint and allow for thirty days from the date of the request for the respondent to submit a response.
(b) If the commission does not find probable cause that a violation occurred, the complaint must be dismissed. The commission must notify the complainant, and respondent, and the appropriate legislative ethics committee.
(c) If the commission determines only a technical violation pursuant to Section 8-13-1170 or 8-13-1372 occurred, the complaint must be referred to the appropriate legislative ethics committee for disposition.
(d) If the commission finds that the complaining party wilfully filed a groundless complaint, the finding must be reported to the Attorney General. The wilful filing of a groundless complaint is a misdemeanor and, upon conviction, the person must be fined not more than one thousand dollars or imprisoned not more than one year. In lieu of the criminal penalty provided by this item, a civil penalty of not more than one thousand dollars may be assessed against the complainant upon proof by a preponderance of the evidence that the filing of the complaint was wilful and without just cause or with malice. In addition to any civil or criminal penalties, the filer of the groundless complaint may be ordered to reimburse the commission for the commission's costs associated with the investigation and disposition of the complaint.
(3) If the commission finds evidence that the person alleged to have committed the violation wilfully violated a section of this chapter or Chapter 17, Title 2 that imposes a criminal penalty, the commission, when appropriate, may forward the complaint and accompanying materials to the Attorney General or circuit solicitor.
(4) If the commission determines that it needs assistance in conducting an investigation, the commission shall request the assistance of appropriate agencies as needed, and may hire or retain auditors, investigators, or other assistance as necessary.
(5) In conducting its investigation, the commission may order testimony to be taken in any investigation or deposition before a person who is designated by the commission and has the power to administer oaths and, in these instances, to compel testimony. The commission may administer oaths and affirmation for the testimony of witnesses and issue subpoenas, by approval of the chairman and subject to judicial enforcement, for the procurement of witnesses and materials including books, papers, records, documents, or other tangible objects relevant to the agency's investigation. A person to whom a subpoena has been issued may move before a commission panel or the commission for an order quashing a subpoena issued pursuant to this section.
(6) Upon completing its investigation, the commission must provide a report to the appropriate ethics committee with a recommendation as to whether there is probable cause to believe a violation of this chapter or of Chapter 17, Title 2 has occurred. A recommendation of probable cause requires an affirmative vote by six or more members of the commission. The report must include a copy of all relevant reports, evidence, and testimony considered by the commission.
(C)(1) All investigations, inquiries, hearings and accompanying documents are confidential and only may be released pursuant to this section.
(2)(i) Upon a recommendation of probable cause by the commission for a violation, other than a technical violation pursuant to Section 8-13-1170 or 8-13-1372, the following documents become public record: the complaint, the response by the respondent, and the commission's recommendation of probable cause.
(ii) If the appropriate committee requests further investigation after receipt of the commission's report, documents may only be released if the commission's second report to the committee recommends a finding of probable cause.
(D)(1) Upon receipt of the Commission's report, the appropriate ethics committee may concur or nonconcur with the commission's recommendation, or within forty-five days from the committee's receipt of the report, request the commission to continue the investigation in order to review information previously received or consider additional matters not considered by the commission.
(2) If, after reviewing the commission's recommendation and relevant evidence, the ethics committee determines that there is not competent and substantial evidence a violation of this chapter or of Chapter 17, Title 2 has occurred, the committee shall dismiss the complaint and send a written decision to the respondent and the complainant. The notice of dismissal must be made public if the commission made a recommendation that probable cause existed.
(3) If, after reviewing the commission's recommendation and relevant evidence, the ethics committee determines that the respondent has committed only a technical violation pursuant to Section 8-13-1170 or 8-13-1372, the provisions of the appropriate section apply.
(4) If, after reviewing the commission's recommendation and relevant evidence, the ethics committee determines that there is competent and substantial evidence that a violation of this chapter or of Chapter 17, Title 2 has occurred, except for a technical violation of Section 8-13-1170 or Section 8-13-1372, the committee shall, as appropriate:
(a) render an advisory opinion to the respondent and require the respondent's compliance within a reasonable time; or
(b) convene a formal public hearing on the matter.
The ethics committee may obtain its own information, or request additional investigation by the State Ethics Commission, if it needs additional information to make a determination as to whether or not competent and substantial evidence of a violation exists. An advisory opinion to the respondent pursuant to subitem (a) must be made public.
(5) If the ethics committee convenes a formal public hearing:
(a) the investigator or attorney handling the investigation for the State Ethics Commission shall present the evidence related to the complaint to the appropriate ethics committee;
(b) it is the duty of the investigator or attorney to further investigate the subject of the complaint and any related matters under the jurisdiction and at the direction of the ethics committee, to request assistance from appropriate state agencies as needed, to request authorization from the committee for funds for the hiring of auditors, investigators, or other assistance as necessary, to prepare subpoenas, and to present evidence to the committee at any public hearing. The appropriate committee shall maintain the authority to approve subpoenas, authorize expenditures, dismiss complaints, schedule hearings, grant continuances, and any other authority as provided for by their rules;
(c) the respondent must be allowed to examine and make copies of all evidence in the ethics committee's possession relating to the charges. At the hearing the respondent must be afforded appropriate due process protections, including the right to be represented by counsel, the right to call and examine witnesses, the right to introduce exhibits, and the right to cross-examine opposing witnesses.
(d) all hearings must be open to the public.
(6)(a) After the formal public hearing, the ethics committee shall determine its findings of fact and issue its final order.
(b) If the ethics committee, based on competent and substantial evidence, finds the respondent has not violated this chapter or Chapter 17, Title 2, the committee shall dismiss the complaint and send a written decision to the respondent and the complainant.
(c) If the ethics committee, based on competent and substantial evidence, finds the respondent has violated this chapter or Chapter 17, Title 2, the committee shall:
(i) administer a public reprimand;
(ii) determine that a technical violation as provided for in Section 8-13-1170 or 8-13-1372 has occurred;
(iii) require the respondent to pay a civil penalty not to exceed two thousand dollars for each nontechnical violation that is unrelated to the late filing of a required statement or report or failure to file a required statement or report;
(iv) require the forfeiture of gifts, receipts, or profits, or the value of each, obtained in violation of Chapter 13, Title 8 or Chapter 17, Title 2;
(v) recommend expulsion of the member;
(vi) provide a copy of the complaint and accompanying materials to the Attorney General if the committee finds that there is probable cause to believe the respondent wilfully violated a section of this chapter or Chapter 17, Title 2 that imposes a criminal penalty; or
(vii) require a combination of subitems (i) through (vi) as necessary and appropriate.
(d) The ethics committee shall report its findings in writing to the Speaker of the House of Representatives or President Pro Tempore of the Senate, as appropriate. The report must be accompanied by an order of punishment or dismissal and supported and signed by a majority of the ethics committee members.
(e) Upon the issuance of the final order, the following documents become public record: exhibits introduced at the hearing, the committee's findings, and the final order. Exhibits introduced must be redacted prior to release to exclude personal information where the public disclosure would constitute an unreasonable invasion of personal privacy. In addition, any documents in the commission's report that substantiate the commission's determination of probable cause that would constitute a public document and are not exempt from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act or other state or federal law shall also become public record. These documents must be redacted, as appropriate, in compliance with state or federal law.
(E) If, after conducting a formal public hearing, the ethics committee finds the respondent has violated this chapter or Chapter 17, Title 2, the respondent has ten days from the date of receiving the committee's order of punishment to appeal the action to the full legislative body.
(F) No ethics committee member may take part in consideration of any matter in which they are the respondent, complainant, witness, or otherwise involved.
(G) The ethics committees shall establish procedures which afford respondents appropriate due process protections, including the right to be represented by counsel, the right to call and examine witnesses, the right to introduce exhibits, and the right to cross-examine opposing witnesses."
SECTION 15. Section 8-13-550(B) of the 1976 Code is amended to read:
"(B) Upon consideration of an ethics committee report by the house or the senate, whether in executive or open session, the results of the consideration, except in the case of the issuance of a private reprimand, are a matter of public record."
SECTION 16. The provisions of this act are severable. If any section, subsection, paragraph, subparagraph, item, subitem, sentence, clause, phrase, or word of this act is for any reason held to be unconstitutional or invalid, such holding shall not affect the constitutionality or validity of the remaining portions of the act, the General Assembly hereby declaring that it would have passed each and every section, subsection, paragraph, subparagraph, item, subitem, sentence, clause, phrase, and word thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more other sections, subsections, paragraphs, subparagraphs, items, subitems, sentences, clauses, phrases, or words hereof may be declared to be unconstitutional, invalid, or otherwise ineffective.
SECTION 17. The provisions of this act are effective as of April 1, 2017 and shall apply to complaints filed on or after April 1, 2017. However, the provisions in Section 8-13-310 regarding the selection of the initial members to serve on the State Ethics Commission as of April 1, 2017 and the termination of terms of the members serving on the commission as of March 31, 2017, take effect after the date of the Governor's signature for the limited purpose of having the initial members of the reconstituted State Ethics Commission begin service on April 1, 2017. The State Ethics Commission, House Ethics Committee and Senate Ethics Committee shall maintain jurisdiction over all open complaints and investigations pending in the appropriate entity on or before March 31, 2017. The reconstituted State Ethics Commission shall have jurisdiction over open complaints and investigations pending within the State Ethics Commission as of March 31, 2017." /
Amend title to conform.
Sen. Larry A. Martin Rep. Thomas E. Pope Sen. Gerald Malloy Rep. George Murrell Smith, Jr. Sen. George E. Campsen III Rep. Mandy Powers Norrell On Part of the Senate. On Part of the House.
Rep. POPE explained the Free Conference Report.
The yeas and nays were taken resulting as follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Alexander Allison Atwater Bales Ballentine Bannister Bernstein Bingham Bowers Bradley R. L. Brown Burns Chumley Clary Clemmons Clyburn Cobb-Hunter Cole Collins Corley H. A. Crawford Crosby Daning Davis Delleney Dillard Douglas Duckworth Erickson Felder Finlay Forrester Fry Funderburk Gagnon George Gilliard Govan Hart Hayes Henderson Henegan Herbkersman Hiott Hixon Hosey Howard Huggins Jefferson Johnson Jordan Kennedy King Kirby Knight Limehouse Loftis Lowe Lucas McCoy McEachern McKnight M. S. McLeod Merrill Mitchell D. C. Moss V. S. Moss Neal Newton Norman Norrell Ott Pitts Pope Quinn Ridgeway Riley Rivers Robinson-Simpson Rutherford Ryhal Sandifer Simrill G. M. Smith G. R. Smith J. E. Smith Sottile Spires Tallon Taylor Thayer Tinkler Toole Weeks Whipper White Whitmire Williams Willis
Those who voted in the negative are:
The Free Conference Report was adopted and a message was ordered sent to the Senate accordingly.
The following was received:
Columbia, S.C., June 15, 2016
Mr. Speaker and Members of the House:
The Senate respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has requested and has granted free conference powers and appointed Senators L. Martin, Malloy and Campsen of the Committee of Free Conference on the part of the Senate on H. 3184:
H. 3184 (Word version) -- Reps. Pope, Cole, Anderson, Bales, G. A. Brown, Burns, Finlay, Funderburk, Hart, Knight, Lucas, Murphy, Newton, Norman, Norrell, Putnam, Rivers, Southard, Spires, Tallon, Taylor, Wells, Williams, Willis, Bernstein, Long, Douglas, Henderson, G. M. Smith, G. R. Smith, McCoy, McKnight, Clary, M. S. McLeod, Thayer, W. J. McLeod, Weeks, J. E. Smith and Stavrinakis: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 8-13-310, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE STATE ETHICS COMMISSION AND ITS MEMBERSHIP, SO AS TO RECONSTITUTE THE MEMBERSHIP OF THE COMMISSION EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2015, TO CONSIST OF FOUR MEMBERS APPOINTED BY THE GOVERNOR, FOUR MEMBERS ELECTED BY THE SUPREME COURT, TWO MEMBERS ELECTED BY THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, AND TWO MEMBERS ELECTED BY THE SENATE, RESPECTIVELY, TO PROVIDE FOR THE QUALIFICATIONS OF THESE MEMBERS, TO PROVIDE FOR OFFICERS OF THE COMMISSION, AND TO PROVIDE FOR THE MEMBERS' TERMS OF OFFICE AND MANNER OF THEIR REMOVAL UNDER CERTAIN CONDITIONS; TO AMEND SECTION 8-13-320, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE DUTIES, POWERS, AND PROCEDURES OF THE STATE ETHICS COMMISSION, SO AS TO REVISE THESE DUTIES, POWERS, AND PROCEDURES INCLUDING PROVISIONS TO VEST WITH THE COMMISSION THE ADDITIONAL RESPONSIBILITY TO INITIATE OR RECEIVE COMPLAINTS AGAINST MEMBERS OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY, ITS STAFF, AND CANDIDATES FOR ELECTION TO THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY, TO INITIATE OR RECEIVE COMPLAINTS AGAINST JUDGES AND OTHER JUDICIAL OFFICIALS OF THE UNIFIED JUDICIAL SYSTEM AND THEIR STAFFS, TO PROVIDE FOR THE INVESTIGATION AND PROCESSING OF COMPLAINTS AGAINST GENERAL ASSEMBLY MEMBERS, STAFF, AND CANDIDATES PURSUANT TO SPECIFIED PROCEDURES AND FOR THE REFERRAL OF SUBSTANTIVE COMPLAINTS TO THE APPROPRIATE HOUSE OR SENATE ETHICS COMMITTEES FOR DISPOSITION TOGETHER WITH THE ETHICS COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATION AS TO WHETHER OR NOT THERE IS PROBABLE CAUSE TO BELIEVE A VIOLATION HAS OCCURRED, TO PROVIDE FOR THE INVESTIGATION AND PROCESSING OF COMPLAINTS AGAINST JUDGES AND OTHER JUDICIAL OFFICIALS OR THEIR STAFF PURSUANT TO SPECIFIED PROCEDURES AND, AFTER INVESTIGATION, FOR THE REFERRAL OF SUBSTANTIVE COMPLAINTS TO THE COMMISSION ON JUDICIAL CONDUCT AND THE SUPREME COURT FOR DISPOSITION TOGETHER WITH THE ETHICS COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATION AS TO WHETHER OR NOT THERE IS PROBABLE CAUSE TO BELIEVE A VIOLATION HAS OCCURRED; TO AMEND SECTIONS 8-13-530 AND 8-13-540, BOTH AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE DUTIES, FUNCTIONS, AND PROCEDURES OF THE HOUSE AND SENATE ETHICS COMMITTEES, SO AS TO REVISE THESE DUTIES, FUNCTIONS, AND PROCEDURES IN ORDER TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE ABOVE PROVISIONS AND TO MAKE OTHER CHANGES; BY ADDING SECTION 8-13-545 SO AS TO AUTHORIZE THE HOUSE OR SENATE ETHICS COMMITTEES TO ISSUE FORMAL ADVISORY OPINIONS AND PROVIDE FOR THEIR EFFECT AND APPLICABILITY; AND BY ADDING ARTICLE 6 TO CHAPTER 13, TITLE 8 SO AS TO PROVIDE FOR JUDICIAL COMPLAINT PROCEDURES IN REGARD TO THE ABOVE PROVISIONS.
Very respectfully,
President
Received as information.
The following was received:
Columbia, S.C., June 15, 2016
Mr. Speaker and Members of the House:
The Senate respectfully informs your Honorable Body that the report of the Committee of Conference on H. 4765, having been adopted by both House ordered that the title be changed to that of an Act and the Act be enrolled for Ratification:
H. 4765 (Word version) -- Reps. G. R. Smith, Parks, D. C. Moss, Cobb-Hunter, Jefferson, Duckworth, Daning, Kirby, R. L. Brown, Burns, Douglas, Brannon, Anthony, Mitchell, Ridgeway, Robinson-Simpson, Clyburn, Ryhal, Johnson, Yow, G. A. Brown, Riley, Taylor, Limehouse, Williams, Simrill, Bedingfield, Chumley, Dillard, Herbkersman, Hicks, Hill, Loftis, Long, V. S. Moss, Pope, Rivers, Thayer, Wells, Crosby and King: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 12-6-5060, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO VOLUNTARY CONTRIBUTIONS MADE BY AN INDIVIDUAL BY MEANS OF THE INCOME TAX RETURN CHECK OFF, SO AS TO ADD HABITAT FOR HUMANITY.
Very respectfully,
President
Received as information.
The following was received:
Columbia, S.C., June 15, 2016
Mr. Speaker and Members of the House:
The Senate respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has adopted of the Committee of Free Conference on H. 3184. The Report of the Committee of Free Conference having been adopted by both Houses ordered that the title be changed to that of an Act and the Act be enrolled for Ratification:
H. 3184 (Word version) -- Reps. Pope, Cole, Anderson, Bales, G.A. Brown, Burns, Finlay, Funderburk, Hart, Knight, Lucas, Murphy, Newton, Norman, Norrell, Putnam, Rivers, Southard, Spires, Tallon, Taylor, Wells, Williams, Willis, Bernstein, Long, Douglas, Henderson, G.M. Smith, G.R. Smith, McCoy, McKnight, Clary, M.S. McLeod, Thayer, W.J. McLeod, Weeks, J.E. Smith and Stavrinakis: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 8-13-310, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE STATE ETHICS COMMISSION AND ITS MEMBERSHIP, SO AS TO RECONSTITUTE THE MEMBERSHIP OF THE COMMISSION EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2015, TO CONSIST OF FOUR MEMBERS APPOINTED BY THE GOVERNOR, FOUR MEMBERS ELECTED BY THE SUPREME COURT, TWO MEMBERS ELECTED BY THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, AND TWO MEMBERS ELECTED BY THE SENATE, RESPECTIVELY, TO PROVIDE FOR THE QUALIFICATIONS OF THESE MEMBERS, TO PROVIDE FOR OFFICERS OF THE COMMISSION, AND TO PROVIDE FOR THE MEMBERS' TERMS OF OFFICE AND MANNER OF THEIR REMOVAL UNDER CERTAIN CONDITIONS; TO AMEND SECTION 8-13-320, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE DUTIES, POWERS, AND PROCEDURES OF THE STATE ETHICS COMMISSION, SO AS TO REVISE THESE DUTIES, POWERS, AND PROCEDURES INCLUDING PROVISIONS TO VEST WITH THE COMMISSION THE ADDITIONAL RESPONSIBILITY TO INITIATE OR RECEIVE COMPLAINTS AGAINST MEMBERS OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY, ITS STAFF, AND CANDIDATES FOR ELECTION TO THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY, TO INITIATE OR RECEIVE COMPLAINTS AGAINST JUDGES AND OTHER JUDICIAL OFFICIALS OF THE UNIFIED JUDICIAL SYSTEM AND THEIR STAFFS, TO PROVIDE FOR THE INVESTIGATION AND PROCESSING OF COMPLAINTS AGAINST GENERAL ASSEMBLY MEMBERS, STAFF, AND CANDIDATES PURSUANT TO SPECIFIED PROCEDURES AND FOR THE REFERRAL OF SUBSTANTIVE COMPLAINTS TO THE APPROPRIATE HOUSE OR SENATE ETHICS COMMITTEES FOR DISPOSITION TOGETHER WITH THE ETHICS COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATION AS TO WHETHER OR NOT THERE IS PROBABLE CAUSE TO BELIEVE A VIOLATION HAS OCCURRED, TO PROVIDE FOR THE INVESTIGATION AND PROCESSING OF COMPLAINTS AGAINST JUDGES AND OTHER JUDICIAL OFFICIALS OR THEIR STAFF PURSUANT TO SPECIFIED PROCEDURES AND, AFTER INVESTIGATION, FOR THE REFERRAL OF SUBSTANTIVE COMPLAINTS TO THE COMMISSION ON JUDICIAL CONDUCT AND THE SUPREME COURT FOR DISPOSITION TOGETHER WITH THE ETHICS COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATION AS TO WHETHER OR NOT THERE IS PROBABLE CAUSE TO BELIEVE A VIOLATION HAS OCCURRED; TO AMEND SECTIONS 8-13-530 AND 8-13-540, BOTH AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE DUTIES, FUNCTIONS, AND PROCEDURES OF THE HOUSE AND SENATE ETHICS COMMITTEES, SO AS TO REVISE THESE DUTIES, FUNCTIONS, AND PROCEDURES IN ORDER TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE ABOVE PROVISIONS AND TO MAKE OTHER CHANGES; BY ADDING SECTION 8-13-545 SO AS TO AUTHORIZE THE HOUSE OR SENATE ETHICS COMMITTEES TO ISSUE FORMAL ADVISORY OPINIONS AND PROVIDE FOR THEIR EFFECT AND APPLICABILITY; AND BY ADDING ARTICLE 6 TO CHAPTER 13, TITLE 8 SO AS TO PROVIDE FOR JUDICIAL COMPLAINT PROCEDURES IN REGARD TO THE ABOVE PROVISIONS.
Very respectfully,
President
Received as information.
The following was received:
Columbia, S.C., June 15, 2016
Mr. Speaker and Members of the House:
The Senate respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has reconsidered the vote whereby the Veto by the Governor was sustained on Veto No. 9 (R. 275, H. 5001 (Word version)), by a vote of 16-17, and has overridden the Veto by a vote of 29 to 10:
Veto 9 Part 1B, Page 372, Section 49, Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism - Proviso 49.16, PRT: Beach Access
Very respectfully,
President
Received as information.
The following was received:
Columbia, S.C., June 15, 2016
Mr. Speaker and Members of the House:
The Senate respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has reconsidered the vote whereby the Veto by the Governor was sustained on Veto No. 11 (R. 275, H. 5001 (Word version)), and has overridden the Veto by a vote of 35 to 4:
Veto 11 Part 1B, Page 370, Section 47, Department of Natural Resources - Proviso 47.10, DNR: Predator Control Program
Very respectfully,
President
Received as information.
The following was received:
Columbia, S.C., June 15, 2016
Mr. Speaker and Members of the House:
The Senate respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has reconsidered the vote whereby the Veto by the Governor was sustained on Veto No. 12 (R. 275, H. 5001 (Word version)), and has overridden the Veto by a vote of 29 to 11:
Veto 12 Part 1B, Page 277, Section 1, Department of Education - Proviso 1.56, SDE: Lee County Bus Shop
Very respectfully,
President
Received as information.
The following was received:
Columbia, S.C., June 15, 2016
Mr. Speaker and Members of the House:
The Senate respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has overridden Veto No. 13 (R. 275, H. 5001 (Word version)), by a vote of 35 to 7:
Veto 13 Part 1B, Page 496, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 7, State Library, Colleton County Bookmobile: $200,000
Very respectfully,
President
Received as information.
The following was received:
Columbia, S.C., June 15, 2016
Mr. Speaker and Members of the House:
The Senate respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has reconsidered the vote whereby the Veto by the Governor was sustained on Veto No. 14 (R. 275, H. 5001 (Word version)), and has overridden the Veto by a vote of 28 to 12:
Veto 14 Part 1B, Page 500, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16, Item 39(h), Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism, Sumter Environmental Center: $300,000
Very respectfully,
President
Received as information.
The following was received:
Columbia, S.C., June 15, 2016
Mr. Speaker and Members of the House:
The Senate respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has overridden Veto No. 15 (R. 275, H. 5001 (Word version)), by a vote of 31 to 5:
Veto 15 Part 1B, Page 497, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 10(d), Commission on Higher Education, Greenwood Promise Scholarship Program: $50,000
Very respectfully,
President
Received as information.
The following was received:
Columbia, S.C., June 15, 2016
Mr. Speaker and Members of the House:
The Senate respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has overridden Veto No. 16 (R. 275, H. 5001 (Word version)), by a vote of 26 to 11:
Veto 16 Part 1B, Page 499, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 25(h), Department of Health and Environmental Control, Air Quality Improvements: $300,000
Very respectfully,
President
Received as information.
The following was received:
Columbia, S.C., June 15, 2016
Mr. Speaker and Members of the House:
The Senate respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has overridden Veto No. 17 (R. 275, H. 5001 (Word version)), by a vote of 30 to 11:
Veto 17 Part 1B, Page 501, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 41, Department of Labor, Licensing and Regulation, Fire Suppression: $25,000
Very respectfully,
President
Received as information.
The following was received:
Columbia, S.C., June 15, 2016
Mr. Speaker and Members of the House:
The Senate respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has overridden Veto No. 18 (R. 275, H. 5001 (Word version)), by a vote of 33 to 8:
Veto 18 Part 1B, Page 502, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 50(d), Division of Aeronautics, Airline Recruitment and Retention: $150,000
Very respectfully,
President
Received as information.
The following was received:
Columbia, S.C., June 15, 2016
Mr. Speaker and Members of the House:
The Senate respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has overridden Veto No. 19 (R. 275, H. 5001 (Word version)), by a vote of 37 to 4:
Veto 19 Part 1B, Page 496, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 6(b), Department of Archives and History, Architectural Heritage Preservation: $2,300,000
Very respectfully,
President
Received as information.
The following was received:
Columbia, S.C., June 15, 2016
Mr. Speaker and Members of the House:
The Senate respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has overridden Veto No. 20 (R. 275, H. 5001 (Word version)), by a vote of 29 to 12:
Veto 20 Part 1B, Page 499, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 27(c), Department of Social Services, After School and Summer Reading Programs: $500,000
Very respectfully,
President
Received as information.
The following was received:
Columbia, S.C., June 15, 2016
Mr. Speaker and Members of the House:
The Senate respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has overridden Veto No. 21 (R. 275, H. 5001 (Word version)), by a vote of 35 to 5:
Veto 21 Part 1B, Page 500, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 38(i), Department of Natural Resources, Outreach Education: $1,600,000
Very respectfully,
President
Received as information.
The following was received:
Columbia, S.C., June 15, 2016
Mr. Speaker and Members of the House:
The Senate respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has reconsidered the vote whereby Veto No. 22 (R. 275, H. 5001 (Word version)), was sustained and has overridden the Veto by a vote of 28 to 13:
Veto 22 Part 1B, Page 499, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 29(i), Department of Commerce, Economic Development: $100,000
Very respectfully,
President
Received as information.
The following was received:
Columbia, S.C., June 15, 2016
Mr. Speaker and Members of the House:
The Senate respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has overridden Veto No. 23 (R. 275, H. 5001 (Word version)), by a vote of 33 to 7:
Veto 23 Part 1B, Page 499, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 29(h), Department of Commerce, Community Development Corporations: $100,000
Very respectfully,
President
Received as information.
The following was received:
Columbia, S.C., June 15, 2016
Mr. Speaker and Members of the House:
The Senate respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has overridden Veto No. 25 (R. 275, H. 5001 (Word version)), by a vote of 37 to 3:
Veto 25 Part 1B, Page 499, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 24(d), Department of Health and Human Services, Osprey Village: $200,000
Very respectfully,
President
Received as information.
The following was received:
Columbia, S.C., June 15, 2016
Mr. Speaker and Members of the House:
The Senate respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has reconsidered the vote whereby Veto No. 26 (R. 275, H. 5001 (Word version)), was sustained and has overridden the Veto by a vote of 27 to 13:
Veto 26 Part 1B, Page 497, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 14.1, Coastal Carolina University (Football Stadium Expansion)
Very respectfully,
President
Received as information.
The following was received:
Columbia, S.C., June 15, 2016
Mr. Speaker and Members of the House:
The Senate respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has overridden Veto No. 27 (R. 275, H. 5001 (Word version)), by a vote of 27 to 13:
Veto 27 Part 1B, Page 497, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 14(c), Coastal Carolina University, Brooks Stadium Engineering: $100,000
Very respectfully,
President
Received as information.
The following was received:
Columbia, S.C., June 15, 2016
Mr. Speaker and Members of the House:
The Senate respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has overridden Veto No. 29 (R. 275, H. 5001 (Word version)), by a vote of 31 to 11:
Veto 29 Part 1B, Page 502, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 50(b), Division of Aeronautics, State Aviation Fund: $7,000,000
Very respectfully,
President
Received as information.
The following was received:
Columbia, S.C., June 15, 2016
Mr. Speaker and Members of the House:
The Senate respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has overridden Veto No. 30 (R. 275, H. 5001 (Word version)), by a vote of 34 to 7:
Veto 30 Part 1B, Page 500, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 38(g), Department of Natural Resources, Upper Coastal Waterfowl Project Maintenance and Repair: $1,600,000
Very respectfully,
President
Received as information.
The following was received:
Columbia, S.C., June 15, 2016
Mr. Speaker and Members of the House:
The Senate respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has reconsidered the vote whereby Veto No. 32 (R. 275, H. 5001 (Word version)), was sustained and has overridden the Veto by a vote of 31 to 9:
Veto 32 Part 1B, Page 501, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 46(c), Department of Administration, State Human Resources, Leadership South Carolina: $150,000
Very respectfully,
President
Received as information.
The following was received:
Columbia, S.C., June 15, 2016
Mr. Speaker and Members of the House:
The Senate respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has overridden Veto No. 33 (R. 275, H. 5001 (Word version)), by a vote of 27 to 11:
Veto 33 Part 1B, Page 496, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 8, Arts Commission, SC Artisans Center: $500,000
Very respectfully,
President
Received as information.
The following was received:
Columbia, S.C., June 15, 2016
Mr. Speaker and Members of the House:
The Senate respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has overridden Veto No. 34 (R. 275, H. 5001 (Word version)), by a vote of 27 to 12:
Veto 34 Part 1B, Page 500, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 39(f), Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism, Sports Development Marketing Program: $3,000,000
Very respectfully,
President
Received as information.
The following was received:
Columbia, S.C., June 15, 2016
Mr. Speaker and Members of the House:
The Senate respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has overridden Veto No. 35 (R. 275, H. 5001 (Word version)), by a vote of 35 to 4:
Veto 35 Part 1B, Page 500, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 39(k), Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism, Parks and Recreation Development Fund: $5,000,000
Very respectfully,
President
Received as information.
The following was received:
Columbia, S.C., June 15, 2016
Mr. Speaker and Members of the House:
The Senate respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has overridden Veto No. 36 (R. 275, H. 5001 (Word version)), by a vote of 34 to 5:
Veto 36 Part 1B, Page 496, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 6(c), Department of Archives and History, Driving Tours Historic African American Sites: $100,000
Very respectfully,
President
Received as information.
The following was received:
Columbia, S.C., June 15, 2016
Mr. Speaker and Members of the House:
The Senate respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has overridden Veto No. 37 (R. 275, H. 5001 (Word version)), by a vote of 34 to 4:
Veto 37 Part 1B, Page 499, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 29(c), Department of Commerce, IT-oLogy Coursepower: $400,000
Very respectfully,
President
Received as information.
The following was received:
Columbia, S.C., June 15, 2016
Mr. Speaker and Members of the House:
The Senate respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has overridden Veto No. 38 (R. 275, H. 5001 (Word version)), by a vote of 32 to 7:
Veto 38 Part 1B, Page 497, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16, Item 13(b), University of Charleston, Gibbs Museum of Art: $350,000
Very respectfully,
President
Received as information.
The following was received:
Columbia, S.C., June 15, 2016
Mr. Speaker and Members of the House:
The Senate respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has overridden Veto No. 39 (R. 275, H. 5001 (Word version)), by a vote of 32 to 7:
Veto 39 Part 1B, Page 501, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 47(g), Office of Adjutant General, SC Military Museum: $380,000
Very respectfully,
President
Received as information.
The following was received:
Columbia, S.C., June 15, 2016
Mr. Speaker and Members of the House:
The Senate respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has overridden Veto No. 40 (R. 275, H. 5001 (Word version)), by a vote of 32 to 6:
Veto 40 Part 1B, Page 500, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 39(g), Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism, Medal of Honor Museum: $3,000,000
Very respectfully,
President
Received as information.
The following was received:
Columbia, S.C., June 15, 2016
Mr. Speaker and Members of the House:
The Senate respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has overridden Veto No. 41 (R. 275, H. 5001 (Word version)), by a vote of 32 to 7:
Veto 41 Part 1B, Page 500, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 39(j), Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism, Children's Museum of the Upstate: $1,000,000
Very respectfully,
President
Received as information.
The following was received:
Columbia, S.C., June 15, 2016
Mr. Speaker and Members of the House:
The Senate respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has overridden Veto No. 42 (R. 275, H. 5001 (Word version)), by a vote of 32 to 7:
Veto 42 Part 1B, Page 497, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 9(b), State Museum Commission, Collections and Content: $5,000
Very respectfully,
President
Received as information.
The following was received:
Columbia, S.C., June 15, 2016
Mr. Speaker and Members of the House:
The Senate respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has carried over Veto No. 43 (R. 275, H. 5001 (Word version)):
Veto 43 Part 1A, Page 497, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16, Item 9(b), State Museum Commission, Collections and Content: $5,000
Very respectfully,
President
Received as information.
The following was received:
Columbia, S.C., June 15, 2016
Mr. Speaker and Members of the House:
The Senate respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has overridden Veto No. 44 (R. 275, H. 5001 (Word version)), by a vote of 33 to 4:
Veto 44 Part 1A, Page 143, Section 50, Department of Commerce, Item II.B, Programs and Services, Small Business/Existing Industry - Council on Competitiveness: $250,000 Total Funds; $250,000 General Funds
Very respectfully,
President
Received as information.
The following was received:
Columbia, S.C., June 15, 2016
Mr. Speaker and Members of the House:
The Senate respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has overridden Veto No. 45 (R. 275, H. 5001 (Word version)), by a vote of 31 to 8:
Veto 45 Part 1A, Page 143, Section 50, Department of Commerce, Item II.B, Programs and Services, Small Business/Existing Industry - SC Small Business Development Centers: $100,000 Total Funds; $100,000 General Funds
Very respectfully,
President
Received as information.
The following was received:
Columbia, S.C., June 15, 2016
Mr. Speaker and Members of the House:
The Senate respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has overridden Veto No. 46 (R. 275, H. 5001 (Word version)), by a vote of 35 to 5:
Veto 46 Part 1B, Page 500, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 36(b), Department of Agriculture, Agribusiness Development: $2,500,000
Very respectfully,
President
Received as information.
The following was received:
Columbia, S.C., June 15, 2016
Mr. Speaker and Members of the House:
The Senate respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has overridden Veto No. 47 (R. 275, H. 5001 (Word version)), by a vote of 34 to 6:
Veto 47 Part 1B, Page 499, Section 118, Statewide Revenue - Proviso 118.16(B), Item 29(e), Department of Commerce, Office of Innovation: $2,000,000
Very respectfully,
President
Received as information.
The following was received:
Columbia, S.C., June 15, 2016
Mr. Speaker and Members of the House:
The Senate respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has overridden Veto No. 1 (R. 275, H. 5001 (Word version)), by a vote of 29 to 10:
Veto 1 Section 1 - Item 58, Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism, State Aquarium: $270,000
Very respectfully,
President
Received as information.
The following was received:
Columbia, S.C., June 15, 2016
Mr. Speaker and Members of the House:
The Senate respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has overridden Veto No. 2 (R. 275, H. 5001 (Word version)), by a vote of 29 to 10:
Veto 2 Section 1 - Item 59, Patriot's Point Development Authority, USS Laffey: $50,000
Very respectfully,
President
Received as information.
The following was received:
Columbia, S.C., June 15, 2016
Mr. Speaker and Members of the House:
The Senate respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has overridden Veto No. 3 (R. 275, H. 5001 (Word version)), by a vote of 36 to 4:
Veto 3 Section 1 - Item 52, Clemson University PSA, T. Ed Garrison Arena Education/Conference Center: $1,000,000
Very respectfully,
President
Received as information.
The following was received:
Columbia, S.C., June 15, 2016
Mr. Speaker and Members of the House:
The Senate respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has overridden Veto No. 4 (R. 275, H. 5001 (Word version)), by a vote of 36 to 4:
Veto 4 Section 1 - Item 54, Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism, Parks, Recreational, and Tourism Revitalizations: $6,375,000
Very respectfully,
President
Received as information.
Rep. KENNEDY moved that the House do now adjourn, which was agreed to.
Pursuant to an invitation the Honorable Speaker and House of Representatives appeared in the Senate Chamber on June 06, 2016, at 1:30 P.M. and the following Acts and Joint Resolution were ratified:
(R. 292, S. 667 (Word version)) -- Senators Hayes, Williams, L. Martin, Alexander and Peeler: AN ACT TO AMEND SECTION 1-1-10, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE JURISDICTION AND BOUNDARIES OF THE STATE, SO AS TO CLARIFY THE BOUNDARY BETWEEN NORTH CAROLINA AND SOUTH CAROLINA ALONG HORRY, DILLON, MARLBORO, CHESTERFIELD, LANCASTER, YORK, CHEROKEE, AND SPARTANBURG COUNTIES AND TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ABOUT THE PLATS DESCRIBING THE LOCATION OF THE BOUNDARY BETWEEN NORTH CAROLINA AND SOUTH CAROLINA ALONG GREENVILLE, PICKENS, AND OCONEE COUNTIES; BY ADDING SECTION 12-2-115 SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT "NEW JOBS" ARE NOT CREATED IN SOUTH CAROLINA BY EMPLOYEES WHOSE WORK LOCATION IS CHANGED FROM NORTH CAROLINA TO SOUTH CAROLINA AS A RESULT OF THE BOUNDARY CLARIFICATION, NOR IS THERE ANY NEW INVESTMENT IN SOUTH CAROLINA AS A RESULT OF PROPERTY THAT CHANGES LOCATION FROM NORTH CAROLINA TO SOUTH CAROLINA AS A RESULT OF THE BOUNDARY CLARIFICATION; BY ADDING SECTION 12-2-120 SO AS TO PROVIDE FOR THE MANNER AND APPLICATION OF TAX ASSESSMENTS AND REFUNDS FOR THE PERIOD PRIOR TO THE BOUNDARY CLARIFICATION; BY ADDING SECTION 12-2-130 SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT IN THE YEAR CONTAINING THE DATE OF THE BOUNDARY CLARIFICATION, THE DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE HAS THE AUTHORITY TO COMPROMISE TAXES THAT RESULT IN TAXATION IN BOTH SOUTH CAROLINA AND NORTH CAROLINA SOLELY BECAUSE OF THE BOUNDARY CLARIFICATION; BY ADDING SECTION 12-6-5600 SO AS TO PROVIDE FOR THE INCOME TAX TREATMENT OF INDIVIDUALS AND BUSINESSES WHOSE STATE OF RESIDENCE OR PROPERTY LOCATION CHANGES AS A RESULT OF THE BOUNDARY CLARIFICATION; BY ADDING SECTION 12-21-820 SO AS TO PROVIDE FOR THE MANNER OF CIGARETTE AND TOBACCO PRODUCTS TAXATION AS A RESULT OF THE BOUNDARY CLARIFICATION; BY ADDING SECTION 12-24-160 SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT IF, AS A RESULT OF THE BOUNDARY CLARIFICATION, PROPERTY IS DEEMED TO HAVE CHANGED LOCATIONS FROM NORTH CAROLINA TO SOUTH CAROLINA AND IF SOLELY AS A RESULT OF THIS CHANGE, A DEED IS FILED IN SOUTH CAROLINA, NO DEED RECORDING FEES ARE DUE ON THIS FILING AND NO COUNTY FILING FEES MAY BE CHARGED; BY ADDING SECTION 12-28-350 SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT A RETAILER THAT SELLS MOTOR FUEL WHOSE BUSINESS LOCATION CHANGES FROM SOUTH CAROLINA TO NORTH CAROLINA AS A RESULT OF THE BOUNDARY CLARIFICATION IS ALLOWED A REFUND OF SOUTH CAROLINA MOTOR FUEL TAXES OR USER FEES IF NORTH CAROLINA REQUIRES THAT RETAILER TO PAY THE NORTH CAROLINA MOTOR FUEL TAXES OR USER FEES ON THAT SAME FUEL; BY ADDING SECTION 12-36-2695 SO AS TO PROVIDE FOR THE MANNER IN WHICH SALES AND USE TAXES AND ADMISSIONS TAXES MUST BE COLLECTED AND PAID AS A RESULT OF THE BOUNDARY CLARIFICATION; BY ADDING SECTION 12-37-140 SO AS TO PROVIDE FOR HOW CERTAIN REAL AND PERSONAL PROPERTY IS SUBJECT TO PROPERTY TAXATION, AND FOR PROCEDURAL MATTERS RELATING TO THIS TAXATION, INCLUDING APPLICATION LIEN DATES; BY ADDING SECTION 12-37-145 SO AS TO FURTHER PROVIDE FOR MOTOR VEHICLE LICENSE REGISTRATION AND MOTOR VEHICLE PERSONAL PROPERTY TAXES AS A RESULT OF THE BOUNDARY CLARIFICATION; BY ADDING SECTION 12-37-150 SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT IF AS A RESULT OF THE BOUNDARY CLARIFICATION AN INDIVIDUAL IS REQUIRED TO REGISTER HIS PERSONAL MOTOR VEHICLE IN SOUTH CAROLINA AND IF THE PROPERTY TAXES ON THAT MOTOR VEHICLE WOULD HAVE BEEN LESS IN NORTH CAROLINA, THE INDIVIDUAL MAY RECEIVE A TAX REBATE FROM THE SOUTH CAROLINA COUNTY FOR THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE TAX THE INDIVIDUAL WAS REQUIRED TO PAY IN SOUTH CAROLINA AND THE INDIVIDUAL WAS REQUIRED TO PAY IN NORTH CAROLINA ON THAT SAME VEHICLE; BY ADDING SECTION 12-37-155 SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT FOR 2017 ONLY, THE LIEN DATE FOR NONBUSINESS PERSONAL PROPERTY, OTHER THAN MOTOR VEHICLES, IS JANUARY 1, 2017, FOR INDIVIDUALS WHOSE STATE OF RESIDENCY CHANGES FROM NORTH CAROLINA TO SOUTH CAROLINA SOLELY AS A RESULT OF THE BOUNDARY CLARIFICATION; BY ADDING SECTION 29-3-800 SO AS TO PROVIDE SPECIFIED PROCEDURES IN REGARD TO THE FORECLOSURE OF MORTGAGES AND OTHER LIENS ENCUMBERING AFFECTED LANDS; BY ADDING SECTION 30-5-270 SO AS TO PROVIDE FOR SPECIAL RECORDING REQUIREMENTS FOR DEEDS, PLATS, MORTGAGES, AND OTHER INSTRUMENTS REGARDING REAL PROPERTY IN THE AFFECTED JURISDICTIONS, AND TO REQUIRE A NOTICE OF THE STATE BOUNDARY CLARIFICATION TO BE PROVIDED BY THE REGISTER OF DEEDS OR CLERKS OF COURT IN CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES; BY ADDING SECTION 44-1-315 SO AS TO PROVIDE A COMPLIANCE SCHEDULE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL PERMITTEES IMPACTED BY THE BOUNDARY CLARIFICATION; BY ADDING SECTION 44-6-110 SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT A MEDICAID PROVIDER OUTSIDE OF THE GEOGRAPHICAL BOUNDARY OF SOUTH CAROLINA BUT WITHIN THE SOUTH CAROLINA MEDICAID SERVICE AREA SHALL NOT LOSE STATUS AS A MEDICAID PROVIDER AS A RESULT OF THE CLARIFICATION OF THE SOUTH CAROLINA - NORTH CAROLINA BORDER; BY ADDING CHAPTER 2 TO TITLE 58 SO AS TO PROVIDE FOR THE MANNER IN WHICH UTILITY SERVICES MUST BE PROVIDED IN AREAS AFFECTED BY THE BOUNDARY CLARIFICATION; BY ADDING SECTION 59-63-550 SO AS TO FURTHER PROVIDE FOR SCHOOL ATTENDANCE PROCEDURES AND REQUIREMENTS FOR CHILDREN RESIDING IN SCHOOL DISTRICTS AFFECTED BY THE BOUNDARY CLARIFICATION; AND BY ADDING SECTION 59-112-150 SO AS TO FURTHER PROVIDE FOR IN-STATE TUITION RATES AND THE AWARDING OF OTHER STATE-SUPPORTED SCHOLARSHIPS AND GRANTS TO INDEPENDENT PERSONS AND THEIR DEPENDENTS AFFECTED BY THE BOUNDARY CLARIFICATION.
(R. 293, S. 777 (Word version)) -- Senators Malloy and Bennett: AN ACT TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING SECTION 62-5-436 SO AS TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL AND ALTERNATIVE REQUIREMENTS FOR MATTERS INVOLVING PAYMENT OF BENEFITS FROM THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS AND TO DEFINE RELEVANT TERMS; TO AMEND SECTION 62-1-201, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO DEFINITIONS APPLICABLE TO THE SOUTH CAROLINA PROBATE CODE, SO AS TO DEFINE THE TERM "VA" AND TO MAKE OTHER TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS; TO AMEND SECTION 62-5-404, RELATING TO THE ORIGINAL PETITION FOR APPOINTMENT OR PROTECTIVE ORDER, SO AS TO REQUIRE THE PETITION TO SHOW THAT THE PERSON TO BE PROTECTED HAS BEEN RATED INCOMPETENT BY THE VA AND TO PROVIDE THAT THE PETITION SHALL STATE THE NAME AND ADDRESS OF THE PERSON TO BE NOTIFIED ON BEHALF OF THE VA; TO AMEND SECTION 62-5-405, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO SERVICE OF SUMMONS AND PETITIONS, NOTICE OF HEARING, AND WAIVER OF NOTICE BY THE PERSON TO BE PROTECTED, SO AS TO REQUIRE SERVICE UPON THE VA AND NOTICE OF THE HEARING IN CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES; TO AMEND SECTION 62-5-407, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO PROCEDURES CONCERNING THE HEARING AND ORDER ON ORIGINAL PETITION, SO AS TO CLARIFY CERTAIN PROVISIONS IN CASES INVOLVING PAYMENT OF BENEFITS FROM THE VA; AND TO REPEAL PART 6, ARTICLE 5, TITLE 62 RELATING TO THE UNIFORM VETERANS' GUARDIANSHIP ACT.
(R. 294, S. 778 (Word version)) -- Senator Malloy: AN ACT TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING ARTICLE 8 TO TITLE 62 SO AS TO ENACT THE "SOUTH CAROLINA UNIFORM POWER OF ATTORNEY ACT"; TO DEFINE APPLICABLE TERMS; TO OUTLINE THE ARTICLE'S REQUIREMENTS AND APPLICABILITY, AND TO PROVIDE EXCEPTIONS; AND TO AMEND PART 5, ARTICLE 5, TITLE 62, RELATING TO POWERS OF ATTORNEY, SO AS TO ENACT THE "SOUTH CAROLINA STATUTORY HEALTH CARE POWER OF ATTORNEY ACT"; TO DEFINE APPLICABLE TERMS; TO OUTLINE THE PART'S REQUIREMENTS AND APPLICABILITY; TO PROVIDE EXECUTION AND WITNESS REQUIREMENTS; AND TO SPECIFY THE PROPER FORM OF A HEALTH CARE POWER OF ATTORNEY.
(R. 295, S. 1015 (Word version)) -- Senators Leatherman and Johnson: AN ACT TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING SECTION 16-13-165 SO AS TO MAKE UNLAWFUL CERTAIN ACTIONS INVOLVING COUNTERFEIT OR NONFUNCTIONAL AIRBAGS.
(R. 296, S. 1065 (Word version)) -- Senators Young, Massey, Setzler and Nicholson: A JOINT RESOLUTION TO CLARIFY THAT SECTION 58-7-10, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, DOES NOT APPLY TO A PRIVATE, FOR-PROFIT PIPELINE COMPANY, INCLUDING A PUBLICLY-TRADED FOR-PROFIT COMPANY THAT IS NOT A PUBLIC UTILITY AS DEFINED BY TITLE 58; AND TO CREATE THE PETROLEUM PIPELINE STUDY COMMITTEE TO STUDY MATTERS RELATED TO THE PRESENCE OF PETROLEUM PIPELINES IN SOUTH CAROLINA, AND FOR THE STUDY COMMITTEE TO PROVIDE A REPORT TO THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY BY JUNE 30, 2017, AND TO CONTINUE ITS WORK UNTIL DECEMBER 31, 2017, IF THE JUNE REPORT DETERMINES FURTHER WORK IS NEEDED.
(R. 297, H. 3147 (Word version)) -- Reps. G.M. Smith, G.R. Smith, Huggins, Weeks, Taylor, Pope, Collins, Johnson, Stavrinakis, Yow, Clemmons, Goldfinch, Murphy, J.E. Smith and Mitchell: AN ACT TO AMEND SECTION 12-6-1170, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE RETIREMENT INCOME TAX DEDUCTION, SO AS TO REDUCE THE DEDUCTION BY THE DEDUCTION CLAIMED PURSUANT TO SECTION 12-6-1171; BY ADDING SECTION 12-6-1171 SO AS TO PROVIDE AN INCOME TAX DEDUCTION FOR CERTAIN ELIGIBLE TAXPAYERS WITH MILITARY RETIREMENT INCOME THAT IS INCLUDED IN SOUTH CAROLINA TAXABLE INCOME, TO SPECIFY THE AMOUNT OF THE DEDUCTION, AND TO PHASE-IN THE DEDUCTION OVER FIVE YEARS; AND TO AMEND SECTION 12-65-30, RELATING TO THE TEXTILE REVITALIZATION TAX CREDIT, SO AS TO SPECIFY UNUSED CREDIT MAY BE CARRIED FORWARD AT THE INDIVIDUAL, PARTNERSHIP, OR LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY LEVEL, AND MAY BE PASSED THROUGH AS PROVIDED BY LAW.
(R. 298, H. 3440 (Word version)) -- Reps. Crosby, Daning, George and Clemmons: AN ACT TO AMEND SECTION 56-1-10, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO TERMS AND THEIR DEFINITIONS REGARDING THE ISSUANCE OF DRIVER'S LICENSES, SO AS TO REVISE THE DEFINITION OF CERTAIN TERMS AND TO ADD THE TERMS "MOPED", "DAYLIGHT HOURS", AND "VEHICLE" AND THEIR DEFINITIONS; TO AMEND SECTION 56-1-30, RELATING TO PERSONS EXEMPT FROM OBTAINING A DRIVER'S LICENSE, SO AS TO DELETE THE TERM "ARTICLE" AND REPLACE IT WITH THE TERM "CHAPTER"; TO AMEND SECTION 56-1-50, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE ISSUANCE OF A BEGINNER'S PERMIT, SO AS TO MAKE TECHNICAL CHANGES, TO DELETE THE PROVISION THAT RELATES TO THE OPERATION OF MOTOR SCOOTERS, LIGHT MOTOR-DRIVEN CYCLES AND MOPEDS, TO PROVIDE THAT A PERMITTEE MUST BE ACCOMPANIED BY A MOTORCYCLE-LICENSED DRIVER WHEN DRIVING A MOTORCYCLE DURING CERTAIN HOURS, TO PROVIDE THE LOCATION THAT AN ACCOMPANYING DRIVER MUST BE POSITIONED, AND TO DELETE AN OBSOLETE PROVISION; TO AMEND SECTION 56-1-175, RELATING TO THE ISSUANCE OF A CONDITIONAL DRIVER'S LICENSE, SO AS TO DELETE THE PROVISION THAT ALLOWS A LICENSEE TO OPERATE A MOTOR SCOOTER OR LIGHT MOTOR-DRIVEN CYCLE, AND THE PROVISION THAT DEFINES THE TERM "DAYLIGHT HOURS"; TO AMEND SECTION 56-1-180, RELATING TO THE ISSUANCE OF A SPECIAL RESTRICTED DRIVER'S LICENSE, SO AS TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL LOCATIONS WHERE A LICENSEE MAY OPERATE A MOTOR VEHICLE, TO MAKE A TECHNICAL CHANGE, TO DELETE THE PROVISION THAT ALLOWS A LICENSEE TO OPERATE A MOTOR SCOOTER OR LIGHT MOTOR-DRIVEN CYCLE, AND TO DELETE THE PROVISION THAT DEFINES THE TERM "DAYLIGHT HOURS"; TO AMEND SECTION 56-1-185, RELATING TO THE REMOVAL OF THE RESTRICTIONS PLACED ON A CONDITIONAL OR SPECIAL RESTRICTED DRIVER'S LICENSE, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT A BEGINNER'S PERMIT, CONDITIONAL LICENSE, OR SPECIAL RESTRICTED LICENSE MAY NOT BE ISSUED TO A PERSON CONVICTED OF CERTAIN VIOLATIONS OF OPERATING A MOPED WHILE UNDER AGE OR WITHOUT A LICENSE FOR A CERTAIN PERIOD OF TIME; TO AMEND SECTION 56-1-1710, RELATING TO THE DEFINITION OF THE TERM MOPED, SO AS TO DELETE THIS PROVISION; TO AMEND SECTION 56-1-1720, RELATING TO THE OPERATION OF A MOPED, SO AS TO REVISE THE FORM OF LICENSURE A PERSON MUST POSSESS TO OPERATE A MOPED, TO REVISE THE AGE OF A PERSON WHO MAY OBTAIN A MOPED OPERATOR'S LICENSE, TO REVISE THE TIME PERIOD WHEN CERTAIN PERSONS MAY OPERATE A MOPED, TO REVISE THE PENALTIES FOR A VIOLATION OF THIS PROVISION, AND TO DELETE THE PROVISION THAT PROHIBITS THE DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES FROM ISSUING A BEGINNER'S PERMIT OR A SPECIAL RESTRICTED LICENSE TO CERTAIN PERSONS CONVICTED OF A MOPED VIOLATION FOR A CERTAIN PERIOD OF TIME; TO AMEND SECTION 56-1-1730, RELATING TO THE ELIGIBILITY TO OBTAIN, SUSPENSION OF, AND REVOCATION OF A MOPED OPERATOR'S LICENSE, SO AS TO MAKE A TECHNICAL CHANGE; TO AMEND SECTION 56-2-2740, RELATING TO MOTOR VEHICLE REGISTRATION AND PROPERTY TAXES, SO AS TO PROVIDE FOR THE ISSUANCE OF MOPED VALIDATION DECALS, TO PROVIDE THE COST OF THE DECALS, AND TO PROVIDE THAT THE FEES COLLECTED FOR THE DECALS MUST BE USED TO DEFRAY THE COSTS OF THE DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES; BY ADDING ARTICLE 3 TO CHAPTER 2, TITLE 56 SO AS TO PROVIDE FOR THE REGISTRATION, TITLING, AND LICENSING OF MOPEDS, TO PROVIDE PENALTIES FOR A VIOLATION OF THIS ARTICLE, TO REGULATE THE OPERATION OF A MOPED, AND TO REGULATE THE SALE OF A MOPED; BY ADDING SECTION 56-2-4000 SO AS TO PROVIDE A PENALTY FOR A VIOLATION OF CHAPTER 2, TITLE 56; TO AMEND SECTION 56-3-20, RELATING TO CERTAIN TERMS AND THEIR DEFINITIONS REGARDING THE REGISTRATION AND LICENSING OF MOTOR VEHICLES, SO AS TO DELETE CERTAIN TERMS AND THEIR DEFINITIONS; TO AMEND SECTION 56-3-200, RELATING TO THE REGISTRATION OF A VEHICLE, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT A CERTIFICATE OF TITLE IS NOT REQUIRED TO REGISTER A MOPED; TO AMEND SECTION 56-3-250, RELATING TO THE REGISTRATION AND LICENSING OF A MOTOR VEHICLE ONCE ALL LOCAL PROPERTY TAXES ARE PAID, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT THIS PROVISION DOES NOT APPLY TO A MOPED, AND TO MAKE A TECHNICAL CHANGE; TO AMEND SECTIONS 56-3-630, AS AMENDED, AND SECTION 56-3-760, RELATING TO VEHICLES, CLASSIFIED AS PRIVATE PASSENGER MOTOR VEHICLES AND THE REGISTRATION FEE FOR CERTAIN VEHICLES, SO AS TO DELETE THE TERM "MOTOR-DRIVEN CYCLE" AND REPLACE IT WITH THE TERM "MOPED", AND TO MAKE A TECHNICAL CHANGE; TO AMEND SECTIONS 56-5-120 AND 56-5-130, RELATING TO THE TERMS "VEHICLE" AND "MOTOR VEHICLE" AND THEIR DEFINITIONS, SO AS TO DELETE BOTH SECTIONS; TO AMEND SECTION 56-5-140, RELATING TO THE TERM "MOTORCYCLE" AND ITS DEFINITION, SO AS TO DELETE THIS SECTION; TO AMEND SECTION 56-5-150, RELATING TO THE TERM "MOTOR-DRIVEN CYCLE" AND ITS DEFINITION, SO AS TO DELETE THIS SECTION; TO AMEND SECTION 56-5-155, RELATING TO THE TERM "MOTORCYCLE THREE-WHEEL VEHICLE" AND ITS DEFINITION, SO AS TO DELETE THIS SECTION; TO AMEND SECTION 56-5-165, RELATING TO THE TERM "MOPED" AND ITS DEFINITION, SO AS TO DELETE THIS SECTION; TO AMEND SECTION 56-5-361, RELATING TO THE TERM "PASSENGER CAR" AND ITS DEFINITION, SO AS TO DELETE THE TERM "MOTOR-DRIVEN CYCLES" AND ADD THE TERM "MOPEDS"; TO AMEND SECTION 56-5-410, RELATING TO THE TERM "OWNER" AND ITS DEFINITION, SO AS TO DELETE THIS SECTION; TO AMEND SECTION 56-5-1550, RELATING TO THE OPERATION OF A MOTOR-DRIVEN CYCLE, SO AS TO DELETE THIS SECTION; TO AMEND SECTION 56-5-1555, RELATING TO THE OPERATION OF A MOPED, SO AS TO RAISE THE MAXIMUM SPEED AT WHICH A MOPED MAY BE OPERATED; TO AMEND SECTION 56-4-4450, RELATING TO DISPLAY OF LIGHTS BY A VEHICLE DURING CERTAIN TIMES OF DAY, SO AS TO DELETE AN OBSOLETE PROVISION AND MAKE A TECHNICAL CHANGE; TO AMEND SECTION 56-9-20, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO CERTAIN TERMS AND THEIR DEFINITIONS CONTAINED IN THE MOTOR VEHICLE FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY ACT, SO AS TO DELETE AND REVISE CERTAIN TERMS AND THEIR DEFINITIONS; TO AMEND SECTION 56-9-110, RELATING TO THE APPLICABILITY OF THE MOTOR VEHICLE FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY ACT TO CERTAIN ACCIDENTS OR JUDGMENTS, SO AS TO DELETE THIS SECTION; TO AMEND SECTION 56-10-520, RELATING TO THE OFFENSE OF OPERATING AN UNINSURED MOTOR VEHICLE, SO AS TO MAKE A TECHNICAL CHANGE AND PROVIDE THAT THIS SECTION APPLIES TO AN OPERATOR OF AN UNINSURED MOPED, WHO IS NOT THE REGISTERED OWNER OF THE MOPED, UNDER CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES; TO AMEND SECTION 56-10-535, RELATING TO THE DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES REQUIRING A PERSON TO PROVIDE PROOF OF FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY AFTER A CONVICTION OF CERTAIN TRAFFIC OFFENSES, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT THIS SECTION APPLIES TO A REGISTERED OWNER OF A MOPED; TO AMEND SECTION 56-15-10, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO CERTAIN TERMS AND THEIR DEFINITIONS REGARDING THE REGULATION OF MOTOR VEHICLE MANUFACTURERS, DISTRIBUTORS, AND DEALERS, SO AS TO REVISE THE DEFINITIONS OF THE TERMS "MOTOR VEHICLE" AND "MOTORCYCLE"; TO AMEND SECTION 56-16-10, RELATING TO TERMS AND THEIR DEFINITIONS REGARDING THE REGULATION OF MOTORCYCLE MANUFACTURES, DISTRIBUTORS, DEALERS, AND WHOLESALERS, SO AS TO REVISE THE DEFINITION OF THE TERM "MOTORCYCLE" AND REVISE THE TYPE OF VEHICLES REGULATED BY THIS CHAPTER; TO AMEND SECTION 56-19-10, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO TERMS AND THEIR DEFINITIONS REGARDING THE PROTECTION OF TITLES TO AND INTERESTS IN MOTOR VEHICLES, SO AS TO DELETE CERTAIN TERMS AND THEIR DEFINITIONS; TO AMEND SECTION 56-19-220, RELATING TO VEHICLES THAT ARE EXEMPTED FROM THE REQUIREMENT TO OBTAIN A CERTIFICATE OF TITLE, SO AS TO MAKE A TECHNICAL CHANGE AND TO ADD MOPEDS TO THE LIST OF EXEMPTED VEHICLES; TO AMEND SECTION 38-77-30, RELATING TO TERMS AND THEIR DEFINITIONS REGARDING AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE, SO AS TO DELETE THE TERMS "MOTOR-DRIVEN CYCLES", "MOTOR SCOOTERS", AND "MOPEDS"; TO PROVIDE THAT A PERSON WHO SELLS, SOLICITS, OR ADVERTISES TO SELL CERTAIN MOPEDS PRIOR TO JULY 1, 2017, MUST LABEL THE MOPEDS WITH THEIR SPECIFICATIONS AND PROVIDE A METAL PLATE THAT IDENTIFIES THE VEHICLE, TO PROVIDE A PENALTY FOR FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THIS PROVISION, TO PROVIDE THAT IT IS UNLAWFUL TO OPERATE CERTAIN MOPEDS WITHOUT THE METAL IDENTIFICATION PLATE, AND TO PROVIDE A PENALTY FOR FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THIS PROVISION; TO AMEND SECTION 56-5-2941, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES REQUIRING A PERSON WHO VIOLATES CERTAIN PROVISIONS TO HAVE INSTALLED ON CERTAIN VEHICLES AN IGNITION INTERLOCK DEVICE, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT THIS PROVISION DOES NOT REQUIRE THE INSTALLATION OF AN IGNITION INTERLOCK DEVICE ON A MOPED; AND TO REPEAL ARTICLE 3, CHAPTER 5, TITLE 56 RELATING TO MOPED REGULATIONS.
(R. 299, H. 3682 (Word version)) -- Reps. Finlay, Bannister, Newton, Cole, Delleney, Weeks, Whipper, Robinson-Simpson and Bingham: AN ACT TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING CHAPTER 4 TO TITLE 39 SO AS TO ENACT THE "BAD FAITH ASSERTION OF PATENT INFRINGEMENT ACT", TO PROVIDE THAT BAD FAITH ASSERTIONS OF PATENT INFRINGEMENTS ARE PROHIBITED, TO DEFINE TERMS, TO PROVIDE FOR A PRIVATE CAUSE OF ACTION IN STATE COURTS BY A RECIPIENT OF A BAD FAITH ASSERTION TO PATENT INFRINGEMENT, TO PROVIDE THAT ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS MAY BE BROUGHT BY THE ATTORNEY GENERAL AND WILFUL AND KNOWING VIOLATIONS MAY RESULT IN CIVIL PENALTIES OF NOT MORE THAN FIFTY THOUSAND DOLLARS FOR EACH VIOLATION, TO PROVIDE FOR THE FACTORS THAT A COURT MAY CONSIDER WHEN MAKING A BAD FAITH DETERMINATION, AND TO PROVIDE EXCEPTIONS.
(R. 300, H. 4090 (Word version)) -- Reps. Bedingfield, Sandifer, G.A. Brown, Ballentine and Loftis: AN ACT TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING SECTION 40-29-55 SO AS TO PROVIDE FOR THE PERIODIC ADJUSTMENT OF CERTAIN MONETARY REQUIREMENTS IN A CERTAIN MANNER, TO PROVIDE THE DEPARTMENT OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS TIMELY SHALL PUBLISH NOTICE OF SUCH CHANGES IN THE STATE REGISTER, TO PROVIDE PEOPLE WHO RELY ON CURRENT PUBLISHED DOLLAR AMOUNTS AT THE TIME TRANSACTIONS OCCUR MAY NOT BE CONSIDERED TO VIOLATE THE PROVISIONS OF CHAPTER 29, TITLE 40 WHEN DOLLAR AMOUNTS SUBSEQUENTLY CHANGE; BY ADDING SECTION 40-29-145 SO AS TO PROVIDE HOLD ORDERS THAT MAY BE PLACED ON PROPERTY IN THE POSSESSION OF PAWNBROKERS WHO SUSPECT THE PROPERTY HAS BEEN MISAPPROPRIATED OR STOLEN, AND TO PROVIDE RELATED REQUIREMENTS CONCERNING REQUIREMENTS AND SPECIFICATIONS OF THESE ORDERS AND PROPERTY ON WHICH HOLD ORDERS ARE PLACED; BY ADDING SECTION 40-29-155 SO AS TO PROVIDE AGGRIEVED PARTIES ARE ENTITLED TO CONTESTED CASE HEARINGS BEFORE THE ADMINISTRATIVE LAW COURT FOR FINAL ADMINISTRATIVE ORDERS, ABSENT WHICH THE DEPARTMENT MAY BRING ACTIONS TO ENFORCE ITS ORDERS; TO AMEND SECTION 40-39-10, RELATING TO DEFINITIONS CONCERNING THE REGULATION OF PAWNBROKERS BY THE DEPARTMENT, SO AS TO REVISE THE DEFINITION OF "PLEDGED GOODS" SPECIFICALLY TO EXCLUDE CERTAIN VEHICLES; TO AMEND SECTION 40-39-20, RELATING TO CERTIFICATES OF AUTHORITY REQUIRED OF PAWN BROKERS, SO AS TO CLARIFY CHARACTERISTICS THAT NECESSITATE CERTIFICATES OF AUTHORITY, TO REVISE REQUIREMENTS CONCERNING BACKGROUND CHECKS REQUIRED FOR CERTIFICATES OF AUTHORITY, TO PROVIDE PAWNBROKERS SHALL COMPLY WITH THESE REQUIREMENTS BEFORE HIRING EMPLOYEES, TO PROVIDE APPLICANTS FOR EMPLOYMENT SHALL PAY THE ACTUAL COSTS OF THESE BACKGROUND CHECKS, TO PROVIDE FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY AND OTHER CRITERIA REQUIRED FOR CERTIFICATES OF AUTHORITY, AND TO PROVIDE A REBUTTABLE PRESUMPTION OF MEETING THESE CRITERIA IN CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES; TO AMEND SECTION 40-39-30, RELATING TO THE REQUIREMENT OF CERTIFICATE OF AUTHORITY FOR EACH BUSINESS LOCATION OF A PAWNBROKER, SO AS TO PROVIDE PAWNBROKERS MAY NOT RETAIN PLEDGED GOODS IN LOCATIONS NOT DESIGNATED IN HIS CERTIFICATE OF AUTHORITY WITHOUT FIRST PROVIDING CERTAIN NOTICE TO THE DEPARTMENT, AND TO PROVIDE A PAWNBROKER CONSPICUOUSLY SHALL POST THE HOURS OF OPERATION AND ANY CLOSURE AT EACH LOCATION; TO AMEND SECTION 40-39-40, RELATING TO THE PROHIBITION ON UNAUTHORIZED FEES, SO AS TO PROVIDE A PAWNBROKER THAT COLLECTS SUCH UNAUTHORIZED FEES MAY NOT COLLECT, RECEIVE, OR RETAIN ANY INTEREST OR CHARGES ON THE LOAN IN VIOLATION OF THIS CHAPTER AND HAS NO RIGHT TO POSSESS THE PLEDGED GOODS; TO AMEND SECTION 40-39-50, RELATING TO BONDS AND OTHER EVIDENCE OF FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY REQUIRED FOR CERTIFICATES OF AUTHORITY, SO AS TO REVISE AND DELETE SOME EXISTING REQUIREMENTS AND TO PROVIDE PAWNBROKERS SHALL PROVIDE CERTAIN NOTICE OF OCCURRENCES THAT MAY AFFECT PLEDGED GOODS WITHIN TWENTY-ONE CALENDAR DAYS AFTER THE OCCURRENCE; TO AMEND SECTION 40-39-70, RELATING TO PAWNBROKER RECORD KEEPING REQUIREMENTS, SO AS TO REQUIRE CERTAIN VERIFICATION OF PLEDGORS' OR SELLERS' IDENTITIES, AND TO PROVIDE PAWN AND PURCHASE TRANSACTIONS MUST BE PERFORMED BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY, OR HIS AUTHORIZED AGENT, WHOSE IDENTITY AND AGENCY RELATIONSHIP MUST BE VERIFIED BY THE PAWNBROKER; TO AMEND SECTION 40-39-80, RELATING TO THE ISSUANCE OF A MEMORANDUM OR NOTE AT THE TIME OF PAWNING AND PLEDGING, SO AS TO CHARACTERIZE THE MEMORANDUM OR NOTE AS A "PAWN TICKET" AND TO SATISFY RELATED REQUIREMENTS, AMONG OTHER THINGS; TO AMEND SECTION 40-39-100, RELATING TO PERMISSIBLE CHARGES ON LOANS BY PAWNBROKERS, SO AS TO REVISE THE MAXIMUM PERMISSIBLE AMOUNT; TO AMEND SECTION 40-39-120, RELATING TO RENEWALS OF A CERTIFICATE OF AUTHORITY, SO AS TO PROVIDE PENALTIES FOR FAILING TO TIMELY RENEW, AND TO PROVIDE REQUIREMENTS FOR PAWN SHOPS THAT MUST CLOSE BECAUSE OF THE SURRENDER OR REVOCATION OF THEIR CERTIFICATE OF AUTHORITY; TO AMEND SECTION 40-39-140, RELATING TO PLEDGED OR PAWNED PROPERTY OWNED BY THIRD PARTIES, SO AS TO PROVIDE CIRCUMSTANCES IN WHICH PAWNBROKERS MUST RETURN SUCH PROPERTY TO THE THIRD PARTIES, TO PROVIDE MONETARY PENALTIES AGAINST PLEDGORS AND SELLERS OF SUCH LEASED PROPERTY, AND TO PROVIDE PAWNBROKERS ARE NOT LIABLE TO SUCH PLEDGORS AND SELLERS FOR SUCH RETURNED PROPERTY; AND TO AMEND SECTION 40-39-150, RELATING TO FINES AND PENALTIES FOR VIOLATIONS, SO AS TO TRANSFER THE AUTHORITY TO ORDER CERTAIN EQUITABLE RELIEF FROM THE ADMINISTRATIVE LAW COURT TO THE DEPARTMENT; AND TO PROVIDE COUNTIES AND MUNICIPALITIES MAY ENACT ORDINANCES THAT COMPLY WITH, BUT THAT ARE NOT MORE RESTRICTIVE THAN, THE PROVISIONS OF THIS ACT, AND TO PROVIDE EXCEPTIONS, AMONG OTHER THINGS.
(R. 301, H. 4262 (Word version)) -- Reps. Erickson, M.S. McLeod, Collins and Long: AN ACT TO AMEND SECTION 63-13-820, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO REGISTRATION OF FAMILY CHILDCARE HOMES, SO AS TO REQUIRE A FINGERPRINT REVIEW OF CERTAIN PERSONS; TO AMEND SECTION 63-13-825, RELATING TO TRAINING FOR FAMILY CHILDCARE HOME OPERATORS AND EMPLOYEES, SO AS TO REQUIRE ADDITIONAL TRAINING; TO AMEND SECTION 63-13-830, RELATING TO STATEMENTS OF REGISTRATION FOR FAMILY CHILDCARE HOMES, SO AS TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL AUTHORITY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES AND RIGHTS OF FAMILY CHILDCARE HOMES; AND TO AMEND SECTION 63-13-850, RELATING TO APPEALS OF DECISIONS TO WITHDRAW A STATEMENT OF REGISTRATION OF A FAMILY CHILDCARE HOME, SO AS TO ALSO ADDRESS APPEALS OF DECISIONS TO DENY AN APPLICATION FOR A STATEMENT OR RENEWAL OF REGISTRATION.
(R. 302, H. 4327 (Word version)) -- Rep. G.M. Smith: AN ACT TO AMEND CHAPTER 71, TITLE 44, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO HOSPICE PROGRAMS, SO AS TO ADD DEFINITIONAL TERMS; TO ESTABLISH CERTAIN REQUIREMENTS FOR HOSPICE LICENSES; TO ESTABLISH A PROCESS FOR THE REGISTRATION OF MULTIPLE OFFICE LOCATIONS OF A PARENT HOSPICE ORGANIZATION AND FOR THE EXPANSION OF A HOSPICE'S OR PARENT HOSPICE ORGANIZATION'S SERVICE AREA; TO CREATE A TASK FORCE TO STUDY ISSUES RELATING TO GEOGRAPHIC LIMITATIONS ON HOSPICES LICENSED IN CERTAIN REGIONS AND TO REQUIRE A REPORT WITH RECOMMENDATIONS; AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES.
(R. 303, H. 4387 (Word version)) -- Reps. Bamberg, Henegan, Clyburn, Pitts, Cobb-Hunter and Whipper: AN ACT TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING SECTION 23-1-245, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT A LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY, DEPARTMENT, OR DIVISION MAY NOT REQUIRE A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER TO ISSUE A SPECIFIC AMOUNT OR MEET A QUOTA FOR THE NUMBER OF CITATIONS ISSUED, TO PROVIDE THAT A LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY, DEPARTMENT, OR DIVISION MAY EVALUATE AN OFFICER'S PERFORMANCE BASED THE OFFICER'S POINTS OF CONTACT, TO ESTABLISH THAT AN OFFICER WHO ALLEGES A VIOLATION OF THE PROVISIONS OF THIS SECTION IS PROTECTED BY THE PROVISIONS CONTAINED IN CHAPTER 27 OF TITLE 8, AND TO DEFINE NECESSARY TERMS.
(R. 304, H. 4521 (Word version)) -- Reps. Putnam, Burns, Loftis, Felder, Taylor, Whipper and R.L. Brown: AN ACT TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, TO ENACT THE "TUCKER HIPPS TRANSPARENCY ACT" BY ADDING SECTION 59-101-210 SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT BEGINNING WITH THE 2016-2017 ACADEMIC YEAR, PUBLIC INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER LEARNING, EXCLUDING TECHNICAL COLLEGES, SHALL MAINTAIN REPORTS OF ACTUAL FINDINGS OF CERTAIN MISCONDUCT BY MEMBERS OF FRATERNITIES AND SORORITIES FORMALLY ASSOCIATED WITH THE INSTITUTION, TO SPECIFY INFORMATION THAT MUST BE INCLUDED AND MUST BE EXCLUDED, TO PROVIDE REQUIREMENTS FOR UPDATING AND PRESERVING REPORTS, TO PROVIDE INSTITUTIONS SHALL MAKE THE REPORTS AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC AND ONLINE, TO PROVIDE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC MAY SEEK REDRESS FOR SUSPECTED VIOLATIONS UNDER THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT; AND TO PROVIDE SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS FOR THE INITIAL REPORTS EACH INSTITUTION SHALL COMPILE AND MAKE AVAILABLE; AND TO PROVIDE THE ACT EXPIRES THREE YEARS AFTER ITS EFFECTIVE DATE ABSENT FURTHER ACTION BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY.
(R. 305, H. 4554 (Word version)) -- Reps. Clemmons, Pitts, Duckworth, Rivers, Fry, H.A. Crawford, Goldfinch, Jordan, Lowe, Johnson and Loftis: AN ACT TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING CHAPTER 11 TO TITLE 35 SO AS TO ENACT THE "SOUTH CAROLINA ANTI-MONEY LAUNDERING ACT" TO PROVIDE REGULATION AND OVERSIGHT OF THE MONEY TRANSMISSION SERVICES BUSINESS MOST COMMONLY USED BY ORGANIZED CRIMINAL ENTERPRISE TO LAUNDER THE MONETARY PROCEEDS OF ILLEGAL ACTIVITIES, AND TO PROVIDE DEFINITIONS, EXCLUSIONS, PROCEDURES, AND PENALTIES.
Pursuant to an invitation, the Honorable Speaker and House of Representatives appeared in the Senate Chamber on June 17, 2016, at 10:00 A.M. and the following Acts were ratified:
(R. 306, H. 3184 (Word version)) -- Reps. Pope, Cole, Anderson, Bales, G.A. Brown, Burns, Finlay, Funderburk, Hart, Knight, Lucas, Murphy, Newton, Norman, Norrell, Putnam, Rivers, Southard, Spires, Tallon, Taylor, Wells, Williams, Willis, Bernstein, Long, Douglas, Henderson, G.M. Smith, G.R. Smith, McCoy, McKnight, Clary, M.S. McLeod, Thayer, W.J. McLeod, Weeks, J.E. Smith and Stavrinakis: AN ACT TO AMEND SECTION 8-13-130, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE STATE ETHICS COMMISSION'S AUTHORITY TO LEVY ENFORCEMENT AND ADMINISTRATIVE FEES, SO AS TO AUTHORIZE THE LEGISLATIVE ETHICS COMMITTEES TO LEVY ENFORCEMENT AND ADMINISTRATIVE FEES; TO AMEND SECTION 8-13-310, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE COMPOSITION OF THE STATE ETHICS COMMISSION, SO AS TO RECONSTITUTE THE STATE ETHICS COMMISSION; TO AMEND SECTION 8-13-320, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE DUTIES AND POWERS OF THE STATE ETHICS COMMISSION, SO AS TO CITE ADDITIONAL LEGAL AUTHORITY AUTHORIZING THE STATE ETHICS COMMISSION TO INITIATE AND RECEIVE COMPLAINTS AND TO PROVIDE THAT THE FILER OF A GROUNDLESS COMPLAINT MAY BE ORDERED TO REIMBURSE THE COMMISSION FOR COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE INVESTIGATION AND DISPOSITION OF THE COMPLAINT, TO AUTHORIZE COMMISSION STAFF TO PARTICIPATE IN FACTS SUFFICIENCY DETERMINATIONS, TO REVISE THE PROCEDURES BY WHICH THE COMMISSION, UPON ITS OWN MOTION, MAY FILE A VERIFIED ETHICS COMPLAINT, TO REVISE THE COMMISSION'S REQUIRED ACTIONS AND TREATMENT OF COMPLAINT INFORMATION FOLLOWING A DISMISSAL OR A FINDING OF PROBABLE CAUSE, TO REVISE THE PROCEDURES BY WHICH THE COMMISSION DETERMINES PROBABLE CAUSE; TO PROVIDE THAT COMMISSION HEARINGS MUST BE OPEN TO THE PUBLIC, AND TO REVISE THE PROCEDURES BY WHICH THE COMMISSION ISSUES FORMAL ADVISORY OPINIONS; BY ADDING SECTION 8-13-322 SO AS TO PROHIBIT ANYONE WHO IS THE SUBJECT OF A PENDING ETHICS INVESTIGATION OR OPEN COMPLAINT FROM CONTACTING OR ATTEMPTING TO CONTACT, EITHER DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY, A MEMBER OF THE STATE ETHICS COMMISSION OR A LEGISLATIVE ETHICS COMMITTEE; TO AMEND SECTION 8-13-530, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE POWERS AND DUTIES OF THE LEGISLATIVE ETHICS COMMITTEES, SO AS TO REVISE THE COMMITTEES' FUNCTIONS AND RESPONSIBILITIES AND TO REQUIRE THE LEGISLATIVE ETHICS COMMITTEES TO REFER CERTAIN ETHICS COMPLAINTS TO THE STATE ETHICS COMMISSION FOR INVESTIGATION; BY ADDING SECTION 8-13-535 SO AS TO ESTABLISH PROCEDURES FOR THE LEGISLATIVE ETHICS COMMITTEES TO ISSUE FORMAL ADVISORY OPINIONS; TO AMEND SECTION 8-13-540, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE MANNER IN WHICH THE LEGISLATIVE ETHICS COMMITTEES CONDUCT INVESTIGATIONS AND HEARINGS, SO AS TO ESTABLISH PROCEDURES FOR FORWARDING CERTAIN ETHICS COMPLAINTS TO THE STATE ETHICS COMMISSION FOR DISPOSITION AND TO MAKE OTHER CONFORMING CHANGES; AND TO AMEND SECTION 8-13-550, RELATING TO THE CONSIDERATION OF AN ETHICS COMMITTEE REPORT BY THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OR SENATE, SO AS TO ELIMINATE THE CONFIDENTIALITY EXCEPTION FOR PRIVATE REPRIMANDS.
(R. 307, H. 3186 (Word version)) -- Reps. Finlay, Cole, Anderson, Bales, G.A. Brown, R.L. Brown, Felder, Funderburk, Hart, Knight, Lucas, Murphy, Newton, Norman, Norrell, Pope, Putnam, Rivers, Southard, Spires, Tallon, Taylor, Wells, Williams, Willis, Long, Henderson, G.R. Smith, G.M. Smith, McCoy, Clary, J.E. Smith, W.J. McLeod, Weeks, Whipper, Hicks, Atwater, Ballentine and Stavrinakis: AN ACT TO AMEND SECTION 8-13-1120, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE CONTENTS OF THE STATEMENT OF ECONOMIC INTERESTS, SO AS TO REQUIRE THE DISCLOSURE OF SPECIFIED INCOME INFORMATION ON THE STATEMENT OF ECONOMIC INTERESTS, AND TO DEFINE "INCOME" FOR PURPOSES OF THE STATEMENT OF ECONOMIC INTERESTS AND TO ENUMERATE EXCLUSIONS.
(R. 308, H. 4391 (Word version)) -- Reps. Burns, Yow, Chumley, Felder, Loftis, Bradley and Collins: AN ACT TO CREATE THE "BRAIN TISSUE DONOR STUDY COMMITTEE" TO PROVIDE A PROCESS AND PROCEDURE FOR CITIZENS OF THIS STATE TO DONATE THEIR BRAIN TISSUE UPON THEIR DEATH FOR RESEARCH AND EDUCATION, TO PROVIDE FOR MEMBERSHIP OF THE STUDY COMMITTEE, TO REQUIRE THE STUDY COMMITTEE TO PREPARE A REPORT FOR THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY, AND TO INCLUDE A SUNSET PROVISION FOR THE STUDY COMMITTEE.
(R. 309, H. 4765 (Word version)) -- Reps. G.R. Smith, Parks, D.C. Moss, Cobb-Hunter, Jefferson, Duckworth, Daning, Kirby, R.L. Brown, Burns, Douglas, Brannon, Anthony, Mitchell, Ridgeway, Robinson-Simpson, Clyburn, Ryhal, Johnson, Yow, G.A. Brown, Riley, Taylor, Limehouse, Williams, Simrill, Bedingfield, Chumley, Dillard, Herbkersman, Hicks, Hill, Loftis, Long, V.S. Moss, Pope, Rivers, Thayer, Wells, Crosby and King: AN ACT TO AMEND SECTION 12-6-5060, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO VOLUNTARY CONTRIBUTIONS MADE BY AN INDIVIDUAL BY MEANS OF THE INCOME TAX RETURN CHECK OFF, SO AS TO ADD THE SOUTH CAROLINA ASSOCIATION OF HABITAT FOR HUMANITY AFFILIATES; AND TO AMEND SECTION 12-6-3750, RELATING TO TAX CREDITS FOR PROCESSING DONATED DEER FOR CHARITABLE DISTRIBUTION, SO AS TO CHANGE THE AMOUNT OF THE CREDIT FROM FIFTY DOLLARS TO SEVENTY-FIVE DOLLARS.
(R. 310, H. 5140 (Word version)) -- Reps. Pope, Felder, King, Gambrell, Gagnon, Erickson, Clary, Tallon and Henderson: AN ACT TO AMEND SECTION 59-1-425, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE OPENING DATE FOR THE PUBLIC SCHOOL YEAR, SO AS TO MAKE GRAMMATICAL CHANGES; AND TO AMEND SECTION 59-18-325, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO CERTAIN ASSESSMENTS OF VARIOUS PUBLIC SCHOOL STUDENTS BASED ON GRADE LEVEL, SO AS TO REVISE VARIOUS ASSESSMENTS USED, MANNER OF PROCUREMENT, IMPLEMENTATION, AND ADMINISTRATION OF THESE ASSESSMENTS, AMONG OTHER THINGS.
The Senate returned to the House with concurrence the following:
H. 5473 (Word version) -- Rep. Funderburk: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION TO EXTEND DEEPEST SYMPATHY TO THE FAMILY AND FRIENDS OF AUSTIN A. BROWN, LEGENDARY HORSEMAN AND GENTLEMAN, AND TO CELEBRATE HIS EXTRAORDINARY CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE CITY OF CAMDEN AND TO THE THOROUGHBRED INDUSTRY.
At 9:45 p.m. the House, in accordance with the motion of Rep. MACK adjourned, and in accordance with S. 1336, the Sine Die Adjournment Resolution, adjourned in memory of the Emanuel 9.
This web page was last updated on Wednesday, November 23, 2016 at 3:18 P.M.