Journal of the House of Representatives
of the First Session of the 111th General Assembly
of the State of South Carolina
being the Regular Session Beginning Tuesday, January 10, 1995

Page Finder Index

| Printed Page 1480, Mar. 9 | Printed Page 1500, Mar. 9 |

Printed Page 1490 . . . . . Thursday, March 9, 1995

The Department of Revenue and Taxation shall revise its manuals for the valuation of motor vehicles for purposes of property taxation to ensure that every vehicle depreciates in value each year until it reaches the minimum assessed value. These revised manuals shall apply with respect to motor vehicle tax years beginning after 1994. A taxpayer who overpaid personal property taxes as a result of the revised values must be refunded the overpayment upon written application therefor to the county auditor./

Renumber sections & amend totals/title to conform.

Rep. G. BROWN explained the amendment.

POINT OF ORDER

Rep. HASKINS raised the Point of Order that Amendment No. 67 was out of order as it was not germane.

Rep. G. BROWN argued contra the Point.

The SPEAKER sustained the Point of Order and ruled the amendment out of order.

Rep. G. BROWN proposed the following Amendment No. 68 (Doc Name L:\council\legis\amend\PFM\7232BDW.95), which was ruled out of order.

Amend the bill, as and if amended, Part II by adding an appropriately numbered section to read:

/SECTION ____

TO AMEND THE 1976 CODE BY ADDING SECTION 50-9-505 SO AS TO AUTHORIZE CERTAIN FISHING ON LAKE ASHWOOD IN LEE COUNTY.

The 1976 Code is amended by adding:

"Section 50-9-505. A person permitted pursuant to Section 50-9-500 is authorized to fish on Lake Ashwood in Lee County with nonmanufactured tackle or natural bait."/

Renumber sections & amend totals/title to conform.

POINT OF ORDER

Rep. HASKINS raised the Point of Order that Amendment No. 68 was out of order as it was not germane.

Rep. G. BROWN argued contra the Point.


Printed Page 1491 . . . . . Thursday, March 9, 1995

The SPEAKER sustained the Point of Order and ruled the amendment out of order.

Rep. CROMER proposed the following Amendment No. 73 (Doc Name L:\council\legis\amend\JIC\5545HTC.95), which was tabled.

Amend the bill, as and if amended, Part II, by adding a new section, appropriately numbered, to read:

/SECTION ___

TO AMEND THE 1976 CODE BY ADDING SECTION 8-1-200 SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT NO STATE OFFICER OR EMPLOYEE MAY RECEIVE A SALARY IN EXCESS OF EIGHTY THOUSAND DOLLARS A YEAR AND TO PROVIDE EXCEPTIONS.

A. Chapter 1, Title 8 of the 1976 Code is amended by adding:

"Section 8-1-200. No state officer or employee may receive a salary in excess of eighty thousand dollars a year for the performance of official duties. This limitation does not apply to any officers and employees of state institutions of higher learning. In the case of a state officer serving for a term of years during which the Constitution of this State prohibits the diminution of the officer's salary, the limitation imposed by this section first applies for the succeeding term."

B. This section takes effect July 1, 1995./

Renumber sections & amend totals/title to conform.

Rep. CROMER explained the amendment.

SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE IN CHAIR

Rep. CROMER continued speaking.

Rep. HUFF moved to table the amendment.

Rep. CROMER demanded the yeas and nays, which were not ordered.

The amendment was then tabled by a division vote of 69 to 10.

Reps. CROMER and HALLMAN proposed the following Amendment No. 74 (Doc Name L:\council\legis\amend\DKA\3766CM.95), which was ruled out of order.

Amend the bill, as and if amended, Part II, by adding an appropriately numbered SECTION to read:

/SECTION __

TO AMEND SECTION 55-5-70, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO DUTIES AND POWERS OF THE AERONAUTICS DIVISION OF THE DEPARTMENT OF
Printed Page 1492 . . . . . Thursday, March 9, 1995

COMMERCE, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT THE DIVISION HAS AUTHORITY OVER ALL PASSENGER AIRCRAFT OWNED BY THE STATE OR ITS DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES; TO PROVIDE THAT THE DIVISION CONDUCT A STUDY TO EXAMINE THE FEASIBILITY AND COST SAVINGS OF PROVIDING SHUTTLE FLIGHTS IN STATE AIRCRAFT TO FREQUENTLY TRAVELED DESTINATIONS AND REPORT TO THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY BY JANUARY 1, 1996; AND TO REQUIRE THE DIVISION TO SELL THREE STATE AIRCRAFT.

A. Section 55-5-70 of the 1976 Code, as last amended by Section 1289, Act 181 of 1993, is further amended to read:

"Section 55-5-70. The division shall foster air commerce within the State and the division shall have supervision over the aeronautical activities and facilities within the State. Such The authority shall include includes supervision and control over all aircraft owned, operated, and maintained by the State, its departments and agencies, airports, landing fields, landing strips, air instruction, air parking, air beacons, and all other air navigation facilities. Accordingly, the division may prescribe such reasonable rules and regulations as it may deem necessary and advisable for the public safety and for the promotion of aeronautics governing:

(1) state aircrafts;

(2) the designing, laying out, location, building, equipping, operation, and use of all airports, landing fields or landing strips.;

(3) The division may further prescribe such reasonable rules and regulations as it may deem necessary governing the curriculum, equipment, personnel, and operation, and management of all air instruction, for the purpose of protecting to protect the health and safety of students receiving or to receive such instruction and insuring, so far as may be, ensuring the public safety through the proper training and instruction of student aviators.;

(4) The division may further prescribe such reasonable rules and regulations as it may deem necessary and advisable for the public safety and the safety of those engaged in aeronautics and for the promotion of aeronautics governing the establishment, location, maintenance, and operation of all air markings, air beacons, and other air navigation facilities.; and

(5) The division may further prescribe such reasonable air traffic rules and regulations as it shall deem necessary for public safety and the safety of those engaged in aeronautics and for the promotion of aeronautics;. provided, however, that no rules or regulations


Printed Page 1493 . . . . . Thursday, March 9, 1995

Regulations prescribed by the division under the authority of this section shall be must not be inconsistent with the then current federal legislation governing aeronautics and the regulations duly promulgated thereunder under federal law."

B. The Aeronautics Division shall conduct a study to examine the feasibility and potential cost savings of providing shuttle flights in state-owned aircraft to frequently traveled destinations. The division shall report its findings to the General Assembly through the House Ways and Means and Senate Finance Committees by January 1, 1996.

C. The Aeronautics Division shall reduce by three the number of state-owned aircraft immediately upon acquisition of jurisdiction over these aircraft as provided in Section 1 of this act.

D. This provision does not apply to aircraft that have been purchased and subsequently operated and maintained with nonappropriated funds./

Renumber sections & amend totals/title to conform.

Rep. CROMER explained the amendment.

POINT OF ORDER

Rep. HODGES raised the Point of Order that Amendment No. 74 was out of order as it was not germane in that it did not relate to a line item.

Rep. CROMER argued contra the Point in stating that there were previous Points of Order which were overruled and one involved state cars and their assignment which ordered a consolidation of all of the cars under one entity and that being the Budget and Control Division, Department of Automobiles, and secondly, the Point was on this amendment which was overruled on March 10, 1994 and it did relate to the budget because it required the immediate sale of three aircraft which would bring instant revenue. He further stated that the language of the line item was not in the amendment itself but on the previous ruling that it stated that in Part C the Aeronautics Division shall reduce by three the number of state-owned acquisitions. He further stated that the jurisdiction of the aircraft was statutorily provided for in Section 1 of the Act and Section C of the Amendment directed the sale and proceeds to go into the line item in Section 1.

Rep. HODGES stated that this clearly was not a provision which related back to Part 1. He further stated that there was not an appropriation for the sale of aircraft.

Rep. CROMER, citing Section 50, Page 325 of the Bill, stated that under other operating expenses, Line 32, it would be increased.

Rep. HODGES stated that it did not appropriate funds there.


Printed Page 1494 . . . . . Thursday, March 9, 1995

Rep. CROMER argued that it affected revenue and there were previous rulings that would make this germane.

Rep. HODGES stated that earlier today there were amendments by Rep. G. Brown ruled out of order and he could have made that argument.

SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE HASKINS stated that the only part of the amendment that dealt with revenue was the sale of aircraft.

Rep. CROMER stated that the substantial effect of the amendment increased revenue and the Legislative Audit Council's conclusion was that $800,000.00 annually would be saved if this were enacted.

SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE HASKINS stated that based on the Speaker's ruling on March 10, 1994, that the substantial effect of the amendment must be directly related to an appropriation in Part I and he sustained the Point of Order and ruled the amendment out of order.

Rep. KEYSERLING proposed the following Amendment No. 81 (Doc Name L:\council\legis\amend\JIC\5534HTC.95), which was tabled.

Amend the bill, as and if amended, Part II, Permanent Provisions, by adding a new section, appropriately numbered, to read:

/SECTION ___

TO AMEND SECTION 12-36-2120, AS AMENDED, OF THE 1976 CODE, RELATING TO SALES TAX EXEMPTIONS, SO AS TO EXTEND THE EXEMPTION ALLOWED MANUFACTURING MACHINERY TO MACHINERY USED FOR RECYCLING AND TO DEFINE "RECYCLING".

A. Section 12-36-2120(17) of the 1976 Code, as added by Act 612 of 1990, is amended to read:

"(17) machines used in manufacturing, processing, recycling, compounding, mining, or quarrying tangible personal property for sale. `Machines' include the parts of machines, attachments, and replacements used, or manufactured for use, on or in the operation of the machines and which are necessary to the operation of the machines and are customarily so used. This exemption does not include automobiles or trucks;. As used in this item, `recycling' means any process by which materials which would otherwise become solid waste are collected, separated, or processed and reused or returned to use in the form of raw materials or products, including composting, for sale;"

B. This section takes effect July 1, 1995./

Renumber sections & amend totals/title to conform.

Rep. H. BROWN moved to table the amendment, which was agreed to.


Printed Page 1495 . . . . . Thursday, March 9, 1995

Reps. HODGES and WILKES proposed the following Amendment No. 99 (Doc Name L:\council\legis\amend\JIC\5539HTC.95), which was tabled.

Amend the bill, as and if amended, Part II, Permanent Provisions, by adding a new section, appropriately numbered, to read:

/SECTION ___

TO AMEND THE 1976 CODE BY ADDING SECTION 12-7-1212 SO AS TO ALLOW A TWO HUNDRED DOLLAR STATE INDIVIDUAL INCOME TAX CREDIT FOR A TAXPAYER WHO IS A FULL-TIME STUDENT AT A TWO OR FOUR-YEAR INSTITUTION OF HIGHER LEARNING, INCLUDING A TECHNICAL COLLEGE, AND FOR A TAXPAYER WHOSE DEPENDENT IS SUCH A STUDENT AND TO LIMIT THE CREDIT TO TAXPAYER WITH ADJUSTED GROSS INCOME OF LESS THAN ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS.

A. Article 10, Chapter 7, Title 12 of the 1976 Code is amended by adding:

"Section 12-7-1212. A resident taxpayer who is a full-time student at a two or four-year institution of higher learning, including a technical college, and a resident taxpayer who has a dependent claimed on the taxpayer's federal income tax return who is such a student is allowed a credit against the tax imposed pursuant to Section 12-7-210 in an amount equal to two hundred dollars. The credit is not allowed a taxpayer who can be claimed as a dependent on the federal income tax return of another individual and no credit is allowed in the case of a taxpayer whose federal adjusted gross income is one hundred thousand dollars or more."

B. This section is effective for taxable years beginning after 1994./

Renumber sections & amend totals/title to conform.

Rep. HODGES explained the amendment.

POINT OF ORDER

Rep. HUFF raised the Point of Order that Amendment No. 99 was out of order as it was not germane in that it did not relate to Part 1.

Rep. HODGES argued that it was germane to Part I because it affected revenue by decreasing revenue and the capitulation section on individual income tax returns, it would reduce the amount of money available.

SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE HASKINS stated that the amendment did directly affect the income under the individual income tax and he overruled the Point of Order.

Rep. HODGES continued speaking.


Printed Page 1496 . . . . . Thursday, March 9, 1995

SPEAKER IN CHAIR

Rep. HODGES continued speaking.

Rep. WILKES spoke in favor of the amendment.

Rep. SCOTT spoke in favor of the amendment.

Rep. HODGES spoke in favor of the amendment.

Rep. HALLMAN spoke against the amendment and moved to table the amendment.

Rep. HODGES demanded the yeas and nays, which were taken resulting as follows:

Yeas 61; Nays 52

Those who voted in the affirmative are:

Allison          Bailey           Brown, H.
Cain             Cato             Chamblee
Cooper           Cotty            Dantzler
Davenport        Easterday        Fair
Fleming          Fulmer           Gamble
Hallman          Harrell          Harris, P.
Harrison         Haskins          Herdklotz
Huff             Hutson           Keegan
Kelley           Klauber          Knotts
Koon             Law              Limbaugh
Limehouse        Littlejohn       Marchbanks
Mason            Meacham          Quinn
Rice             Richardson       Riser
Robinson         Sandifer         Seithel
Sharpe           Simrill          Smith, D.
Smith, R.        Stuart           Thomas
Tripp            Trotter          Vaughn
Walker           Wells            Whatley
Wilkins          Witherspoon      Wofford
Worley           Wright           Young, A.
Young, J.

Total--61

Those who voted in the negative are:

Anderson         Baxley           Beatty
Boan             Breeland         Brown, G.


Printed Page 1497 . . . . . Thursday, March 9, 1995

Brown, J.        Brown, T.        Byrd
Carnell          Cave             Clyburn
Cobb-Hunter      Cromer           Delleney
Elliott          Govan            Harris, J.
Harwell          Hines            Hodges
Howard           Jaskwhich        Jennings
Keyserling       Kinon            Kirsh
Lloyd            Martin           McCraw
McElveen         McMahand         McTeer
Moody-Lawrence   Neal             Neilson
Phillips         Rhoad            Rogers
Scott            Sheheen          Shissias
Spearman         Stille           Stoddard
Townsend         Waldrop          Whipper, L.
Whipper, S.      White            Wilder
Wilkes

Total--52

So, the amendment was tabled.

Reps. SPEARMAN, QUINN, CROMER and KLAUBER proposed the following Amendment No. 100 (Doc Name L:\council\legis\amend\PFM\7258BDW.95), which was adopted.

Amend the bill, as and if amended, Part II, by adding an appropriately numbered section to read:

/SECTION___

TO REPEAL ARTICLE 37, CHAPTER 5, TITLE 56 OF THE 1976 CODE, RELATING TO THE INSPECTION OF VEHICLES.

A. Article 37, Chapter 5, Title 56 of the 1976 Code is repealed.

B. This section takes effect July 1, 1995./

Rep. SPEARMAN explained the amendment.

The amendment was then adopted.

Reps. HODGES, WILKES and NEAL proposed the following Amendment No. 103 (Doc Name L:\council\legis\amend\JIC\5546HTC.95), which was tabled.

Amend the bill, as and if amended, Part II, Permanent Provisions, by adding a new section, appropriately numbered, to read:

/SECTION ___


Printed Page 1498 . . . . . Thursday, March 9, 1995

TO AMEND SECTION 12-7-435, AS AMENDED, OF THE 1976 CODE, RELATING TO DEDUCTIONS FROM SOUTH CAROLINA TAXABLE INCOME, SO AS TO REVISE THE DEDUCTION ALLOWED FOR DEPENDENTS UNDER SIX YEARS OF AGE BY LIMITING THE AMOUNTS THAT MAY BE CLAIMED BASED ON THE TAXPAYER'S SOUTH CAROLINA TAXABLE INCOME.

A. The unnumbered item added in Section 12-7-435 of the 1976 Code, pursuant to Section 3, Part II, Act 497 of 1994, is amended to read:

"( ) A resident individual taxpayer is allowed a deduction for each dependent claimable on the taxpayer's federal income tax return who has not yet attained the age of six years during the applicable tax year. This deduction is contingent upon the identification in the annual general appropriations act of revenues sufficient to offset the revenue loss caused by the exemption and for fiscal year 1994-95 only, the revenue source is a one year delay in the final step of the state individual income tax deduction allowed a portion of net capital gain. Accordingly, notwithstanding the provisions of Section 12-7-437, the provisions of Section 12-7-437(A)(2) apply for the 1994 taxable year and the provisions of Section 12-7-437(A)(3) apply for taxable years beginning after 1994. The deduction allowed by this section is an amount equal to a percentage of the federal income tax personal exemption amount allowed for the applicable taxable year as follows:

Taxable year 1994 twenty-five percent

Taxable year 1995 fifty percent

Taxable year 1996 seventy-five percent

Taxable years after 1996 one hundred percent
Notwithstanding the amounts allowed as a deduction pursuant to this item, the maximum deduction allowed is six hundred twelve dollars and fifty cents for each dependent of a taxpayer whose South Carolina taxable income exceeds sixty thousand dollars."

B. This section is effective for taxable years beginning after 1994./

Renumber sections, amend title/totals to conform.

Rep. HODGES explained the amendment.

LEAVE OF ABSENCE

The SPEAKER granted Rep. BAILEY a leave of absence.

Rep. HODGES continued speaking.

Rep. HALLMAN spoke against the amendment and moved to table the amendment.


Printed Page 1499 . . . . . Thursday, March 9, 1995

Rep. HODGES demanded the yeas and nays, which were taken resulting as follows:
Yeas 62; Nays 43

Those who voted in the affirmative are:

Allison          Brown, H.        Cain
Cato             Chamblee         Cooper
Cotty            Davenport        Easterday
Fair             Felder           Fleming
Fulmer           Gamble           Hallman
Harrell          Harris, J.       Harrison
Haskins          Herdklotz        Huff
Hutson           Jaskwhich        Jennings
Keegan           Kelley           Klauber
Knotts           Koon             Lanford
Law              Limehouse        Littlejohn
Marchbanks       Mason            Meacham
Quinn            Rice             Richardson
Riser            Robinson         Sandifer
Seithel          Sharpe           Simrill
Smith, R.        Stuart           Thomas
Townsend         Tripp            Trotter
Vaughn           Waldrop          Walker
Wells            Whatley          Wilkins
Witherspoon      Wofford          Wright
Young, A.        Young, J.

Total--62

Those who voted in the negative are:

Anderson         Baxley           Beatty
Boan             Breeland         Brown, G.
Brown, J.        Brown, T.        Byrd
Carnell          Cave             Clyburn
Cobb-Hunter      Cromer           Delleney
Elliott          Govan            Hines
Hodges           Howard           Keyserling
Kirsh            Lloyd            Martin
McCraw           McElveen         McMahand
McTeer           Moody-Lawrence   Neal
Neilson          Phillips         Rhoad


Printed Page 1500 . . . . . Thursday, March 9, 1995

Rogers           Scott            Sheheen
Shissias         Spearman         Whipper, L.
Whipper, S.      White            Wilder
Wilkes

Total--43

So, the amendment was tabled.


| Printed Page 1480, Mar. 9 | Printed Page 1500, Mar. 9 |

Page Finder Index