Indicates Matter Stricken
Indicates New Matter

The Senate assembled at 12:00 Noon, the hour to which it stood adjourned and was called to order by the PRESIDENT.

A quorum being present the proceedings were opened with a devotion by the Chaplain as follows:

Beloved, it has become a tradition with us here to pray President George Washington's Prayer for the United States on commemorating his birthday or Presidents' Day.
Let us pray George Washington's Prayer for the United States:

"Almighty God, we make our earnest prayer

that Thou wilt keep the United States in Thy

holy protection; that Thou wilt incline the

hearts of the citizens to cultivate a spirit

of subordination and obedience to government,

and entertain a brotherly affection and love

for one another and for their fellow citizens

of the United States at large. And finally

that Thou wilt most graciously be pleased to

dispose us all to do justice, to love mercy,

and demean ourselves with that charity, humility

and pacific temper of mind which were the

characteristics of the Divine Author of our

blessed religion, without a humble imitation

of whose example in these things we can

never hope to be a happy nation. Grant our

supplication, we beseech Thee, through Jesus Christ,

our Lord. Amen."

The PRESIDENT called for Petitions, Memorials, Presentments of Grand Juries and such like papers.

January 3, 1996
Mr. President and Members of the Senate:

I am transmitting herewith an appointment for confirmation. This appointment is made with the "advice and consent of the Senate," and is, therefore, submitted for your consideration.

Respectfully,
David M. Beasley

Reappointment, State Board of Social Work Examiners, with term to commence November 27, 1996, and to expire November 27, 2000:

Master:

Mr. John R. Kennedy, 917 Rolling View Lane, Columbia, S.C. 29210

Referred to the General Committee.

January 22, 1996
Mr. President and Members of the Senate:

I am transmitting herewith appointments for confirmation. These appointments are made with the "advice and consent of the Senate," and are, therefore, submitted for your consideration.

Respectfully,
David M. Beasley

Initial Appointment, Board of Trustees for the Children's Trust Fund of South Carolina, with term to commence June 30, 1996, and to expire June 30, 2000:

5th Congressional District:

Ms. Caryn M. Proctor, Route 1, Box 178-C, Hamer, S.C. 29547 VICE Thomas Alexander Givens

Referred to the General Committee.

Initial Appointment, Crime Victims' Ombudsman, with term to commence November 1, 1995, and to expire at the pleasure of the Governor:

Mr. Burton W. Fowles, Jr., 2502 Burney Drive, Columbia, S.C. 29205

Referred to the Committee on Corrections and Penology.

January 23, 1996
Mr. President and Members of the Senate:

I am transmitting herewith an appointment for confirmation. This appointment is made with the "advice and consent of the Senate," and is, therefore, submitted for your consideration.

Respectfully,
David M. Beasley

Reappointment, South Carolina Advisory Board for Victim Assistance, with term to commence September 1, 1996, and to expire September 1, 2001:

Sexual Assault Prevention/Treatment:

Dean G. Kilpatrick, Ph.D., Department of Psychiatry, Medical University of South Carolina, 171 Ashley Avenue, Charleston, S.C. 29425

Referred to the Committee on Corrections and Penology.

S. 654 -- Senator Greg Smith: A BILL TO AMEND CHAPTER 5, TITLE 61, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING SECTION 61-5-185 SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT A PERMIT AUTHORIZED BY SECTION 61-5-180 MAY BE ISSUED TO NONPROFIT ORGANIZATIONS AND BUSINESSES LOCATED EAST OF THE INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY IN A COUNTY THAT IS CONTIGUOUS TO A COUNTY THAT HAS ANNUAL ACCOMMODATIONS TAX COLLECTIONS IN EXCESS OF SIX MILLION DOLLARS AND HAS PASSED A REFERENDUM AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF PERMITS PURSUANT TO SECTION 61-5-180.

Senator GREG SMITH asked unanimous consent to take the Bill up for immediate consideration.

There was no objection.

The House returned the Bill with amendments.

Senator GREG SMITH proposed the following amendment (JUD0654.005), which was adopted:

Amend the bill, as and if amended, page 1, line 32, in Section 61-5-185(A), as contained in SECTION 1, by striking /and (C)/.

Amend the bill further, as and if amended, page 2, beginning on line 31, in Section 61-5-185, as contained in SECTION 1, by striking subsection (C), as contained in lines 31 through 38, in its entirety.

Amend title to conform.

Senator GREG SMITH explained the amendment.

There being no further amendments, the Bill was amended and ordered returned to the House with amendments.

S. 953 -- Senators Jackson, Passailaigue and Elliott: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 20-7-3097, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO CRIMINAL BACKGROUND CHECKS FOR EMPLOYEES AND PROSPECTIVE EMPLOYEES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES' DAYCARE LICENSING AND CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICES DIVISIONS, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT A PERSON MAY BE EMPLOYED PROVISIONALLY FOR A PERIOD NOT TO EXCEED ONE HUNDRED TWENTY DAYS, PROVIDED THAT THE PERSON AFFIRMS IN WRITING THAT THEY HAVE NOT BEEN CONVICTED OF ANY OF THE CRIMES PROVIDED BY THIS SECTION.

Senator ROSE asked unanimous consent to make a motion to recall the Bill from the General Committee.

There was no objection.

On motion of Senator ROSE, with unanimous consent, the Bill was committed to the Committee on Judiciary.

S. 968 -- Senator Jackson: A BILL TO AMEND SUBARTICLE 11, ARTICLE 13, CHAPTER 7, TITLE 20, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO CHILD DAY CARE FACILITIES, BY ADDING SECTION 20-7-2725 SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT NO INITIAL LICENSE, APPROVAL, OR REGISTRATION TO OPERATE A PRIVATE DAY CARE CENTER, GROUP DAY CARE HOME, PUBLIC DAY CARE CENTER, FAMILY DAY CARE HOME, CHURCH OR RELIGIOUS DAY CARE CENTER, OR OTHER FACILITY DESCRIBED IN THIS SUBARTICLE ON A REGULAR OR PROVISIONAL BASIS SHALL BE ISSUED UNLESS AND UNTIL THE CRIMINAL BACKGROUND CHECKS REQUIRED BY THIS SUBARTICLE ARE COMPLETED FOR THE APPLICANT AND ALL EMPLOYEES AND CAREGIVERS WHO WILL WORK AT THE FACILITY WHEN IT BEGINS OPERATION.

Senator ROSE asked unanimous consent to make a motion to recall the Bill from the General Committee.

There was no objection.

On motion of Senator ROSE, with unanimous consent, the Bill was committed to the Committee on Judiciary.

The following was introduced:

S. 1155 -- Senator Drummond: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION CONGRATULATING MS. KELLY MCCALLA OF GREENWOOD COUNTY FOR BEING NAMED THE 1997 SOUTH CAROLINA TEACHER OF THE YEAR.

The Concurrent Resolution was adopted, ordered sent to the House.

THE SENATE PROCEEDED TO A CALL OF THE UNCONTESTED LOCAL AND STATEWIDE CALENDAR.

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

S. 804 -- Senators Rose, McConnell and Mescher: A BILL TO DEVOLVE THE AUTHORITY FOR APPOINTMENTS AND BUDGETARY APPROVALS FOR CERTAIN OFFICES, BOARDS, AND COMMISSIONS FROM THE JOINT LEGISLATIVE DELEGATION REPRESENTING DORCHESTER COUNTY TO THE GOVERNING BODY OF DORCHESTER COUNTY.

Senator MATTHEWS asked unanimous consent to take the Bill up for immediate consideration.

There was no objection.

S. 1118 -- Education Committee: A BILL TO REVISE THE MANNER IN WHICH FUNDS OF THE EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE ENDOWMENT FUND ARE DISTRIBUTED FOR FISCAL YEAR 1995-96 BY DELETING A REQUIREMENT THAT A SPECIFIED DOLLAR AMOUNT BE USED FOR HIGHER EDUCATION SCHOLARSHIP GRANTS, AND TO REPEAL PARAGRAPH 72.71, SECTION 72, PART 1B OF ACT 145 OF 1995 WHICH SPECIFIES THE MANNER IN WHICH THESE FUNDS MUST BE DISTRIBUTED FOR FISCAL YEAR 1995-96.

Senator BRYAN asked unanimous consent to take the Bill up for immediate consideration.

There was no objection.

The following Bill having been read the second time was ordered placed on the third reading Calendar:

S. 1154 -- Senators Washington, Passailaigue, Ford, Greg Smith, Richter and McConnell: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 7-7-140, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO VOTING PRECINCTS IN CHARLESTON COUNTY, SO AS TO REVISE THESE PRECINCTS AND THE DATE OF THE OFFICIAL MAP ON WHICH THE LINES OF THESE PRECINCTS ARE DELINEATED.

On motion of Senator PASSAILAIGUE, S. 1154 was ordered to receive a third reading on Wednesday, February 21, 1996.

S. 1142 -- Banking and Insurance Committee: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 56-9-20, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE MOTOR VEHICLE FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY ACT AND DEFINITIONS, SO AS TO ADD A DEFINITION FOR "UNINSURED MOTORIST FUND"; TO AMEND CHAPTER 10, TITLE 56, RELATING TO MOTOR VEHICLE REGISTRATION AND FINANCIAL SECURITY, BY ADDING ARTICLE 5 SO AS TO PROVIDE FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF AN UNINSURED MOTORIST FUND; TO AMEND SECTION 38-73-470, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE DISPOSITION OF THE UNINSURED MOTORIST PREMIUM, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT ONE DOLLAR OF THIS YEARLY PREMIUM IS DIRECTED TO BE PAID TO THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE "UNINSURED ENFORCEMENT FUND"; TO AMEND SECTION 38-73-910, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO NOTICE OF HEARING AS A PREREQUISITE TO GRANTING OF RATE INCREASES FOR AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE AND CERTAIN OTHER TYPES OF INSURANCE, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT THE REQUIREMENT OF THIS SECTION IS ABATED UNTIL JANUARY 1, 1998; TO AMEND THE 1976 CODE BY ADDING SECTION 38-73-736 SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT ANY SCHEDULE OF RATES, RATE CLASSIFICATIONS, OR RATING PLANS FOR AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE SHALL PROVIDE FOR AN APPROPRIATE REDUCTION IN PREMIUM CHARGES FOR INSURED PERSONS WHO ARE FIFTY-FIVE YEARS OF AGE AND OLDER AND WHO QUALIFY UNDER SECTION 38-73-737; TO AMEND SECTION 38-77-10, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE PURPOSES OF CHAPTER 77, TITLE 38, ON AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE, SO AS TO, AMONG OTHER THINGS, DELETE CERTAIN LANGUAGE AND PROVISIONS, AND PROVIDE THAT THERE SHALL BE AN ASSIGNED RISK PLAN, KNOWN AS THE "SOUTH CAROLINA AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE PLAN"; TO AMEND SECTION 38-77-30, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE AND DEFINITIONS, SO AS TO, AMONG OTHER THINGS, DELETE CERTAIN LANGUAGE AND PROVISIONS, AND PROVIDE A DEFINITION FOR "CANCELLATION" OR "TO CANCEL" AND FOR "INSTITUTIONAL SOURCE", "INSURER-SUPPORT ORGANIZATION", AND "POLICY OF AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE" OR "POLICY"; TO AMEND SECTION 38-77-110, AS AMENDED, FROM JANUARY 1, 1997, TO SEPTEMBER 30, 1997, RELATING TO THE REQUIREMENT THAT AUTOMOBILE INSURERS MUST INSURE AND EXCEPTIONS, SO AS TO PROVIDE, AMONG OTHER THINGS, THAT AUTOMOBILE INSURERS OTHER THAN INSURERS DESIGNATED AND APPROVED AS SPECIALIZED INSURERS BY THE DIRECTOR OF THE DEPARTMENT OF INSURANCE OR HIS DESIGNEE MAY NOT REFUSE TO RENEW AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE POLICIES FOR INDIVIDUAL PRIVATE PASSENGER AUTOMOBILES OR SMALL COMMERCIAL RISKS EXCEPT FOR REASONS SPECIFIED IN SECTION 38-77-123, AND TO PROVIDE THAT, AFTER SEPTEMBER 30, 1997, SECTION 38-77-110 IS REPEALED; TO AMEND SECTION 38-77-112, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE AND THE REQUIREMENT THAT AN INSURANCE APPLICANT OR POLICYHOLDER MUST HAVE A DRIVER'S LICENSE AND EXCEPTIONS, SO AS TO, AMONG OTHER THINGS, DELETE REFERENCES TO CERTAIN CODE SECTIONS AND PROVIDE THAT, AT THE TIME OF APPLICATION, AN INSURER OR AN AGENT SHALL RETAIN FOR THREE YEARS THE DRIVER'S LICENSE NUMBERS FOR ALL APPLICANTS WHO WERE REFUSED COVERAGE AND SHALL FURNISH THIS INFORMATION UPON THE REQUEST OF THE DIRECTOR OF THE DEPARTMENT OF INSURANCE OR HIS DESIGNEE; TO AMEND SECTION 38-77-120, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE REQUIREMENTS FOR NOTICE OF CANCELLATION OF OR REFUSAL TO RENEW AN AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE POLICY, SO AS TO PROVIDE, AMONG OTHER THINGS, THAT THE NOTICE SHALL PROVIDE FOR THE NOTIFICATION REQUIRED BY SECTION 38-77-390(b), THAT THOSE NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS DO NOT APPLY WHEN THE POLICY IS BEING CANCELED OR NOT RENEWED FOR THE REASON SET FORTH IN SECTION 38-77-123(b), AND THAT THE NOTICE SHALL INFORM THE INSURED OF HIS RIGHT TO REQUEST IN WRITING WITHIN FIFTEEN DAYS OF THE RECEIPT OF THE NOTICE THAT THE DIRECTOR OF THE DEPARTMENT OF INSURANCE REVIEW THE ACTION OF THE INSURER; TO AMEND THE 1976 CODE BY ADDING SECTIONS 38-77-121, 38-77-122, 38-77-123, 38-77-124, 38-77-141, 38-77-142, 38-77-143, 38-77-151, 38-77-154, AND 38-77-155 SO AS TO ENACT PROVISIONS PROVIDING, AMONG OTHER THINGS, THAT ANY APPLICATION FOR THE ORIGINAL ISSUANCE OF A POLICY OF AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COVERING LIABILITY ARISING OUT OF THE OWNERSHIP, MAINTENANCE, OR USE OF A MOTOR VEHICLE DEFINED IN SECTION 38-77-30 THAT REQUIRES THE INSURED TO DISCLOSE INFORMATION AS TO ANY PREVIOUS CANCELLATION OR REFUSAL TO RENEW SHALL ALSO PERMIT THE INSURED TO OFFER OR PROVIDE A FULL EXPLANATION OF THE REASON FOR THE CANCELLATION OR REFUSAL TO RENEW, THAT NO INSURER OR AGENT SHALL REFUSE TO ISSUE AN AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE POLICY AS DEFINED IN SECTION 38-77-30 SOLELY BECAUSE OF CERTAIN SPECIFIED FACTORS, THAT NO INSURER OR AGENT SHALL REFUSE TO ISSUE, OR FAIL TO RENEW, A POLICY OF MOTOR VEHICLE LIABILITY INSURANCE SOLELY BECAUSE OF THE AGE OF THE MOTOR VEHICLE TO BE INSURED SO LONG AS THE VEHICLE IS LICENSED, AND THAT MONIES DISTRIBUTED ANNUALLY FROM THE UNINSURED MOTORIST FUND MUST BE DISTRIBUTED IN THE PROPORTION THAT EACH INSURER'S PREMIUM INCOME FOR THE BASIC UNINSURED MOTORISTS LIMITS COVERAGE BEARS TO THE TOTAL PREMIUM INCOME FOR BASIC UNINSURED MOTORISTS LIMITS COVERAGE WRITTEN IN THIS STATE DURING THE PRECEDING YEAR; TO AMEND SECTION 38-77-140, RELATING TO AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE AND BODILY INJURY AND PROPERTY DAMAGE LIMITS, SO AS TO INCREASE THE MINIMUM PROPERTY DAMAGE COVERAGE; TO AMEND SECTION 38-77-150, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE, THE UNINSURED MOTORIST PROVISION, AND THE DEFENSE OF AN ACTION BY AN INSURER, SO AS TO INCREASE THE MINIMUM AMOUNT OF UNINSURED MOTORIST COVERAGE, AND PROVIDE THAT BENEFITS PAID PURSUANT TO THIS SECTION ARE SUBJECT TO SUBROGATION AND ASSIGNMENT IF AN UNINSURED MOTORIST HAS SELECTED THE "FIVE HUNDRED DOLLAR OPTION"; TO AMEND SECTION 38-77-280, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE AND COLLISION AND COMPREHENSIVE COVERAGES, SO AS TO DELETE CERTAIN LANGUAGE AND PROVISIONS, AND PROVIDE THAT ANY AUTOMOBILE INSURER MAY MAKE COLLISION COVERAGE AND EITHER COMPREHENSIVE OR FIRE, THEFT, AND COMBINED ADDITIONAL COVERAGE AVAILABLE TO AN INSURED OR QUALIFIED APPLICANT WHO REQUESTS THE COVERAGE, AND TO AMEND THE CODE SECTION FOR THE PERIOD FROM JANUARY 1, 1997, TO SEPTEMBER 30, 1997, BY PROVIDING AN EXCEPTION WITH RESPECT TO THE REASONS SPECIFIED IN SECTION 38-77-123; TO AMEND SECTION 38-77-350, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE FORM TO BE USED WHEN OPTIONAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COVERAGES ARE OFFERED, SO AS TO DELETE CERTAIN PROVISIONS, INCLUDING THE PROVISION THAT A POLICY OF AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE OFFERED OR ISSUED BY A NEW SERVICING CARRIER FOR THE SOUTH CAROLINA REINSURANCE FACILITY TO REPLACE A POLICY PREVIOUSLY ISSUED BY A FORMER SERVICING CARRIER AND CONTAINING THE SAME COVERAGE LIMITS AS THE FORMER POLICY CONSTITUTES A VALID REPLACEMENT POLICY THAT DOES NOT REQUIRE THE NEW SERVICING CARRIER OR AGENT TO MAKE A NEW OFFER OF COVERAGE OR TO OBTAIN A NEW APPLICATION FROM THE INSURED; TO AMEND THE 1976 CODE BY ADDING SECTIONS 38-77-370, 38-77-380, AND 38-77-390 SO AS TO ENACT PROVISIONS PROVIDING, AMONG OTHER THINGS, THAT, IF AN INDIVIDUAL SUBMITS A WRITTEN REQUEST TO AN INSURER, AGENT, OR INSURANCE-SUPPORT ORGANIZATION FOR ACCESS TO CERTAIN RECORDED PERSONAL INFORMATION ABOUT THE INDIVIDUAL, THE INSURER, AGENT, OR INSURANCE-SUPPORT ORGANIZATION SHALL DO CERTAIN SPECIFIED THINGS WITHIN THIRTY BUSINESS DAYS FROM THE DATE THE REQUEST IS RECEIVED, THAT AN INSURER, AGENT, OR INSURANCE-SUPPORT ORGANIZATION SHALL DO CERTAIN SPECIFIED THINGS WITHIN THIRTY BUSINESS DAYS FROM THE DATE OF RECEIPT OF A WRITTEN REQUEST FROM AN INDIVIDUAL TO CORRECT, AMEND, OR DELETE ANY RECORDED PERSONAL INFORMATION ABOUT THE INDIVIDUAL WITHIN ITS POSSESSION, AND THAT, IN THE EVENT OF AN ADVERSE UNDERWRITING DECISION, THE INSURER OR AGENT RESPONSIBLE FOR THE DECISION SHALL GIVE A WRITTEN NOTICE IN A FORM APPROVED BY THE DIRECTOR OF THE DEPARTMENT OF INSURANCE THAT PROVIDES THE APPLICANT, POLICYHOLDER, OR INDIVIDUAL PROPOSED FOR COVERAGE CERTAIN INFORMATION; TO AMEND SECTION 38-77-530, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE PLAN OF OPERATION OF THE REINSURANCE FACILITY, SO AS TO ADD PROVISIONS PROVIDING, AMONG OTHER THINGS, THAT THE PLAN OF OPERATION SHALL COMMENCE RECOUPMENT OF FACILITY ASSESSMENTS BY WAY OF A SURCHARGE ON PRIVATE PASSENGER AND COMMERCIAL AUTOMOBILE BUSINESS ISSUED BY A MEMBER OR THROUGH THE FACILITY; TO AMEND SECTION 38-77-590, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE REINSURANCE FACILITY AND DESIGNATED PRODUCERS, SO AS TO DELETE CERTAIN PROVISIONS AND TO PROVIDE THAT A PRODUCER DESIGNATED UNDER THIS SECTION MAY NOT WRITE NEW PRIVATE PASSENGER AND COMMERCIAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE BUSINESS AFTER JANUARY 1, 1997, AND MUST NOT RENEW PRIVATE PASSENGER AND COMMERCIAL AUTOMOBILE BUSINESS AFTER SEPTEMBER 30, 1997, AND THAT NO POLICIES WITH AN EFFECTIVE DATE AFTER SEPTEMBER 30, 1997, SHALL BE ACCEPTED BY THE REINSURANCE FACILITY; TO AMEND SECTION 38-77-595, RELATING TO CONDITIONS FOR DESIGNATION AS A DESIGNATED PRODUCER OF AN OTHERWISE INELIGIBLE APPLICANT, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT A PRODUCER DESIGNATED UNDER THIS SECTION MAY NOT WRITE NEW PRIVATE PASSENGER AND COMMERCIAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE BUSINESS AFTER JANUARY 1, 1997, AND MUST NOT RENEW PRIVATE PASSENGER AND COMMERCIAL AUTOMOBILE BUSINESS AFTER SEPTEMBER 30, 1997, AND THAT NO POLICIES WITH AN EFFECTIVE DATE AFTER SEPTEMBER 30, 1997, SHALL BE ACCEPTED BY THE REINSURANCE FACILITY; TO AMEND CHAPTER 77, TITLE 38 OF THE 1976 CODE, RELATING TO AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE, BY ADDING ARTICLE 8 SO AS TO ENACT PROVISIONS FOR THE ASSIGNMENT OF RISKS; AND TO REPEAL SECTIONS 38-73-455, RELATING TO AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE RATES, 38-73-456, RELATING TO THE PROHIBITION AGAINST AN INCREASE IN AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE PREMIUMS OR ADDITIONAL SURCHARGES FOR DRIVING VIOLATIONS UNTIL THERE HAS BEEN A CONVICTION, 38-73-457, RELATING TO FILING INFORMATION ON BASE RATES FOR AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE PURPOSES, 38-73-460, RELATING TO THE EFFECT OF GAINS AND LOSSES INCURRED BY MEMBERS OF THE REINSURANCE FACILITY ON AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE RATES, 38-73-465, RELATING TO AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE AND UNFAIRLY DISCRIMINATORY, EXCESSIVE, OR UNREASONABLE PROFITS OR RATES, REVIEW OF RATES, AND RATE EXPERIENCE, 38-73-720, RELATING TO THE STATE RATING AND STATISTICAL DIVISION AND THE POWER TO ESTABLISH RISK AND TERRITORIAL CLASSIFICATIONS, 38-73-730, RELATING TO RISK CLASSIFICATION PLANS FOR AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE PURPOSES, 38-73-731, RELATING TO REMOVAL FROM THE YOUTHFUL DRIVER CLASSIFICATION, 38-73-735, RELATING TO PLANS FOR CREDITS AND DISCOUNTS FOR AUTOMOBILE INSUREDS, 38-73-750, RELATING TO THE REQUIREMENT THAT AUTOMOBILE INSURERS MUST FILE THEIR PLANS OR SYSTEMS FOR ALLOCATING EXPENSES AND PROFIT AS RESPECTS THE VARIOUS KINDS OR TYPES OF AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE RISKS AND THE CLASSES OF RISKS THEREUNDER, 38-73-760, RELATING TO UNIFORM STATISTICAL PLANS FOR AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE PURPOSES, 38-73-770, RELATING TO THE REQUIREMENT THAT EVERY CLASSIFICATION PLAN PROMULGATED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF INSURANCE MUST BE SO STRUCTURED AS TO PRODUCE AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE RATES OR PREMIUM CHARGES WHICH ARE ADEQUATE, NOT EXCESSIVE, AND NOT UNFAIRLY DISCRIMINATORY, 38-77-111, RELATING TO AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE POLICIES WHICH MAY BE CEDED TO THE REINSURANCE FACILITY, 38-77-115, RELATING TO THE PROVISION THAT CERTAIN SIGNS ARE REQUIRED IN AN INSURANCE AGENT'S PLACE OF BUSINESS, 38-77-145, RELATING TO THE PROVISION THAT PERSONAL INJURY PROTECTION COVERAGE IS NOT MANDATED UNDER THE AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE LAWS OF THIS STATE, 38-77-285, RELATING TO THE REQUIREMENT THAT ALL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COVERAGES MUST BE IN ONE POLICY, 38-77-360, RELATING TO THE PROVISION THAT THERE BE NO INCREASE IN AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE PREMIUMS AFTER CERTAIN FIRST OFFENSE VIOLATIONS, 38-77-600, RELATING TO THE REINSURANCE FACILITY RECOUPMENT CHARGE, 38-77-605, RELATING TO THE REQUIREMENT THAT THE FACILITY RECOUPMENT CHARGE BE DISPLAYED ON THE PREMIUM NOTICE OR BILL, 38-77-610, RELATING TO THE FILING OF RECOUPMENT CHARGES, 38-77-620, RELATING TO THE REQUIREMENT THAT THE FACILITY RECOUPMENT CHARGES APPROVED OR ESTABLISHED PURSUANT TO SECTION 38-77-610 MUST BE ADDED TO THE APPROVED BASE RATE AND OBJECTIVE STANDARDS RATE IN EFFECT FOR EACH AUTOMOBILE INSURER, 38-77-625, RELATING TO THE PROVISION THAT IF AN INSURED IS INVOLVED IN A MOTOR VEHICLE ACCIDENT WHERE HE IS NOT THE AT-FAULT DRIVER, HIS FACILITY RECOUPMENT CHARGE MAY NOT BE INCREASED BY HIS INSURER BECAUSE OF THIS OCCURRENCE, AND ARTICLE 9 OF CHAPTER 77, TITLE 38, RELATING TO THE STATE'S AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE LAWS AND UNLAWFUL ACTS.

On motion of Senator LEATHERMAN, the Bill was carried over.

THE CALL OF THE UNCONTESTED CALENDAR HAVING BEEN COMPLETED, THE SENATE PROCEEDED TO THE MOTION PERIOD.

On motion of Senator DRUMMOND, the Senate agreed to dispense with the Motion Period.

THE SENATE PROCEEDED TO THE ADJOURNED DEBATES.

H. 4138 -- Ways and Means Committee: A BILL TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING SECTION 11-11-145 SO AS TO PROVIDE FOR THE CONTINUING AUTHORITY TO PAY THE EXPENSES OF STATE GOVERNMENT WHEN A FISCAL YEAR BEGINS WITHOUT A GENERAL APPROPRIATIONS ACT FOR THE YEAR IN EFFECT.

The Senate proceeded to a consideration of the Bill. The question being the third reading of the Bill.

On motion of Senator DRUMMOND, the Bill was carried over.

S. 1117 -- Education Committee: A BILL TO AMEND TITLE 59, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO EDUCATION, BY ADDING CHAPTER 144 SO AS TO ENACT THE "PUBLIC SCHOOL FACILITIES ASSISTANCE ACT", TO MAKE FUNDS AVAILABLE TO CONSTRUCT AND RENOVATE PUBLIC SCHOOL FACILITIES, AND TO AUTHORIZE THE ISSUANCE OF SCHOOL REVENUE BONDS FOR SPECIFIED PURPOSES IN CONNECTION THEREWITH.

The Senate proceeded to a consideration of the Bill. The question being the second reading of the Bill.

Senator BRYAN spoke on the Bill.

On motion of Senator DRUMMOND, with unanimous consent, consideration was interrupted by the Joint Assembly, with Senator BRYAN retaining the floor.

The PRESIDENT appointed Senators HOLLAND, LEVENTIS, COURTNEY and WASHINGTON to escort the Honorable Ernest A. Finney, Jr., Chief Justice of the South Carolina Supreme Court, and his party to the rostrum of the House of Representatives for the Joint Assembly.

At 12:27 P.M., the Senate receded from business for the purpose of attending the Joint Assembly.

At 12:30 P.M., the Senate appeared in the Hall of the House.

The PRESIDENT of the Senate called the Joint Assembly to order and announced that it had convened under the terms of a Concurrent Resolution adopted by both Houses:

H. 4595 -- Reps. Wilkins and Harrison: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION TO INVITE THE CHIEF JUSTICE OF THE SOUTH CAROLINA SUPREME COURT, THE HONORABLE ERNEST A. FINNEY, JR., TO ADDRESS THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY IN JOINT SESSION ON THE STATE OF THE JUDICIARY AT 12:30 P.M. ON TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 20, 1996.

The Honorable Ernest A. Finney, Jr., Chief Justice of the South Carolina Supreme Court, and members of his party, were escorted to the rostrum by Senators HOLLAND, LEVENTIS, COURTNEY and WASHINGTON and Reps. Tucker, Klauber, Govan and Thomas.

The PRESIDENT introduced the Honorable Ernest A. Finney, Jr., Chief Justice of the South Carolina Supreme Court.

Chief Justice Finney addressed the Joint Assembly as follows:

"Mr. President, Mr. Speaker, Members of the General Assembly, other officials, members of the Judiciary, and honored guests... 20 years ago, your speaker was a member of the South Carolina House of Representatives and when I assumed the responsibility of a Circuit Judge, I thought it was probably the most awesome responsibility that I would ever assume. I tell you today, that I am having second thoughts about that because to describe in detail so that you would understand and be supportive of our mission, the budget and the concerns of the Judiciary of this State in a reasonable period of time before lunch, it is even more awesome a task. Last March I met with you and at that time, I outlined before you and my fellow South Carolinians the state of the judicial branch of South Carolina government and shared my vision for its future. I also described the roles which I envisioned were necessary for the executive branch, the legislature, the citizens of this State, and judicial system personnel to play in making our system more responsive to its mission of effectively and efficiently administering justice. Personally, on behalf of the Supreme Court, and the entire judicial branch, I want to thank you for your support, and particularly for approving the major portions of last year's budgetary request. I appreciate very much the cooperative and professional manner in which I have been received by members of these Bodies and by officials of the executive branch as we attempted to keep open the lines of communication throughout the year. In my first State of the Judiciary message, I told you that our courts were overextended, understaffed, and overwhelmed by the sheer volume of cases. Despite the fact that our judges, and other judicial branch personnel have continued to perform admirably under difficult circumstances, I am unable to report today that a miracle has occurred during the past year. So this branch has already bottomed out financially by the time of the most recent rounds of state imposed fiscal austerity. Your judicial branch went into a state of crisis prematurely over a period of decades. By the fiscal year 1995-96, we were operating with too few judges and insufficient travel funds to make full use of the judges we have. More court has been scheduled, but staffing the courts with court reporters meant transcripts were delayed because of the shortage of court reporters necessitated by constant in court assignment of every available reporter. The number of other staff and support personnel remain reasonably constant during that period of time. By the time of last year's State of the Judiciary message, we found ourselves with Circuit and Family Court dockets literally out of control. Added to the previous deluge of cases, recent legislation to combat crime was causing dockets to spiral out of control. During 1995, our Circuit and Family Court judges disposed of 251,000 cases. As of December 31, 1995, there were 136,484 cases pending in the Circuit and Family Courts, an increase of over 5,552. Obviously, those figures indicate that the cases are not moving through the system at an acceptable rate. Staffing is still less than adequate. Personnel morale is suffering. Technology is lagging. And, public consternation indicates either our inability to effectively articulate the gravity of our problems or their intolerance of our pace in crafting solutions. However, I can report to you that we are beginning to see the first fruits of our collective efforts to enhance this state's judicial system. I sense a heightened awareness on the part of citizens, and what appears to be an increased receptiveness to suggestions regarding the time factors and costs involved in fashioning remedies. I am especially grateful for the insight and vision you have demonstrated by the passage last week of a supplemental appropriation for the judicial branch. These funds will enable us to maintain operations for the remainder of this fiscal year and proceed with partial implementation of programs that were authorized in our fiscal year 1995-96 appropriations, but which had to be deferred. A substantial portion of our budget consists of personnel costs and other so-called 'pass-through' funds over which we have no control or discretion. Therefore, the gubernatorial veto of approximately 1.4 million dollars from that budget forced us to defer filling the nine new judgeships, delay implementation of the alternative dispute resolution pilot project, and to curtail other vital programs. The supplemental appropriations bill will enable us to proceed with the following programs, alternate dispute resolutions. March 15, 1996, has been selected as the start-up date for South Carolina's two-year experiment with court-ordered ADR. The Circuit and Family courts of Richland and Florence counties have been chosen as representative sites and they will hopefully furnish us reliable data indicating the availability and the feasibility of ADR in our court system. The nine new judges which were elected last week will enable us to add three new judges each to the Family Court, the Circuit Court, and to the Court of Appeals. Our Family Court judges are traumatized by the escalation of divorce controversies, interminable custody disputes, staggering juvenile criminal matters, and soaring numbers of cases which involve clients of the Department of Social Services. The addition of three judges will at least stem the rising tide of Family Court cases and, hopefully, provide the opportunity for troubled individuals and problematic families to come before the court without excessive delay and get a just and fair resolution of their problem. The new Circuit Court judges will be rotated to counties with the heavier dockets. Among the immediate benefits will be the earlier disposition of cases involving repeat offenders and defendants accused of committing subsequent crimes while out on bond from an earlier arrest. We feel that these Circuit Judges will make the difference between state civil dockets that are stagnated with aging cases and civil dockets that are at least manageable. The three Appeals Court judges will allow the formation of a third panel. Last year, the Court of Appeals issued 498 opinions, and 252 cases were pending as the end of 1995. The additional judges will permit that court to increase its case disposition rate by at least one-third. Expanding the Court of Appeals will also facilitate another phase of our plan for a more efficient and effective appellate process. The Chief Justice serves as the chief administrative officer of the judicial branch, and ministerial functions consume an inordinate amount of time and energy. The Chief Justice also sits as one of the five-member Supreme Court which shares with the Court of Appeals the remaining portion of the state's civil and criminal appellate case load. The Supreme Court disposed of 557 cases and 4,608 motions in 1995. The Supreme Court also hears appeals from post-conviction relief proceedings, grievance and disciplinary appeals, and the five classes of appeals mandated by the constitution and statutes. The current plan provides for the Supreme Court to become a Court of Certiorari, thereby enabling that court to more effectively fulfill its constitutionally delegated functions of establishing legal parameters and setting the course of law in a more thoughtful, thorough and deliberate manner. The new proposal provides for post-conviction relief appeals to remain in the Supreme Court for the immediate future. Likewise, the Supreme Court would retain jurisdiction of grievance and disciplinary matters and the five classes of statutorily and constitutionally mandated cases. Reorganization of the Appellate Courts will require procedural changes and some shifting of personnel from the Supreme Court to the Court of Appeals, as well as some additional space. A contract has been let for renovations of the Calhoun building with a projected completion date of May 1, 1996. In addition, we are taking innovative methods to improve the flow on the civil and criminal side of our court. One of the examples on the civil side is the ADR study mentioned earlier and is designed to produce reliable indicators of whether or not court-ordered arbitration and mediation would be fully implemented as a means of case management. Another example on the civil side has been settlement week. Several counties are utilizing settlement weeks to manage their case dockets. During these designated weeks, a mediator is available to assist parties in resolving disputes before and after lawsuits have been filed. On the criminal side, the South Carolina Bar Committee studying ways to relieve overcrowded dockets has forwarded its report and proposals on criminal docketing in South Carolina. The Supreme Court has also received recommendations on criminal docketing from the Circuit Court Judges Advisory Committee. We are considering these proposals for use on a trial basis in the Circuit Court. Another idea floating around has been differentiated case management as another means of relieving docket congestion at the Circuit Court level, differentiated case management is being tested in the sixteenth judicial circuit with the endorsement of the solicitor and the approval of the Circuit judges. DCM provides a mechanism for identifying and processing each case based upon the amount of time and judicial system resources required for a particular case, as opposed to having cases automatically 'wait in line' for disposition. We have heard and read much about attorneys and grievance discipline. In March we expect to release a report on our study of the grievance and disciplinary procedures for lawyers and judges. The two major areas of immediate modification will be expediting the process with a view to permitting earlier disclosure, and closer cooperation between the Supreme Court agencies which handle grievances and the prosecutorial arm of the State Attorney General's office. An internal review of judicial branch job descriptions and compensation indicated the need for further study. We commissioned a study by the State Office of Human Resources, and that agency issued its preliminary report in late January of this year. We were pleased to note that compensation for approximately 90% of the non-judiciary employees of this branch is within the range of the state average for similar positions. But, as we suspected, roughly 10% of our personnel were significantly out of line with their state counterparts, some as much as 28% below the state average. We are now in the process of rectifying this situation. In the few moments that I will take in the remainder of your time, I am going to review our budgetary request. I fully understand that a review in this perspective is not in detail and I will once again renew my request and offer to you that at any time, you or any of you, a small group or a large group, would like to discuss the budgetary request of your Judicial department, please feel free to contact us and we will make the time available. We will make ourselves available on every Wednesday from now until the legislative session ends to have in depth discussion concerning our judicial budget request. The Judicial department's major budgetary request for fiscal year 1996-97 incorporates the immediate cost of the programs I have mentioned, each of which will require either additional personnel, expanded facilities or greater utilization of information technology. The requested funds are vital to efforts of the Judicial branch to meet constitutional mandates, to respond to the demands of our beleaguered fellow citizens, and to implement legislation enacted by the General Assembly and approved by the Governor. For example, since initial funding for the nine new judges was provided by supplemental appropriations, it is necessary to request funding again this year. For that reason, we are seeking recurring appropriations for the judges and their staffs. Additionally, one and a quarter million dollars ($1,259,217) are needed on a recurring basis to operate our Circuit and Family courts, which would restore this back to where it was in 1988-89; and approximately one million dollars ($1,156,496) to continue the planned phase-in of information technology. Approximately $200,000 has been requested to raise the Board of Commissioners on Grievance and Discipline and the Judicial Standards Commission to more acceptable levels of effectiveness. I assure you legislators of South Carolina that your Family Courts are besieged by too many cases and too few judicial resources. We are seeking 16 law clerks to provide research assistance for Family Court judges and to aid Family Court clientele by reducing the delay in disposing of cases. Just under $300,000 has been requested for eight additional Circuit and Family court reporters and three staff persons to relieve understaffing in the office of finance and personnel. Like the biblical warning that the love of money is the root of evil - in the judicial branch, the lack of money is at the root of the evils which beset us. Justice delayed is justice denied. Adequate funding will result in a more timely disposition of cases and, hopefully, lead to an abatement of court backlogs and the hardship imposed upon litigants, victims, witnesses and accused individuals who are unable to have their causes adjudicated within a reasonable period of time. The two crucial areas are sufficiency of funds and recurring appropriations. These are the cornerstones of our budgetary request for fiscal year 1996-97. If approved, we expect to move forward with these programs which incorporate the court's constitutional mandates, embody our vision, and correspond to the necessity which you and the people of South Carolina have articulated for a judicial system that is fair, effective and efficient. I challenge you to share the vision, to aspire to the spirit of nobility in us all as we strive - together - to set sterling examples of faithful stewardship and dedicated public service in the highest and best tradition of the American system of justice and responsive, responsible state government. Once again, we are indebted to you for the affirmative role you have taken in supporting the judicial branch during the past year and I solicit your continued cooperation with our efforts to enhance the effectiveness of the South Carolina judicial system and thank you for allowing me to share these moments with you. Thank you very much."

The purposes of the Joint Assembly having been accomplished, the PRESIDENT declared it adjourned, whereupon the Senate returned to its Chamber and was called to order by the PRESIDENT.

The Senate reassembled at 1:05 P.M. and was called to order by the PRESIDENT.

H. 3901 -- Reps. Harrell, Fleming, Cobb-Hunter, Seithel, A. Young, Limbaugh, Wilkins, Wofford, Hallman, H. Brown, Cain, Cotty, Martin, D. Smith, Fulmer, L. Whipper, Shissias, Quinn, McCraw, Knotts, Stuart, Harrison, Sheheen, Huff, Klauber, Beatty, Limehouse, Whatley, Harwell, Hodges, J. Young, Govan, Herdklotz, Jennings, Richardson, Hutson, Delleney and McElveen: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 12-51-90, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE REDEMPTION OF REAL PROPERTY SOLD FOR DELINQUENT TAXES, SO AS TO INCREASE THE INTEREST RATE FROM EIGHT TO TWELVE PERCENT IN THE LAST SIX MONTHS OF THE REDEMPTION PERIOD FOR ALL REAL PROPERTY NOT ASSESSED AS OWNER-OCCUPIED RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY.

Senator MOORE asked unanimous consent to amend the motion made by Senator DRUMMOND pertaining to H. 3901 and contained on page 12 of Journal No. 5, Tuesday, January 16, 1996, by changing the date from February 21, 1996, to February 28, 1996.

There was no objection and the motion was adopted.

[The motion as amended is as follows:

Senator DRUMMOND asked unanimous consent to make a motion to recommit the Bill to the Committee on Finance, retaining its place on the Calendar, with Senator WILSON retaining the floor, for the purpose of holding public hearings and, the Bill is to be reported out and available for consideration by the Senate no later than February 28, 1996.]

S. 1117 -- Education Committee: A BILL TO AMEND TITLE 59, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO EDUCATION, BY ADDING CHAPTER 144 SO AS TO ENACT THE "PUBLIC SCHOOL FACILITIES ASSISTANCE ACT", TO MAKE FUNDS AVAILABLE TO CONSTRUCT AND RENOVATE PUBLIC SCHOOL FACILITIES, AND TO AUTHORIZE THE ISSUANCE OF SCHOOL REVENUE BONDS FOR SPECIFIED PURPOSES IN CONNECTION THEREWITH.

The Senate resumed consideration of the Bill. The question being the second reading of the Bill.

Senator BRYAN spoke on the Bill.

On motion of Senator DRUMMOND, with unanimous consent, consideration was interrupted by adjournment.

At 1:33 P.M., on motion of Senator DRUMMOND, the Senate adjourned to meet tomorrow at 11:00 A.M.

This web page was last updated on Monday, June 29, 2009 at 1:57 P.M.