Indicates Matter Stricken
Indicates New Matter
The House assembled at 10:00 a.m.
Deliberations were opened with prayer by Rev. Charles E. Seastrunk, Jr. as follows:
Our thought for today is from Isaiah 40:29: "He gives strength to the weary and increases the power of the weak but those who hope in the Lord will renew their strength. They will soar on wings like eagles; they will run and not grow weary, they will walk and not faint."
Let us pray. Almighty God, fill Your people with the courage and strength to accomplish the work You have given. Help them to make the right decisions to provide Your people with freedom and good things. Bless our leaders of the State and Nation. Protect our defenders of freedom and keep them safe. Hear our prayer, O God. 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 yesterday, the SPEAKER ordered it confirmed.
Rep. KEEGAN moved that when the House adjourns, it adjourn in memory of the Honorable Terry B. Cooper, Horry County councilman, which was agreed to.
January 20, 2004
Mr. Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives:
The Senate respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has confirmed the Governor's appointment of:
State Ethics Commission
Term Commencing: June 30, 2003
Term Expiring: June 30, 2008
Seat: 1st Congressional District
Vice: Jessamine D. Griffin (resigned)
Initial Appointment
Mr. Marvin D. Infinger
Sinkler & Boyd
Post Office Box 340
Charleston, South Carolina 29402
843-722-3366
State Ethics Commission
Term Commencing: May 31, 2001
Term Expiring: May 31, 2005
Seat: 2nd Congressional District
Vice: L. Earle Brown (resigned)
Initial Appointment
Mr. Edward E. Duryea
John Demosthenes Company, LLC
Post Office Box 5292
Parris Island, South Carolina 29905
843-228-2973
Prisoner of War Commission
Term Commencing: July 1, 2001
Term Expiring: July 1, 2005
Seat: 6th Congressional District
Reappointment
Mr. Charles R. Murray
200 Carolina Avenue
St. George, South Carolina 29477
803-563-4424
Very respectfully,
President of the Senate
Received as information.
The following was received:
Columbia, S.C., January 20, 2004
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. 127, H. 3749, Veto 5, Part 1A, Section 63, by a vote of 28 to 11.
(R127) H. 3749 -- 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, 2003; TO REGULATE THE EXPENDITURE OF SUCH FUNDS; AND TO FURTHER PROVIDE FOR THE OPERATION OF STATE GOVERNMENT DURING THE FISCAL YEAR AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES.
Very respectfully,
President
Received as information.
The following was received:
Columbia, S.C., January 20, 2004
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. 127, H. 3749, Veto 6, Part 1B, Section 8.34, by a vote of 45 to 0.
(R127) H. 3749 -- 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, 2003; TO REGULATE THE EXPENDITURE OF SUCH FUNDS; AND TO FURTHER PROVIDE FOR THE OPERATION OF STATE GOVERNMENT DURING THE FISCAL YEAR AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES.
Very respectfully,
President
Received as information.
The following was received:
Columbia, S.C., January 20, 2004
Mr. Speaker and Members of the House:
The Senate respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has sustained the veto by the Governor on R. 127, H. 3749, Veto 7, Part 1B, Section 8.38, by a vote of 0 to 45.
(R127) H. 3749 -- 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, 2003; TO REGULATE THE EXPENDITURE OF SUCH FUNDS; AND TO FURTHER PROVIDE FOR THE OPERATION OF STATE GOVERNMENT DURING THE FISCAL YEAR AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES.
Very respectfully,
President
Received as information.
The following was received:
Columbia, S.C., January 20, 2004
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. 127, H. 3749, Veto 10, Part 1B, Section 19.6, by a vote of 34 to 4.
(R127) H. 3749 -- 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, 2003; TO REGULATE THE EXPENDITURE OF SUCH FUNDS; AND TO FURTHER PROVIDE FOR THE OPERATION OF STATE GOVERNMENT DURING THE FISCAL YEAR AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES.
Very respectfully,
President
Received as information.
The following was received:
Columbia, S.C., January 20, 2004
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. 127, H. 3749, Veto 14, Part 1B, Section 36.1, by a vote of 44 to 1.
(R127) H. 3749 -- 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, 2003; TO REGULATE THE EXPENDITURE OF SUCH FUNDS; AND TO FURTHER PROVIDE FOR THE OPERATION OF STATE GOVERNMENT DURING THE FISCAL YEAR AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES.
Very respectfully,
President
Received as information.
The following was received:
Columbia, S.C., January 20, 2004
Mr. Speaker and Members of the House:
The Senate respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has sustained the veto by the Governor on R. 127, H. 3749, Veto 16, Part 1B, Section 63.2, by a vote of 34 to 3.
(R127) H. 3749 -- 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, 2003; TO REGULATE THE EXPENDITURE OF SUCH FUNDS; AND TO FURTHER PROVIDE FOR THE OPERATION OF STATE GOVERNMENT DURING THE FISCAL YEAR AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES.
Very respectfully,
President
Received as information.
The following was received:
Columbia, S.C., January 20, 2004
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. 127, H. 3749, Veto 21, J16, DDSN, Special Olympics, by a vote of 35 to 3.
(R127) H. 3749 -- 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, 2003; TO REGULATE THE EXPENDITURE OF SUCH FUNDS; AND TO FURTHER PROVIDE FOR THE OPERATION OF STATE GOVERNMENT DURING THE FISCAL YEAR AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES.
Very respectfully,
President
Received as information.
The following was received:
Columbia, S.C., January 20, 2004
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. 175, H. 3941 by a vote of 45 to 0.
(R175) H. 3941 (Word version) -- Reps. Bowers, Lloyd and R. Brown: A JOINT RESOLUTION TO POSTPONE UNTIL PROPERTY TAX YEARS BEGINNING AFTER 2003 THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE REVISED VALUES DETERMINED IN THE COUNTYWIDE APPRAISAL AND EQUALIZATION PROGRAM CONDUCTED IN COLLETON COUNTY IN 2001.
Very respectfully,
President
Received as information.
Rep. CATO, from the Committee on Labor, Commerce and Industry, submitted a favorable report with amendments on:
H. 4405 (Word version) -- Reps. Cato, Wilkins and Sandifer: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 58-27-865, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO FUEL COSTS INCURRED BY ELECTRICAL UTILITIES FOR THE SALE OF ELECTRICITY, SO AS TO FURTHER CLARIFY THAT THE TERM "FUEL COSTS RELATED TO PURCHASED POWER" INCLUDES COSTS OF FIRM GENERATION CAPACITY PURCHASES AND THE TOTAL DELIVERED COST OF ECONOMY PURCHASES OF ELECTRIC POWER.
Ordered for consideration tomorrow.
Rep. J. BROWN, from the Committee on Medical, Military, Public and Municipal Affairs, submitted a favorable report on:
H. 4115 (Word version) -- Reps. Lourie, Parks and Littlejohn: A BILL TO ENACT THE SOUTH CAROLINA BIRTH DEFECTS ACT OF 2003 BY ADDING CHAPTER 44 TO TITLE 44, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, SO AS TO ESTABLISH A BIRTH DEFECTS PROGRAM WITHIN THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL TO PROMOTE INCREASED UNDERSTANDING AND THE PREVENTION AND REDUCTION OF BIRTH DEFECTS; TO PROVIDE INFORMATION AND REFERRAL SERVICES; TO ESTABLISH THE BIRTH DEFECTS ADVISORY COUNCIL AND TO PROVIDE FOR ITS MEMBERS, POWERS, AND DUTIES; TO REQUIRE THE PROGRAM TO CONDUCT SURVEILLANCE AND MONITORING OF BIRTH DEFECTS AND TO MAINTAIN A CENTRAL DATABASE OF THIS INFORMATION; TO REQUIRE VARIOUS HEALTHCARE PROVIDERS TO PROVIDE ACCESS TO BIRTH DEFECT INFORMATION; TO PROVIDE PROCEDURES FOR DISCLOSURE OF INFORMATION; AND TO PROVIDE IMMUNITY AND CONFIDENTIALITY PROVISIONS AND PENALTIES FOR VIOLATIONS.
Ordered for consideration tomorrow.
The following was introduced:
H. 4578 (Word version) -- Rep. J. R. Smith: A HOUSE RESOLUTION TO HONOR AND RECOGNIZE THE MEMBERS OF THE JACKSON VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT UPON THE CELEBRATION OF THEIR FIFTIETH ANNIVERSARY, TO THANK THEM FOR ALL THEY DO FOR THEIR COMMUNITY, AND TO EXTEND TO THEM BEST WISHES IN ALL THEIR FUTURE ENDEAVORS.
The Resolution was adopted.
The following was introduced:
H. 4579 (Word version) -- Reps. Wilkins, Allen, Cato, Hamilton, Haskins, Leach, Loftis, Rice, F. N. Smith, G. R. Smith, Taylor, Tripp, Vaughn, Altman, Anthony, Bailey, Bales, Barfield, Battle, Bingham, Bowers, Branham, Breeland, G. Brown, J. Brown, R. Brown, Ceips, Chellis, Clark, Clemmons, Clyburn, Coates, Cobb-Hunter, Coleman, Cooper, Cotty, Dantzler, Davenport, Delleney, Duncan, Edge, Emory, Freeman, Frye, Gilham, Gourdine, Govan, Hagood, Harrell, Harrison, Harvin, Hayes, Herbkersman, J. Hines, M. Hines, Hinson, Hosey, Howard, Huggins, Jennings, Keegan, Kennedy, Kirsh, Koon, Lee, Limehouse, Littlejohn, Lloyd, Lourie, Lucas, Mack, Mahaffey, Martin, McCraw, McGee, McLeod, Merrill, Miller, Moody-Lawrence, J. H. Neal, J. M. Neal, Neilson, Ott, Owens, Parks, Perry, Phillips, Pinson, E. H. Pitts, M. A. Pitts, Quinn, Rhoad, Richardson, Rivers, Rutherford, Sandifer, Scarborough, Scott, Sheheen, Simrill, Sinclair, Skelton, D. C. Smith, G. M. Smith, J. E. Smith, J. R. Smith, W. D. Smith, Snow, Stewart, Stille, Talley, Thompson, Toole, Townsend, Trotter, Umphlett, Viers, Walker, Weeks, Whipper, White, Whitmire, Witherspoon and Young: A HOUSE RESOLUTION TO EXTEND THE CONGRATULATIONS OF THE MEMBERS OF THE SOUTH CAROLINA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TO THE GREENVILLE HIGH SCHOOL VARSITY/COMPETITIVE CHEERLEADING SQUAD OF GREENVILLE COUNTY ON ITS VICTORY IN THE 2003 CLASS AAA STATE CHEERLEADING CHAMPIONSHIP COMPETITION.
The Resolution was adopted.
The following was introduced:
H. 4580 (Word version) -- Rep. G. Brown: A HOUSE RESOLUTION TO EXPRESS THE PROFOUND SORROW OF THE MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES UPON THE DEATH OF MRS. JULIA MAE FORTUNE SCOTT OF LEE COUNTY ON MONDAY, JUNE 30, 2003, AND TO CONVEY DEEPEST SYMPATHY TO HER FAMILY AND MANY FRIENDS.
The Resolution was adopted.
The following was introduced:
H. 4581 (Word version) -- Reps. Stewart, Perry, Clark, Clyburn, D. C. Smith and J. R. Smith: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION TO RECOGNIZE ONE OF AIKEN'S MOST DELIGHTFUL COUPLES, MR. AND MRS. JOHN GRANAGHAN, FOR THEIR MANY CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE AIKEN COMMUNITY AND TO WISH THEM GODSPEED AS THEY MOVE TO TEXAS.
The Concurrent Resolution was agreed to and ordered sent to the Senate.
The following Bill was introduced, read the first time, and referred to appropriate committee:
H. 4582 (Word version) -- Rep. Tripp: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 44-6-170, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE ESTABLISHMENT, COMPOSITION, AND DUTIES OF THE DATA OVERSIGHT COUNCIL UNDER THE OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND STATISTICS IN THE BUDGET AND CONTROL BOARD, SO AS TO REQUIRE THE COUNCIL TO PREPARE AND ISSUE REPORTS TO THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY AND THE PUBLIC CONCERNING, AMONG OTHER THINGS, INPATIENT AND OUTPATIENT HEALTH SERVICES, PROVIDER QUALITY AND SERVICE EFFECTIVENESS, DIFFERENCES IN MORTALITY RATES AND OTHER COMPARATIVE OUTCOME MEASURES, THE INCIDENCE RATE OF SELECTED MEDICAL OR SURGICAL PROCEDURES; TO REQUIRE ALL MEETINGS OF THE COUNCIL TO BE OPEN TO THE PUBLIC; AND TO MAKE TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS.
Referred to Committee on Medical, Military, Public and Municipal Affairs
The following was introduced:
H. 4583 (Word version) -- Rep. G. Brown: A HOUSE RESOLUTION EXPRESSING THE CONGRATULATIONS OF THE MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TO WILLENE AND GORDON SMITH OF LEE COUNTY ON THE OCCASION OF THEIR FIFTIETH AND GOLDEN WEDDING ANNIVERSARY AND WISHING FOR THEM MANY MORE YEARS OF WEDDED HAPPINESS.
The Resolution was adopted.
The following was introduced:
H. 4584 (Word version) -- Rep. J. Brown: A HOUSE RESOLUTION TO COMMEND THE EAU CLAIRE COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTERS IN THE GREATER COLUMBIA AREA AND PFIZER FOR THEIR COMMITMENT TO SHARING THE CARE, A PARTNERSHIP THAT EXPANDS ACCESS TO PFIZER MEDICATIONS, AND TO CONGRATULATE THEM ON THE TENTH ANNIVERSARY OF THIS UNIQUE AND MEANINGFUL PARTNERSHIP.
The Resolution was adopted.
The roll call of the House of Representatives was taken resulting as follows:
Altman Anthony Bales Barfield Battle Bingham Branham Breeland G. Brown J. Brown R. Brown Cato Ceips Chellis Clemmons Cobb-Hunter Coleman Cooper Cotty Dantzler Davenport Delleney Duncan Edge Emory Freeman Frye Gilham Gourdine Govan Hagood Hamilton Harrison Haskins Hayes Herbkersman J. Hines M. Hines Hinson Hosey Huggins Jennings Keegan Kennedy Kirsh Koon Leach Lee Littlejohn Lloyd Lourie Lucas Mack Mahaffey Martin McCraw McGee McLeod Merrill Miller Moody-Lawrence J. M. Neal Ott Owens Parks Perry Pinson M. A. Pitts Rhoad Rice Richardson Sandifer Scarborough Scott Sheheen Simrill Sinclair Skelton D. C. Smith G. R. Smith J. R. Smith W. D. Smith Snow Stewart Stille Talley Taylor Thompson Toole Tripp Trotter Umphlett Vaughn Walker Whipper White Whitmire Wilkins Witherspoon Young
I came in after the roll call and was present for the Session on Wednesday, January 21.
Karl Allen Thayer Rivers Kenneth G. Clark H.B. "Chip" Limehouse William Bowers G. Murrell Smith Thad Viers David Weeks Ronald Townsend Dwight Loftis William Clyburn Olin Phillips Denny Neilson Edward H. "Ted" Pitts George Bailey Todd Rutherford Leon Howard Richard Quinn Fletcher Smith Alex Harvin
The SPEAKER granted Rep. COATES a leave of absence for today and tomorrow for business reasons.
The SPEAKER granted Rep. HARVIN a temporary leave of absence due to illness.
Rep. G. R. SMITH signed a statement with the Clerk that he came in after the roll call of the House and was present for the Session on Tuesday, January 20.
Announcement was made that Dr. Patricia Westmoreland of Greenville is the Doctor of the Day for the General Assembly.
In accordance with House Rule 5.2 below:
"5.2 Every bill before presentation shall have its title endorsed; every report, its title at length; every petition, memorial, or other paper, its prayer or substance; and, in every instance, the name of the member presenting any paper shall be endorsed and the papers shall be presented by the member to the Speaker at the desk. After a bill or resolution has been presented and given first reading, no further names of co-sponsors may be added. A member may add his name to a bill or resolution or a co-sponsor of a bill or resolution may remove his name at any time prior to the bill or resolution receiving passage on second reading. The member or co-sponsor shall notify the Clerk of the House in writing of his desire to have his name added or removed from the bill or resolution. The Clerk of the House shall print the member's or co-sponsor's written notification in the House Journal. The removal or addition of a name does not apply to a bill or resolution sponsored by a committee."
Bill Number: H. 3517 (Word version)
Date: ADD:
01/21/04 LOURIE
Bill Number: H. 3594 (Word version)
Date: ADD:
01/21/04 LOURIE
Bill Number: H. 3130 (Word version)
Date: ADD:
01/21/04 HASKINS
Bill Number: H. 4426 (Word version)
Date: ADD:
01/21/04 PERRY
Bill Number: H. 4427 (Word version)
Date: ADD:
01/21/04 PERRY
Bill Number: H. 4411 (Word version)
Date: ADD:
01/21/04 COBB-HUNTER
Bill Number: H. 3689 (Word version)
Date: ADD:
01/21/04 LOURIE
Bill Number: H. 3689 (Word version)
Date: ADD:
01/21/04 LOFTIS
Bill Number: H. 3689 (Word version)
Date: ADD:
01/21/04 SCARBOROUGH
Bill Number: H. 4262 (Word version)
Date: ADD:
01/21/04 LOURIE
Bill Number: H. 3744 (Word version)
Date: ADD:
01/21/04 G. R. SMITH
Bill Number: H. 3744 (Word version)
Date: ADD:
01/21/04 CLEMMONS
Bill Number: H. 4464 (Word version)
Date: ADD:
01/21/04 BARFIELD
Bill Number: H. 4464 (Word version)
Date: ADD:
01/21/04 VIERS
Bill Number: H. 4464 (Word version)
Date: ADD:
01/21/04 G. R. SMITH
Bill Number: H. 4464 (Word version)
Date: ADD:
01/21/04 RICE
Bill Number: H. 4464 (Word version)
Date: ADD:
01/21/04 WHITE
Bill Number: H. 4464 (Word version)
Date: ADD:
01/21/04 SANDIFER
Bill Number: H. 3196 (Word version)
Date: REMOVE:
01/21/04 COBB-HUNTER
Bill Number: H. 3120 (Word version)
Date: REMOVE:
01/21/04 COBB-HUNTER
The following Bill was taken up, read the third time, and ordered sent to the Senate:
H. 4544 (Word version) -- Rep. Harvin: A BILL TO ENACT THE "CLARENDON COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICTS PROPERTY TAX RELIEF ACT" BY PROVIDING FOR THE IMPOSITION OF A SPECIAL ONE PERCENT SALES AND USE TAX IN CLARENDON COUNTY FOR NOT MORE THAN TWENTY YEARS WITH THE REVENUE OF THE TAX USED TO DEFRAY GENERAL OBLIGATION DEBT SERVICE OR OTHERWISE DEFRAY THE COSTS OF CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS OF THE SCHOOL DISTRICTS OF CLARENDON COUNTY, TO PROVIDE THAT THE TAX MAY BE IMPOSED BY ORDINANCE OF THE GOVERNING BODY OF CLARENDON COUNTY AND TO AUTHORIZE BUT NOT REQUIRE A REFERENDUM IN THE COUNTY ON THE QUESTION OF IMPOSITION OF THIS TAX, AND TO PROVIDE THAT A TAX IMPOSED PURSUANT TO THIS ACT MUST BE COLLECTED BY THE SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE AND REMITTED TO THE CLARENDON COUNTY TREASURER FOR THE CLARENDON COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICTS, TO PROVIDE THAT THE GOVERNING BODY OF CLARENDON COUNTY SHALL DETERMINE THE METHOD OF DISTRIBUTION OF THE REVENUES OF THIS TAX TO THE THREE SCHOOL DISTRICTS IN CLARENDON COUNTY, TO PROVIDE THAT THE TAX AUTHORIZED BY THIS ACT MUST BE IMPOSED AND IS SUBJECT TO THE SAME EXEMPTIONS AND MAXIMUM TAXES AS PROVIDED IN THE SOUTH CAROLINA SALES TAX ACT EXCEPT FOR AN ADDITIONAL EXEMPTION FOR FOOD ITEMS WHICH LAWFULLY MAY BE PURCHASED WITH UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE FOOD COUPONS, AND TO PROVIDE THE METHOD OF APPLYING THE REVENUES OF THE TAX TO SCHOOL DISTRICT GENERAL OBLIGATION DEBT SERVICE.
The following Bill was taken up, read the second time, and ordered to a third reading:
H. 4574 (Word version) -- Rep. Bowers: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 7-7-300, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO VOTING PRECINCTS AND POLLING PLACES IN HAMPTON COUNTY, SO AS TO CHANGE THE LOCATION OF TWO POLLING PLACES.
The Senate amendments to the following Bill were taken up for consideration:
S. 466 (Word version) -- Senators McConnell and Ford: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 44-48-50, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE MULTIDISCIPLINARY TEAM REVIEWING RECORDS TO DETERMINE IF A PERSON IS A SEXUALLY VIOLENT PREDATOR, SO AS TO CHANGE THE MEMBERSHIP OF THE TEAM.
Rep. LUCAS explained the Senate Amendments.
Rep. SCOTT moved to adjourn debate on the Senate Amendments.
Rep. LUCAS moved to table the motion, which was agreed to by a division vote 45 to 15.
Rep. LUCAS continued speaking.
Rep. SCOTT spoke against the Senate Amendments.
The Senate amendments were agreed to, and the Bill 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 by a division vote of 45 to 28.
The Senate amendments to the following Bill were taken up for consideration:
H. 3617 (Word version) -- Reps. Sandifer, Bailey, Frye, Cato, E. H. Pitts, Cotty, J. H. Neal, J. Brown, Anthony, Ceips, Duncan, Freeman, Mahaffey, McCraw, Ott, Phillips, M. A. Pitts, Stille, White and Whitmire: A BILL TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING SECTION 32-7-60 SO AS TO CREATE THE PRENEED FUNERAL LOSS REIMBURSEMENT FUND AND TO PROVIDE FOR THE PURPOSE AND USES OF MONIES IN THE FUND; TO AMEND SECTION 32-7-45, RELATING TO THE TRANSFER PROCEDURES FOR TRUST FUNDS HELD PURSUANT TO PRENEED BURIAL CONTRACTS, SO AS TO REVISE THESE PROCEDURES; AND TO AMEND SECTION 32-7-50, RELATING TO LICENSURE REQUIREMENTS TO OFFER AND ENTER INTO PRENEED BURIAL CONTRACTS, SO AS TO PROVIDE A PENALTY FOR ENTERING INTO SUCH CONTRACTS WITHOUT BEING LICENSED.
Rep. CATO moved to adjourn debate upon the Senate Amendments until Wednesday, January 28, which was agreed to.
The following House Resolution was taken up:
H. 4483 (Word version) -- Reps. W. D. Smith and Wilkins: A HOUSE RESOLUTION TO MEMORIALIZE THE CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES TO ENACT LEGISLATION TO MAKE THE FEDERAL TAX CUTS PROPOSED BY PRESIDENT BUSH AND ENACTED BY CONGRESS SINCE 2001 PERMANENT.
Rep. LEACH moved to adjourn debate on the Resolution until Thursday, January 22, which was agreed to.
The following House Resolution was taken up:
H. 4484 (Word version) -- Reps. W. D. Smith and Wilkins: A HOUSE RESOLUTION TO MEMORIALIZE CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES TO SUPPORT NO INCREASES IN PAYROLL TAXES, NO CUTS TO SOCIAL SECURITY BENEFITS, AND OPTIONAL SOCIAL SECURITY PERSONAL RETIREMENT ACCOUNTS.
Rep. LEACH moved to adjourn debate on the Resolution until Thursday, January 22, which was agreed to.
The following House Resolution was taken up:
H. 4485 (Word version) -- Reps. W. D. Smith and Wilkins: A HOUSE RESOLUTION TO MEMORIALIZE THE CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES TO ENACT LEGISLATION TO ABOLISH THE DEATH TAX PERMANENTLY.
Rep. LEACH moved to adjourn debate on the Resolution until Thursday, January 22, which was agreed to.
The following House Resolution was taken up:
H. 4486 (Word version) -- Reps. W. D. Smith and Wilkins: A HOUSE RESOLUTION TO MEMORIALIZE THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES TO ALLOW A TIMELY VOTE ON THE FLOOR OF THE UNITED STATES SENATE ON ALL JUDICIAL NOMINATIONS MADE BY PRESIDENT BUSH WHO HAVE BEEN FAVORABLY REPORTED BY THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE.
Rep. LEACH moved to adjourn debate on the Resolution until Thursday, January 22, which was agreed to.
The following House Resolution was taken up:
H. 4487 (Word version) -- Reps. W. D. Smith and Wilkins: A HOUSE RESOLUTION TO MEMORIALIZE THE CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES TO SUPPORT PRESIDENT BUSH'S EFFORT TO PROTECT THE UNITED STATES FROM TERRORISTS, DANGEROUS AUTHORITARIAN REGIMES, AND WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION.
Rep. LEACH moved to adjourn debate on the Resolution until Thursday, January 22, which was agreed to.
The following House Resolution was taken up:
H. 4488 (Word version) -- Reps. W. D. Smith and Wilkins: A HOUSE RESOLUTION TO MEMORIALIZE THE CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES TO ENACT LEGISLATION TO GIVE FIRST PRIORITY TO SUPPORTING AND ENACTING THE DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS BILL BEFORE ALL OTHER SPENDING BILLS IN 2004 AND TO DO THE SAME IN FUTURE YEARS.
Rep. LEACH moved to adjourn debate on the Resolution until Thursday, January 22, which was agreed to.
The following House Resolution was taken up:
H. 4495 (Word version) -- Reps. W. D. Smith and Wilkins: A HOUSE RESOLUTION TO MEMORIALIZE THE CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES TO ENACT LEGISLATION TO PROVIDE FOR LIFETIME AND RETIREMENT SAVINGS ACCOUNTS.
Rep. LEACH moved to adjourn debate on the Resolution until Thursday, January 22, which was agreed to.
The following Concurrent Resolution was taken up:
H. 4425 (Word version) -- Reps. M. A. Pitts, Duncan, Vaughn, Taylor, Leach and Mahaffey: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION TO EXPRESS THE CONCERN OF THE MEMBERS OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY FOR SOUTH CAROLINA INDUSTRY AND THE JOBS IT PROVIDES AND TO MEMORIALIZE THE UNITED STATES CONGRESS AND THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES TO ABROGATE, RESCIND, OR OTHERWISE RENEGOTIATE THIS NATION'S MEMBERSHIP IN OR RELATIONSHIP WITH THE WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION, THE GENERAL AGREEMENT ON TARIFFS AND TRADE, AND THE NORTH AMERICAN FREE TRADE AGREEMENT.
Rep. LEACH moved to adjourn debate on the Resolution until Thursday, January 22, which was agreed to.
The SPEAKER granted Rep. MARTIN a temporary leave of absence.
The following Concurrent Resolution was taken up:
H. 4290 (Word version) -- Reps. Thompson, Cooper, Frye, Martin, Stille, Townsend and White: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION TO REQUEST THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION TO NAME THAT PORTION OF SOUTH CAROLINA SECONDARY HIGHWAY 77 IN ANDERSON COUNTY FROM SOUTH CAROLINA HIGHWAY 20 TO BEAVER DAM ROAD (SOUTH CAROLINA SECONDARY HIGHWAY 75) IN HONOR OF MR. DAVID R. CHASTAIN AND TO INSTALL APPROPRIATE MARKERS ON SIGNS ON THE BRIDGE CONTAINING THE WORDS "DAVID R. CHASTAIN HIGHWAY".
Be it resolved by the House of Representatives, the Senate concurring:
That the members of the South Carolina General Assembly, by this resolution, request the Department of Transportation to name that portion of South Carolina Secondary Highway 77 in Anderson County from South Carolina Highway 20 to Beaver Dam Road (South Carolina Secondary Highway 75) in honor of Mr. David R. Chastain and to install appropriate markers on signs on the bridge containing the words "David R. Chastain Highway".
Be it further resolved that a copy of this resolution be forwarded to the Department of Transportation.
The Concurrent Resolution was adopted and sent to the Senate.
The following Concurrent Resolution was taken up:
S. 823 (Word version) -- Senators Knotts, Cromer, Setzler and Ryberg: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION TO REQUEST THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION TO NAME A NEWLY CONSTRUCTED ROAD IN LEXINGTON COUNTY WHICH CONNECTS SOUTH CAROLINA HIGHWAY NO. 1 TO SOUTH CAROLINA HIGHWAY NO. 6 AROUND THE NEWLY CONSTRUCTED LEXINGTON COUNTY COURTHOUSE "MYERS WAY" AND INSTALL APPROPRIATE MARKERS OR SIGNS ON THE NEWLY CONSTRUCTED ROAD.
Be it resolved by the Senate, the House of Representatives concurring:
That the members of the General Assembly request the Department of Transportation to name a newly constructed road in Lexington County which connects South Carolina Highway No. 1 to South Carolina Highway No. 6, approximately two blocks long, around the newly constructed Lexington County Courthouse "Myers Way" and install appropriate markers or signs on the newly constructed road.
Be it further resolved that a copy of this resolution be forwarded to the Department of Transportation.
The Concurrent Resolution was adopted and sent to the Senate.
The motion period was dispensed with on motion of Rep. SKELTON.
The following Bill was taken up:
H. 3744 (Word version) -- Reps. Sandifer, Kirsh, Richardson, Cato, Young, Battle, E. H. Pitts, Barfield, G. R. Smith, Clemmons, Ceips, Chellis, Clark, Cooper, Davenport, Duncan, Edge, Gilham, Herbkersman, Huggins, Keegan, Bingham, Leach, Littlejohn, Townsend, Kennedy, Loftis, Dantzler, Mahaffey, Bailey, Koon, McCraw, Frye, Owens, Perry, Umphlett, Phillips, Pinson, Rice, Scarborough, Simrill, D. C. Smith, J. R. Smith, Snow, Stille, Taylor, Toole, Tripp, Trotter, Vaughn, Viers, Walker, White, Whitmire and Witherspoon: A BILL TO ENACT THE SOUTH CAROLINA ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, CITIZENS, AND SMALL BUSINESS PROTECTION ACT OF 2003 BY ADDING CHAPTER 32 TO TITLE 15, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, SO AS TO ESTABLISH A LIMIT OF TWO HUNDRED FIFTY THOUSAND DOLLARS FOR NONECONOMIC DAMAGES THAT MAY BE AWARDED A PLAINTIFF IN A PERSONAL INJURY ACTION AND TO PROVIDE THAT PUNITIVE DAMAGES MAY BE AWARDED FOR FRAUDULENT OR WILFUL OR INTENTIONAL CONDUCT SPECIFICALLY INTENDED TO HARM THE PERSON SEEKING PUNITIVE DAMAGES, TO REQUIRE A PLAINTIFF, PRIOR TO JUDGMENT, TO ELECT BETWEEN PUNITIVE DAMAGES AND OTHER DAMAGES AVAILABLE UNDER ANOTHER REMEDY, TO SPECIFY FACTORS THAT MUST BE CONSIDERED IN AWARDING PUNITIVE DAMAGES; TO ADD CHAPTER 40 TO TITLE 15 SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT IN ALL TORT ACTIONS EVIDENCE OF COLLATERAL SOURCE PAYMENTS TO BE MADE TO THE CLAIMANT IS ADMISSIBLE AND TO REQUIRE SPECIFIC FINDINGS TO BE MADE FOR THE AMOUNT OF CERTAIN PAST AND FUTURE DAMAGES; TO AMEND SECTION 34-31-20, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE ANNUAL LEGAL RATE OF INTEREST ON MONEY DECREES AND JUDGMENTS, SO AS TO CHANGE THE INTEREST RATE FROM TWELVE PERCENT TO SIX PERCENT; TO AMEND SECTION 15-1-310, RELATING TO IMMUNITY FROM LIABILITY FOR PERSONS, WHO IN GOOD FAITH, RENDER EMERGENCY CARE AT THE SCENE OF AN ACCIDENT, SO AS TO PROVIDE IMMUNITY TO HEALTH CARE PROVIDERS, WHO WITH NO EXPECTATION OF PAYMENT, RENDER MEDICAL CARE AND TO APPLY THE LIMITS OF LIABILITY PROVIDED FOR IN THE TORT CLAIMS ACT FOR ANY CLAIM BROUGHT AGAINST SUCH PERSONS; TO ADD SECTION 15-1-315 SO AS TO PROVIDE IMMUNITY FROM LIABILITY TO A HEALTH CARE PROVIDER FOR AN INJURY SUSTAINED BY A PATIENT FROM TAKING A PRESCRIPTION DRUG OR USING A MEDICAL DEVICE PRESCRIBED BY THE PROVIDER IN ACCORDANCE WITH INSTRUCTIONS OF THE UNITED STATES FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION; TO AMEND SECTION 56-5-6540, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO VIOLATIONS OF MANDATORY SEATBELT USAGE, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT SUCH VIOLATIONS ARE ADMISSIBLE TO PROVE CONTRIBUTORY OR COMPARATIVE NEGLIGENCE OR CERTAIN OTHER DEFENSES IN A CIVIL ACTION; TO ADD CHAPTER 47 TO TITLE 15 SO AS TO ESTABLISH PROCEDURES FOR A HOMEOWNER OR PURCHASER TO ASSERT A CLAIM AGAINST A CONTRACTOR, SUBCONTRACTOR, SUPPLIER, OR DESIGN PROFESSIONAL FOR A CONSTRUCTION DEFECT IN A RESIDENTIAL DWELLING, TO REQUIRE A CLAIMANT TO COMPLY WITH THESE PROCEDURES BEFORE COMMENCING LITIGATION FOR SUCH DEFECTS, AND TO PROHIBIT A PERSON FROM PROVIDING ANYTHING OF MONETARY VALUE TO A PROPERTY MANAGER, MEMBER, OR OFFICER OF AN EXECUTIVE BOARD OF A HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION TO INDUCE THE INDIVIDUAL TO ENCOURAGE OR DISCOURAGE THE ASSOCIATION TO FILE A CLAIM FOR SUCH DEFECTS AND TO PROVIDE PENALTIES FOR VIOLATIONS; TO AMEND SECTION 15-78-20, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE TORT CLAIMS ACT, SO AS TO DELETE PROVISIONS AUTHORIZING RECOVERY AGAINST A GOVERNMENTAL HEALTH FACILITY FOR A CLAIM ARISING BEFORE THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE TORT CLAIMS ACT IF THE FACILITY MAINTAINED LIABILITY INSURANCE COVERAGE AND TO DELETE THE PROVISION SPECIFICALLY DELAYING INCLUSION OF PHYSICIANS AND DENTISTS IN THE TORT CLAIMS ACT UNTIL JANUARY 1, 1989; TO AMEND SECTION 15-78-30, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE DEFINITION OF TERMS USED IN THE TORT CLAIMS ACT, SO AS TO REVISE THE DEFINITION OF "EMPLOYEE" AND "SCOPE OF OFFICIAL DUTY" TO INCLUDE HEALTH CARE PROVIDERS RENDERING CARE UNDER MEDICAID AND OTHER PUBLICLY FUNDED HEALTH CARE PROGRAMS AND TO DEFINE "DISCRETIONARY ACT"; TO AMEND SECTIONS 15-78-70 AND 15-78-120, BOTH AS AMENDED, RELATING RESPECTIVELY TO THE STATE TORT CLAIMS ACT BEING THE EXCLUSIVE REMEDY FOR CLAIMS AGAINST THE STATE FOR ACTS OF ITS EMPLOYEES AND TO LIMITATIONS ON THE AMOUNT OF DAMAGES A PERSON MAY RECOVER, SO AS TO DELETE PROVISIONS PROVIDING NO LIMIT ON THE AMOUNT OF LIABILITY AGAINST PHYSICIANS OR DENTISTS RENDERING SERVICES WHICH ARE PAID FROM A SOURCE OTHER THAN A GOVERNMENTAL SALARY AND TO DELETE PROVISIONS WHICH ESTABLISH A HIGHER LIMIT OF LIABILITY UNDER THE TORT CLAIMS ACT FOR ACTIONS AGAINST GOVERNMENTAL PHYSICIANS AND DENTISTS ACTING WITHIN THE SCOPE OF THEIR GOVERNMENTAL EMPLOYMENT; TO ADD SECTION 15-78-55 SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT EACH EXCEPTION TO THE WAIVER OF IMMUNITY UNDER THE TORT CLAIMS ACT IS SEPARATE FROM OTHER EXCEPTIONS AND EACH RENDERS THE GOVERNMENTAL ENTITY IMMUNE; TO AMEND SECTION 15-78-100, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS AND JURISDICTION UNDER THE TORT CLAIMS ACT, SO AS TO AUTHORIZE A GOVERNMENTAL ENTITY TO IMPLEAD A PERSON OR ENTITY IN AN ACTION; TO AMEND SECTION 15-3-640, RELATING TO ACTIONS BASED ON DEFECT OR UNSAFE CONDITION OF IMPROVEMENT TO REAL PROPERTY, SO AS TO CHANGE THE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS FROM THIRTEEN YEARS TO SIX YEARS; TO ADD SECTION 15-3-645 SO AS TO ESTABLISH A SIX-YEAR STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS ON ACTIONS BASED UPON AN ALLEGED DEFECT OR FAILURE IN A PRODUCT; TO ADD CHAPTER 41 TO TITLE 15 SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT IN AN ACTION FOR PERSONAL INJURY, PROPERTY DAMAGE, OR WRONGFUL DEATH, THE LIABILITY FOR EACH DEFENDANT IS SEVERAL ONLY AND MUST BE ALLOCATED TO THE DEFENDANTS BASED ON EACH DEFENDANT'S PERCENTAGE OF FAULT AND TO ESTABLISH CRITERIA FOR ESTABLISHING THE PERCENTAGES OF FAULT; TO AMEND CHAPTER 36, TITLE 15, RELATING TO SOUTH CAROLINA FRIVOLOUS CIVIL PROCEEDINGS SANCTIONS ACT, SO AS TO REPLACE THE PROVISIONS OF THAT CHAPTER WITH PROVISIONS REQUIRING AN ATTORNEY FOR A PLAINTIFF TO SIGN DOCUMENTS FILED IN A CIVIL OR ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION, TO PROVIDE THAT THE SIGNING CONSTITUTES CERTIFICATION THAT THE DOCUMENT IS NOT FRIVOLOUS OR INTERPOSED FOR DELAY, AND TO PROVIDE SANCTIONS; TO AMEND SECTION 15-7-30, RELATING TO ACTIONS WHICH MUST BE TRIED IN THE COUNTY IN WHICH THE DEFENDANT RESIDES, SO AS TO FURTHER PROVIDE FOR THE PROPER VENUE IF THE DEFENDANT IS A NONRESIDENT, A DOMESTIC CORPORATION, OR A FOREIGN CORPORATION; TO REPEAL SECTION 15-33-135 RELATING TO THE EVIDENTIARY STANDARD FOR PROVING PUNITIVE DAMAGES; TO REPEAL SECTION 44-7-50 RELATING TO THE MODIFICATION OF THE DOCTRINES OF CHARITABLE AND SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY; TO REPEAL SECTION 58-23-90 RELATING TO THE PROPER VENUE IN WHICH TO BRING AN ACTION AGAINST A LICENSED MOTOR CARRIER; AND TO REPEAL CHAPTER 38, TITLE 15 RELATING TO THE UNIFORM CONTRIBUTION AMONG TORT FEASORS ACT.
The Judiciary Committee proposed the following Amendment No. 1 (Doc Name COUNCIL\PT\1813AHB04), which was adopted:
Amend the bill, as and if amended, by striking all after the enacting words and inserting:
/ SECTION 1. Section 15-7-30 of the 1976 Code is amended to read:
"Section 15-7-30. (A) As used in this section:
(1) 'Domestic corporation' means a 'domestic corporation' as defined in Section 33-1-400.
(2) 'Domestic limited partnership' means a 'domestic limited partnership' as defined in Section 33-42-20.
(3) 'Domestic limited liability company' means a 'domestic limited liability partnership' as defined in Section 33-41-1110 with its principal place of business within this State.
(4) 'Domestic limited liability partnership' means a 'domestic limited liability partnership' as defined in Section 33-41-1110 with its principal place of business within this State.
(5) 'Foreign corporation' means a 'foreign corporation' as defined in Section 33-1-400.
(6) 'Foreign limited partnership' means a 'foreign limited partnership' as defined in Section 33-42-20.
(7) 'Foreign limited liability company' means a 'foreign limited liability partnership' as defined in Section 33-41-1150 with its principal place of business outside of the State.
(8) 'Foreign limited liability partnership' means a 'foreign limited liability partnership' as defined in Section 33-41-1150 with its principal place of business outside of the State.
(9) 'Nonresident individual' means a person who is not domiciled in this State.
(10) 'Principal place of business' means:
(a) the corporation's home office location from which the corporation's officers direct, control, or coordinate its activities within the State;
(b) the location of the corporation's manufacturing, sales, or purchasing facility within the State if the corporation does not have a home office within the State; or
(c) the location at which the majority of corporate activity takes place if the corporation has multiple centers of manufacturing, sales, or purchasing located within the State. The following factors may be considered when determining the location at which the majority of corporate activity takes place:
(i) the number of employees located in any one county;
(ii) the authority of the employees located in any one county;
(iii) the tangible corporate assets that exist in any one county.
(11) 'Resident individual' means a person who is domiciled in this State.
(B) In all other cases not provided for in Sections 15-7-10, 15-7-20, or 15-78-100, and except as provided in Section 15-7-100(D), the action shall must be tried in the county in which the defendant resides at the time of the commencement of the action it properly may be brought and tried against the defendant according to the provisions of this section. If there be is more than one defendant, then the action may be tried in any county in which one or more of the defendants to such action resides at the time of the commencement of an the action properly may be maintained against one of the defendants pursuant to this section. If none of the parties shall reside in the State the action may be tried in any county which the plaintiff shall designate in his complaint. This section is subject however to the power of the court to change the place of trial in certain cases as provided by law.
(C) A civil action tried pursuant to this section against a resident individual defendant must be brought and tried in the county in which the:
(1) defendant resides at the time the cause of action arose; or
(2) cause of action arose.
(D) A civil action tried pursuant to this section against a nonresident individual defendant must be brought and tried in the county in which the cause of action arose.
(E) A civil action tried pursuant to this section against a domestic corporation, domestic limited partnership, domestic limited liability company, or domestic limited liability partnership must be brought and tried in the county in which the:
(1) corporation's principal place of business at the time the cause of action arose; or
(2) cause of action arose.
(F) A civil action tried pursuant to this section against a foreign corporation, foreign limited partnership, foreign limited liability company, or foreign limited liability partnership must be brought and tried in the county in which the:
(1) foreign corporation, foreign limited partnership, foreign limited liability company, or foreign limited liability partnership has its principal place of business in this State at the time the cause of action arose; or
(2) cause of action arose."
SECTION 2. Section 15-7-100 of the 1976 Code is amended to read:
"Section 15-7-100. (A) The court may shall change the place of trial in the following cases if:
(1) When the county designated for that purpose in the complaint is not the proper county;
(2) When there is reason to believe that a fair and impartial trial cannot be had therein there; and or
(3) When the convenience of witnesses and the ends of justice would be promoted by the change.
(B) In determining if the place of trial should be changed pursuant to subsection (A)(3), the court shall consider:
(1) the relative ease of access to the sources of proof;
(2) witness availability and costs of obtaining attendance of a witness;
(3) the possibility of viewing premises, if applicable to the action;
(4) ease, time, efficiency, and expense incurred trying the case;
(5) enforceability of a judgment if one is obtained;
(6) administrative difficulties for South Carolina courts;
(7) local interests in the trial; and
(8) difficulties for South Carolina courts arising from conflict of laws and interpretation of foreign laws.
(C) When the place of trial is changed all other proceedings shall must be had in the county to which the place of trial is changed, unless otherwise provided by the consent of the parties in writing duly filed or by order of the court. And The papers shall must be filed or transferred accordingly."
(D) If the court changes the place of trial pursuant to the provisions of subsection (A)(3), the action is not subject to the provisions of Section 15-7-30."
SECTION 3. Section 36-2-803 of the 1976 Code is amended to read:
"Section 36-2-803. (1) A court may exercise personal jurisdiction over a person who acts directly or by an agent as to a cause of action arising from the person's:
(a) transacting any business in this State;
(b) contracting to supply services or things in the State;
(c) commission of a tortious act in whole or in part in this State;
(d) causing tortious injury or death in this State by an act or omission outside this State if he regularly does or solicits business, or engages in any other persistent course of conduct, or derives substantial revenue from goods used or consumed or services rendered, in this State; or
(e) having an interest in, using, or possessing real property in this State; or
(f) contracting to insure any person, property or risk located within this State at the time of contracting; or
(g) entry into a contract to be performed in whole or in part by either party in this State; or
(h) production, manufacture, or distribution of goods with the reasonable expectation that those goods are to be used or consumed in this State and are so used or consumed.
(2) When jurisdiction over a person is based solely upon this section, only a cause of action arising from acts enumerated in this section may be asserted against him, and such action, if brought in this State, shall not be subject to the provisions of Section 15-7-100 (3). Reserved."
SECTION 4. Section 15-36-10 of the 1976 Code, as last amended by Act 432 of 1988, is further amended to read:
"Section 15-36-10. (A)(1) Any person who takes part in the procurement, initiation, continuation, or defense of any civil proceeding is subject to being assessed for payment of all or a portion of the attorney's fees and court costs of the other party if:
(1) he does so primarily for a purpose other than that of securing the proper discovery, joinder of parties, or adjudication of the claim upon which the proceedings are based; and
(2) the proceedings have terminated in favor of the person seeking an assessment of the fees and costs.
As used in this chapter, "person" is defined to mean any individual, corporation, company, association, firm, partnership, society, joint stock company, and any other entity, including any governmental entity or unincorporated association of persons. A pleading filed in a civil or administrative action on behalf of a party who is represented by an attorney must be signed by at least one attorney of record who is an active member of the South Carolina Bar and must include the address and telephone number of the attorney signing the document.
(2) A document filed in a civil or administrative action by a party who is not represented by an attorney must be signed by the party and must include the address and telephone number of the party.
(3) The signature of an attorney or a pro se litigant constitutes a certificate to the court that the person:
(a) has read the document;
(b) reasonably believes that under the facts his claim or defense may be warranted under the existing law or, if it is not warranted under the existing law, a good faith argument exists for the extension, modification, or reversal of existing law;
(c) believes in good faith that his procurement, initiation, continuation, or defense of a civil cause is not intended merely to harass or injure the other party; and
(d) believes that it is not frivolous, interposed for delay, or brought for any purpose other than securing proper discovery, joinder of parties, or adjudication of the claim or defense upon which the proceedings are based.
(4) An attorney or pro se litigant participating in a civil or administrative action or defense may be sanctioned for filing a frivolous pleading, motion, or document and for making frivolous arguments.
(5) A party may be sanctioned if he fails in good faith to disclose fully facts necessary to put his attorney on notice that the claim or defense he seeks is frivolous.
(B)(1) If a document is not signed or does not comply with this section, it must be stricken unless it is signed promptly or amended to comply with this section after the omission is called to the attention of the attorney or the party.
(2) If a document is signed in violation of this section, a party has violated subsection (A)(5), or an attorney or pro se litigant has violated subsection (A)(4), the court, upon its own motion, or motion of a party, or by petition in collateral proceedings, may impose an appropriate sanction upon the person in violation.
(3) In determining whether sanctions are appropriate or the severity of a sanction, the court may consider previous violations of this section.
(4) Sanctions may include:
(a) an order for the party or pro se litigant to pay the reasonable costs and attorney's fees;
(b) an order for the attorney to pay a reasonable fine to the court; or
(c) a directive of a nonmonetary nature designed to deter a future frivolous action or an action in bad faith.
(5) In determining if an attorney, a party, or a pro se litigant has violated the provisions of this section, the court shall take into account:
(a) the number of parties;
(b) the complexity of the claims and defenses;
(c) the length of time available to the attorney, party, or pro se litigant to investigate and conduct discovery;
(d) information disclosed or undisclosed to the attorney, party, or pro se litigant through discovery and adequate investigation; and
(e) other factors the court considers appropriate.
(C) A person is entitled to notice and an opportunity to respond before the imposition of sanctions pursuant to this section. A court or party proposing a sanction pursuant to this section shall notify the court and all parties of the conduct constituting a violation of this section and explain the basis for the potential sanction imposed. Upon notification the attorney, party, or pro se litigant has thirty days to:
(1) withdraw the document or argument constituting a violation of this section; or
(2) respond to the allegations of the violation of this section; or
(3) mitigate the effects of the violation of this section in a manner the court deems tantamount to withdrawal pursuant to subsection (C)(1); and
(4) provide all parties and the court with:
(a) written notification of withdrawal pursuant to subsection (C)(1); or
(b) a copy of the response indicated in subsection (C)(2); or
(c) an explanation of mitigation pursuant to subsection (C)(3).
(D) This act may not alter the South Carolina Rules of Civil Procedure or the South Carolina Appellate Court Rules.
(E) The provisions of this section apply in addition to all other remedies available at law or in equity.
(F) The amount requested for damages in a pleading may not be considered in a determination of a violation of this section."
SECTION 5. Chapter 36, Title 15 of the 1976 Code is amended by adding:
"Section 15-36-100. (A) As used in this section, 'expert witness' means an expert who is qualified as to the acceptable conduct of the professional whose conduct is at issue and who is:
(1) licensed by an appropriate regulatory agency to practice his or her profession in the location in which the expert practices or teaches; and
(2)(a) board certified by a national or international association or academy which administers written and oral examinations for certification in the area of practice or specialty about which the opinion on the standard of care is offered; or
(b) has actual professional knowledge and experience in the area of practice or specialty in which the opinion is to be given as the result of having been regularly engaged in:
(i) the active practice of the area of specialty of his or her profession for at least three of the last five years immediately preceding the opinion;
(ii) the teaching of the area of practice or specialty of his or her profession for at least half of his or her professional time as an employed member of the faculty of an educational institution which is accredited in the teaching of his or her profession for at least three of the last five years immediately preceding the opinion; or
(iii) any combination of the active practice or the teaching of his or her profession in a manner which meets the requirements of subitems (i) and (ii) for at least three of the last five years immediately preceding the opinion.
(B) In an action for damages alleging professional malpractice against a professional licensed by or registered with the State of South Carolina and listed in subsection (G) or against any licensed health care facility alleged to be liable based upon the action or inaction of a health care professional licensed by the State of South Carolina and listed in subsection (G), the plaintiff is required to file with the complaint an affidavit of an expert witness, which must specify at least one negligent act or omission claimed to exist and the factual basis for those claims based on the available evidence at the time of the filing of the affidavit.
(C) The contemporaneous filing requirement of subsection (B) does not apply to any case in which the period of limitation will expire or there is a good faith basis to believe it will expire on a claim stated in the complaint within ten days of the date of filing and, because of the time constraints, the plaintiff alleges that an affidavit of an expert could not be prepared. In this case, the plaintiff has forty-five days after the filing of the complaint to supplement the pleadings with the affidavit. The trial court may, on motion, after hearing and for good cause extend the time as it determines justice requires. If an affidavit is not filed within the period specified in this subsection or as extended by the trial court and the defendant against whom an affidavit should have been filed alleges, by motion to dismiss filed contemporaneously with its initial responsive pleading that the plaintiff has failed to file the requisite affidavit, the complaint is subject to dismissal for failure to state a claim.
(D) This section does not extend an applicable period of limitation, except that if the affidavit is filed within the period specified in this section, the filing of the affidavit after the expiration of the statute of limitations is considered timely and provides no basis for a statute of limitations defense.
(E) If a plaintiff files an affidavit which is allegedly defective, and the defendant to whom it pertains alleges, with specificity, by motion to dismiss filed contemporaneously with its initial responsive pleading, that the affidavit is defective, the plaintiff's complaint is subject to dismissal for failure to state a claim, except that the plaintiff may cure the alleged defect by amendment within thirty days of service of the motion alleging that the affidavit is defective. The trial court may, in the exercise of its discretion, extend the time for filing an amendment or response to the motion, or both, as it determines justice requires.
(F) If a plaintiff fails to file an affidavit as required by this section and the defendant raises the failure to file an affidavit by motion to dismiss filed contemporaneously with its initial responsive pleading, the complaint is not subject to renewal after the expiration of the applicable period of limitation, unless a court determines that the plaintiff had the requisite affidavit within the time required pursuant to this section and the failure to, file the affidavit is the result of a mistake.
(G) This section applies to the following professions:
(1) architects;
(2) attorneys at law;
(3) certified public accountants;
(4) chiropractors;
(5) dentists;
(6) land surveyors;
(7) medical doctors;
(8) marriage and family therapists;
(9) nurses;
(10) occupational therapists;
(11) optometrists;
(12) osteopathic physicians;
(13) pharmacists;
(14) physical therapists;
(15) physicians' assistants;
(16) professional counselors;
(17) professional engineers;
(18) podiatrists;
(19) psychologists;
(20) radiological technicians;
(21) respiratory therapists; and
(22) veterinarians."
SECTION 6. Section 15-3-640 of the 1976 Code is amended to read:
"Section 15-3-640. (A) No An actions action to recover damages based upon or arising out of the defective or unsafe condition of an improvement to real property may not be brought more than thirteen eight years after substantial completion of such an the improvement. For purposes of this section, an action based upon or arising out of the defective or unsafe condition of an improvement to real property includes is an action:
(1) an action to recover damages for breach of a contract to construct or repair an improvement to real property;
(2) an action to recover damages for the negligent construction or repair of an improvement to real property;
(3) an action to recover damages for personal injury, death, or damage to property;
(4) an action to recover damages for economic or monetary loss;
(5) an action in contract or in tort or otherwise;
(6) an action for contribution or indemnification for damages sustained on account of an action described in this subdivision;
(7) an action against a surety or guarantor of a defendant described in this section;
(8) an action brought against any a current or prior owner of the real property or improvement, or against any other another person having a current or prior interest in the real property or improvement;
(9) an action against an owners owner or manufacturers manufacturer of components, or against any a person furnishing materials, or against any a person who develops real property, or who performs or furnishes the design, plans, specifications, surveying, planning, supervision, testing, or observation of construction, or construction of an improvement to real property, or a repair to an improvement to real property.
(B) This section describes an outside limitation of thirteen eight years after the substantial completion of the improvement, within which normal statutes of limitations continue to run.
(C) Any A building permit for the construction of an improvement to real property shall must contain in bold type notice to the owner or possessor of the property of his rights under this section to contract for a guarantee of the structure being free from defective or unsafe conditions beyond thirteen eight years after substantial completion of the improvement. The Department of Consumer Affairs shall publish in conspicuous places the right of any an owner or possessor to contract for such extended liability under this section. Nothing in this section shall prohibit any prohibits a person from entering into any contractual agreement prior to the substantial completion of the improvement which extends any guarantee of a structure or component being free from defective or unsafe conditions beyond thirteen eight years after substantial completion of the improvement or component."
SECTION 7. A. Section 40-59-840 of the 1976 Code, as added by Act 82 of 2003, is amended to read:
"Section 40-59-840. (A) In an action brought against a contractor or subcontractor arising out of the construction of a dwelling, the claimant must, no later than ninety days before filing the action, serve a written notice of claim on the contractor. Upon service of the notice, the statute of limitations is tolled until the claim is denied or upon completion of repairs by the contractor or his agent. The notice of claim must contain the following:
(1) a statement that the claimant asserts a construction defect;
(2) a description of the claim or claims in reasonable detail sufficient to determine the general nature of the construction defect; and
(3) a description of any the results of the defect, if known.
The contractor or subcontractor shall advise the claimant, within fifteen days of receipt of the claim, if the construction defect is not sufficiently stated and shall request clarification."
B. Section 40-59-850 of the 1976 Code, as added by Act 82 of 2003, is amended to read:
"Section 40-59-850. (A) The contractor or subcontractor has thirty days from service of the initial notice of claim to inspect, offer to remedy, offer to settle with the claimant, or deny the claim regarding the defects. The claimant shall receive written notice of the contractor's or subcontractor's, as applicable, election under this section Within thirty days from the service of the initial notice of claim, the contractor or subcontractor shall serve written notice on the claimant of the contractor's or subcontractor's election pursuant to this section. The claimant shall allow inspection of the construction defect at an agreeable time to both parties, if requested under this section. The claimant shall give the contractor and any subcontractors reasonable access to the dwelling for inspection and if repairs have been agreed to by the parties, reasonable access to affect repairs. Failure to respond within thirty days is deemed a denial of the claim.
(B) The claimant shall serve a response to the contractor's offer, if any, within ten days of receipt of the offer.
(C) If the parties cannot agree to settle the dispute pursuant to this article, within ninety days after service of the initial notice of claim on the contractor, the claim is considered denied and the claimant may proceed with a civil action or other remedy provided by contract or by law.
(D) Any offers of settlement, repair, or remedy pursuant to this section, are not admissible in an action."
SECTION 8. Sections 40-11-5 through 40-11-430 of the 1976 Code are designated as Article 1, Contractors Generally.
SECTION 9. Chapter 11, Title 40 of the 1976 Code is amended by adding:
Section 40-11-500. This article may be cited as the 'South Carolina Notice and Opportunity to Cure Non-Residential Construction Defects Act'.
Section 40-11-510. As used in this article:
(1) 'Action' means a civil lawsuit or action or arbitration proceeding for damages or indemnity asserting a claim for injury or loss to non-residential property caused by an alleged defect arising out of or related to the design, construction, condition, or sale of the non-residential property, or a remodel of a non-residential property.
(2) 'Claimant' means a non-residential property owner, including a subsequent purchaser, who asserts a claim against a contractor, subcontractor, supplier, or design professional concerning a defect in the design, construction, condition, or sale of a non-residential property or in the remodel of a non-residential property.
(3) 'Construction defect' means a deficiency in or a deficiency arising out of the design, specifications, surveying, planning, supervision, or construction of non-residential improvements that results from any of the following:
(a) defective material, products, or components used in the construction of non-residential improvements;
(b) failure to substantially comply with applicable codes in effect at the time of construction of non-residential improvements;
(c) failure of the design of non-residential improvements to meet the applicable professional standards of care and applicable building codes at the time of governmental approval of the design of non-residential improvements; or
(d) failure to construct non-residential improvements in accordance with accepted trade standards for good and workmanlike construction at the time of construction. Substantial compliance with the applicable codes in effect at the time of construction conclusively establishes construction in accordance with accepted trade standards for good and workmanlike construction, with respect to all matters specified in those codes.
(4) 'Contractor' means a person licensed or registered pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 11, Title 40 who is engaged in the business of designing, developing, or the construction of non-residential properties.
(5) 'Design professional' means a person licensed or registered pursuant to the provisions of Title 40 as an architect, landscape architect, engineer, or surveyor;
(6) 'Non-residential Property' means any property, building, structure, or improvement to real property that is not a dwelling as defined in Section 40-59-820.
(7) 'Serve' or 'service' means personal service or delivery by certified mail to the last known address of the addressee.
(8) 'Supplier' means a person who provides materials, equipment, or other supplies for the construction of a non-residential property.
(9) 'Subcontractor' means a contractor who performs work on behalf of another contractor in the construction of a non-residential property who is licensed or registered pursuant to the provisions of Title 40.
Section 40-11-520. If the claimant files an action in court before first complying with the requirements of this article, on motion of a party to the action, the court shall stay the action until the claimant has complied with the requirements of this article.
Section 40-11-530. (A) In an action brought against a contractor, subcontractor, supplier, or design professional arising out of the construction of a non-residential property, the claimant must, no later than ninety days before filing the action, serve a written notice of claim on the contractor, subcontractor, supplier, or design professional. Upon service of the notice, the statute of limitations is tolled until the claim is denied or upon completion of repairs by the contractor, subcontractor, supplier, or design professional. The notice of claim must contain the following:
(1) a statement that the claimant asserts a construction defect;
(2) a description of the claim or claims in reasonable detail sufficient to determine the general nature of the construction defect; and
(3) a description of any results of the defect, if known.
(B) The contractor, subcontractor, supplier, or design professional shall advise the claimant within fifteen days of receipt of the claim if the construction defect is not sufficiently stated and shall request clarification.
Section 40-11-540. (A) The contractor, subcontractor, supplier, or design professional has sixty days from service of the initial notice of claim to inspect, offer to remedy, offer to settle with the claimant, or deny the claim regarding the defects. The claimant shall receive written notice of the contractor's, subcontractor's, supplier's, or design professional's, as applicable, election pursuant to the provisions of this section. The claimant shall allow inspection of the construction defect at an agreeable time, during normal business hours, to all parties, if requested pursuant to this section. The claimant shall give the contractor, subcontractor, supplier, or design professional reasonable access to the property for inspection and if repairs have been agreed to by the parties, reasonable access to affect repairs. Failure of the contractor to respond within sixty days is deemed a denial of the claim.
(B) The claimant shall serve a response to the contractor's, subcontractor's, supplier's, or design professional's offer within ten days of receipt of the offer.
(C) If the parties cannot agree to settle the dispute pursuant to this article within ninety days after service of the initial notice of claim on the contractor, subcontractor, supplier, or design professional, the claim is considered denied and the claimant may proceed with a civil action or other remedy provided by contract or by law.
(D) An offer of settlement, repair, or remedy pursuant to this section, is not admissible in an action.
Section 40-11-550. (A) This article does not apply to actions arising out of claims for personal injury, death, or both.
(B) South Carolina Court Administration is directed to develop a designation on the civil action cover sheet which indicates whether a stay has been granted for a civil action filed pursuant to this article."
SECTION 10. Section 34-31-20 of the 1976 Code, as last amended by Act 344 of 2000, is further amended to read:
"Section 34-31-20. (A) In all cases of accounts stated and in all cases wherein any sum or sums of money shall be ascertained and, being due, shall draw interest according to law, the legal interest shall be at the rate of eight and three-fourths percent per annum.
(B) All A money decrees decree and or judgments judgment of the courts court enrolled or entered shall must draw interest according to law. The legal rate of interest is at the rate of twelve percent a year equal to the prime rate as listed in the first edition of the Wall Street Journal published for each calendar year for which the damages are awarded, plus four percent, compounded annually. The South Carolina Supreme Court shall issue a court order by January 15 of each year confirming the annual prime rate."
SECTION 11. Title 15 of the 1976 Code is amended by adding:
Section 15-32-10. This article may be cited as the 'South Carolina Noneconomic Damage Awards Act of 2004'.
Section 15-32-20. As used in this chapter, unless the context clearly requires otherwise:
(1) 'Actual economic damages' means pecuniary damages arising from medical expenses and medical care, rehabilitation services, custodial care, loss of earnings and earning capacity, loss of income, burial costs, loss of use of property, costs of repair or replacement of property, costs of obtaining substitute domestic services, loss of employment, loss of business or employment opportunities, and other monetary losses.
(2) 'Claimant' means the person suffering personal injury.
(3) 'Noneconomic damages' means nonpecuniary damages arising from pain, suffering, inconvenience, physical impairment, disfigurement, mental anguish, emotional distress, loss of society and companionship, loss of consortium, injury to reputation, humiliation, other nonpecuniary damages, and any other theory of damages including, but not limited to, fear of loss, illness, or injury.
(4) 'Personal injury' means injuries to the person including, but not limited to, bodily injuries, mental distress or suffering, loss of wages, loss of services, loss of consortium, and other noneconomic damages and actual economic damages.
(5) 'Personal injury action' means an action for personal injury, including a wrongful death action pursuant to Sections 15-51-10 through 15-51-60 and a survival action pursuant to Section 15-5-90.
Section 15-32-30. (A) In a personal injury action, the prevailing plaintiff may be awarded compensation for:
(1) actual economic damages suffered by the claimant; and
(2) noneconomic damages suffered by the claimant not to exceed two million dollars, except as provided in subsection (C).
(B) the provisions of subsection (A)(2) may not be made known to the jury through any means, including voir dire, the introduction of evidence, argument of counsel, or instructions to the jury.
(C) At the end of each calendar year, the State Budget and Control Board, Board of Economic Advisors, shall determine the increase or decrease in the ratio of the Consumer Price Index to the index as of December 31 of the previous year, and the limitation on compensation for noneconomic damages pursuant to subsection (A)(2) must be increased or decreased accordingly. As soon as practicable after this adjustment is calculated, the Director of the State Budget and Control Board shall submit the revised limitation on compensation to The State Register for publication pursuant to Section 1-23-40(2), and the revised limitation becomes effective upon publication in The State Register. For purposes of this subsection, 'Consumer Price Index' means the Consumer Price Index for Wage Earners and Clerical Workers as published by the United States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics.
Section 15-32-40. The provisions of this article do not affect any right, privilege, or provision of the South Carolina Tort Claims Act pursuant to Chapter 78, Title 15."
SECTION 12. Chapter 32, Title 15 of the 1976 Code is amended by adding:
Section 15-32-310. As used in this article:
(1) 'Claimant' means a party to a civil action, including a plaintiff, counterclaimant, cross-claimant or third-party plaintiff, seeking the recovery of punitive damages.
(2) 'Compensatory damages' means actual damages, including nominal damages.
(3) 'Defendant' means a party to a civil action, including a counter defendant, cross-defendant or third-party defendant, from whom a claimant seeks recovery of punitive damages.
(4) 'Punitive damages' means extra-compensatory or exemplary damages awarded for the purposes set forth in Section 15-32-320.
Section 15-32-320. Subject to the provisions of this article, punitive damages may be awarded in a civil action to punish a defendant or to deter repetition of similar acts only if the plaintiff proves the damages by clear and convincing evidence.
Section 15-32-330. (A) This article applies to every claim for punitive damages, regardless of whether the claim for relief is based upon a statutory or common law right of action or based in equity. In an action subject to this article, in whole or in part, the provisions of this article prevail over another provision of law to the contrary.
(B) The provisions of this article do not apply to actions brought under the South Carolina Tort Claims Act, pursuant to Chapter 78 of Title 15, for which punitive damages are not recoverable.
Section 15-32-340. (A) In an action seeking an award of punitive damages, the jury must determine and state the amount of punitive damages separately from the amount of compensatory damages.
(B) Punitive damages awarded against a defendant may not exceed nine times the amount of compensatory damages, except in the case of fraud or the infliction of an intentional tort including, but not limited to, false imprisonment, trespass, invasion of privacy, and civil actions arising out of criminal violations. If a jury returns a verdict for punitive damages in excess of the maximum amount specified pursuant to this subsection, the trial court shall reduce the award and enter judgment for punitive damages in the maximum amount.
(C) The provisions of subsection (B) may not be made known to the jury through any means, including voir dire, the introduction of evidence, argument of counsel, or instructions to the jury.
Section 15-32-350. (A) A civil action tried before a jury and seeking punitive damages must be conducted in a bifurcated trial. Each phase of the trial must be conducted before the same jury.
(B) In the first phase of the trial the jury shall:
(1) determine and assign liability among the parties; and
(2) award compensatory damages against the liable parties.
(C) At the conclusion of the first phase of the trial, if the court determines that the conduct of the liable parties was wilful and wanton and compensatory damages are awarded against the liable parties, the jury shall determine if punitive damages are warranted against the liable parties and the amount of punitive damages to be awarded during the second phase of the trial.
(D) In determining the amount of punitive damages, the jury shall consider:
(1) degree of culpability of the liable parties;
(2) duration of the conduct;
(3) awareness or concealment of the conduct by the liable parties;
(4) existence of similar past conduct;
(5) likelihood that an award will deter these or other parties from similar conduct;
(6) whether the award is reasonably related to the harm likely to result from the conduct;
(7) defendant's ability to pay; and
(8) any other factor the court considers necessary for the jury to make an adequate and informed determination.
(E) Upon motion of the liable party, the court shall conduct a post trial review, on the record, to ensure that an award is not grossly disproportionate to the severity of the offense or conduct.
Section 15-32-360. When reviewing the evidence regarding a finding by the jury concerning liability for punitive damages in accordance with this article or regarding the amount of punitive damages awarded, the trial court shall state in a written opinion its reasons for upholding or overturning the finding or award. The trial court shall specifically address the evidence, or lack of evidence, as it relates to liability or the amount of punitive damages pursuant to the requirements of this article.
Section 15-32-370. A demand for punitive damages must be stated specifically, except for the amount, in the complaint and the aggravating factor supporting the award of punitive damages must be averred with particularity. The amount of damages must be pled in accordance with applicable court rules."
SECTION 13. Chapter 38, Title 15 is amended to read:
Section 15-38-10. This chapter may be cited as the Uniform Contribution Among Tortfeasors Act.
Section 15-38-15. (A) In an action to recover damages resulting from personal injury, wrongful death, or damage to property, if the damages are determined to be proximately caused by more than one defendant, each defendant against whom recovery is allowed is liable to the claimant only for the defendant's proportionate share of the recoverable damages except as provided in subsection (D).
(B) The proportionate share of damages for which each defendant is liable is calculated by multiplying the damages by a fraction in which the numerator is the defendant's percentage of liability determined pursuant to subsection (C), and the denominator is the total of the percentages of liability determined pursuant to subsection (C), to be attributable to all defendants whose actions are a proximate cause of the injury, death, or damage to property including settled or released persons pursuant to Section 15-38-50. A percentage of liability attributable to the claimant may not be included in the denominator of the fraction.
(C) The jury or court, if there is no jury, shall specify:
(1) the amount of damages;
(2) findings of fact necessary for the court to specify recoverable damages; and
(3) the percentage of liability that proximately caused the injury, death, or damage to property in relation to one hundred percent, that is attributable to each defendant whose actions are a proximate cause of the injury, death, or damage to property including settled or released persons pursuant to Section 15-38-50.
(D)(1) Upon motion by the claimant to open the judgment filed, after good faith efforts by the claimant to collect from a liable defendant, at least one year but not more than two years after judgment becomes final through lapse of time or through exhaustion of appeal, whichever occurs later, the court shall determine whether all or part of a defendant's proportionate share of the recoverable damages is not collectible from that defendant, and shall reallocate that amount among the other defendants in accordance with the provisions of this section.
(2) The court shall order that the portion of the amount not collectible be reallocated among the other defendants. The court shall reallocate to the other defendants an amount equal to the amount not collectible of recoverable damages multiplied by a fraction in which the numerator is the defendant's percentage of liability and the denominator is the total of the percentages of liability of all defendants excluding any defendant whose liability is reallocated.
(3) The defendant whose liability is reallocated remains subject to contribution pursuant to the provisions of this chapter and to any continuing liability to the claimant on the judgment.
Section 15-38-20. (A) Except as otherwise provided in this chapter, where two or more persons become jointly or severally liable in tort for the same injury to person or property or for the same wrongful death, there is a right of contribution among them even though judgment has not been recovered against all or any of them.
(B) The right of contribution exists only in favor of a tortfeasor who has paid more than his pro rata proportionate share of the common liability as determined by the jury or court at the time of judgment, and his total recovery is limited to the amount paid by him in excess of his pro rata proportionate share as determined by the jury or court at the time of judgment. No tortfeasor is compelled to make contribution beyond his own pro rata proportionate share of the entire liability as determined by the jury or court at the time of judgment.
(C) There is no right of contribution in favor of any tortfeasor who has intentionally caused or contributed to the injury or wrongful death.
(D) A tortfeasor who enters into a settlement with a claimant is not entitled to recover contribution from another tortfeasor whose liability for the injury or wrongful death is not extinguished by the settlement nor in respect to any amount paid in a settlement which is in excess of what was reasonable.
(E) A liability insurer, who by payment has discharged in full or in part the liability of a tortfeasor and has thereby discharged in full its obligation as insurer, is subrogated to the tortfeasor's right of contribution to the extent of the amount it has paid in excess of the tortfeasor's pro rata proportionate share of the common liability as determined by the jury or court at the time of judgment. This provision does not limit or impair any right of subrogation arising from any other relationship.
(F) This chapter does not impair any right of indemnity under existing law. Where one tortfeasor is entitled to indemnity from another, the right of the indemnity obligee is for indemnity and not contribution, and the indemnity obligor is not entitled to contribution from the obligee for any portion of his indemnity obligation.
(G) This chapter does not apply to breaches of trust or of other fiduciary obligation.
Section 15-38-30. In determining the pro rata shares of tortfeasors in the entire liability (1) their relative degrees of fault shall not be considered; (2) if equity requires, the collective liability of some as a group shall constitute a single share; and (3) principles of equity applicable to contribution generally shall apply.
Section 15-38-40. (A) Whether or not judgment has been entered in an action against two or more tortfeasors for the same injury or wrongful death, contribution may be enforced by separate action.
(B) Where a judgment has been entered in an action against two or more tortfeasors for the same injury or wrongful death, contribution may be enforced in that action by judgment in favor of one against other judgment defendants by motion upon notice to all parties to the action. Provided, however, contribution may not be enforced in the action until the issue of liability, and the resulting damages against the defendant or defendants named in the action, and the proportionate fault of the defendant is determined. Once the issue of liability has been resolved, subject to Section 15-38-20(B), a defendant has the right to seek contribution against any judgment defendant and other persons who were not made parties to the action.
(C) If there is a judgment for the injury or wrongful death against the tortfeasor seeking contribution, any separate action by him to enforce contribution must be commenced within one year after the party seeking contribution has made the final payment in excess of that party's share of the judgment after the judgment has become final by lapse of time for appeal or after appellate review.
(D) If there is no judgment for the injury or wrongful death against the tortfeasor seeking contribution, his right of contribution is barred unless he has either (1) discharged by payment the common liability within the statute of limitations period applicable to claimant's right of action against him and has commenced his action for contribution within one year after payment, or (2) agreed while action is pending against him to discharge the common liability and has within one year after the agreement paid the liability and commenced his action for contribution.
(E) The recovery of a judgment for an injury or wrongful death against one tortfeasor does not of itself discharge the other tortfeasors from liability for the injury or wrongful death unless the judgment is satisfied. The satisfaction of the judgment does not impair any right of contribution.
(F) The judgment of the court in determining the liability of the several defendants to the claimant for an injury or wrongful death shall be binding as among such defendants in determining their right to contribution.
Section 15-38-50. When a release or a covenant not to sue or not to enforce judgment is given in good faith to one of two or more persons liable in tort for the same injury or the same wrongful death:
(1) it does not discharge any of the other tortfeasors from liability for the injury or wrongful death unless its terms so provide, but it reduces the claim against the others to the extent of any amount stipulated by the release or the covenant, or in the amount of the consideration paid for it, whichever is the greater; and
(2) it discharges the tortfeasor to whom it is given from all liability for contribution to any other tortfeasor.
Section 15-38-60. This chapter shall be so interpreted and construed as to effectuate its general purpose to make uniform the law of those that enact it.
Section 15-38-65. No payment shall be made from state appropriated funds or other public funds to satisfy claims or judgments against governmental entities or governmental employees acting within the scope of their official duties arising under the Uniform Contribution Among Tortfeasors Act. The South Carolina Tort Claims Act is the exclusive and sole remedy for any tort committed by an employee of a governmental entity while acting within the scope of his official duty. The Uniform Contribution Among Tortfeasors Act shall not apply to governmental entities.
Section 15-38-70. All acts or parts of acts which are inconsistent with the provisions of this chapter are hereby repealed."
SECTION 14. Section 29-7-20(1) of the 1976 Code, as last amended by Act 247 of 1991, is further amended to read:
"(1) A contractor or subcontractor who, for other purposes than paying the money loaned upon such the contract, transfers, invests or expends and fails to pay to a laborer, subcontractor, or materialman out of the money received as provided in Section 29-7-10 is guilty of a misdemeanor and, upon conviction, when the consideration for the work and material exceeds the value of one hundred dollars must be fined not less than five hundred dollars nor more than one thousand dollars or imprisoned not less than three months nor more than six months and when such consideration does not exceed the value of one hundred dollars must be fined not more than five hundred dollars or imprisoned not longer than thirty days is subject to an action for damages."
SECTION 15. Sections 58-23-90, 15-36-20, 15-36-30, 15-36-40, and 15-36-50 of the 1976 Code are repealed.
SECTION 16. The repeal or amendment by this act of any law, whether temporary or permanent or civil or criminal, does not affect pending actions, rights, duties, or liabilities founded thereon, or alter, discharge, release or extinguish any penalty, forfeiture, or liability incurred under the repealed or amended law, unless the repealed or amended provision shall so expressly provide. After the effective date of this act, all laws repealed or amended by this act must be taken and treated as remaining in full force and effect for the purpose of sustaining any pending or vested right, civil action, special proceeding, criminal prosecution, or appeal existing as of the effective date of this act, and for the enforcement of rights, duties, penalties, forfeitures, and liabilities as they stood under the repealed or amended laws.
SECTION 17. If any section, subsection, paragraph, subparagraph, 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 this act, the General Assembly hereby declaring that it would have passed this act, and each and every section, subsection, paragraph, subparagraph, sentence, clause, phrase, and word thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more other sections, subsections, paragraphs, subparagraphs, sentences, clauses, phrases, or words hereof may be declared to be unconstitutional, invalid, or otherwise ineffective.
SECTION 18. This act takes effect upon approval by the Governor and applies to a cause of action arising on or after the effective date of this act. /
Amend the title to read:
/ TO AMEND SECTION 15-7-30, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO ACTIONS THAT MUST BE TRIED IN THE COUNTY WHERE THE DEFENDANT RESIDES, SO AS TO DEFINE KEY TERMS AND TO PROVIDE FACTORS FOR THE COURT TO CONSIDER WHEN DETERMINING A CORPORATION'S PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS; TO AMEND SECTION 15-7-100, RELATING TO CHANGING THE PLACE OF TRIAL, SO AS TO PROVIDE FACTORS FOR THE COURT TO CONSIDER WHEN DETERMINING WHETHER TO CHANGE THE PLACE OF TRIAL; TO AMEND SECTION 36-2-803, RELATING TO PERSONAL JURISDICTION BASED UPON CONDUCT, SO AS TO DELETE THE PROVISION THAT PROHIBITED CHANGE OF VENUE IN AN ACTION WHEN JURISDICTION IS BASED SOLELY ON THIS SECTION; TO AMEND SECTION 15-36-10, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO LIABILITY FOR ATTORNEY'S FEES AND COSTS OF FRIVOLOUS SUITS, SO AS TO REPLACE THE EXISTING PROVISIONS OF THE CHAPTER WITH PROVISIONS REQUIRING THE SIGNATURE OF AN ATTORNEY OR PRO SE LITIGANT ON ALL PLEADINGS AND OTHER DOCUMENTS FILED IN A CIVIL OR ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION, TO PROVIDE THAT THE SIGNATURE CONSTITUTES CERTIFICATION THAT THE ACTION IS NOT FRIVOLOUS OR INTERPOSED FOR DELAY, AND TO PROVIDE SANCTIONS; BY ADDING SECTION 15-36-100 SO AS TO ESTABLISH THE REQUIREMENT FOR AN AFFIDAVIT OF AN EXPERT WITNESS IN A PROFESSIONAL MALPRACTICE ACTION; TO AMEND SECTION 15-3-640, RELATING TO THE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS FOR FILING AN ACTION FOR A CONSTRUCTION DEFECT, SO AS TO DECREASE THE STATUTE OF REPOSE FROM THIRTEEN TO EIGHT YEARS; TO AMEND SECTIONS 40-59-840 AND 40-59-850, BOTH RELATING TO NOTICE AND OPPORTUNITY TO CURE CONSTRUCTION DWELLING DEFECTS, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT THE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS IS TOLLED UNTIL A CLAIM IS DENIED OR REPAIRS ARE COMPLETED AND TO PROVIDE THAT THE CLAIMANT MAY PROCEED WITH A CIVIL ACTION IF THE PARTIES CANNOT AGREE TO SETTLE THE DISPUTE WITHIN NINETY DAYS OF THE INITIAL NOTICE OF CLAIM; TO AMEND CHAPTER 11, TITLE 40, RELATING TO CONTRACTORS, SO AS TO DESIGNATE THE EXISTING SECTIONS AS ARTICLE 1; BY ADDING ARTICLE 3, CHAPTER 11, TITLE 40 SO AS TO ENACT THE "SOUTH CAROLINA NOTICE AND OPPORTUNITY TO CURE NON-RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION DEFECTS ACT", TO PROVIDE A DEFINITION FOR "NON-RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY" AND OTHER KEY TERMS, TO PROVIDE THAT THE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS IS TOLLED UNTIL A CLAIM IS DENIED OR REPAIRS ARE COMPLETED, AND TO PROVIDE THAT THE CLAIMANT MAY PROCEED WITH A CIVIL ACTION IF THE PARTIES CANNOT AGREE TO SETTLE THE DISPUTE; TO AMEND SECTION 34-31-20, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE POST JUDGMENT LEGAL RATE OF INTEREST, SO AS TO PROVIDE THE RATE OF INTEREST IS EQUAL TO THE PRIME RATE AS LISTED IN THE WALL STREET JOURNAL PLUS FOUR PERCENT; BY ADDING ARTICLE 1, CHAPTER 32, TITLE 15 SO AS TO ENACT THE SOUTH CAROLINA NONECONOMIC DAMAGE AWARDS ACT, TO PROVIDE A DEFINITION FOR "NONECONOMIC DAMAGES" AND OTHER KEY TERMS, AND TO PROVIDE THAT A PLAINTIFF MAY BE AWARDED COMPENSATION FOR ACTUAL ECONOMIC DAMAGES AND NONECONOMIC DAMAGES NOT TO EXCEED TWO MILLION DOLLARS; BY ADDING ARTICLE 3, CHAPTER 32, TITLE 15 SO AS TO ESTABLISH A PROCEDURE FOR THE AWARD OF PUNITIVE DAMAGES, TO PROVIDE A DEFINITION FOR "PUNITIVE DAMAGES" AND OTHER KEY TERMS, TO PROVIDE PUNITIVE DAMAGES MUST BE PROVEN BY CLEAR AND CONVINCING EVIDENCE, TO PROVIDE THE JURY MUST DETERMINE AND STATE THE AMOUNT OF PUNITIVE DAMAGES SEPARATELY FROM THE AMOUNT OF COMPENSATORY DAMAGES, TO PROHIBIT PUNITIVE DAMAGES FROM EXCEEDING NINE TIMES THE AMOUNT OF COMPENSATORY DAMAGES, AND TO PROVIDE FOR A BIFURCATED TRIAL IN CIVIL ACTIONS TRIED BEFORE A JURY WHEN PUNITIVE DAMAGES ARE SOUGHT; TO AMEND CHAPTER 38, TITLE 15, RELATING TO THE SOUTH CAROLINA CONTRIBUTION AMONG TORTFEASORS ACT, SO AS TO INCREASE THE TIME IN WHICH A CLAIMANT MAY OPEN A JUDGMENT TO TWO YEARS, TO ABOLISH JOINT AND SEVERAL LIABILITY, AND TO PROVIDE FOR CONTRIBUTORY LIABILITY AMONG TORTFEASORS; TO AMEND SECTION 29-7-20, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO PENALTIES FOR FAILURE TO PAY LABORERS, SO AS TO DELETE THE PROVISION THAT PROVIDES THAT A VIOLATION OF THE SECTION IS A MISDEMEANOR, TO DELETE THE PROVISION THAT PROVIDES FOR A FINE OR IMPRISONMENT, AND TO PROVIDE THAT A PERSON WHO VIOLATES THE PROVISIONS OF THIS SECTION IS SUBJECT TO AN ACTION FOR DAMAGES; TO REPEAL SECTION 58-23-90 OF THE 1976 CODE RELATING TO THE PROPER VENUE TO BRING AN ACTION AGAINST A LICENSED MOTOR CARRIER, AND TO REPEAL SECTIONS 15-36-20, 15-36-30, 15-36-40, 15-36-50 OF THE 1976 CODE, ALL RELATING TO FRIVOLOUS CIVIL PROCEEDINGS. /
Renumber sections to conform.
Amend title to conform.
Rep. HARRISON explained the amendment.
Rep. ALTMAN spoke against the amendment.
Rep. SANDIFER spoke in favor of the amendment.
Rep. SCOTT spoke against the amendment.
Rep. RUTHERFORD spoke against the amendment.
Rep. TRIPP spoke in favor of the amendment.
Rep. SKELTON spoke in favor of the amendment.
Rep. JENNINGS spoke against the amendment.
Rep. JENNINGS spoke against the amendment.
Rep. SCOTT spoke against the amendment.
The question then recurred to the adoption of the amendment.
Rep. SCOTT demanded the yeas and nays which were taken, resulting as follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Anthony Bailey Bales Barfield Battle Bingham Cato Ceips Chellis Clark Clemmons Cooper Cotty Dantzler Davenport Delleney Duncan Edge Freeman Frye Gilham Hagood Hamilton Harrell Harrison Haskins Hayes Herbkersman Hinson Huggins Keegan Kirsh Koon Leach Littlejohn Loftis Lourie Lucas Mahaffey McCraw McGee Merrill Miller Ott Owens Perry Phillips E. H. Pitts M. A. Pitts Quinn Rice Richardson Sandifer Scarborough Sheheen Simrill Sinclair Skelton D. C. Smith G. M. Smith G. R. Smith J. R. Smith W. D. Smith Stewart Stille Talley Taylor Thompson Townsend Tripp Trotter Umphlett Viers Walker White Whitmire Wilkins Witherspoon Young
Those who voted in the negative are:
Allen Altman Bowers Branham Breeland G. Brown J. Brown R. Brown Clyburn Emory Gourdine Govan J. Hines M. Hines Hosey Howard Jennings Kennedy Lee Lloyd McLeod Moody-Lawrence J. M. Neal Neilson Parks Rhoad Rivers Rutherford Scott Snow Weeks Whipper
So, the amendment was adopted.
I was temporarily out of the Chamber but would have voted in favor of Amendment No. 1.
Rep. Lewis Eugene Pinson
Rep. HARRISON proposed the following Amendment No. 54 (Doc Name COUNCIL\PT\1818AHB04), which was adopted:
Amend the bill, as and if amended, by adding an appropriately numbered SECTION to read:
/ SECTION __. The provisions of this act do not affect any right, privilege, or provision of the South Carolina Tort Claims Act pursuant to Chapter 78, Title 15 of the 1976 Code. /
Renumber sections to conform.
Amend title to conform.
Rep. HARRISON explained the amendment.
The amendment was then adopted.
Pursuant to Rule 7.7 the Yeas and Nays were taken resulting as follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Anthony Bailey Bales Barfield Battle Bingham Cato Ceips Chellis Clark Clemmons Cooper Cotty Dantzler Davenport Delleney Duncan Edge Emory Frye Gilham Hagood Hamilton Harrell Harrison Hayes Herbkersman Huggins Keegan Kirsh Koon Leach Limehouse Littlejohn Loftis Lourie Mahaffey McCraw McGee McLeod J. M. Neal Ott Owens Perry Phillips Pinson E. H. Pitts M. A. Pitts Quinn Rice Richardson Sandifer Scarborough Simrill Sinclair Skelton D. C. Smith G. M. Smith G. R. Smith J. R. Smith W. D. Smith Stewart Stille Talley Taylor Thompson Toole Townsend Tripp Trotter Umphlett Vaughn Viers Walker White Whitmire Wilkins Witherspoon Young
Those who voted in the negative are:
Allen Altman Bowers Branham Breeland G. Brown J. Brown R. Brown Clyburn Cobb-Hunter Freeman Gourdine Govan J. Hines M. Hines Hosey Howard Jennings Kennedy Lee Lloyd Lucas Mack Miller Moody-Lawrence Neilson Parks Rhoad Rivers Rutherford Scott Sheheen F. N. Smith Snow Weeks Whipper
So, the Bill, as amended, was read the second time and ordered to third reading.
The following Bill was taken up:
H. 4464 (Word version) -- Reps. W. D. Smith, Taylor, G. M. Smith, Clemmons, Walker, Barfield, Keegan, White, Viers, G. R. Smith, Owens, Rice and Sandifer: A BILL TO ENACT THE "MEDICAL MALPRACTICE AND PATIENT SAFETY REFORM ACT" BY ADDING TITLE 15, CHAPTER 80 TO THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976.
The Judiciary Committee proposed the following Amendment No. 1 (Doc Name COUNCIL\NBD\12053AC04), which was adopted:
Amend the bill, as and if amended, by striking all after the enacting words and inserting:
/SECTION 1. Title 15 of the 1976 Code is amended by adding:
Section 15-80-10. This chapter may be cited as the 'Medical Malpractice and Patient Safety Reform Act'.
Section 15-80-20. As used in this chapter:
(1) 'Healthcare provider' means a physician, surgeon, osteopath, nurse, oral surgeon, dentist, pharmacist, chiropractor, optometrist, podiatrist, hospital, nursing home, or any similar category of licensed healthcare provider, including a healthcare practice, association, partnership, or other legal entity.
(2) 'Insurance carrier' means any corporation, fraternal organization, burial association, other association, partnership, society, order, individual, or aggregation of individuals engaging or proposing or attempting to engage as principals in any kind of insurance or surety business, including the exchanging of reciprocal or interinsurance contracts between individuals, partnerships, and corporations and includes the joint underwriting association created pursuant to Chapter 79, Title 38 for the purpose of providing medical malpractice insurance.
(3) 'Medical Malpractice' means doing that which the reasonably prudent healthcare provider would not do or not doing that which the reasonably prudent healthcare provider would do in the same or similar circumstances.
(4) 'Claims review office' or 'office' means the Medical Claims Review Office established in the Department of Insurance pursuant to this chapter.
Section 15-80-30. The Department of Insurance shall promulgate regulations necessary to carry out the provisions of this chapter.
Section 15-80-200. There is established the Medical Claims Review Office in the Department of Insurance which shall review all claims against healthcare providers for damages allegedly resulting from medical malpractice.
Section 15-80-210. (A)(1) Except as provided for in Section 15-80-250, before an individual may file an action in a court in this State against a healthcare provider for damages allegedly resulting from medical malpractice:
(a) the individual shall have served a claim for damages on the healthcare provider;
(b) a medical claims review panel must have reviewed and rendered an opinion on the claim within one hundred twenty days of service of the claim on the healthcare provider;
(c) sixty days must have elapsed since the claimant was served with the opinion of the medical claims review panel.
(2) If a claimant files an action against a healthcare provider before the requirements of subsection (A)(1) have been met, the court shall dismiss the action without prejudice, unless the applicable statute of limitations has elapsed. The claimant may not refile the action until the provisions of this chapter have been satisfied.
(B) The claim for damages must be served on the healthcare provider by certified mail, return receipt requested at the healthcare provider's primary place of practice or upon the healthcare provider's registered agent. The claim must describe the loss suffered, the circumstances that brought about the loss, the extent of the loss, the time and place the loss occurred, and the names and addresses of all persons involved, if known, and the amount of the loss sustained. Submitting a claim for damages constitutes a release authorizing the Medical Claims Review Office and the healthcare provider's medical malpractice insurance carrier to obtain the claimant's medical and hospital records only for the limited purposes provided for in this chapter.
(C) The service of the claim on the healthcare provider pursuant to subsection (B) tolls the statute of limitations which remains tolled one hundred and eighty days from the date service was effected on the healthcare provider or sixty days after the Medical Claims Review Office has served a final opinion on the claimant, whichever occurs first.
(D)(1) Within twenty days of receiving a claim for damages, the healthcare provider must serve the claim on the Medical Claims Review Office and to the healthcare provider's medical malpractice insurance carrier by certified mail, return receipt requested.
(2) Within thirty days of receiving a claim for damages, the healthcare provider shall serve a response to the claim on the Medical Claims Review Office, the healthcare provider's medical malpractice insurance carrier, and the claimant by certified mail, return receipt requested.
(3) A healthcare provider who fails to comply with subsection (D)(1) or (D)(2) is, after notice and an opportunity to be heard, subject to a fine of not less than five hundred dollars or more than one thousand dollars to be imposed by the Medical Claims Review Office.
Section 15-80-220. (A) Following receipt of a claim for damages, the Medical Claims Review Office shall convene a panel to review the claim. The office, in conjunction with healthcare provider licensing boards and the Department of Health and Environmental Control, shall develop procedures whereby individual healthcare providers and representatives of healthcare entities can register to volunteer to serve on medical claims review panels. Healthcare providers are strongly encouraged to volunteer to serve on review panels in order to minimize costs associated with convening these panels. The office shall develop medical claims review guidelines and training materials which must be provided to all healthcare providers who register.
(B)(1) Within twenty days of receiving a claim for damages from a healthcare provider, the Medical Claims Review Office shall appoint a panel comprised of three healthcare providers who have registered pursuant to subsection (A). All panel members must be licensed in the same discipline as the healthcare provider named in the claim; and one of the three healthcare providers must practice in the same medical specialty as the named healthcare provider. If a healthcare provider is a hospital, nursing home, or another legal entity, the panel members must be representative of a similar entity. If there are multiple healthcare providers named in a claim, the director of the Medical Claims Review Office shall determine if the healthcare providers are to be combined for review or reviewed by individual panels, and if combined, the director shall appoint a sufficient number of members to the panel so that all disciplines and specialties of the named healthcare providers are represented on the panel.
(2) Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (B)(1), if a sufficient number of panel members are not available from the same medical specialty as a healthcare provider named in the claim, the director may appoint panel members from a related medical specialty.
(C) Members of the medical review panels may not receive compensation for serving on a panel, including mileage, per diem, and subsistence.
Section 15-80-230. The Medical Claims Review Office shall staff each panel and before providing claimant medical records and other information to the panel members for review, the office shall remove all claimant and healthcare provider identifying information.
Section 15-80-240. (A) In reviewing the claim for damages, the review panel shall consider the claim for damages statement submitted, the healthcare provider's response, and all medical records and other information related to the claim. The panel may obtain additional information by submitting questions and requests for information to the claimant and the healthcare provider in accordance with procedures developed by the Medical Claims Review Office, and if necessary, the director of the claims review office may compel responses to such inquiries and may subpoena records and documents only for the limited purposes provided for in this chapter.
(B) The panel shall render its opinion in writing and the Claims Review Office shall serve the claimant with the opinion by certified mail, return receipt requested, within one hundred twenty days from the date the claim for damages was served on the healthcare provider pursuant to Section 15-80-210(B).
(C) The panel shall determine whether the claim has merit or does not have merit and if meritorious, whether the conduct complained of resulted in harm to the claimant. If the panel finds that the conduct complained of resulted in harm to the claimant, the panel also shall include in its opinion:
(1) whether the healthcare provider has assumed any responsibility for the conduct complained of and whether anyone has been disciplined as a result of the conduct, and in multiple healthcare provider claims, the assignment and degree of responsibility if the healthcare providers have not assumed all or part of the responsibility;
(2) whether the healthcare provider has been available and responsive to the claimant; if the healthcare provider has not provided an adequate explanation to the claimant of what occurred, the panel must provide an explanation and the reason the healthcare provider did not provide an explanation;
(3) whether any standards of care, processes, or procedures involved in this claim have been revised, or are proposed to be revised, by the healthcare provider in an effort to prevent future occurrences, including enhanced or remedial training, and if no revisions have been made or are proposed to be made, recommendations, if any, for such revisions;
(4) whether any compensation has been offered and if so, what type of compensation was offered; whether the panel recommends compensation and if so, what type of compensation is recommended; for purposes of this item, 'type of compensation' includes, but is not limited to, future medicals, economic damages, pain and suffering, and other noneconomic damages; however, no specific monetary amounts for such damages may be recommended.
(D) All members of the panel shall sign the opinion and have the right to attach a separate concurring opinion or a dissenting opinion. The Medical Claims Review Office shall serve the panel's opinion by certified mail, return receipt requested on the claimant, the named healthcare provider, the healthcare provider's insurance carrier, and the licensing board or licensing entity for the healthcare provider. If multiple healthcare providers are combined for review, the office shall remove any identifying information not related to the recipient of the opinion before serving the opinion pursuant to this section.
(E) There is no review or appeal of the panel's opinion.
Section 15-80-250. Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 15-80-210, if an opinion is not served on the claimant by registered mail, return receipt requested within one hundred twenty days from the date the claim for damages was served on the healthcare provider pursuant to Section 15-80-220(B) and the parties have not agreed in writing to an extension, the panel has no further jurisdiction over the matter, and the claimant is considered to have complied with the provisions of this chapter. The claimant is no longer prohibited from filing an action, and the statute of limitations begins to run on the one hundred and twenty-first day.
Section 15-80-260. Within one hundred and eighty days of receiving an opinion from the Medical Claims Review Office pursuant to Section 15-80-240(D), the licensing board or licensing entity shall submit an interim report to the Claims Review Office and to the Department of Insurance stating any action the board or entity has taken in connection with a licensee who was a healthcare provider named in a claim for damages. No later than one year from receipt of the opinion, the board or entity shall submit a final report to the Claims Review Office and to the department stating the final disposition of the matter. Information provided by a licensing board or licensing entity pursuant to this section retains the same manner of confidentiality, if any, assigned to such information by the board or entity.
Section 15-80-270. (A) The Medical Claims Review Office shall maintain records of all proceedings, including a brief summary of each claim for damages submitted and the opinion of the panel on each claim.
(B) If the claimant files an action for damages based upon the conduct complained of in the claim for damages, the opinion of the Medical Claims Review Panel must be included in the pre-trial briefs required pursuant to South Carolina Rules of Civil Procedure.
(C) The proceedings of the review panel and any documents, reports and opinions of the review panels and of the claims review office are:
(1) privileged and not subject to discovery and are not admissible as evidence in a medical malpractice action pertaining to this matter;
(2) not subject to disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act.
Section 15-80-280. The Medical Claims Review Office and healthcare providers who serve on review panels convened by this office are immune from civil liability for all communications, findings, opinions, and conclusions made in the course and scope of their duties as prescribed by this chapter.
Section 15-80-290. (A) Revenue to fund the Medical Claims Review Office must be generated from fees assessed in accordance with this section.
(B) Annually the Department of Insurance shall determine what percentage of the Medical Claims Review Office budget is attributable to each health care profession based upon the staffing time and resources utilized by each. The department shall calculate the budget amount attributable to each healthcare licensing profession and submit this information annually to the Department of Labor, Licensing and Regulation which shall direct the licensing board of each profession to assess its licensees the budget amount attributable to that profession.
Section 15-80-310. (A) Upon receipt of a claim for damages from a healthcare provider pursuant to Section 15-80-210(D)(1), the healthcare provider's insurance carrier shall commence a full evaluation of the potential liability of each healthcare provider named in the claim and must be fair and diligent in evaluating and adjusting the claim. In evaluating these claims the carrier may utilize such information as it obtains including, but not limited to, the opinion of the Medical Claims Review Office provided pursuant to Section 15-80-240(D) and medical experts. When using medical experts, the carrier is encouraged to use experts licensed in this State.
Section 15-80-320. (A) The insurance carrier has one hundred and eighty days from the date the claim is submitted to the healthcare provider pursuant to Section 15-80-210(B) or sixty days after the Medical Claims Review Office has served an opinion on the claimant pursuant to Section 15-80-240(D), whichever occurs first, to make a final disposition of the claim by adjusting, compromising, settling, or rejecting the claim and submitting the final disposition to the healthcare provider, the Medical Claims Review Office, and the claimant by certified mail, return receipt requested.
(B) If the carrier fails to comply with this section, the Department of Insurance may impose sanctions upon the carrier as provided for in regulation.
Section 15-80-330. Upon concluding its evaluation and final disposition of the claim, the insurance carrier shall prepare a written report of its findings. This report and any other record, report, information, or documentation, relied upon by the insurance carrier in evaluating, adjusting, or disposing of the claim or in preparing its report, including information or any report provided to the carrier by an expert, are:
(1) privileged, not subject to discovery, and are not admissible as evidence in a medical malpractice action pertaining to this matter;
(2) not subject to disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act.
Section 15-80-340. If the claimant files an action for damages based upon the conduct complained of in the claim for damages, the insurance carrier must provide to the claimant a copy of the report prepared pursuant to Section 15-80-330, and the report and final offers of settlement made by all parties to the action must be included in the pre-trial briefs required pursuant to South Carolina Rules of Civil Procedure.
Section 15-80-410.(A) The Division of Health and Demographics in the Office of Research and Statistics, Budget and Control Board, in consultation with the Department of Insurance and the South Carolina Board of Medical Examiners, shall develop procedures for providing information to the:
(1) Board of Medical Examiners that identifies healthcare providers and their outcome data; and
(2) Department of Insurance and the Department of Health and Environmental Control that identifies hospitals and their outcome data;
(3) Public in a manner that is readily available and understandable that contains:
(a) nonidentifying healthcare provider outcome data;
(b) identifying hospital outcome data.
(B) Information provided pursuant to subsections (A) is:
(1) privileged, not subject to discovery, and not admissible as evidence in a medical malpractice action pertaining to this matter;
(2) not subject to disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act.
Section 15-80-510. At anytime before a medical malpractice action is brought to trial, including prior to the filing of such an action, the parties shall participate in mediation pursuant to procedures established in the South Carolina Court Circuit Court Alternative Dispute Resolution Rules in effect at the time for the State or any portion of the State. Parties may also agree to participate in binding arbitration.
Section 15-80-610. If a judge finds that an expert healthcare provider in a medical malpractice action in this State may have engaged in any unjustifiable conduct in connection with testifying as an expert in deposition or at trial, the judge shall report the expert to the state entity that licenses and regulates the profession of the expert or the type of healthcare entity represented by the expert. The state entity is authorized to investigate the reported conduct, hold hearings, and impose sanctions. By testifying as an expert in deposition or at trial an expert is deemed to have submitted to the jurisdiction of the state entity."
Section 15-80-710. (A) Compensation for pain and suffering may be awarded in a medical malpractice action in an amount not to exceed three hundred thousand dollars for each plaintiff, except as provided for in subsection (B). The jury shall determine and state the amount for pain and suffering separately from amounts for other damages. Such an award is the total compensation allowed for actual physical pain inflicted and for any continued physical suffering that results from the infliction of that pain. An award for pain and suffering does not include compensation for:
(1) permanent disability;
(2) disfigurement or scarring;
(3) paralysis;
(4) loss of limb or any organ.
(B) At the end of each calendar year, the State Budget and Control Board, Board of Economic Advisors shall determine the increase or decrease in the ratio of the Consumer Price Index to the index as of the prior December 31, and the limitation on compensation for pain and suffering pursuant to subsection (A) must be increased or decreased accordingly. As soon as practicable after this adjustment is calculated, the Director of the Budget and Control Board shall submit the revised limitation on compensation to The State Register for publication pursuant to Section 1-23-40(2), and the revised limitation becomes effective upon publication of The State Register. For purposes of this subsection, 'Consumer Price Index' means the Consumer Price Index for Wage Earners and Clerical Workers as published by the United States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics.
(C) This section must not be construed to effect the limitations on damages established in the South Carolina Torts Claims Act.
Section 15-80-810. In an action to recover damages for personal injury or wrongful death resulting from alleged medical malpractice, the liability of each defendant for damages is not joint but is several only, based directly upon each defendant's percentage of fault, except as provided for in Section 15-80-820. Each defendant is liable only for the amount of damages allocated to that defendant in direct proportion to that defendant's percentage of fault, and a separate judgment must be rendered against the defendant for that amount. To determine the amount of judgment to be entered against each defendant, the jury, or the court in the absence of a jury, shall specify the percentage of fault attributable to each defendant, including persons who have settled or have been released. The court, with regard to each defendant, shall multiply the total amount of damages recoverable by the plaintiff by the percentage of each defendant's fault, and the amount calculated for each defendant is the maximum recoverable against that defendant, except as provided for in Section 15-80-820.
Section 15-80-820. (A) One year, but not later than two years, after judgment in a medical malpractice action becomes final through lapse of time or through exhaustion of appeal, whichever occurs later, a plaintiff who, through good faith efforts, has been unable to collect from a defendant against whom recovery was awarded may move to open the judgment filed and request that the uncollectible amount be reallocated among the other defendants. If the court finds that all or part of a defendant's share, as established pursuant to Section 15-80-810, of the recoverable damages is not collectible from that defendant, the court shall reallocate the uncollectible amount among the other defendants in accordance with provisions of this section.
(B)(1) The court shall order that the portion of the uncollectable amount which represents recoverable damages be reallocated among the other defendants according to their percentages of fault. The court shall reallocate to any such other defendant an amount equal to the uncollectible amount of recoverable damages multiplied by a fraction in which the numerator is such defendant's percentage of negligence and the denominator is the total of the percentages of negligence of all defendants, excluding any defendant whose liability is being reallocated.
(2) A defendant whose liability is reallocated is nonetheless subject to contribution pursuant to subsection (B)(3) and to any continuing liability to the claimant on the judgment.
(3) A right of contribution exists in parties who, pursuant to this section, are required to pay more than their share of a judgment, as established pursuant to Section 15-80-810. An action for contribution pursuant to this subsection must be brought within one year after the party seeking contribution has made the final payment in excess of that party's share of the judgment.
Section 15-80-830. (A) In a medical malpractice action where comparative fault is or becomes an issue, if a defendant named in an original complaint initiating a suit filed within the applicable statute of limitations, or named in an amended complaint filed within the applicable statute of limitations, alleges in an answer or amended answer to the original or amended complaint that a person not a party to the suit caused or contributed to the injury or damage for which the plaintiff seeks recovery, and if the plaintiff's cause or causes of action against such person would be barred by any applicable statute of limitations but for the operation of this section, the plaintiff may, within ninety days of the filing of the first answer or first amended answer alleging such person's fault, either:
(1) amend the complaint to add such person as a defendant pursuant to South Carolina Rules of Civil Procedure and effect service of process on that person; or
(2) institute a separate action against that person by filing a summons and complaint. If the plaintiff elects to proceed under this item by filing a separate action, the complaint so filed must not be considered an "original complaint initiating the suit" or "an amended complaint" for purposes of this subsection.
(B) A cause of action brought pursuant to subsection (A) must not be barred by any statute of limitations.
(C) This section does not shorten nor lengthen the applicable statute of limitations for any cause of action, other than as provided in subsection (A).
(D) This section does not limit the right of any defendant to allege in an answer or amended answer that a person not a party to the suit caused or contributed to the injury for which the plaintiff seeks recovery.
(E) For purposes of this section, "person" means any individual or legal entity.
(F) Notwithstanding any provision of law to the contrary, this section applies to suits involving governmental entities."
SECTION 2. Chapter 47, Title 40 of the 1976 Code is amended by adding:
"Section 40-47-290. The South Carolina Board of Medical Examiners shall establish licensure fees, and other fees that the board is authorized to impose, sufficient to generate revenue enabling the board to perform its duties and enhance its capabilities pursuant to its responsibilities under this chapter including, but not limited to, increasing investigative staff and conducting inquiries which result from opinions provided to the board by the Medical Claims Review Office pursuant to Section 15-80-240(D)."
SECTION 3. Chapter 79, Title 38 of the 1976 Code is amended by adding:
"Section 38-79-40. (A) An insurer issuing a policy of healthcare provider medical malpractice insurance shall offer, as a part of the policy or as an optional endorsement to the policy, deductibles and policy limits optional to the policyholder. Deductible amounts and policy limits offered must be disclosed fully to the prospective policyholder in writing in an amount to be established by the Department of Insurance in regulation for each compensable claim. The policyholder exercising the deductible or policy limits options, or both, shall choose only one deductible amount and one policy limit.
(B)(1) If the policyholder exercises the option and chooses:
(a) a deductible, the insured healthcare provider is liable for the amount of the deductible for benefits paid for each compensable claim of medical malpractice;
(b) a policy limit, the insured healthcare provider is liable for the amount awarded in excess of the policy limits for each compensable claim of medical malpractice.
(2) The insurer shall pay all or part of the deductible amount to the claimant entitled to the benefits and then seek reimbursement from the insured healthcare provider for the amount of the deductible paid. The payment or nonpayment of deductible by the insured healthcare provider to the insurer must be treated under the policy insuring the liability for medical malpractice in the same manner as payment or nonpayment of premiums.
(3) The insurer shall only pay that amount awarded to the claimant within the policy limits, and the insured healthcare provider shall pay any amount in excess of the policy limits.
(C) Optional deductibles and policy limits must be offered in each policy insuring liability for healthcare providers which is issued, delivered, issued for delivery, or renewed after June 30, 2004, unless an insured and insurer agree to renegotiate a medical malpractice insurance policy in effect on July 1, 2004, so as to include a provision allowing for a deductible and policy limits.
(D) Premium reduction for deductibles and policy limits must be determined before the application of any experience modification, premium surcharge, or premium discounts. To the extent that a healthcare provider's experience rating is based on benefits paid, money paid by the insured under a deductible as provided in this section must not be included as benefits paid so as to harm the experience rating of the insured.
(E) This section does not apply to healthcare providers who are approved to self-insure against liability for medical malpractice or group self-insurance funds for medical malpractice established pursuant to the laws of this State."
SECTION 4. Section 38-79-150 of the 1976 Code is amended to read:
"Section 38-79-150. Any licensed health care provider in a category in which the department has declared an emergency exists is entitled to apply to the association for coverage. The application may be made on behalf of by the applicant by a licensed agent or broker authorized in writing by the applicant. If the association determines that the applicant meets the underwriting standards of the association as set forth in the approved plan of operation and there is no unpaid, uncontested premium due from the applicant for any prior insurance of the same kind, the association, upon receipt of the premium, or a portion thereof as prescribed by the plan of operation, shall cause to be issued a policy of medical malpractice liability insurance for a term of one year. The amount charged for the policy must include only the premium amount required for coverage and must not include any fee, commission, or surcharge.
The rates, rating plans, rating rules, rating classifications, territories, and policy forms applicable to insurance written by the association and the statistical and experience data relating thereto are subject to this article and to those provisions of Chapter 73 of this title which are not inconsistent with the purposes and provisions of this article."
SECTION 5. Article 1, Chapter 79, Title 38 is amended by adding:
"Section 38-79-40. A person serving on the Board of the Joint Underwriting Association or the Board of Governors of the Patients' Compensation Fund is prohibited from being employed in any manner or compensated by the Joint Underwriting Association or the Patients' Compensation Fund, and this prohibition continues for one year after the person ceases to be a member of the board."
SECTION 6. Section 15-36-10 of the 1976 Code is amended to read:
"Section 15-36-10. Any person who takes part in the procurement, initiation, continuation, or defense of any civil proceeding is subject to being assessed for payment of all or a portion of the attorney's fees and court costs of the other party if:
(1) he does so primarily for a purpose other than that of securing the proper discovery, joinder of parties, or adjudication of the claim upon which the proceedings are based; and
(2) the proceedings have terminated in favor of the person seeking an assessment of the fees and costs.
As used in this chapter, "person" is defined to mean any individual, corporation, company, association, firm, partnership, society, joint stock company, and any other entity, including any governmental entity or unincorporated association of persons.
(A)(1) Every document filed in a civil or administrative action on behalf of a party who is represented by an attorney must be signed by at least one attorney of record who is an active member of the South Carolina Bar and must include the address and telephone number of the attorney signing the document. Every document filed in a civil or administrative action by a party who is not represented by an attorney must be signed by the party and must include the party's address and telephone number.
(2) The signature of an attorney or a party constitutes a certificate to the court that the person:
(a) has read the document;
(b) that to the best of his knowledge, information, and belief there is good ground to support it; and
(c) that it is not frivolous, interposed for delay, or brought for any purpose other than securing proper discovery, joinder of parties, or adjudication of the claim upon which the proceedings are based.
(3) If a document is not signed or does not comply with this section, it must be stricken unless it is signed promptly after the omission is called to the attention of the attorney or the party. If a document is signed in violation of this section, the court, upon its own motion or the motion of a party or, or by petition in collateral proceedings, may impose an appropriate sanction upon the person who signed it.
(B)(1) A participant to a civil or administrative action may be sanctioned for filing a frivolous pleading, motion, or document, for making a frivolous argument, or for filing a pleading, motion, or other document in bad faith whether or not there is good ground to support it.
(2) Sanctions may include:
(a) an order to pay the reasonable costs and attorney's fees incurred by the party or parties defending against a frivolous pleading, motion, or document filed, a frivolous argument made, or a pleading, motion, or document filed in bad faith;
(b) a reasonable fine to be paid to the court;
(c) a directive of a nonmonetary nature designed to deter the person from engaging in future frivolous actions or actions made in bad faith; or
(d) an order for payment of a reasonable monetary penalty to the party or parties defending against a frivolous pleading, motion, or document filed, a frivolous argument made, or a pleading, motion, or document filed in bad faith.
(C) A person is entitled to notice and an opportunity to respond prior to the imposition of sanctions under this section. A court imposing sanctions under this section shall describe in its order the conduct determined to constitute a violation of this section, explain the basis for the sanction imposed, and enter judgment accordingly.
(D) The provisions of this section apply in addition to all other remedies available at law or in equity."
SECTION 7. Section 38-79-460 of the 1976 Code is amended to read:
"Section 38-79-460. The fund, and any income from it, must be held in trust, deposited in the office of the State Treasurer and kept in a segregated account entitled "Patients' Compensation Fund", invested and reinvested by the State Treasurer in the same manner as provided by law for the investment of other state funds in interest-bearing investments and may not become a part of the general fund of the State. All expenses of collecting, protecting, and administering the Fund must be paid from the Fund managed by the board according to its plan of operation developed pursuant to Section 38-79-430."
SECTION 8. Section 38-79-470(1) of the 1976 Code is amended to read:
"(1) Monies may be withdrawn from the fund only upon the signature of the chairman of the Board of Governors or his designee upon written warrants of the Comptroller General, drawn on the State Treasurer to the payee designated in the requisition."
SECTION 9. As of this act's effective date, the State Treasurer shall relinquish the management of funds in the Patient's Compensation Fund, created pursuant to Section 38-79-420 of the 1976 Code, to the Board of Governor's of the fund, and premiums paid on or after this act's effective date must be deposited with the Board of Governors of the fund. The fund must be fully transferred to the Board of Governors, and the State Treasurer may not hold any deposits of the fund as of ninety days after this act's effective date.
SECTION 10. Sections 15-36-20 through 15-36-50 of the 1976 Code are repealed.
SECTION 11. This act takes effect six months after approval by the Governor and applies to medical malpractice actions, as defined in Section 15-80-20, as added by Section 1 of this act, that are filed on or after this act's effective date./
Renumber sections to conform.
Amend title to conform.
Rep. HARRISON explained the amendment.
Rep. JENNINGS spoke in favor of the amendment.
The question then recurred to the adoption of the amendment.
Rep. RUTHERFORD demanded the yeas and nays which were taken, resulting as follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Anthony Bailey Bales Barfield Battle Bingham Bowers Branham Cato Ceips Chellis Clark Clemmons Cooper Cotty Dantzler Davenport Delleney Duncan Edge Emory Freeman Frye Gilham Hagood Hamilton Harrell Harrison Hayes Herbkersman M. Hines Hinson Huggins Keegan Kirsh Koon Leach Limehouse Littlejohn Loftis Lourie Lucas Mahaffey McCraw McGee McLeod Merrill Miller J. M. Neal Neilson Ott Owens Phillips Pinson E. H. Pitts M. A. Pitts Quinn Rhoad Rice Richardson Sandifer Scarborough Sheheen Simrill Sinclair Skelton D. C. Smith G. M. Smith G. R. Smith J. R. Smith W. D. Smith Stewart Stille Talley Taylor Thompson Toole Townsend Tripp Umphlett Vaughn Viers Walker White Whitmire Wilkins Witherspoon Young
Those who voted in the negative are:
Allen Altman Breeland G. Brown J. Brown R. Brown Clyburn Cobb-Hunter Gourdine Govan J. Hines Hosey Howard Jennings Kennedy Mack Moody-Lawrence Parks Perry Rivers Rutherford Scott F. N. Smith Snow Weeks Whipper
So, the amendment was adopted.
Rep. SHEHEEN proposed the following Amendment No. 2 (Doc Name COUNCIL\NBD\12096AC04), which was adopted:
Amend the bill, as and if amended, by deleting Section 15-80-810 and inserting:
/ Section 15-80-810. In an action to recover damages for personal injury or wrongful death resulting from alleged medical malpractice, the liability of each defendant is based on percentage of fault, except as provided for in Section 15-80-820. Each defendant is liable only for the amount of damages allocated to that defendant in direct proportion to that defendant's percentage of fault, and a separate judgment must be rendered against the defendant for that amount. To determine the amount of judgment to be entered against each defendant, the jury, or the court in the absence of a jury, shall specify the percentage of fault attributable to each defendant, including persons who have settled or have been released. The court, with regard to each defendant, shall multiply the total amount of damages recoverable by the plaintiff by the percentage of each defendant's fault, and the amount calculated for each defendant is the maximum recoverable against that defendant, except as provided for in Section 15-80-820./
Renumber sections to conform.
Amend title to conform.
Rep. SHEHEEN explained the amendment.
The amendment was then adopted.
Rep. HARRISON proposed the following Amendment No. 3 (Doc Name COUNCIL\NBD\12092AC04), which was adopted:
Amend the bill, as and if amended, by deleting SECTION 4 of the bill in its entirety.
Renumber sections to conform.
Amend title to conform.
Rep. HARRISON explained the amendment.
The amendment was then adopted.
Rep. G. M. SMITH proposed the following Amendment No. 4 (Doc Name COUNCIL\NBD\12076AC04), which was adopted:
Amend the bill, as and if amended, Section 38-79-40, page 4464-14, immediately after line 7 by inserting:
/No provision of this section may be construed to prohibit an insurance agent from selling insurance products to the association./
Renumber sections to conform.
Amend title to conform.
Rep. G. M. SMITH explained the amendment.
The amendment was then adopted.
Rep. HARRISON proposed the following Amendment No. 5 (Doc Name COUNCIL\NBD\12093AC04), which was adopted:
Amend the bill, as and if amended, page 4464-2 immediately after line 15 by inserting:
/SECTION 15-80-40. The provisions of this chapter do not affect any right, privilege, or provision of the South Carolina Tort Claims Act, as provided for in Chapter 78, Title 15 of the 1976 Code./
Renumber sections to conform.
Amend title to conform.
Rep. HARRISON explained the amendment.
The amendment was then adopted.
Pursuant to Rule 7.7 the Yeas and Nays were taken resulting as follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Anthony Bailey Bales Barfield Battle Bingham Bowers Branham Cato Ceips Chellis Clark Clemmons Cooper Cotty Dantzler Davenport Delleney Duncan Edge Emory Freeman Frye Gilham Hagood Hamilton Harrell Harrison Haskins Hayes Herbkersman Hinson Huggins Keegan Kirsh Koon Leach Limehouse Littlejohn Loftis Lourie Lucas Mahaffey McCraw McGee McLeod Merrill Miller J. M. Neal Neilson Ott Owens Parks Perry Phillips Pinson E. H. Pitts M. A. Pitts Quinn Rhoad Rice Richardson Sandifer Scarborough Sheheen Simrill Sinclair Skelton D. C. Smith G. M. Smith G. R. Smith J. R. Smith W. D. Smith Stewart Stille Talley Taylor Thompson Toole Townsend Tripp Trotter Umphlett Vaughn Viers Walker White Whitmire Wilkins Witherspoon Young
Those who voted in the negative are:
Allen Altman Breeland G. Brown J. Brown R. Brown Clyburn Gourdine Govan J. Hines M. Hines Hosey Howard Jennings Kennedy Lee Lloyd Mack Moody-Lawrence Rivers Rutherford Scott F. N. Smith Snow Weeks
So, the Bill, as amended, was read the second time and ordered to third reading.
Rep. COOPER moved that the House recur to the Morning Hour, which was agreed to.
The following was introduced:
H. 4585 (Word version) -- Reps. Richardson, Scott, Govan, Emory, Kirsh, McCraw, Moody-Lawrence, Simrill, Allen, Altman, Anthony, Bailey, Bales, Barfield, Battle, Bingham, Bowers, Branham, Breeland, G. Brown, J. Brown, R. Brown, Cato, Ceips, Chellis, Clark, Clemmons, Clyburn, Coates, Cobb-Hunter, Coleman, Cooper, Cotty, Dantzler, Davenport, Delleney, Duncan, Edge, Freeman, Frye, Gilham, Gourdine, Hagood, Hamilton, Harrell, Harrison, Harvin, Haskins, Hayes, Herbkersman, J. Hines, M. Hines, Hinson, Hosey, Howard, Huggins, Jennings, Keegan, Kennedy, Koon, Leach, Lee, Limehouse, Littlejohn, Lloyd, Loftis, Lourie, Lucas, Mack, Mahaffey, Martin, McGee, McLeod, Merrill, Miller, J. H. Neal, J. M. Neal, Neilson, Ott, Owens, Parks, Perry, Phillips, Pinson, E. H. Pitts, M. A. Pitts, Quinn, Rhoad, Rice, Rivers, Rutherford, Sandifer, Scarborough, Sheheen, Sinclair, Skelton, D. C. Smith, F. N. Smith, G. M. Smith, G. R. Smith, J. E. Smith, J. R. Smith, W. D. Smith, Snow, Stewart, Stille, Talley, Taylor, Thompson, Toole, Townsend, Tripp, Trotter, Umphlett, Vaughn, Viers, Walker, Weeks, Whipper, White, Whitmire, Wilkins, Witherspoon and Young: A HOUSE RESOLUTION CONGRATULATING THE CINDERELLA CAROLINA PANTHERS ON THEIR 14-3 NFC TITLE WIN OVER THE HEAVILY FAVORED PHILADELPHIA EAGLES AND PLEDGING THEM THE STEADFAST SUPPORT OF THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA AS THEY FACE THE NEW ENGLAND PATRIOTS IN SUPER BOWL XXXVIII.
The Resolution was adopted.
The following was introduced:
H. 4586 (Word version) -- Reps. M. A. Pitts, Duncan, Merrill, Parks, Pinson and Taylor: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION TO REQUEST THE BOARD OF THE DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES TO NAME THE LAW ENFORCEMENT STAGING AREA LOCATED ON LAKE GREENWOOD IN LAURENS COUNTY AS THE "DR. JULIUS L. LEARY, JR., LAW ENFORCEMENT STAGING AREA" IN HONOR OF THIS DISTINGUISHED SOUTH CAROLINIAN.
The Concurrent Resolution was ordered referred to the Committee on Invitations and Memorial Resolutions.
The following Bills were introduced, read the first time, and referred to appropriate committees:
H. 4587 (Word version) -- Reps. Young, Chellis, Bailey and Townsend: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 56-5-1520, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO SPEED LIMITS ALONG THE STATE'S HIGHWAYS, SO AS TO REVISE THE PROCEDURE WHEREBY A LOCAL AUTHORITY MAY ESTABLISH A MAXIMUM SPEED LIMIT, TO PROVIDE THAT THIS PROVISION IS LIMITED TO THE ESTABLISHMENT OF SPEED LIMITS ALONG LOCALLY MAINTAINED ROADS, AND TO DELETE THE PROVISION THAT ALLOWS A LOCAL AUTHORITY TO ESTABLISH A SPEED LIMIT OF LESS THAN THIRTY MILES AN HOUR IN AN URBAN DISTRICT.
Referred to Committee on Judiciary
H. 4589 (Word version) -- Reps. Cato, Sandifer, Lee, Anthony, Bailey, Battle, G. Brown, Ceips, Clemmons, Cooper, Duncan, Edge, Hamilton, Harrison, Hayes, Huggins, Jennings, Limehouse, Loftis, Martin, McCraw, Perry, Scarborough, W. D. Smith, Talley, Thompson, Townsend, Tripp, Trotter, Viers, Walker, White and Wilkins: A BILL TO AMEND CHAPTER 5, TITLE 58, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING ARTICLE 4 SO AS TO PROVIDE FOR A PROCEDURE FOR THE ADJUSTMENT OF RATES AND CHARGES OF NATURAL GAS DISTRIBUTION UTILITIES TO REFLECT CHANGES IN EXPENSES, REVENUES, INVESTMENTS, DEPRECIATION, AND OTHER CHANGES IN REVENUES AND EXPENSES TO PROVIDE PROCEDURES FOR INTERESTED PARTIES TO CHALLENGE THESE ADJUSTMENTS, AND TO PROVIDE FOR RELATED PROCEDURAL MATTERS.
Referred to Committee on Labor, Commerce and Industry
H. 4590 (Word version) -- Reps. Bailey, Breeland, J. Brown, Ceips, Chellis, Clark, Clemmons, Cobb-Hunter, Dantzler, Delleney, Gourdine, Harvin, Herbkersman, Hinson, Kennedy, Kirsh, Mahaffey, Merrill, J. H. Neal, Ott, Perry, Phillips, M. A. Pitts, Rhoad, Scott and Umphlett: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 12-36-2120, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO SALES TAX EXEMPTIONS GENERALLY, INCLUDING THE EXEMPTION FOR THE SALE OF PRESCRIPTION MEDICINES USED IN THE TREATMENT OF CANCER AND RELATED DISEASES, SO AS TO EXTEND THIS EXEMPTION TO THE SALE OF PRESCRIPTION MEDICINES USED IN THE TREATMENT OF RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS.
Referred to Committee on Ways and Means
H. 4591 (Word version) -- Rep. Bailey: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 50-11-565, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE USE OF CROSSBOWS WHILE HUNTING BY DISABLED PERSONS, SO AS TO PERMIT THE STATEMENT OF DISABILITY TO BE CERTIFIED BY A RHEUMATOLOGIST AS WELL AS A NEUROLOGIST OR ORTHOPEDIST.
Referred to Committee on Agriculture, Natural Resources and Environmental Affairs
The following was introduced:
H. 4588 (Word version) -- Reps. Freeman, Lucas, Anthony, Hayes, Jennings and Neilson: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION TO EXTEND THE CONGRATULATIONS OF THE MEMBERS OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY TO THE MEMBERS OF THE 2003 CENTRAL HIGH SCHOOL "EAGLES" FOOTBALL TEAM AND HEAD COACH JOEY MANGUM AND HIS STAFF FOR THEIR OUTSTANDING STATE CHAMPIONSHIP WIN IN THE CLASS AA STATE FOOTBALL CHAMPIONSHIP COMPETITION.
The Concurrent Resolution was agreed to and ordered sent to the Senate.
On motion of Rep. FREEMAN, with unanimous consent, the following was taken up for immediate consideration:
H. 4592 (Word version) -- Rep. Freeman: A HOUSE RESOLUTION TO EXTEND THE PRIVILEGE OF THE FLOOR OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OF THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA TO THE CENTRAL HIGH SCHOOL "EAGLES" 2003 FOOTBALL TEAM AND THEIR COACHING STAFF AT A DATE AND TIME TO BE DETERMINED BY THE SPEAKER, TO EXTEND THEIR CONGRATULATIONS TO THE MEMBERS OF THE 2003 CENTRAL HIGH SCHOOL "EAGLES" FOOTBALL TEAM AND COACHING STAFF FOR THEIR OUTSTANDING STATE CHAMPIONSHIP WIN IN THE CLASS AA STATE FOOTBALL CHAMPIONSHIP COMPETITION.
Be it resolved by the House of Representatives:
That the members of the House of Representatives of the State of South Carolina, by this resolution, extend the privilege of the floor to the Central High School "Eagles" 2003 Football Team and their coaching staff at a date and time to be determined by the Speaker and congratulate them on their State Championship win in the Class AA State Football Championship Competition.
The Resolution was adopted.
On motion of Rep. HARRELL, with unanimous consent, the following Bill was ordered recalled from the Committee on Ways and Means and was referred to the Committee on Labor, Commerce and Industry:
H. 4509 (Word version) -- Rep. Leach: A BILL TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING SECTION 8-11-81 SO AS TO AUTHORIZE THE COMPTROLLER GENERAL TO PAY A PREMIUM FOR THE PREPAID LEGAL INSURANCE OF A STATE EMPLOYEE BY MEANS OF PAYROLL DEDUCTION AND TO PROVIDE THE CONDITIONS APPLICABLE WITH RESPECT TO THE PAYROLL DEDUCTION.
Rep. HARRELL moved that the House recede until 6:45 p.m., which was agreed to.
At 6:45 p.m. the House resumed, the SPEAKER in the Chair.
The House stood at ease, subject to the call of the Chair.
At 6:55 p.m. the House resumed, the SPEAKER in the Chair.
At 7:00 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. 4497 (Word version) -- Reps. Wilkins, W. D. Smith, Harrison, Harrell, J. Brown, Cato, Witherspoon, Townsend and Chellis: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION INVITING HIS EXCELLENCY, MARSHALL CLEMENT (MARK) SANFORD, JR., GOVERNOR OF THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA, TO ADDRESS THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY IN A JOINT SESSION AT 7:00 P.M. ON WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 21, 2004, IN THE CHAMBER OF THE SOUTH CAROLINA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
Governor Marshall C. Sanford, Jr. and distinguished party were escorted to the rostrum by Senators McConnell, Courson, Reese, Alexander and Malloy and Representatives HASKINS, HOWARD, SCARBOROUGH, KIRSH and PERRY. The President of the Senate introduced Governor Sanford who then addressed the Joint Assembly as follows:
Mr. Speaker, Mr. President, Ladies and Gentlemen of the General Assembly, Constitutional Officers, and my fellow South Carolinians:
It's a real honor for me to be with you tonight to deliver my view on the State of our State.
Last year I said from this podium that I wished that I could say that the State of South Carolina's economy was strong but that Dickie Moorehead, working construction in the UpState, knew better.
I said last year I wished I was assuming leadership of a state whose budget was sound - but everyone in this Chamber knew it was not. We begin this year with a $350 million shortfall.
I said last year that I wished that I could tell you that our education system was second to none - but that too many children graduate without skills essential to success in the 21st century.
But I also said that despite these challenges if we addressed them properly, we had a great opportunity because we could move South Carolina forward.
I am here to report to you, and I am pleased and encouraged to say, that we have begun that process.
My dad used to say that Rome wasn't built in a day, and we have clearly many, many miles to go - but I believe that we've begun that process.
I'd like to start off tonight by walking through a few of the things I talked about in last year's State of the State and a few of the things that have happened and the result of your hard work in the House and Senate - then I'd like to move from the past to present challenges and future goals.
In last year's State of the State, I focused not on more money for programs, because we didn't have the money, but on root causes that I thought boiled down to five things.
I. Did you have a voice in government and is government accountable?
II. The economy and the need for wealth creation
III. Government's structure
IV. Education
V. Quality of life
Those five root causes are things that I plan to talk about not just in the first or second year in office, but every year in office. And while certainly in many cases, more money would have helped with any one of those programs once again; it is not realistic in this budget year. So one of our best shots at raising income levels here in South Carolina lies in government using new tools and new approaches, and that's what I find so encouraging and exciting about what I believe has begun over this last year.
I. Do you have a voice in government and is government accountable?
I think that the largest single accomplishment of this administration lies in the way that we have asked that question.
Too many people, because they were white and poor, black and rich, or just plain had something else on their minds other than politics, have felt that they had no voice in government. And because their voice wasn't heard government wasn't as accountable as it could have been. In concrete ways we have tried to change this.
We have as well respectfully tried to challenge the way that things have been done in the past because for change to occur you have to change attitude first. The Super Bowl will soon be upon us, but what's interesting are in fact the games leading up to the Super Bowl and the way that literally attitudes have changed results. Two years ago the Panthers went 1-15, so along with players and practices there was this belief that things could be different. They believed that they could win before they did win. Brett Favre, quarterback for Green Bay played the game of his life the day after his father died because he believed it was a way of honoring his father. John F. Kennedy said in 1961 we are going to send a man to the moon and back, the only problem was that at the time he issued that national challenge half the technology to make it happen didn't exist. He made us as a nation, and the NASA team responsible, challenge assumptions that brought about a history making success.
In this vein, what is the Promised Land for all of us as South Carolinians? What represents our trip to the moon and back? I bet we could agree it's a place in our future where better education, better economic opportunities and better quality of life exist for everyone of us.
I'm not so foolish as to believe that everyone will want to take my road map to getting there - or that there isn't great value to debating how we do get there. I just know that we have to change to prosper. It's what I believe, what thousands of South Carolinians have told me over the last couple years, and what Michael Porter and the Monitor Group focused on in their in-depth review of our State.
So every time we have tried to ask the simple question "why," or challenged conventional wisdom or look at a new ways of doing things, it has all been part of an effort to move us forward, to make us a little bit more responsive and just a little bit more accountable as a government.
Let me give you just a couple of things tied to this central theme of accountability and doing things differently that have happened this year. I said in last year's State of the State that I believed in the concept of servant leadership. Too many people in government seem to think they are above regular folks, and I would expect humility in the way that my team served - that they would recognize that the taxpayer was boss.
While I could cite many examples, I don't think there is a better example of how this administration has tried to hit that mark than with Judge Byars, my Cabinet appointee to Juvenile Justice. In fact Judge would you mind standing. Interesting about the judge is that for 13 years the court system said that the State of South Carolina wasn't accountable, and as a consequence it took over the juvenile justice system and essentially ran it. That changed this last year because of a lot of hard work by folks in that agency that was complemented by a man at the top who was smart and competent but who above all else had a servant's heart in the way he did things. Judge, thank you for what you are doing and for the way you have upheld that marker that we laid out last year.
I said last year that each of us in this Chamber are stewards, literally the divide between taxpayers and tax spenders, and that this administration's goal was to help each of you in strengthening that trust. For that reason I said we would, and we did sign an executive order directing my agencies to end the long standing practice of stonewalling the legislature as you do your job of gathering information.
I asked you to send me a campaign finance reform bill that had been vetoed in the past and was gathering dust in Columbia. You sent it, I signed it and every one of you should be proud of the work that Speaker David Wilkins, Wes Hayes, Doug Smith, and Tommy Moore put into making that Bill a reality.
Just as we needed disclosure of campaign finances, we needed to end the long standing practice of basically hiding expenditures at the Department of Commerce. Our simple belief was that expenditures no matter where they are in government, should be disclosed. Jakie Knotts worked hard on that Bill, and I want to thank all of you for passing that Bill as well.
I mentioned last year that South Carolina State government spent $1.9 million lobbying itself. Government agencies going out and contracting with lobbyists to lobby for yet more taxpayer money, from my perspective creates an unacceptable cycle that fuels the upward growth of money. We began the process of changing that - when I signed an executive order last year that ended agency lobbying for all my cabinet. I'd still ask that you to go one step further and pass Jim Merrill's bill that would extend that moratorium to all of State government. Jim, thank you for your work on that.
I also said last year, that too many people had to travel to the Statehouse complex to be heard and that I wanted to begin the process to change that. We did two things in the Governor's Office that I think made me a more accountable governor. First we held neighborhood office hours in people's home towns, at places like Agri Supply in Florence or the Wal-Mart in Anderson - and I learned a lot.
Probably the spot I learned the most fell on the first Wednesday night of every month when we held "Open Door After 4" office hours and anyone from anywhere in South Carolina could come by the governor's office for a visit.
All of this has been about changing the culture of the way that things have been done in Columbia - and my hope is that we make an impact on people's attitudes - in and outside of government - and that this leads to an environment more conducive to changing a whole lot of things necessary to raising income levels in South Carolina. While we have worked diligently to focus on in essence the culture of the way that some things have been done in Columbia, it by no stretch of the imagination represents all that's been done this past year.
Working together we passed, among other things, the Predatory Lending Bill, Securities Fraud legislation and DMV reform - but let me just mention two Bills. I think a critical component to quality of life lies in not getting run over by a drunk driver on a South Carolina road. JoAnne Gilham deserves particular credit for pouring years of energy into doing something about it. Last session we passed .08 legislation that's intent was to make our roads safer. While it was a positive step to move to .08, law enforcement friends have told me it's tough to effectively administer that new law. It's become a fertile ground for legal challenges and frankly a weak spot for the law enforcement in their ability to arrest a drunk on the road. I'd say we owe it to JoAnne and to the law enforcement community to go back to the drawing board and tighten up that piece of legislation that was made weaker in conference. I know the Speaker has a Bill to that effect and I'd ask that y'all support him on that Bill.
Second, we last year substantially strengthened our State's domestic violence laws, and in the process thousands of women in our State are just a little bit safer because of the great work of Jim Ritchie, Robert Ford, Gilda Cobb-Hunter, Becky Richardson and the entire woman's caucus. I want to stop for just a minute though, and issue a challenge to every man in South Carolina, and that is to live up to the gentlemanly traditions of our ancestors. Whether Robert E. Lee or Booker T. Washington, both were Southern men who passionately believed things, but never reduced those passions down to physical control in the house as their way of expressing an idea or getting a thought across. We can't either. I'd ask every South Carolina man to work as an individual to change South Carolina's deplorable statistics on the domestic violence front.
Let me move on, though, from what's been happening this past year to the future goals and present challenges within the context of the 5 root causes I mentioned a moment ago.
II. The economy and the need for wealth creation.
Our number one front burner issue for us this year, tied right up there with the restructuring is doing something about the number of jobs, the quality of jobs, the pay of jobs and the economy in South Carolina.
I have a chart right here that tells a whole lot; let me just tell you what it says. Several Senators in the back are giving me that look like, 'Is this some kind of strange reading test?' What this chart says is that there is something we're doing wrong on a structural level that is holding us back in South Carolina. Because over the last four years what this chart shows is job creation and small business creation. The red represents South Carolina, North Carolina, Georgia and Florida. What has happened over these four years is that for instance South Carolina has lost 3,600 small businesses. South Carolina has lost 2% of its work force while North Carolina, Georgia and Florida all gained both small businesses and jobs. In some cases at astounding levels, Florida for instance, added 10% to its work force while we lost 2% of our work force. Florida gained thirty-six thousand new small businesses while we lost thirty six hundred small businesses. Mind you, Florida is a State with no income tax.
Where I am going with this is that I believe and I think the data supports that the most significant single tax change that we could make to improve the climate for small business generation and job creation in South Carolina is to lower the income tax.
It's what the Beacon Hill study showed, when twenty-five thousand direct jobs were gained in New Jersey because they cut the income tax from 7% to 5.68%. It's what the Legislative Exchange Council found when they looked at the ten States that raised their income tax versus the fifteen States that lowered their income tax over the last ten years. It's what Democratic Governor Bill Richardson talked about as he cut the income tax in New Mexico from 8.2 to 4.9%.
We need to ask ourselves this simple question. Should we have a greater proportional tax on work, savings and investment, or for instance on one's choice to buy cigarettes or a lottery ticket? Our income tax is effectively the highest income tax rate in the entire southeast and that's rough on families, workers and retirees in South Carolina. I passionately believe that cutting the income tax will help with the job situation in this State. It is something we can't delay on. It is something we need to take action on now because the people are hurting now out there. If you look on the front page of today's State Newspaper, what it talked about was for the first time since the Great Depression, we have had three consecutive years of job losses in South Carolina. That has not happened since the Great Depression and we have got to take action on this front. It is a front burner issue for us.
On the subject of jobs and economy, I would ask that you adhere to what we laid out in our budget, which is to not raise the tax load on South Carolinians. Bob Faith and I went to China this fall and what's interesting is to look at how we are in a real world competition for jobs in China, India and a whole host of places around the globe. I don't think we can be competitive without being simply midrange in taxes.
Let me add this though...in not raising the overall tax load for South Carolinians, it does not mean we shouldn't raise a single tax category while lowering another. I think it is worth a discussion. I think that our cigarette tax for income tax is a pure rifle shot, if you will, aimed specifically at job creation, but it's worth having a larger discussion on more comprehensive reforms along the lines of what Rick Quinn has talked about or Vince Sheheen has talked about or Bobby Harrell or David Thomas have talked about. I think it is worth having that discussion. Let's just make sure that in that process we don't use tax reform as a vehicle to raise taxes.
Let me also say this about economic development. We need to provide more tools for all of us interested in economic development - and very specifically for Secretary Bob Faith. Bob is doing a fabulous job as the head of Commerce. He's somebody that every one as taxpayers should be proud of and he needs more tools. In that vein, the Life Sciences Bill, the Capital Access Program, Venture Capital Bill, Pathways to Prosperity, the Small Business Regulatory Act and our income tax cut would all be useful arrows in the quiver of economic development. One surprising little arrow of help would be for South Carolina to cease to be the only mini-bottle State in the union - something the House worked to change just last week. There are a number of things we can do, but the point is that we need to take action.
I want to say as well, on the economic development front, I applaud the work of Speaker Wilkins and Jim Harrison in advancing a long needed debate on Tort Reform. We aim ultimately to complement those actions with Workers' Compensation Reform. The bottom line is that change on both fronts would result in a more competitive playing for small business creation or for delivering a baby in South Carolina.
III. Government's structure
Front burner issue number two for us this year is restructuring.
We've begun the process of laying out our restructuring process in our budget in painstaking detail. For any of you who want real detail about what we want to add, leave, or change in the structure of government, I simply ask that you get a copy of our budget. Our budget lays it out in absolutely great detail what we would like to do in regard to restructuring. If you don't want to carry it around, just log onto www.scgovernor.com to pull it up on line. You will see a broad swath of structural change from our belief that the Governor and Lieutenant Governor ought to run together on a ticket just as the President and Vice President do at the national level, to healthcare, natural resources management and procurement reform. And what does it all add up to? A more accountable and more efficient government in South Carolina, both of which are very much needed in enhancing our ability to compete in the twenty-first century.
Not only have we laid out where we want to go in regard to government restructuring, we have in fact have begun that process in the budget. Each one of us can find individual parts we like or dislike. Senator Peeler was telling me about a particular part that he didn't like this morning over in Union, but I think what is important about that budget is the way it sets priorities - in the way that it was indeed a different approach, in the way that it looked and how the individual pieces of government actually fit together. So I'd say while you will certainly add or delete programs in your budget - based on different opinions of what works and what does not - I ask you hold true to a few of its principals: of not cutting across the board, of reducing annualizations, and restoring money to trust funds. If you look at this budget, all I can say, and having been through that process over the last six months, is that I wish my friends Bobby and Hugh the best of luck in the fairly unenviable task that they have in leading House and Senate efforts to the budgets - because these are real tough times driven by a 350 million dollar shortfall.
I'd say a piece of restructuring was the MAP Commission. I can't applaud Ken Wingate and the MAP Commission enough for their great work. If you look at what they came up with after reviewing government and looking under the hood, they came up with basically between $200-350 million worth of annualized savings going forward if we implemented restructuring.
The biggest thing we did though was to go ahead and begin it with our cabinet. Some of it was tough, but these are tough budget times -and since I'm going to highlight a part of what they have been up to I'd ask my cabinet to stand and ask that you recognize them.
Let me go into a couple of things that these different cabinet members have been up to as it relates to specifically restructuring.
Bob has led efforts to cut the overall size of the Department of Commerce by twenty-six percent. We've gone from eleven divisions down to four, and from four floors down to two floors in the SouthTrust building. In the process of saving the taxpayer 1.8 million dollars and best of all, we have been able to move money from administration and into actual economic development and recruitment.
Jon Ozmint led our efforts at Corrections to start our own grist mill for grits and chicken laying operation for eggs. It is a win-win because it will save taxpayers $750,000 a year and, more importantly, it will teach inmates a little bit more about work ethic and agricultural practices.
In exceeding tough times Jon has been willing to think outside the box, and I want to announce tonight a new program he will help implement. Jon and I both believe in restorative justice - but don't have a budget year that has allowed us much room. I have a small start, born from a conversation I had with my friend Lonnie Randolph.
In our prison system right now, there are almost 24,000 inmates and about 63% of the total prison population doesn't have a high school education or equivalency. Up until now, if a capable inmate wasn't interested in getting an education, there was nothing we could do about it. I've instructed Jon Ozmint to change that policy at Corrections, and to make participation in education programs mandatory for appropriate inmates. If an inmate refuses, they don't get privileges, period. Despite these budget times, I propose allocating $2.5 million to this program because I think it is crazy to continue sending folks out of a criminal justice system with no better educational leg to stand on and expect good results.
Back to this year's restructuring - at the Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism we cut full-time staff by 12% and part-time staff by 38%. We moved money from operations to marketing and actually raised our direct marketing budget by $2 million. We did this because while they might grow great wheat in Kansas they don't have the mountains and lakes and beaches that we do, and we wanted to more strongly market one of our natural competitive advantages as a State.
I want to pay a particular compliment to Chad Prosser and his crew at PRT in the way that creative thought has mirrored structural change. I'll give you an example of that, the Highway Department receives about $100,000 each year in federal funds to produce highway maps with evacuation routes from the coast in the event of a hurricane. PRT each year produces maps to be given at our Welcome Centers. Chad and his team, to their credit, said wait a minute - if the Highway Department already produces the map, can't we just flip it over, put our stuff on the other side and hand those maps out at the Visitor's Center - and in the process save State taxpayers one hundred thousand dollars. That isn't a giant savings, but it's indicative of the kind of out of the box thinking that I think we want to see more of in government.
The Judge consolidated Juvenile Justice's use of dental clinics with the Department of Corrections and has saved us $450,000 up front and $100,000 annually.
Even John Frampton and DNR who are not part of my cabinet were good enough to implement our plan with Chief Stewart and SLED, and Bob at Commerce, to consolidate the State's air fleet for a one time savings of more than $1 million and annual savings of over $100,000 - as they sold off two planes and a helicopter.
I would report to you that within my cabinet restructuring has brought real savings and even greater accountability. What I must also report is that I have gone as far as I can go. My cabinet only represents 16% of State government. For restructuring to continue it will now require legislative action. Whether we expand on these successes or stop where we allow further restructuring to die on the vine is in your hands. I ask for your help.
I want to single out Glenn McConnell in the way he has reviewed our case and found merit to what we are asking. Glenn has been an absolute Statesman in his efforts to help us with the restructuring bill. I also want to thank so many in the Senate, both Republicans and Democrats, for their help in the just released restructuring bill. I see my friend John Land over there, who was kind enough to sign on to that bill, I see Tommy Moore who was kind enough to sign on to that bill. I would go so far to say that anyone listening over the radio or watching on TV, if you agree with where we are coming from, I would ask that you look up and see if your senator signed on to Glenn's bill, and if they did would you call them and thank them. Because what we are talking about here is indeed important to the kind of South Carolina your children's children will inherit.
Part of what I think tipped the scale for Glenn was how real the benefits were to South Carolinians in DMV restructuring. I think the evidence in this real world test case makes a compelling case for restructuring. I want to recognize JT Gandolfo, Marcia Adams and Maurine Boyles. JT was the head of our DMV task force and did an outstanding job as the head of that task force. Marcia is our new DMV director and Maurine joins us tonight on behalf of all DMV employees.
Maurine's been on the front lines for 10 years, and all through those years she's poured her heart into providing a good service to folks here in South Carolina. Many times though the system worked against her personal effort, so much so that as we all know many people complained of the one to two hour waits when they went to a DMV office. We recognized that problem, and during my transition last year, put together a DMV task force headed by JT. Its recommendations complimented the work of Ronnie Townsend and the House DMV task force and together we put together a reform bill that worked its way through the legislative process. Ronnie, thank you again for all your efforts in pushing that through the legislative process -you did a great job on that and the South Carolina folks that were waiting in lines before have you to thank for that. Again thank you for your work.
I will simply say this, the structure of government matters. Same people in place, Maurine and her peers are still there - but because of a different structure, a decidedly different result. People who were before standing in line instead can spend that time with their family, at work or at play. It strikes me that that's what we ought to be about in government - helping people with their problems not adding to them.
I want to say one additional thing. The changes we propose to the constitutional officers means constitutional change, which means direct input by the voter at the ballot. Giving South Carolina voters the chance to vote on the structure of their government doesn't mean that you agree or you disagree, as House or Senate members, with that constitutional change. It does mean, though, that you believe voters of South Carolina deserve the right to vote. Given the significance of this issue, I personally ask each one of you to give South Carolinians the right to vote on this all important issue, which will affect our government for many years down the road.
I do want to mention three legislative items tied to government's structure. The first is Doug Smith's State Spending Limitation Bill. I know that Bobby has a similar Bill. Please support him with this idea because if we don't do something like this, a few years from now, when the economy next turns south we'll be in exactly the same financial mess we've been in over the last couple years. A Bill like this guards against the upswings and downswings of the economy wreaking havoc on State government.
Second, Richard Eckstrom, our Comptroller General, deserves great credit for the way he found and highlighted a budget deficit that had been swept under the rug for two years. In response, David Wilkins, Bobby Harrell, Hugh Leatherman, and Glenn McConnell in leadership joined me in endorsing the idea of the Fiscal Discipline Act of 2004. I appreciate their leadership, and I join the credit agencies in asking you to support that Bill.
Finally, we need a sunset commission. In the budget hearings we ran across far too many programs and laws that had outlived their purpose. Please join me in creating one.
IV. Education
The fourth root cause of great significance to the future of South Carolina. Whether it's K-12 or Higher Ed - the international competition for jobs I talked about earlier tonight is going to be won or lost by the quality of a South Carolina education.
In signing a bill twenty years ago that raised our sales tax 25% to add funding to education, Gov. Dick Riley said - "We will not build the new South Carolina with bricks and mortar. We will build it with minds. The power of knowledge and skills is our hope for survival in this new age." I completely agree, as do a whole lot of teachers in our State who show it in their lives as they pour all kinds of energy into making a difference in a young person's life. In looking at the numbers though I'd argue that just as the DMV structure worked against the individual effort of Maurine Boyles, at times our current educational structure works against the individual effort of some great teachers, of Inez our Superintendent or an individual principal or administrator. I say that because too many people have been working too hard for too long for the numbers we've seen to make any kind of sense.
Did you know during the last 30 years, we have raised K-12 funding in our State by over 130%, yet last August, we learned our State's SAT scores once again ranked next-to-last in the nation - the third consecutive decade that we've ranked either last or next-to-last every single year. The Commission on Higher Education's numbers showed we ranked last in the nation in graduation rates - 49% of ninth-graders failed to graduate from high school in four years. Just last month, we found out not a single South Carolina school district met the new federal guidelines for adequate yearly progress. In fact, almost a full third of our eighth graders tested below basic on last year's PACT test.
Now you certainly need money for our public school education system and in the midst of a $350 million shortfall we went to remarkable lengths to keep education our State's #1 funding priority and actually added $30 million for K-12, but money clearly isn't the only answer. What strikes me are two things. One, the number of school districts. Reform has to precede more money because otherwise you will never get reform. If you look at the legislative audit, what it showed was that we could save twenty-five million dollars and put that money not to administration in a multitude of different school districts but instead put that money into teachers and to actual students.
The second thing that we have got to do is go ahead and try new ideas. Too many parents, kids and teachers are working too hard not to have a debate on new ideas in education. Given our 30 years of history, is it fair to say to any student, "You've got to stay put in a situation not meeting your needs until we get it right?"
Next month I'll be announcing one of those new ideas - a universal tax credit for education. Along with reforms we've already talked about on charter schools and making sure money actually gets down to teachers, the goal of this plan is simple: open up the education marketplace by giving parents more choices. In addition to empowering parents, you would improve the quality of public schools. That's what's happened in Milwaukee, if you look at the low-income neighborhoods closest to the choice programs they have increased performance by significantly larger amounts than schools in other parts of the State. It's what happened in Florida, where the number of failing schools has been cut in half since the State implemented its "Opportunity Scholarships" four years ago. I think it's also a novel way of addressing equity concerns raised by a number of rural counties in our State.
On other reform fronts, conduct grades are close in the Senate, I just need help from one particular friend. I'd sure appreciate that help. Our SMART Funding bill passed the House and I want to thank Speaker Wilkins, Bill Cotty and Roland Smith for their work in making that happen. The idea of SMART Funding is to break apart the silos. Currently education funding goes from the State level down to local school districts in 80 different silos. This Bill would change that so that local schools have much greater flexibility in how they spend that money. It is up to the Senate now and I'd sure appreciate your help.
On the subject of higher education, we need to have another serious discussion - something that's been highlighted with the latest proposal to move USC-Sumter from a two-year school to four-year school. Let's take a look at this process. First of all, the President of USC is opposed to it. Second, the USC Board of Trustees is opposed to it. Third, the Commission on Higher Education is opposed to it. So what happens? The local delegation tacks it onto a bill nobody wants to vote against and tries to get it passed. That is exactly the problem we have in South Carolina with respect to higher ed - namely that politics, not a Statewide plan, too often drives the decisions we make. As a result we've got duplication - one reason tuition costs in South Carolina are well over the national average - and going up every year.
This issue is far bigger than whether friends in Sumter do or don't want a four-year school in Sumter. It is about Michael Porter's report and its insistence that we do a better job targeting the limited dollars we've got to spend on higher ed.
We have got to have a true Statewide vision for higher education - and one that's backed by a governing board. I don't care whether we call it a Board of Regents or a strengthened CHE, it doesn't matter what we call it, but it is vital that we change the system because we can't afford to go down the road that we are on with the duplication that is inherent in the road that we're on.
V. Quality of life
Quality of life is many things. It's a State trooper going into harm's way on a daily basis to maintain order on our roads, it's good drinking water. But tonight, I'd like to ask all South Carolinians to join with me in advancing quality of life on two fronts - first, by getting personally involved in protecting the way we look and feel as a State but - secondly perhaps even more importantly, getting personally involved in the way we look and feel as individual South Carolinians.
On that first front - how we look and feel as a State - we took a step forward last year by passing Neighborhood Schools legislation. As a result, State Department of Education restrictions were lifted and local communities are now much more empowered to incorporate new schools within the fabric of their own communities. I'd credit Bob Leach, Dwight Loftis, Ronnie Townsend, Greg Gregory and Joel Lourie in particular for their help in getting this measure through the General Assembly. Empowered doesn't necessarily mean a local board does it, though, because there are a lot of institutional biases to build these remote mega schools that have proven themselves to be less effective as learning environments. I know of one such situation in northern Beaufort County. Unless we want to continue this costly practice of using schools as an excuse to drag infrastructure across the countryside, all I can say is that I would encourage voters to demand schools are built in communities that reflect the size of that community.
Our budget proposes we fund the Conservation Bank this year. I'd ask you do the same. Once land is developed you never have a second chance to have your children's children get a glimpse of the beauty that makes our State so special. I'd also go a step further and ask each of you to support the notion of Priority Investment Areas, and my friend Ben Hagood's Bill in particular, which would work with local communities to better target public investment and reduce sprawl in our communities.
On the second front, how we look and feel as individual South Carolinians, I'd like to single out the work of a businessman up in Greenville, Jim Anthony. He and Dr. Jim Silliman have come together on a concept called Zest Quest, which is all about getting South Carolinians in better shape. The A.M.E. Church and the Medical University are doing the same kind of thing at the opposite end of the state. Bottom line is that we don't eat the right things and we don't get enough exercise in South Carolina - which is part of the reason we lead the nation in stroke deaths and rank in the top 10 in obesity, heart disease and diabetes.
Do we propose to fund Medicaid fully and with recurring money this year? Yes. Do we propose health care restructuring to better the system? Yes. But we could have all the money in the world to fund the best health care system in the world, yet if we're not making better choices as individuals we're still going to have a serious problem.
I'd like to issue a personal challenge tonight to every South Carolinian. In this year's list of New Year's resolutions commit to being just a bit more active. You can do that, one, as a youngster by joining up with an effort like Zest Quest. If not a program, find something you can do in your own backyard, or at the local Y, or on your street. As for me, I'm going on a bike ride across South Carolina this Spring. I'll start out in the mountains - hoping it's more or less downhill and I'm taking Jenny, the boys, and I'd invite anybody in South Carolina to join us on that ride. We'll do it in a couple Saturdays throughout the spring. From the mountains to the seashore we will see a little bit more of our great State, but more importantly get some exercise on the way. If you can't join us on that bike ride, then what I'd ask is that you commit to walking, to running, to canoeing that same three hundred mile distance over the course of a year. That's only eight tenths of a mile per day. It's something you can do. It'll make a profound difference in your life. It'll make a profound difference in the health care system in South Carolina. I see Gilda Cobb-Hunter laughing right now, sorry to single you out Gilda, I guess why she is laughing is that I am pretty far out there talking about a bike ride. Let me just go ahead and just completely divert. It just strikes me that whether I am talking about that bike ride or whether I'm talking about cancer awareness or whether I'm talking about helping to fix the budget at the mansion, I'd like to single out my wife and your first lady, Jenny, for what she has been up to this last year. Jenny, I thank you, as your husband, our sons thank you as their mother and all of us as South Carolinians thank you for all that you have accomplished this last year.
While we are still on this theme of quality of life, let me mention four other things. First, adoption. It's a priority for us because it goes straight back to the significance of a family in our State. Unfortunately it takes twice as long to get kids out of government and into homes in our State, and I want to thank Kim Aydlette and her team over at DSS for their efforts to change this. I'd also credit Chief Justice Toal for her help on the court side, and her willingness to assist Kim and her team. We've tried to leverage their efforts by increasing the adoption incentive payment from $250 to $1,500, and we're going to continue to look for ways to improve an orphan's chance to be a part of something we all need - a family.
Quality of life means a state government retiree knowing their retirement will be there - on this front, I think the TERI plan needs reform and I ask for your help.
Quality of life means many of the state services we enjoy, ranging from the great work law enforcement does on a daily basis to DMV or DHEC. It is important we reward great efforts as we have the chance given these budget times. It's the idea behind our proposal to move $25 million over from sales in our large car fleet to state employee healthcare. I'd ask that you do something similar.
Finally, I'm a big fan of the Socratic Method and looking at issues based on their merits, not on their politics. Essential to that process, though, is perspective. That's why I'm particularly proud that we've included minorities in my appointments to boards and commissions in a way that's never happened before under Republican leadership. As we continue that process moving forward, I'd renew my commitment not just to having an administration that works for all South Carolinians, but one that includes its diverse perspectives.
Let me close tonight with a story - one I think sums up the kind of courage and attitude it's going to take if we're truly going to create the kind of change our State so desperately needs.
It's the story of Captain Josh Byers, a soldier originally from Anderson, who commanded an armored cavalry unit in Iraq. In letters sent back to his folks at home, Josh writes about the responsibility of the mission, the duty of leadership, the reward of service and yes, even the fear of sacrifice.
In a letter dated July 3 of last year he wrote. "Dear Mom and Dad, I'm healthy and doing fine - and although I really want to get that redeployment order and come home (as everyone does) I don't dwell on it. We are accomplishing our mission here and I think I'll take a lot of pride in that for the rest of my life. Although the sacrifice is great, the rewards of service are so much greater."
Tragically, the "rest of Josh's life" would be short-lived. He was killed during a guerilla attack on his convoy west of Baghdad, just two days after his last letter home.
I'd ask that we honor the life of Josh Byers, and all the South Carolina servicemen and women killed in Iraq, by renewing our commitment tonight in this Chamber - to the ideals and process of self-governance for which they've given their lives.
If we could bring to each of our roles just a fraction of the leadership, courage and unity our men and women in uniform have shown - there is truly nothing that can hold us back as a state. We need to remember, as Josh did, that our service is a blessing, and in place of the political differences that so often haunt this process, it is and always should be about serving others.
If we can do those things, we can indeed make strides toward keeping this State home to future generations. As Josh said, "although the sacrifice is great, the rewards of service are so much greater."
I look forward to your help in that service, and I ask for your prayers. God bless this great State and good night.
Under the conclusion of his address, Governor Sanford and his escort party retired from the Chamber.
The purposes of the Joint Assembly having been accomplished, the PRESIDENT announced that under the terms of the Concurrent Resolution the Joint Assembly would recede from business.
The Senate accordingly retired to its Chamber.
At 8:01 p.m. the House resumed, the SPEAKER in the Chair.
Rep. W. D. SMITH moved that the House do now adjourn, which was agreed to.
The Senate returned to the House with concurrence the following:
H. 4571 (Word version) -- Reps. Richardson, Delleney, Emory, Kirsh, McCraw and Moody-Lawrence: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION TO CONGRATULATE THE MEMBERS OF THE 2003 FORT MILL HIGH SCHOOL BAND AND THEIR DIRECTOR, MARTIN DICKEY, ON THEIR ACHIEVEMENTS OF EXCELLENCE IN MUSIC ON BEING NAMED CLASS AAAA STATE CHAMPIONS AND ONE OF THE TOP TWENTY-FIVE BANDS IN AMERICA AND TO COMMEND THEM ON THEIR HARD WORK AND DEDICATION.
H. 4581 (Word version) -- Reps. Stewart, Perry, Clark, Clyburn, D. C. Smith and J. R. Smith: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION TO RECOGNIZE ONE OF AIKEN'S MOST DELIGHTFUL COUPLES, MR. AND MRS. JOHN GRANAGHAN, FOR THEIR MANY CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE AIKEN COMMUNITY AND TO WISH THEM GODSPEED AS THEY MOVE TO TEXAS.
At 8:03 p.m. the House, in accordance with the motion of Rep. KEEGAN, adjourned in memory of the Honorable Terry B. Cooper, Horry County councilman, to meet at 10:00 a.m. tomorrow.
This web page was last updated on Wednesday, June 24, 2009 at 3:24 P.M.