Indicates Matter Stricken
Indicates New Matter
The Senate assembled at 12:00 Noon, under the provisions of S. 1469, the Sine Die Resolution and was called to order by the PRESIDENT.
A quorum being present, the proceedings were opened with a devotion by the Chaplain as follows:
Surely feeling unsettled-and perhaps even fearful-Job at one point conceivably spoke for all of us when he said: " 'I am not at ease, nor am I quiet; I have no rest, but trouble comes.' "
(Job 3:26)
Let us bow in prayer, friends:
Gracious, loving Lord, as these leaders return to this State House today, there are all sorts of troublesome realities which face them. May these Senators and their aides especially feel Your steady hand, Your wise counsel, Your gracious Spirit guiding them along their way. Truly, in these days of economic woes, O God, the challenges which have to be faced may well seem insurmountable. Yet just as you comforted and led Job, so are we confident that you will guide and bless these leaders. Give these women and men exceptional wisdom and gracious hearts to bring about comparative good for all of the people of South Carolina. In Your loving name we pray, dear Lord.
Amen.
Senator LEVENTIS was recognized in order to extend best wishes and congratulations on behalf of the entire Senate family to Senator and Mrs. Shane Massey on the birth of a daughter, Carter Elizabeth Massey, on September 29, 2008.
The Honorable André Bauer
President of the Senate
State House, First Floor, East Wing
Columbia, South Carolina 29201
Dear Mr. President and Members of the Senate:
I am hereby vetoing and returning without my approval S. 429, R-429.
(R429, S. 429 (Word version)) -- Senators Malloy and Jackson: AN ACT TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING ARTICLE 1, CHAPTER 28 TO TITLE 17 SO AS TO ENACT THE "ACCESS TO JUSTICE POST-CONVICTION DNA TESTING ACT", TO DEFINE NECESSARY TERMS, PROVIDE PROCEDURES FOR POST-CONVICTION DNA TESTING, PROVIDE A MANNER FOR THE PRESERVATION OF PHYSICAL AND BIOLOGICAL EVIDENCE, PROVIDE THE METHOD OF DISCLOSING THE RESULTS OF DNA TESTING, PROVIDE IMMUNITY FROM CIVIL LIABILITY UNLESS THERE IS AN ACT OF GROSS NEGLIGENCE OR INTENTIONAL MISCONDUCT, AND PROVIDE LIMITS ON EXPENDITURES IN ONE YEAR TO ADMINISTER THE ACT; BY ADDING ARTICLE 3, CHAPTER 28 TO TITLE 17 SO AS TO ENACT THE "PRESERVATION OF EVIDENCE ACT", TO DEFINE NECESSARY TERMS, PROVIDE PROCEDURES FOR PRESERVATION OF EVIDENCE, DELINEATE THE OFFENSES FOR WHICH PHYSICAL EVIDENCE AND BIOLOGICAL MATERIAL MUST BE PRESERVED, CREATE THE OFFENSE OF DESTROYING OR TAMPERING WITH PHYSICAL EVIDENCE OR BIOLOGICAL MATERIAL AND TO PROVIDE A PENALTY, AND PROVIDE IMMUNITY FROM CIVIL LIABILITY UNLESS THERE IS AN ACT OF GROSS NEGLIGENCE OR INTENTIONAL MISCONDUCT; TO ENACT THE "UNIDENTIFIED HUMAN REMAINS DNA DATABASE ACT" BY ADDING SECTION 23-3-625 SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT FAMILY MEMBERS OF A MISSING PERSON MAY SUBMIT DNA SAMPLES TO THE STATE LAW ENFORCEMENT DIVISION (SLED), TO REQUIRE SLED TO CONDUCT DNA IDENTIFICATION, TYPING, AND TESTING ON THE DNA SAMPLE PROVIDED BY FAMILY MEMBERS IF THE PERSON HAS BEEN MISSING THIRTY DAYS, TO PROVIDE A PROCEDURE FOR ENTERING THE DNA SAMPLES OF FAMILY MEMBERS INTO THE COMBINED DNA INDEXING SYSTEM (CODIS); BY ADDING SECTION 23-3-635 SO AS TO PROVIDE PROCEDURES FOR DNA TESTING OF THE BODIES OF UNIDENTIFIED PERSONS BY SLED WHEN NOTIFIED BY THE MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA (MUSC) OR ANOTHER FACILITY THAT THE BODY REMAINS UNIDENTIFIED AFTER THIRTY DAYS; BY ADDING SECTION 17-7-25 SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT A CORONER PERFORMING AN AUTOPSY ON AN UNIDENTIFIED BODY MUST OBTAIN TISSUE AND FLUID SAMPLES FROM THE BODY SUITABLE FOR DNA IDENTIFICATION, TYPING, AND TESTING AND TO PROVIDE THAT THE CORONER MUST SEND THE SAMPLES TO SLED; TO AMEND SECTION 17-5-570, RELATING TO THE RELEASE AND BURIAL OF DEAD BODIES AND THE PRESERVATION AND DISPOSITION OF UNIDENTIFIED DEAD BODIES, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT MUSC OR ANOTHER FACILITY PRESERVING AN UNIDENTIFIED DEAD BODY MUST NOTIFY SLED IF THE BODY REMAINS UNIDENTIFIED AFTER THIRTY DAYS, AND TO PROVIDE THAT THERE MAY BE NO DISPOSITION OF THE BODY UNTIL AT LEAST THIRTY DAYS AFTER THE BODY'S DNA PROFILE HAS BEEN ENTERED INTO CODIS; TO ENACT THE "SOUTH CAROLINA PROTECTION FROM VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN AND CHILDREN ACT" BY ADDING SECTION 23-3-615 TO DEFINE NECESSARY TERMS; TO AMEND SECTION 23-3-620, RELATING TO OFFENDERS REQUIRED TO SUBMIT SAMPLES FOR INCLUSION IN THE STATE DNA DATABASE, SO AS TO REQUIRE SAMPLES UPON LAWFUL CUSTODIAL ARREST, SERVICE OF A COURTESY SUMMONS, OR A DIRECT INDICTMENT FOR A FELONY OFFENSE, AN OFFENSE THAT CARRIES A SENTENCE OF FIVE YEARS OR MORE, OR AN ARREST FOR EAVESDROPPING, PEEPING, OR STALKING, TO PROVIDE THAT THESE PROVISIONS APPLY TO JUVENILES UNDER CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES, AND TO REQUIRE SAMPLES TO BE PROVIDED BEFORE A PERSON IS RELEASED ON PAROLE, RELEASED FROM CONFINEMENT, OR RELEASED FROM AN APPROPRIATE AGENCY'S JURISDICTION; TO AMEND SECTION 23-3-630, RELATING TO PERSONS AUTHORIZED TO TAKE DNA SAMPLES AND THEIR IMMUNITY FROM LIABILITY, SO AS TO DELETE REQUIREMENTS THAT THE PERSONS AUTHORIZED MUST BE CERTAIN TYPES OF HEALTH PROFESSIONALS AND TO PROVIDE THAT THEY MUST BE APPROPRIATELY TRAINED; TO AMEND SECTION 23-3-650, RELATING TO THE CONFIDENTIALITY OF DNA PROFILES, SO AS TO PROVIDE FOR COORDINATION BETWEEN SLED AND LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES TO PREVENT COLLECTION AND PROCESSING OF DUPLICATE DNA SAMPLES AND TO INCREASE THE PENALTY FOR THE OFFENSE OF WILFULLY DISCLOSING OR OBTAINING CONFIDENTIAL DNA INFORMATION; TO AMEND SECTIONS 23-3-660 AND 23-3-670, RELATING TO EXPUNGEMENTS AND FEES FOR DNA SAMPLES, RESPECTIVELY, SO AS TO PROVIDE FOR EXPUNGEMENT AT NO COST TO THE ACCUSED WHEN CHARGES ARE DISMISSED, NOLLE PROSSED, OR REDUCED BELOW THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE TAKING OF THE DNA SAMPLE, TO PROVIDE THAT THE STATE WILL PAY FOR THE COSTS OF COLLECTING AND PROCESSING A DNA SAMPLE INITIALLY AND THE PERSON TESTED MUST PAY A PROCESSING FEE UPON CONVICTION, PLEA OF NOLO CONTENDERE, OR FORFEITURE OF BOND; AND TO AMEND SECTION 23-3-120, RELATING TO THE TAKING OF FINGERPRINTS, SO AS TO PROVIDE FOR THE PLACE AND TIMING FOR THE FINGERPRINTING OF A PERSON PLACED UNDER CUSTODIAL ARREST.
L:\COUNCIL\ACTS\429AHB08.DOC
This Bill mainly does two things: (1) provides individuals convicted of certain crimes with procedures to preserve DNA evidence and to challenge their conviction through the use of DNA evidence and (2) requires all individuals who are arrested for a felony and certain other crimes to submit DNA samples and have their DNA profiles stored on a national database. We applaud the first part of the Bill because it provides those who may have been wrongly accused a chance to clear their names, and we fully support the notion of due process in all cases. If this were the only provision of law, we would have signed this legislation into law. I am compelled to veto this legislation because of the further encroachment on our civil liberties and privacy rights.
Let me begin by expressing sincere admiration and appreciation for the law enforcement officials who fight crime on a daily basis. We have consistently advocated for giving them all the resources possible to maintain safe communities. However, we have also consistently tried to strike a balance between those tools and maintaining our civil liberties and privacy in the way that our Founders intended. I vetoed similar legislation on those same grounds just last year.
Allow me to explain.
To date, we have put safeguards on government's access to this type of personal information. Law enforcement currently has the authority to collect a DNA sample from an accused for comparison purposes - but only after a court order has been sought and granted.
The Fourth Amendment to the Constitution guarantees that all people shall be "secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures." The Fourth Amendment is intended to establish a perimeter of personal integrity into which the government cannot intrude without compelling reason. Currently, the State allows collection of a DNA sample from arrestees after a search warrant is granted by a judge based on probable cause. See State v. Adolphe, 314 S.C. 89, 92, 441 S.E.2d 832 (S.C.App. 1994). This practice is consistent with the Fourth Amendment because it ensures that an arrestee is afforded due process as would be expected under the Constitution. This Bill abolishes that right and requires collection of DNA automatically upon arrest without any showing that the DNA is needed as evidence of the crime for which the individual was arrested. Accordingly, we believe that this Bill circumvents the probable cause requirement for a search warrant and is, therefore, unconstitutional. See In re Welfare of C.T.L., 722 N.W.2d 484 (Minn.App. 2006) (holding that obtaining DNA specimens upon arrest of certain crimes was unconstitutional under the Fourth Amendment).
Lowering the threshold for obtaining DNA samples to felony arrest instead of conviction is particularly troubling when you consider that not even half of all felony arrests lead to felony convictions. For instance, in 2006, approximately 150,000 arrests were made, yet less than 40% of these arrests resulted in convictions. This means that this Bill would require the State to take DNA samples of thousands of people who will never be convicted of the charges for which they are arrested. While the Bill requires the destruction of the DNA sample in cases where someone is arrested and later exonerated, it does not address the uses of that evidence before guilt or innocence is determined. It is for this reason that the legislation appears to be about something much larger than simply criminal investigations.
Though American society values personal liberties, we are the first to recognize that persons convicted of a crime must give up some of those liberties, including the protection against search and seizure. By limiting DNA collection to those who have been convicted of a crime, we ensure that no DNA is collected unless that person has been granted due process of rights and has experienced a full vetting by the judicial system. In fact, we would become just the 14th state to enact some sort of upon arrest DNA collection. Even then, there have already been efforts to go beyond even this step.
Our fear that permitting the expansion of the DNA database under this Bill will ultimately lead to further expansions in the future is justified in consideration of the DNA database's history. The DNA database was created in 1994 under the State DNA Identification Database Act, which required only individuals who had been convicted of sex-related crimes or individuals who had been convicted of violent crimes that had been ordered by the court to provide DNA samples for the database. Since its creation in 1994, the DNA Identification Database Act has been amended three times in a mere fourteen years by expanding the database to include samples from all individuals convicted of a felony, eavesdropping, peeping, and a misdemeanor punishable up to five years of imprisonment. Given the ever-expanding scope of the DNA database, we believe that it is finally time to draw a line in the sand and say that the DNA database will not be expanded to individuals who have not been convicted of a crime. We think the clear divide created with conviction has served us well because one of the central tenets of American law is that one is presumed innocent until proven guilty.
We are aware that some have justified the expansion of the DNA database by analogizing DNA sampling to fingerprinting. We reject this analogy because it fails to take into account the many varied and different uses that the DNA profiles can be used for. For example, California recently announced that it would begin using its DNA database to investigate biological relationships between individuals by comparing DNA evidence left at a crime-scene to near-matches in the DNA database. This means that law enforcement will investigate an unmistakably innocent person in the hope of obtaining clues to the identity of the actual culprit. Thus, unlike fingerprinting, DNA sampling is not limited to identifying the actual culprit of the crime because it provides for the investigation of demonstrably innocent people. Therefore, we cannot accept expanding the DNA database on the premise that it is like fingerprinting.
Thomas Jefferson is quoted as saying, "The natural progression of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." What he recognized well over 200 years ago is just as true today, that liberty is not simply an idea that remains consistent. Instead, it is under constant attack from even seemingly well-intended people. We see this legislation as a reach past that very foundation upon which this country was founded.
For these reasons, I am vetoing S. 429, R-429.
Sincerely,
/s/ Mark Sanford
(R429, S. 429 (Word version)) -- Senators Malloy and Jackson: AN ACT TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING ARTICLE 1, CHAPTER 28 TO TITLE 17 SO AS TO ENACT THE "ACCESS TO JUSTICE POST-CONVICTION DNA TESTING ACT", TO DEFINE NECESSARY TERMS, PROVIDE PROCEDURES FOR POST-CONVICTION DNA TESTING, PROVIDE A MANNER FOR THE PRESERVATION OF PHYSICAL AND BIOLOGICAL EVIDENCE, PROVIDE THE METHOD OF DISCLOSING THE RESULTS OF DNA TESTING, PROVIDE IMMUNITY FROM CIVIL LIABILITY UNLESS THERE IS AN ACT OF GROSS NEGLIGENCE OR INTENTIONAL MISCONDUCT, AND PROVIDE LIMITS ON EXPENDITURES IN ONE YEAR TO ADMINISTER THE ACT; BY ADDING ARTICLE 3, CHAPTER 28 TO TITLE 17 SO AS TO ENACT THE "PRESERVATION OF EVIDENCE ACT", TO DEFINE NECESSARY TERMS, PROVIDE PROCEDURES FOR PRESERVATION OF EVIDENCE, DELINEATE THE OFFENSES FOR WHICH PHYSICAL EVIDENCE AND BIOLOGICAL MATERIAL MUST BE PRESERVED, CREATE THE OFFENSE OF DESTROYING OR TAMPERING WITH PHYSICAL EVIDENCE OR BIOLOGICAL MATERIAL AND TO PROVIDE A PENALTY, AND PROVIDE IMMUNITY FROM CIVIL LIABILITY UNLESS THERE IS AN ACT OF GROSS NEGLIGENCE OR INTENTIONAL MISCONDUCT; TO ENACT THE "UNIDENTIFIED HUMAN REMAINS DNA DATABASE ACT" BY ADDING SECTION 23-3-625 SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT FAMILY MEMBERS OF A MISSING PERSON MAY SUBMIT DNA SAMPLES TO THE STATE LAW ENFORCEMENT DIVISION (SLED), TO REQUIRE SLED TO CONDUCT DNA IDENTIFICATION, TYPING, AND TESTING ON THE DNA SAMPLE PROVIDED BY FAMILY MEMBERS IF THE PERSON HAS BEEN MISSING THIRTY DAYS, TO PROVIDE A PROCEDURE FOR ENTERING THE DNA SAMPLES OF FAMILY MEMBERS INTO THE COMBINED DNA INDEXING SYSTEM (CODIS); BY ADDING SECTION 23-3-635 SO AS TO PROVIDE PROCEDURES FOR DNA TESTING OF THE BODIES OF UNIDENTIFIED PERSONS BY SLED WHEN NOTIFIED BY THE MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA (MUSC) OR ANOTHER FACILITY THAT THE BODY REMAINS UNIDENTIFIED AFTER THIRTY DAYS; BY ADDING SECTION 17-7-25 SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT A CORONER PERFORMING AN AUTOPSY ON AN UNIDENTIFIED BODY MUST OBTAIN TISSUE AND FLUID SAMPLES FROM THE BODY SUITABLE FOR DNA IDENTIFICATION, TYPING, AND TESTING AND TO PROVIDE THAT THE CORONER MUST SEND THE SAMPLES TO SLED; TO AMEND SECTION 17-5-570, RELATING TO THE RELEASE AND BURIAL OF DEAD BODIES AND THE PRESERVATION AND DISPOSITION OF UNIDENTIFIED DEAD BODIES, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT MUSC OR ANOTHER FACILITY PRESERVING AN UNIDENTIFIED DEAD BODY MUST NOTIFY SLED IF THE BODY REMAINS UNIDENTIFIED AFTER THIRTY DAYS, AND TO PROVIDE THAT THERE MAY BE NO DISPOSITION OF THE BODY UNTIL AT LEAST THIRTY DAYS AFTER THE BODY'S DNA PROFILE HAS BEEN ENTERED INTO CODIS; TO ENACT THE "SOUTH CAROLINA PROTECTION FROM VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN AND CHILDREN ACT" BY ADDING SECTION 23-3-615 TO DEFINE NECESSARY TERMS; TO AMEND SECTION 23-3-620, RELATING TO OFFENDERS REQUIRED TO SUBMIT SAMPLES FOR INCLUSION IN THE STATE DNA DATABASE, SO AS TO REQUIRE SAMPLES UPON LAWFUL CUSTODIAL ARREST, SERVICE OF A COURTESY SUMMONS, OR A DIRECT INDICTMENT FOR A FELONY OFFENSE, AN OFFENSE THAT CARRIES A SENTENCE OF FIVE YEARS OR MORE, OR AN ARREST FOR EAVESDROPPING, PEEPING, OR STALKING, TO PROVIDE THAT THESE PROVISIONS APPLY TO JUVENILES UNDER CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES, AND TO REQUIRE SAMPLES TO BE PROVIDED BEFORE A PERSON IS RELEASED ON PAROLE, RELEASED FROM CONFINEMENT, OR RELEASED FROM AN APPROPRIATE AGENCY'S JURISDICTION; TO AMEND SECTION 23-3-630, RELATING TO PERSONS AUTHORIZED TO TAKE DNA SAMPLES AND THEIR IMMUNITY FROM LIABILITY, SO AS TO DELETE REQUIREMENTS THAT THE PERSONS AUTHORIZED MUST BE CERTAIN TYPES OF HEALTH PROFESSIONALS AND TO PROVIDE THAT THEY MUST BE APPROPRIATELY TRAINED; TO AMEND SECTION 23-3-650, RELATING TO THE CONFIDENTIALITY OF DNA PROFILES, SO AS TO PROVIDE FOR COORDINATION BETWEEN SLED AND LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES TO PREVENT COLLECTION AND PROCESSING OF DUPLICATE DNA SAMPLES AND TO INCREASE THE PENALTY FOR THE OFFENSE OF WILFULLY DISCLOSING OR OBTAINING CONFIDENTIAL DNA INFORMATION; TO AMEND SECTIONS 23-3-660 AND 23-3-670, RELATING TO EXPUNGEMENTS AND FEES FOR DNA SAMPLES, RESPECTIVELY, SO AS TO PROVIDE FOR EXPUNGEMENT AT NO COST TO THE ACCUSED WHEN CHARGES ARE DISMISSED, NOLLE PROSSED, OR REDUCED BELOW THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE TAKING OF THE DNA SAMPLE, TO PROVIDE THAT THE STATE WILL PAY FOR THE COSTS OF COLLECTING AND PROCESSING A DNA SAMPLE INITIALLY AND THE PERSON TESTED MUST PAY A PROCESSING FEE UPON CONVICTION, PLEA OF NOLO CONTENDERE, OR FORFEITURE OF BOND; AND TO AMEND SECTION 23-3-120, RELATING TO THE TAKING OF FINGERPRINTS, SO AS TO PROVIDE FOR THE PLACE AND TIMING FOR THE FINGERPRINTING OF A PERSON PLACED UNDER CUSTODIAL ARREST. L:\COUNCIL\ACTS\429AHB08.DOC
The veto of the Governor was taken up for immediate consideration.
Senator FORD spoke on the veto.
Senator MALLOY spoke on the veto.
Senator KNOTTS spoke on the veto.
Senator McCONNELL spoke on the veto.
Senator FORD moved that the veto of the Governor be overridden.
The question was put, "Shall the Act become law, the veto of the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding?"
At 12:55 P.M., Senator MARTIN assumed the Chair.
The "ayes" and "nays" were demanded and taken, resulting as follows:
Alexander Anderson Bryant Campbell Campsen Ceips Cleary Courson Cromer Drummond Elliott Fair Ford Grooms Hawkins Hayes Hutto Jackson Knotts Land * Leatherman Leventis Lourie Malloy Martin Massey Matthews McConnell McGill O'Dell Patterson Peeler Pinckney Rankin Reese Ritchie Ryberg * Scott Setzler Sheheen Thomas * Vaughn * Verdin Williams
*These Senators were not present in the Chamber at the time the vote was taken and the votes were recorded by leave of the Senate, with unanimous consent.
The necessary two-thirds vote having been received, the veto of the Governor was overridden, and a message was sent to the House accordingly.
Senator McCONNELL rose for an Expression of Personal Interest.
Senator McCONNELL asked unanimous consent to make a motion that the Senate recede under the terms of Article III, Section 9 of the South Carolina Constitution until such day as called by the President Pro Tempore, and on that day the Senate will meet under the provisions of Rule 1B for the exclusive purpose of introducing new Bills, referral of Bills to committee and receiving committee reports as authorized by the Sine Die Resolution.
There was no objection and the motion was adopted.
Senator McCONNELL asked unanimous consent to make a motion that when the Senate is convened under the prior motion that, when the Senate stands adjourned, the following day, the Senate will meet in regular Statewide session at 10:00 A.M.
There was no objection and the motion was adopted.
Senator McCONNELL asked unanimous consent to make a motion that the provisions of Rules 37 and 39 be suspended.
There was no objection and the motion was adopted.
At 1:09 P.M., on motion of Senator McCONNELL, the Senate receded from business until 2:30 P.M.
The Senate reassembled at 2:44 P.M. and was called to order by the ACTING PRESIDENT, Senator MARTIN.
The following was introduced:
S. 1470 (Word version) -- Senator McConnell: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION TO PROVIDE THAT PURSUANT TO ARTICLE III, SECTION 21 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THIS STATE, SECTION 2-1-180 OF THE 1976 CODE, AND THE PROVISIONS OF S. 1469, WHEN THE RESPECTIVE HOUSES OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY ADJOURN ON FRIDAY, OCTOBER 31, 2008, NOT LATER THAN 5:00 P.M. OR ANYTIME PRIOR, EACH HOUSE SHALL STAND ADJOURNED TO MEET AT A TIME MUTUALLY AGREED UPON BY THE PRESIDENT PRO TEMPORE OF THE SENATE AND THE SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ONLY FOR THE CONSIDERATION OF GUBERNATORIAL VETOES OF ANY ACTS RATIFIED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY BEFORE OCTOBER 31, 2008, AND FOR THE CONFIRMATION OF MAGISTERIAL APPOINTMENTS BY THE SENATE IF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY IS CALLED BACK INTO SESSION TO CONSIDER GUBERNATORIAL VETOES; AND THAT THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY SHALL STAND ADJOURNED SINE DIE NO LATER THAN 5:00 P.M. ON SUNDAY, NOVEMBER 9, 2008.
l:\council\bills\gjk\20771sd08.doc
Be it resolved by the Senate, the House of Representatives concurring:
(A) Pursuant to the provisions of Article III, Section 21 of the Constitution of this State, Section 2-1-180 of the 1976 Code, and the provisions of S. 1469, the Sine Die adjournment date for the General Assembly for the 2008 session is recognized and extended to permit the General Assembly to continue in session after Friday October 31, 2008, under the terms and conditions stipulated in this resolution and for this purpose each house agrees that when the Senate and the House of Representatives adjourn on Friday, October 31, 2008, not later than 5:00 p.m. or at anytime prior, each house shall stand adjourned to meet in statewide session at a date and time mutually agreed upon by the President Pro Tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives, if any acts ratified by the General Assembly before Friday, October 31, 2008, are vetoed by the Governor and returned to the House originating the enactment. Each house agrees to limit itself only to the receipt and consideration of gubernatorial vetoes of these acts if called back into session as provided in this resolution, and in addition the Senate is permitted to consider confirmation of magisterial appointments during this period if the General Assembly is called back into session to consider gubernatorial vetoes.
(B) Unless adjourned earlier, the General Assembly shall stand adjourned Sine Die no later than 5:00 p.m. on Sunday, November 9, 2008.
Senator McCONNELL spoke on the Resolution.
The question then was the adoption of the Resolution.
The "ayes" and "nays" were demanded and taken, resulting as follows:
Alexander Anderson Bryant Campbell Campsen Ceips Cleary Courson Cromer Drummond Elliott Fair Ford Grooms Hawkins Hayes Hutto Jackson Knotts Land Leatherman Leventis Lourie Malloy Martin Massey Matthews McConnell McGill O'Dell Patterson Peeler Pinckney Rankin Reese Ritchie Ryberg Scott Setzler Sheheen Thomas Vaughn Verdin Williams
The Concurrent Resolution was adopted, ordered sent to the House.
On motion of Senator McCONNELL, the seal of secrecy was removed and the Senate adjourned to meet at the call of the President Pro Tempore.
On motion of Senator MALLOY, with unanimous consent, the Senate stood adjourned out of respect to the memory of Mr. Keith Hancock of Hartsville, S.C.
On motion of Senator MARTIN, with unanimous consent, the Senate stood adjourned out of respect to the memory of Mr. William Robert "Bob" Craig of Pickens, S.C. Mr. Craig was the former Superintendent of Education of Pickens County and Director of Business and Properties, having served 35 years with the school district. He also served the town of Pickens as mayor, town councilman and volunteer fireman. He was a loving husband and devoted father.
At 3:11 P.M., on motion of Senator McCONNELL, the Senate stood adjourned to meet under the terms of Article III, Section 9 of the South Carolina Constitution until such day as called by the President Pro Tempore.
This web page was last updated on Monday, June 22, 2009 at 1:51 P.M.