South Carolina General Assembly · Web view2015/07/06 · Indicates Matter Stricken. Indicates New Matter. The House assembled at 1:00 p.m. Deliberations were opened with prayer

Monday, July 6, 2015(Statewide Session)

Indicates Matter StrickenIndicates New Matter

The House assembled at 1:00 p.m.Deliberations were opened with prayer by The Very Reverend

Timothy Jones, Dean of Trinity Episcopal Cathedral, as follows:

Lord, You have said through the prophet Isaiah that heaven is Your throne and the earth is your footstool. Your glory in in all of the world, and Your presence in every place.

Help us to remember that while You are majestic and immense, You draw close to those who seek You. Help us to remember that while these are momentous times in which we live, You work in the little moments, the sometimes tedious hours. Help us to remember that while You give us a passion and urgency, Your vast purposes may sometimes surprise us. Help us to remember that while You give us words to speak and skills to persuade, You sometimes call us to be eloquent listeners, patient and alert to the convictions of others.

Give us a love of righteousness and truth. Make us mindful of our calling to serve others. Give us wisdom to know Your will and the strength to do it. We who long to serve You this day offer ourselves to Your will and Your eternal ways, as we commend this State to Your merciful care. We pray in and through Your holy name. 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 Tuesday, June 23, the SPEAKER ordered it confirmed.

MOTION ADOPTEDRep. WEEKS moved that when the House adjourns, it adjourn in

memory of Reginald D. English of Sumter, which was agreed to.

R. 127, H. 3701--ORDERED PRINTED IN THE JOURNALThe SPEAKER ordered the following Veto printed in the Journal:

4616

MONDAY, JULY 6, 2015

STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINAOFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR

June 29, 2015The Honorable James H. LucasSpeaker of the House of RepresentativesSouth Carolina Statehouse, Second FloorColumbia, South Carolina 29201

Dear Speaker Lucas and Members of the House of Representatives,I am vetoing and returning without my approval certain line items

in R. 127, H. 3701, the Fiscal Year 2015-16 General Appropriation Act.

Although veto messages tend to highlight differences between a governor and the General Assembly, I believe this budget and this message really focus on the challenges and opportunities we have tackled this year as a state. In years past, we have focused on education, the administration of government, and economic development as the matters most pressing to us.

This year, we have been faced with many other issues; those of family welfare and domestic violence and of improving the public trust with law enforcement agencies. This budget contains some responses to those challenges and others with funding for body cameras, increased support for social services and victims of domestic violence, a continued commitment to mental health and substance abuse, and new investments in education.

However, the underlying principles of fiscal responsibility have also been challenged repeatedly this year. We have been challenged to invest in our state’s infrastructure while avoiding the easy, but expensive, answer of tax increases. We have been challenged to have a frank conversation about the responsible use of our state’s credit and the need to issue debt wisely and only for those investments with real returns to the people of South Carolina. Finally, we have been challenged to maintain a transparent and open budget process – one that does not use surpluses to grow government, but rather provides for the core functions of government and taxpayer relief.

The budget sent to my desk contains far too many earmarks for local pork and marketing, private nonprofits, and legislative pet projects. Today, I have vetoed dozens of such earmarks, and I hope that the political courage necessary to protect South Carolina’s

4617


taxpayers takes precedence over political deal making to protect individual special interests.

On a positive front, we should all be proud of some of the changes and additions we have seen in this year’s budget. The Department of Administration begins operating on July 1, 2015, and is the result of over a decade of work to modernize South Carolina’s government. Finally, this budget keeps the Department of Transportation in the executive branch for one additional year, avoiding a return to legislative control as we seek more accountability when fixing South Carolina’s roads and bridges.

The coming year is full of opportunity to address the pressing needs of our constituents and our state as a whole. I look forward to working with you to make the best of all of them.

I. Part IA – FundingPrioritizing the Core Functions of Government

Veto 1 Part IA, Page 149, Section 49, Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism; I. Administration; B. Administrative Services; Aid to Subdivisions – Allocations to Municipalities-Restricted, $1,806,000 Total Funds, $500,000 General Funds

Veto 2 Part IA, Page 149, Section 49, Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism; I. Administration; B. Administrative Services; Aid to Subdivisions – Allocations to Counties-Restricted, $1,514,500 Total Funds, $500,000 General Funds

Veto 3 Part IA, Page 150, Section 49, Department of Parks, Recreation and Programs and Services; A. Tourism Sales and Marketing; Special Items – Sports Marketing Grant Program, $500,000 General Funds

As passed, the Fiscal Year 2015-16 General Appropriations act contains more than $5.3 million for marketing and advertising at the Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism in addition to $500,000 to augment the Department’s park grants programs. The Fiscal Year 2015-16 Executive Budget recommended $1.4 million for

4618


infrastructure needs in South Carolina state parks, which allows the Department to keep our state parks operationally self-sufficient, in stark contrast to this year’s appropriations for the Department, which are almost entirely for marketing and local pork projects. In a year where the State has identified critical needs in transportation, law enforcement transparency, and social services, such excessive funding for an already robust tourism marketing budget is simply irresponsible.

Last year, the General Assembly agreed with this approach, sustaining my veto of the Undiscovered South Carolina program. Even with these vetoes, and others in Part IB, the Department will retain over $3 million in new recurring appropriations to support regional tourism efforts and statewide marketing – a 12.4% increase to the combined programs.

Veto 4 Part IA, Page 80, Section 29, State Museum Commission; II. Programs; New Positions – Program Coordinator I, $35,000 General Funds

Veto 5 Part IA, Page 80, Section 29, State Museum commission; II. Programs; New Positions – Program Coordinator II, $40,000 General Funds

The State Museum is one of South Carolina’s unique agencies that receives significant state funding but also has a business model that requires it to find private-sector support through museum memberships, private donations, and special events. This year I recommended, and the General Assembly provided, capital funds for improved physical security at the State Museum, and the Department of Administration will continue to provide support to the Mills Building that houses the State Museum. Although I have been supportive of the Museum’s physical infrastructure, I am vetoing these positions as I believe this year’s programmatic expansion should be funded through earned revenue and not entirely subsidized by the taxpayers.

Controlling the Growth of Government

Veto 6 Part 1A, Page 36, Section 14, Clemson University (Education & General); I. Education & General; A. Unrestricted; New Positions – ENG/ASSOC ENG IV, $279,850 General Funds

4619


Veto 7 Part IA, Page 36, Section 14, Clemson University (Education & General); I. Education & General; A. Unrestricted; New Positions – Professor, $748,000 General Funds

Veto 8 Part IA, Page 36, Section 14, Clemson University (Education & General); I. Education & General; A. Unrestricted; New Positions – Research Associate, $187,000 General Funds

Veto 9 Part IA, Page 137, Section 45, Clemson University (Public Service Activities); IV. Cooperative Extension Service; New Positions – GIS Analyst, $40,000 General Funds

Veto 10 Part IA, Page 137, Section 45, Clemson University (Public Service Activities); IV. Cooperative Extension Service; New Positions – Program Assistant, $35,000 General Funds

Veto 11 Part IA, Page 137, Section 45, Clemson University (Public Service Activities); IV. Cooperative Extension Service; New Positions – Program Manager I, $50,000 General Funds

Veto 12 Part IA, Page 138, Section 45, Clemson University (Public Service Activities); IV. Cooperative Extension Service; New Positions – Extension Associates, $200,000 General Funds

Veto 13 Part IA, Page 138, Section 45, Clemson University (Public Service Activities); IV. Cooperative Extension Service; New Positions – Extension Agent, $600,000 General Funds

I have vetoed the new positions for Clemson University and its related Public Service Authority, because these expenditures are excessive when combined with the University’s capital items and do not focus on core instructional quality. I believe the basis of our state’s investment in higher education should be in an accountable system of education focused on technical certification and associate and

4620


baccalaureate degrees that prepare our citizens for the modern workforce.

In this budget and related appropriations bills, Clemson University receives $6.5 million for capital expenditures, including $5 million for the further development of a Business School Building and $1.5 million for Clemson Public Service Authority facilities, both of which will become law even if this veto is sustained.

Veto 14 Part IA, Page 1, Section 1, Department of Education; IV. Accountability; A. Operations; New Positions – Education Associate, $130,000 General Funds

Veto 15 Part IA, Page 1, Section 1, Department of Education; IV. Accountability; A. Operations; New Positions – DPTY/Division Director, $119,000 General Funds

Veto 16 Part IA, Page 2, Section 1, Department of Education; VIII. School Effectiveness; New Positions – Education Associate, $175,000 General Funds

Veto 17 Part IA, Page 2, Section 1, Department of Education; VIII. School Effectiveness; New Positions – Administrative Assistant, $38,000 General Funds

Veto 18 Part IA, Page 2, Section 1, Department of Education; VIII. School Effectiveness; New Positions – Program Manager I, $155,000 General Funds

Veto 19 Part IA, Page 2, Section 1, Department of Education; VIII. School Effectiveness; Personal Service – Program Coordinator I, $95,000

South Carolina has seen resurgence in education investments over the past several years, and I am pleased to have a partner leading the Department of Education who is focused on improving educational outcomes for children across this state. It is for this reason that I support the creation and expansion of several literacy, educator compensation, school choice, and technology programs in this budget.

4621


Although I have been supportive of programmatic support for students, this budget adds a dozen new positions to our state’s education administration. I believe that the four teaching positions made available will provide Superintendent Spearman with the support she needs to implement Read to Succeed and evaluate the various literacy programs authorized by this budget as required by Proviso 1.93. However, I am vetoing these new positions as I believe the additional resources that remain in this budget are enough to continue the recent progress we have made, together, in educating our children.

II. Part IB – Temporary FundingRejecting Irresponsible Budgeting Practices

Veto 20 Part IB, Page 372, Section 33, Department of Health and Human Services – Proviso 33.30, Healthcare Workforce Analysis

This proviso steals $200,000 from the Department of Health and Human Service’s reserves and sends it to a different state agency – the Area Health Education Consortium (AHEC). If the General Assembly wants to fund AHEC, then it should be placed on the line as requested by AHEC, not raided from our Medicaid program.

Rejecting New Earmarks

Veto 21 Part IA, Page 9, Section 1, Department of Education; XII. Education Improvement Act; F.Partnerships; 2. Other Agencies and Entities; District Subdivisions – Arts Curricula, $1,000,000 Total Funds

Over the course of my administration, I have repeatedly expressed support for expanding arts curricula through our public and charter schools. Unfortunately, this earmark does not provide direct support for arts education through the Department of Education; it is a pass-through to an arts bureaucracy. If we want to send money for arts education to our schools, we should do that and do so directly.

Higher Education Earmarks

Veto 22 Part IB, Page 526, Section 118, Statewide Revenue; Proviso 118.14(B), Nonrecurring Revenue –

4622


Item 43(c) Department of Labor, Licensing and Regulation, Wind and Seismic Residential Building Requirements Study, $40,000Veto 23 Part IB, Page 431, Section 81, Department of Labor, Licensing and Regulation – Proviso 81.14, Wind and Structural Engineering Research Lab

These two provisos, in conjunction, direct funding to the Department of Labor, Licensing and Regulation (LLR) to contract with The Citadel to conduct a study of South Carolina’s building codes. While I do not object to a robust analysis of South Carolina’s building regulations for the safety of our citizens and success of our vibrant homebuilding industry, this appropriation is nothing more than an earmark for The Citadel; LLR should have the ability to openly and independently procure its own vendor.

Veto 24 Part IB, Page 515, Section 117, General Provisions – Proviso 117.131, Energy Efficiency Repair and Related Maintenance

Proviso 118.16(B)(56) of the Fiscal Year 2014-15 General Appropriations Act established a committee to examine the effectiveness and efficiency of our state’s institutions of higher education as a precursor to determining the needs and challenges of each. Ultimately, this committee was unable to determine an effective course of action and failed to produce a viable set of recommendations for policy makers to use when determining the adequate scope and quantity of funding that is appropriate for South Carolina’s colleges and universities.

This proviso takes the carry-forward funds originally intended to procure external evaluators for individual university reviews and doles them out as earmarks for small energy efficiency projects. Given that the committee’s funds were never used for their original purpose, the funds should lapse to the General Fund and be appropriated based on the needs of our state, not used as small rewards for colleges and universities that still have not identified areas for individual improvement to state policymakers.


4623


Item 10(a) Commission on Higher Education, University Center of Greenville, $250,000

The University Center of Greenville is governed by a consortium of public and private colleges and universities that are working together to expand access to higher education for students in the Upstate. I respect this goal but note that these intuitions each receive state support through direct appropriations, the Education Lottery, Higher Education Tuition Grants program, or various other state sources. Furthermore, the University is receiving nearly $1.1 million in direct subsidies through this budget.

I am vetoing this additional $250,000, because it is unreasonable to expect taxpayers across the state to shoulder an additional burden on behalf of the relatively small number of students who attend courses through this Center. If this facility truly needs another $250,000 to operate, then participating institutions should make the required contributions.

Veto 26 Part IB, Page 526, Section 118, Statewide Revenue; Proviso 118.14(B), Nonrecurring Revenue – Item (42)(f) Department of Commerce - IT-ology - Coursepower Project, $200,000

The CoursePower initiative was originally developed in FY 2013-14 to provide a six-hour applied minor in Applied Computing at four colleges and universities without state support. This earmark was added in last year’s budget, and it appears as though IT-ology has become a recurring appropriation.

I am pleased to see that the partner institutions are collaborating to promote education in the high-tech field, but I believe they should share the burden among themselves or with the students who are enrolled in these courses, instead of seeking a state earmark to sustain the program.

Earmarks for Health and Social Service Providers

Veto 27 Part IB, Page 524, Section 118, Statewide Revenue; Proviso 118.14(B), Nonrecurring Revenue – Item (29), Prosecution Coordination Commission, SC Center for Fathers and Families, $400,000

4624


The Center has been a contracted service provider to the Department of Social Services for over a decade, receiving an average of $1.8 million annually for its efforts. If we receive a set of defined services in exchange for those funds, then why would we just hand them this additional $400,000 earmark in exchange for nothing?

Veto 28 Part IB, Page 525, Section 118, Statewide Revenue; Proviso 118.14(B), Nonrecurring Revenue – Item (35)(b), Department of Probation, Parole and Pardon Services, Turning Leaf - Offender Education and Reentry Initiative, $100,000

By earmarking community corrections service to a single vendor, the Department of Probation, Pardon and Parole Services loses the flexibility and authority to manage its own contracts and services. I believe strongly in preparing offenders to re-enter our communities with an emphasis on offenders quickly joining the workforce. Offenders who work are less likely to commit crimes and return to prison. Nevertheless, I have consistently opposed this style of earmarking. The Department should have greater discretion to choose its partners and the ability to insist on performance standards in its contracts. Earmarking undermines both of these principles.

Veto 29 Part IB, Page 523, Section 118, Statewide Revenue; Proviso 118.14(B), Nonrecurring Revenue – Item (24)(c) Department of Disabilities and Special Needs, Savannah’s Playground, $100,000

I appreciate the value of local pools and playgrounds, but each community must decide for itself how – and if – to fund these facilities. These are not projects that the State’s taxpayers should be financing.

Veto 30 Part IB, Page 523, Section 118, Statewide Revenue; Proviso 118.14(B), Nonrecurring Revenue – Item (21)(e), Department of Health and Human Services, Family Health Solutions of the Low Country - Low Country Healthy Start, $250,000


4625


Item (21)(f), Department of Health and Human Services, Healthy Learners - Greenwood Program, $50,000

Veto 32 Part IB, Page 523, Section 118, Statewide Revenue; Proviso 118.14(B), Nonrecurring Revenue – Item (21)(d), Department of Health and Human Services, Osprey Village, $200,000

These three earmarks for private health organizations represent well-meaning but highly local efforts that we see duplicated across the state. Many churches, social non-profits, and start-up health companies wish for the opportunity to receive supplemental funds or seed-money to launch initiatives. Each of these organizations should seek private investment or philanthropic contributions to further their private efforts.

Good Government

Veto 33 Part IB, Page 526, Section 118, Statewide Revenue; Proviso 118.14 – Nonrecurring Revenue – Item 42(e) Department of Commerce, Community Development Corporations Initiative, $100,000

Veto 34 Part IB, Page 526, Section 118, Statewide Revenue; Proviso 118.14 – Nonrecurring Revenue – Item 42(h) Department of Commerce, SC Healthy Food Financing Initiative, $250,000

On June 3, 2015, I signed into law S.350, which reauthorized the Community Economic Development Act for an additional five years. In a statement to Senator Campbell, I indicated that my support for reauthorization was based on giving Community Development Corporations (CDC) investors time to meet the $5 million maximum tax credit ceiling and then wind-down this program. I further stated that I would not support any appropriation for CDCs or support further reauthorization.

Both of the items represent earmarks for CDCs, and I am vetoing these items in accordance with my previous communication to Senator Campbell.

4626


Veto 35 Part IB, Page 445, Section 93, Department of Administration – Proviso 93.14, Inspector General Support Services

Veto 36 Part IB, Page 467, Section 104, State Fiscal Accountability Authority – Proviso 104.9, Aeronautics Support Function

These two provisos direct the support functions for two small agencies: the Inspector General (IG), and Division of Aeronautics. Proviso 93.14 prohibits the Department of Administration from providing any support services to the Inspector General and Proviso 104.9 requires the State Fiscal Accountability Authority to provide the same services to the Division of Aeronautics.

These provisos, when taken together, are totally inconsistent. Further, they defeat the goals of the South Carolina Restructuring Act of 2014 entirely. On July 1, 2015, both the IG and Division of Aeronautics will be allowed to enter into agreements with the support agency of their choice. These decisions should not be micro-managed through the budget process. We have high quality directors in both agencies, and they should be given the flexibility to manage their own organizations.

Excessive Spending

Veto 37 Part IB, Page 526, Section 118, Statewide Revenue; Proviso 118.14, Nonrecurring Revenue – Item 47, Codification of Laws and Legislative Council, Dues, $50,000

The General Assembly should not give itself an earmark to cover expenses. This is especially true considering, in 2012, the House of Representatives enjoyed a $2 million recurring increase in operating funds and in this Act, the Senate will see a $500,000 increase for the same. The General Assembly has provided sufficient recurring funds to pay for these operating costs and do not need additional earmarks.

Veto 38 Part IB, Page 523, Section 118, Statewide Revenue; Proviso 118.14, Nonrecurring Revenue – Item 22(e), Department of Health and Environmental Control, Water Quality, $5,000,000

4627


The practice of providing an agency with large appropriations for grants without any direction, and then providing “letters of instruction” from legislative members or staff violates every sense of budgeting transparency and fiscal responsibility, and even violates the earmarking rules of the House of Representatives.

Instead of approving this unaccountable block grant, I have allowed $3.7 million in recurring funds for this purpose in the Rural Infrastructure Fund to become law so that regional water infrastructure grants may be awarded in a fair and impartial basis.

Veto 39 Part IB, Page 523, Section 118, Statewide Revenue; Proviso 118.14, Nonrecurring Revenue – Item 23(g) Department of Mental Health, Columbia Area Mental Health Center -Relocation form Bull Street Property (Requires 2:1 Match), $500,000

Pursuant to the sale of the Bull Street mental health facilities, the Department of Mental Health is subject to receive a guaranteed $15 million in proceeds in addition to performance-based funding as the property is redeveloped. The Department has more than enough funding on hand to self-finance any relocation from the property and will be made whole as Bull Street is developed, making any such additional funding unnecessary.

Veto 40 Part IB, Page 525, Section 118, Statewide Revenue; Proviso 118.14, Nonrecurring Revenue – Item 38, Department of Agriculture, “Certified SC” Marketing, $2,000,000

For several years, the Department of Agriculture has received time-limited appropriations from the Tobacco Master Settlement Fund for marketing and other efforts to assist tobacco farmers’ transition from tobacco to other crops or industries. This is the first year that those funds have not been available to the Department, and despite a clear understanding that those funds were only available for five years, the Department is seeking to supplant them with state funds.

While I support efforts to promote South Carolina’s goods, it is worth noting that this budget provides an additional $1.5 million for marketing and agribusiness. The Department will still have a sufficiently robust marketing and advertising budget to sell South Carolina.

4628


Impairing Service Delivery – Micromanagement

Veto 41 Part IB, Page 305, Section 1, Department of Education – Proviso 1.35, Replacement Facilities

Every Superintendent of Education since 2004 has determined this project is not viable, yet this proviso has remained on the books. This proviso was originally established over a decade ago to support the development of a joint-use transportation and maintenance facility in Greenville County. It should be removed from the budget.

Veto 42 Part IB, Page 310, Section 1, Department of Education – Proviso 1.58, Lee County Bus Shop

This proviso first appeared in 2012 and forces the Department of Education to fund two specific bus shops at precisely the same levels as the prior year. This action interferes with the Department’s ability to deploy its resources in an effective, statewide manner.

Veto 43 Part IB, Page 314, Section 1, Department of Education – Proviso 1.73, Alternative Fuel Transportation

This proviso directs the Department of Education to use at least ten percent of funds appropriated for the purchase or lease of school buses to purchase or lease alternative fuel vehicles. I have allowed provisos similar to this one to become law in two previous budgets, because the total size of the program was capped between five and ten percent of appropriations for the purchase of buses.

Unfortunately, this proviso removes all limitations on the amount of funds that can be used on the purchase of alternative fuel buses and sets a floor at ten percent of appropriated funds. In short, this proviso makes it more expensive to buy school buses. We have a poorly conditioned bus fleet and limited funds to purchase new buses – making them more expensive moves us entirely in the wrong direction.

Veto 44 Part IB, Page 393, Section 38, Department of Social Services – Proviso 38.28, Child Care Facilities Floor Beds

4629


This proviso introduces ambiguous language that would allow certain childcare facilities that use “the practice of a documented educational curriculum including the least restrictive environment for infants” to employ floor beds instead of cribs for infant care. This is a significant change to childcare standards and was done without input of the relevant stakeholders. That is dangerous; it is unsafe for our kids, and it should not happen.

Parents across South Carolina should trust that their children will be safe when left with a childcare provider, and significant changes to safety standards are best left to the full consideration and debate of childcare providers, regulators, and public stakeholders.

Veto 45 Part IB, Page 450, Section 93, Department of Administration – Proviso 93.33, Classification and Compensation System Study

This proviso directs the Department of Administration to undertake a comprehensive study of statewide employee compensation and classification. The General Assembly passed legislation in 1990 that would make this exercise ongoing but has never fully funded that initiative. Furthermore, the cost to hire an external evaluator to do this work would be significantly more than this proviso allows.

While a comprehensive, statewide look at our human resources policies certainly falls under the umbrella of the Department of Administration, this proviso is unnecessarily prescriptive, and will not result in a comprehensive or useable tool.

Housekeeping

Veto 46 Part IB, Page 320, Section 1, Department of Education – Proviso 1.95, First Steps Study Committee

On June 1, 2015, I signed H.3843, completing this task. This proviso is unnecessary.

Veto 47 Part IB, Page 435, Section 84, Department of Transportation – Proviso 84.11, Horry-Georgetown Evacuation Route

Last year, the General Assembly earmarked $4.5 million for this project out of Department of Transportation (DOT) funds and has

4630


placed language in H.4230, the Fiscal Year 2015-16 Supplemental Appropriation Act, allowing affected counties to use County Transportation Funds for the furtherance of this project. Per the DOT, the Department has the money to do this already. This proviso is no longer necessary.

Veto 48 Part IB, Page 406, Section 57, Judicial Department – Proviso 57.19, Active Retired Judges

I am vetoing this proviso at the request of Chief Justice Jean Toal, on behalf of the Judicial Department, due to errors in the proviso’s wording that will result in reducing the current pay rate for active retired judges.

Old-fashioned Pork

Veto 49 Part IB, Page 526, Section 118, Statewide Revenue; Proviso 118.14(B), Nonrecurring Revenue – Item (46)(b), Department of Transportation, Highway 17 Corridor Study, $25,000

Veto 50 Part IB, Page 525, Section 118, Statewide Revenue; Proviso 118.14(B), Nonrecurring Revenue – Item (41)(o), Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism, City of Conway - Renovation of Horry County Museum for Multipurpose Space (Requires 3:1 Match), $250,000

Veto 51 Part IB, Page 525, Section 118, Statewide Revenue; Proviso 118.14(B), Nonrecurring Revenue – Item (41)(a), Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism, Undiscovered SC, $500,000

Veto 52 Part IB, Page 525, Section 118, Statewide Revenue; Proviso 118.14(B), Nonrecurring Revenue – Item (41)(c), Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism, Sports Development Marketing Program, $875,000

Veto 53 Part IB, Page 523, Section 118, Statewide Revenue; Proviso 118.14(B), Nonrecurring Revenue – Item (22)(j), Department of Health and Environmental

4631


Control, Indoor Aquatic and Community Center - Richland County (Requires 2:1 Match), $100,000

Veto 54 Part IB, Page 525, Section 118, Statewide Revenue; Proviso 118.14(B), Nonrecurring Revenue – Item (41)(k), Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism, Woodrow Wilson Home - National Marketing, $125,000

Veto 55 Part IB, Page 525, Section 118, Statewide Revenue; Proviso 118.14(B), Nonrecurring Revenue – Item (41)(m), Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism, Calhoun County Renovation of Former John Ford Middle/High School for Community Center (Requires 2:1 Match), $180,000

Veto 56 Part IB, Page 525, Section 118, Statewide Revenue; Proviso 118.14(B), Nonrecurring Revenue – Item (41)(l), Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism, City of Sumter Green Space Initiative (Requires 1:1 Match), $400,000

Veto 57 Part IB, Page 525, Section 118, Statewide Revenue; Proviso 118.14(B), Nonrecurring Revenue – Item (41)(f), Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism, Columbia Museum of Art, $200,000

Veto 58 Part IB, Page 525, Section 118, Statewide Revenue; Proviso 118.14(B), Nonrecurring Revenue – Item (41)(s), Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism, Inman City Market, $100,000

Veto 59 Part IB, Page 525, Section 118, Statewide Revenue; Proviso 118.14(B), Nonrecurring Revenue – Item (41)(r), Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism, Manning Avenue/Wilder School Area Green Space Initiative, $250,000

Veto 60 Part IB, Page 525, Section 118, Statewide Revenue; Proviso 118.14(B), Nonrecurring Revenue – Item (41)(j), Department of Parks, Recreation and

4632


Tourism, Mountain Lakes Destination Promotion and Historic Preservation (Requires 2:1 Match), $100,000

Veto 61 Part IB, Page 525, Section 118, Statewide Revenue; Proviso 118.14(B), Nonrecurring Revenue – Item (41)(d), Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism, Newberry Opera House, $60,000

Veto 62 Part IB, Page 525, Section 118, Statewide Revenue; Proviso 118.14(B), Nonrecurring Revenue – Item (41)(h), Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism, Medal of Honor Museum, $1,000,000

Veto 63 Part IB, Page 525, Section 118, Statewide Revenue; Proviso 118.14(B), Nonrecurring Revenue – Item (41)(e), Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism, Palmetto Conservation Foundation - Palmetto Trail, $300,000

Veto 64 Part IB, Page 525, Section 118, Statewide Revenue; Proviso 118.14(B), Nonrecurring Revenue – Item (41)(n), Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism, Spartanburg City Park Project, $300,000

Veto 65 Part IB, Page 525, Section 118, Statewide Revenue; Proviso 118.14(B), Nonrecurring Revenue – Item (41)(q), Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism, Township Auditorium, $250,000

Veto 66 Part IB, Page 525, Section 118, Statewide Revenue; Proviso 118.14(B), Nonrecurring Revenue – Item (41)(i), Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism, Upstate 9/11 Memorial (Requires 2:1 Match), $200,000

This list of 18 pork-barrel projects above represents over $5 million of some of the most irresponsible political deal-making that South Carolina has to offer. These earmarks fortunately disappeared during the most recent recession but returned in force as tax revenues rebounded. I will not support pork in this or any budget.

4633


Veto 67 Part IB, Page 517, Section 117, General Provisions – Proviso 117.137, Grant Funds

This proviso allows grant funds awarded to the now defunct Kiwanis Club of Fountain Inn to be transferred to another Kiwanis Club. Passing grant funds between different organizations by proviso subverts the grant requirements and oversight safeguards of the original grant. As stewards of public funds, we have a responsibility to ensure tax dollars are spent wisely by following our own grant-making rules.

Veto 68 Part IB, Page 399, Section 49, Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism – Proviso 49.3, Advertising Funds Use and Carry Forward

Every year, I am put in a position to veto public funds for the Southeastern Wildlife Exposition (SEWE), a private organization that annually holds an event in Charleston that draws a large enough attraction to operate independently of state support. Despite repeatedly demonstrating that this earmark overwhelmingly goes to pay a single salary for SEWE’s director, it inexplicably retains sufficient support to remain in the budget.

The one thing that has changed is that SEWE and its legislative supporters have engaged in efforts to make this earmark decreasingly transparent, first sanitizing it through the SEWE non-profit to a private consultancy and is now hiding behind the credibility of the Charleston CVB. This should be the last year such tactics are tolerated by the General Assembly.

Local Earmarks

Veto 69 Part IB, Page 526, Section 118, Statewide Revenue; Proviso 118.14(B), Nonrecurring Revenue – Item (43)(b), Department of Labor, Licensing and Regulation, State Fire Marshal: Fairfield County - Countywide Fire Suppression, $100,000

Veto 70 Part IB, Page 526, Section 118, Statewide Revenue; Proviso 118.14(B), Nonrecurring Revenue – Item (43)(a), Department of Labor, Licensing and Regulation, State Fire Marshal: Chester County - Countywide Fire Suppression, $100,000

4634


South Carolina has 46 counties, yet only two were funded directly in this budget. There is no justifiable reason to provide this funding to these two counties in this manner and ignore the other 44. In addition, while I generally support the efforts of fire districts to provide better services for citizens, but I believe that South Carolina has a stable process for funding local services locally.

Veto 71 Part IB, Page 524, Section 118, Statewide Revenue; Proviso 118.14(B), Nonrecurring Revenue – Item (32)(b), Department of Public Safety, Law Enforcement Grants, $60,000

This is a direct earmark to Sumter County. Again we have 46 counties in South Carolina, and there is no justifiable reason to provide this funding to Sumter County and ignore the other 45. In addition, the State already provides resources to local law enforcement via the law enforcement grants managed by the Department of Public Safety, the body camera funding available in this Act, or the many uncompensated support services provided by the State Law Enforcement Division to local governments.

Earmarks for Museums, Historical, and Cultural Facilities

Veto 72 Part IB, Page 522, Section 118, Statewide Revenue; Proviso 118.14(B), Nonrecurring Revenue – Item (9), Confederate Relic Room & Military Museum Commission, C.A. Huey Collection, $390,198

The C.A. Huey Collection is a private collection recently made available for purchase. Private donations can and should pay for this.

Veto 73 Part IB, Page 521, Section 118, Statewide Revenue; Proviso 118.14(B), Nonrecurring Revenue – Item (7)(a), Arts Commission, Auntie Karen Foundation - Education Through Arts Curriculum, $10,000

Veto 74 Part IB, Page 521, Section 118, Statewide Revenue; Proviso 118.14(B), Nonrecurring Revenue – Item (7)(b), Arts Commission, Orangeburg County Fine Arts Center (Requires 2:1 Match), $90,000

4635


Veto 75 Part IB, Page 521, Section 118, Statewide Revenue; Proviso 118.14(B), Nonrecurring Revenue – Item (6)(a), Department of Archives and History, Restoration and Repurposing of Fireproof Building (Requires 2:1 Match), $1,500,000

Veto 76 Part IB, Page 521, Section 118, Statewide Revenue; Proviso 118.14(B), Nonrecurring Revenue – Item (6)(b), Department of Archives and History, Kings Mountain - Fort Thicketty - Historic Restoration, $100,000

Veto 77 Part IB, Page 521, Section 118, Statewide Revenue; Proviso 118.14(B), Nonrecurring Revenue – Item (6)(c), Department of Archives and History, Historic Heyward House, $100,000

Veto 78 Part IB, Page 521, Section 118, Statewide Revenue; Proviso 118.14(B), Nonrecurring Revenue – Item (6)(d), Department of Archives and History, Architectural Heritage Preservation, $250,000

In each of our communities, we have historic sites, museums, and cultural centers that could benefit from renovations, refreshed exhibits, or new artifacts. The right way to finance these undertakings is by selling memberships, collecting admissions fees, and soliciting philanthropic support. The wrong way to do it is by earmarking state funds to choose one site over another to support. This is exactly what the taxpayers of South Carolina have asked to stop.

Maintaining Unified Economic Development Efforts

Veto 79 Part IB, Page 526, Section 118, Statewide Revenue; Proviso 118.14(B), Nonrecurring Revenue – Item (42)(j), Department of Commerce, Marion County Economic Development, $250,000


4636


Item (42)(l), Department of Commerce, Richland County Economic Development, $100,000

Veto 81 Part IB, Page 526, Section 118, Statewide Revenue; Proviso 118.14(B), Nonrecurring Revenue – Item (42)(d), Department of Commerce, Rock Hill Knowledge Park (Requires 2:1 Match), $400,000

Veto 82 Part IB, Page 526, Section 118, Statewide Revenue; Proviso 118.14(B), Nonrecurring Revenue – Item (42)(k), Department of Commerce, Williamsburg County Economic Development, $100,000

The Department of Commerce gives all regional economic development alliances money each year. This year, the alliances will receive $5,000,000 through an agreed upon formula. Why would we select only four organizations to receive additional money when all are worthy?

Veto 83 Part IB, Page 526, Section 118, Statewide Revenue; Proviso 118.14(B), Nonrecurring Revenue – Item (42)(i), Department of Commerce, Hartsville Downtown Revitalization - Center Theater (Requires 2:1 Match), $500,000

The City of Hartsville, like so many others cities and towns across this state were deeply affected by the most recent recession, has needs for community revitalization and economic development. We provided for these needs in 2012 when we signed into law the Abandoned Buildings Revitalization Act. However, city or town, Hartsville or any other, should be singled out in the budget this way. It is not an appropriate way for this government to spend the taxpayers’ dollars, and I ask that you join me in discontinuing this process.

For these reasons, I am vetoing the aforementioned line items and sections in R. 127, H. 3701

My very best,Nikki R. HaleyGovernor

Received as information.

4637


4638





Dear Mr. Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives,I am vetoing and returning to you several line items in R. 128,

H. 3702, a Joint Resolution to appropriate monies from the Capital Reserve Fund.

When I submitted my Fiscal Year 2015-16 Executive Budget in January, my recommendations for the Capital Reserve Fund included funding for our colleges and universities, our technical college system, our National Guard armories, and other priorities to maintain state-owned infrastructure. Many of those same priorities are expressed in the Joint Resolution that came to my desk, but it is worth noting how this bill got to my desk.

Earlier this year, the General Assembly proposed a massive bond bill that would have totaled over $500 million in borrowing for state-owned buildings and one-time cash for recurring expenses of government. With help from many legislators, this hasty and irresponsible borrowing plan was placed on the shelf. By the end of May, we had an additional $300 million in General Funds alone and another $100 million in other sources such as the education sales tax and lottery funds. South Carolina’s good fortune – the result of a trained workforce, business-friendly climate, and low debt – drives tax revenues to pay for our needs on a recurring basis.

The Capital Reserve Fund bill you have sent to my desk largely reflects our values and priorities, funding colleges and technical schools with money we have now, not with debt we will pay for over the next fifteen years.

Veto 1 Section 1, Page 2 – Item (7), Judicial Department Disaster Recovery Plan, $2,500,000

4639


The Fiscal Year 2015-16 Appropriation Act supports two additional family court judges and related staff, as well as capital funding for digital courtroom reporting equipment to make our courts run more efficiently. I am unable to support, however, the $2,500,000 for disaster recovery in light of Act 269 of 2012, which gives the court a dedicated source of recurring funding expressly for “the support of court technology” that should be used to pay for this item.

Veto 2 Section 1, Page 3 – Item (17), Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism, State Aquarium Renovation, $1,000,000

As with over a dozen other earmarks I vetoed in the FY 2015-16 General Appropriations Act, this is an unacceptable earmark in a year where the General Assembly gave state parks very little capital support. The State Aquarium should seek local and philanthropic support, memberships, and fees to pay for facility maintenance.

Veto 3 Section 1, Page 3 – Item (18), Election Commission, Presidential Preference Primaries, $2,200,000

I vetoed a similar item in 2011 and must now do so for the same reasons. As I have made clear throughout my entire administration, I believe that private dollars are the appropriate way to fund a partisan Presidential Primary. The Attorney General has affirmed that the respective state parties can contract with the State Election Commission to conduct the primary. South Carolina will host the First in the South Presidential Primary in 2016, and it will be as successful as it always has been; but it should not fall to the taxpayers to cover the expense.

For these reasons, I am vetoing the aforementioned line items and sections in R. 128, H. 3702.



4640





Dear Mr. Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives,Today, I am vetoing and returning without my approval a certain line

item in R. 130, H. 4230, the FY 2015-16 Supplemental Appropriations Act.

This year, the State of South Carolina was fortunate enough to see revenues greater than any since the Great Recession, but those revenues were not certified until close to the end of this year’s budget process. When I proposed my Executive Budget in January, it funded government and made investments in education, infrastructure, and public safety, doing so with less than $300 million in recurring General Fund dollars. When the Board of Economic Advisors certified over $300 million new General Fund dollars to be spent next year, it was effectively the same as certifying an entirely new year’s amount of revenues.

Fortunately, due to the efforts of many House and Senate fighters, we made sure that supplemental appropriations went to debt relief and core functions of government, with a significant investment in infrastructure. Between direct appropriations and other items, over $350 million will go to roads next year – all without raising taxes.

Our work to fix roads is not finished yet. While supplemental funds may be going to local governments – the governments closest to the people – most of the money is non-recurring and will not be repeated next year. Further, local governments are not required to follow the same priorities as the Department of Transportation; this leaves room for County Transportation Committees to pick road projects that may not be the highest priority of citizens. Next year, we need to work hard to secure a more permanent source of funds for our roads and do so in an accountable way.

4641


In addition to appropriating new General Funds to infrastructure and debt relief, I do not object to the remaining parts of this Act, including sections that allocate monies for education from state funds restricted for education-only use, with one exception: I am vetoing one allocation for the Lieutenant Governor’s Office on Aging, which is an earmark requested by a single state lawmaker, not the agency.

Veto 1 Section 3; Page 3; Item B(1) Lieutenant Governor’s Office – Predatory Lending Education, $250,000.

As stated above, this item is an earmark for a single state lawmaker intended to be used for a private business for predatory lending education. These types of hidden earmarks on behalf of private businesses violate the principles of transparent budgeting and competitive procurement.

I ask that you sustain this good-government veto with my thanks and those of the people of South Carolina for taking another important step in improving our state’s infrastructure.



SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE IN CHAIR

ROLL CALLThe roll call of the House of Representatives was taken resulting as

follows:Alexander Allison AndersonAnthony Bales BallentineBamberg Bedingfield BinghamBradley G. A. Brown R. L. BrownBurns Chumley ClaryClemmons Clyburn Cobb-HunterCole Collins CorleyH. A. Crawford Crosby DaningDelleney Dillard DouglasDuckworth Felder Forrester

4642


Funderburk Gagnon GeorgeGoldfinch Hamilton HardeeHart Hayes HendersonHenegan Herbkersman HicksHodges Horne HoseyHoward Huggins JeffersonJohnson Jordan KingKirby Knight LoweLucas McEachern McKnightW. J. McLeod Mitchell D. C. MossV. S. Moss Murphy NanneyNeal Newton NormanNorrell Ott ParksPitts Pope PutnamQuinn Ridgeway RiversRobinson-Simpson Rutherford RyhalSimrill G. M. Smith G. R. SmithJ. E. Smith Sottile SouthardSpires Stringer TallonThayer Tinkler TooleWeeks Wells WhipperWhite Williams Yow

STATEMENT OF ATTENDANCEI came in after the roll call and was present for the Session on

Monday, July 6.Todd Atwater Bruce W. BannisterBeth Bernstein William BowersDouglas "Doug" Brannon Shannon EricksonKirkman Finlay Mike GambrellWendell Gilliard Jerry GovanJonathon Hill Ralph KennedyH. B. "Chip" Limehouse Dwight LoftisDeborah A. Long David MackPeter McCoy, Jr. Mia S. McLeodRobert Riley W. E. "Bill" SandiferLeon Stavrinakis William "Bill" TaylorWilliam R. "Bill" Whitmire Mark Willis

Total Present--120

4643


SPEAKER IN CHAIR

LEAVE OF ABSENCEThe SPEAKER granted Rep. HIXON a leave of absence for the day

due to a long-scheduled, prior commitment.

LEAVE OF ABSENCEThe SPEAKER granted Rep. MERRILL a leave of absence for the

day.

LEAVE OF ABSENCEThe SPEAKER granted Rep. HIOTT a leave of absence for the day

due to previously scheduled church mission trip.

LEAVE OF ABSENCEThe SPEAKER granted Rep. BERNSTEIN a temporary leave of

absence to attend a funeral.

CO-SPONSOR REMOVEDIn 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. 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.”

CO-SPONSOR REMOVEDBill Number: H. 4093Date: REMOVE:06/30/15 MCEACHERN

4644



R. 127, H. 3701--THE GENERAL APPROPRIATIONS BILLThe Vetoes on the following Act were taken up:

(R. 127) H. 3701 -- 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, 2015, TO REGULATE THE EXPENDITURE OF SUCH FUNDS, AND TO FURTHER PROVIDE FOR THE OPERATION OF STATE GOVERNMENT DURING THIS FISCAL YEAR AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES.

VETO NO. 1-- OVERRIDDENVeto 1 Part IA, Page 149, Section 49, Department of Parks,

Recreation and Tourism; I. Administration; B. Administrative Services; Aid to Subdivisions – Allocations to Municipalities-Restricted, $1,806,000 Total Funds, $500,000 General Funds

Rep. HERBKERSMAN explained the Veto.Rep. BALLENTINE spoke in favor of the Veto.Rep. HAYES spoke against the Veto.

The question was put, shall the Item become a part of the law, the Veto of her Excellency, the Governor, to the contrary notwithstanding, the yeas and nays were taken resulting as follows:

Yeas 80; Nays 30

Those who voted in the affirmative are:Alexander Anderson AnthonyBales Bamberg BowersG. A. Brown R. L. Brown ClaryClemmons Clyburn Cobb-HunterCorley H. A. Crawford DelleneyDillard Douglas DuckworthErickson Felder FunderburkGagnon Gambrell GeorgeGilliard Goldfinch GovanHardee Hart HayesHenegan Herbkersman Hicks

4645


Hodges Horne HoseyHoward Jefferson JohnsonJordan King KirbyKnight Limehouse LoweLucas McEachern M. S. McLeodW. J. McLeod Mitchell D. C. MossV. S. Moss Murphy NealNewton Norrell OttParks Pitts PopeRidgeway Riley Robinson-SimpsonRutherford Ryhal SandiferSimrill G. M. Smith J. E. SmithSottile Spires TaylorTinkler Weeks WellsWhipper White WhitmireWilliams Yow

Total--80

Those who voted in the negative are:Allison Atwater BallentineBedingfield Bingham BradleyBurns Chumley ColeCollins Crosby DaningForrester Hamilton HendersonHill Huggins LoftisLong Nanney NormanPutnam Quinn G. R. SmithSouthard Stringer TallonThayer Toole Willis

Total--30

So, the Veto of the Governor was overridden and a message was ordered sent to the Senate accordingly.


Recreation and Tourism; I. Administration; B. Administrative Services; Aid to Subdivisions – Allocations to Counties-Restricted, $1,514,500 Total Funds, $500,000 General Funds

4646


Rep. HERBKERSMAN explained the Veto.Rep. BALLENTINE spoke in favor of the Veto.Rep. HAYES spoke against the Veto.Rep. HERBKERSMAN spoke against the Veto.


Yeas 85; Nays 27

Those who voted in the affirmative are:Alexander Anderson AnthonyBales Bamberg BannisterBowers G. A. Brown R. L. BrownClary Clemmons ClyburnCobb-Hunter Cole CorleyH. A. Crawford Crosby DaningDillard Douglas DuckworthErickson Felder FinlayFunderburk Gagnon GambrellGeorge Gilliard GoldfinchGovan Hardee HartHayes Henegan HerbkersmanHicks Hodges HorneHosey Howard JeffersonJohnson Jordan KingKirby Knight LimehouseLowe Lucas McEachernMcKnight M. S. McLeod W. J. McLeodMitchell D. C. Moss V. S. MossMurphy Neal NewtonNorrell Ott ParksPitts Pope RidgewayRiley Robinson-Simpson RutherfordRyhal Sandifer SimrillG. M. Smith J. E. Smith SottileSpires Taylor TinklerWeeks Wells Whipper

4647


White Whitmire WilliamsYow

Total--85 Those who voted in the negative are:Allison Atwater BallentineBedingfield Bingham BradleyBurns Chumley CollinsForrester Hamilton HendersonHill Huggins LoftisLong Nanney NormanPutnam Quinn G. R. SmithSouthard Stringer TallonThayer Toole Willis

Total--27



Recreation and Programs and Services; A. Tourism Sales and Marketing; Special Items – Sports Marketing Grant Program, $500,000 General Funds

Rep. HERBKERSMAN explained the Veto.


Yeas 87; Nays 26

Those who voted in the affirmative are:Alexander Anderson AnthonyBales Bamberg BannisterBowers G. A. Brown R. L. BrownClary Clemmons ClyburnCobb-Hunter Cole CorleyH. A. Crawford Crosby DaningDelleney Dillard Douglas

4648


Duckworth Erickson FinlayFunderburk Gagnon GambrellGeorge Gilliard GoldfinchGovan Hardee HartHayes Henegan HerbkersmanHicks Hodges HorneHosey Howard JeffersonJohnson Jordan KingKirby Knight LimehouseLowe Lucas MackMcCoy McEachern McKnightM. S. McLeod W. J. McLeod MitchellD. C. Moss V. S. Moss MurphyNeal Newton NorrellOtt Parks PittsPope Ridgeway RileyRobinson-Simpson Rutherford RyhalSandifer Simrill G. M. SmithJ. E. Smith Sottile SpiresStavrinakis Taylor TinklerWeeks Wells WhiteWhitmire Williams Yow

Total--87

Those who voted in the negative are:Allison Atwater BallentineBedingfield Bingham BradleyBurns Chumley CollinsFelder Forrester HamiltonHenderson Hill HugginsLong Nanney NormanPutnam Quinn SouthardStringer Tallon ThayerToole Willis

Total--26


4649


VETO NO. 4-- SUSTAINEDVeto 4 Part IA, Page 80, Section 29, State Museum Commission;

II. Programs; New Positions – Program Coordinator I, $35,000 General Funds

Rep. WHITE explained the Veto.Rep. HILL spoke in favor of the Veto.


Yeas 68; Nays 45

Those who voted in the affirmative are:Alexander Anderson AnthonyBales Bamberg BinghamBowers G. A. Brown R. L. BrownClary Clemmons ClyburnCobb-Hunter Corley DelleneyDillard Douglas FinlayFunderburk George GilliardGovan Hardee HartHayes Henegan HerbkersmanHicks Hodges HorneHosey Howard HugginsJefferson King KirbyKnight Mack McEachernMcKnight M. S. McLeod W. J. McLeodMitchell D. C. Moss V. S. MossMurphy Neal NorrellOtt Parks QuinnRidgeway Riley Robinson-SimpsonRutherford Ryhal SandiferJ. E. Smith Spires StavrinakisTaylor Tinkler WeeksWells Whipper WhitmireWilliams Yow

Total--68

Those who voted in the negative are:

4650


Allison Atwater BallentineBannister Bedingfield BradleyBurns Chumley ColeCollins H. A. Crawford CrosbyDuckworth Erickson FelderForrester Gagnon GambrellGoldfinch Hamilton HendersonHill Johnson JordanKennedy Long LoweLucas McCoy NanneyNewton Norman PopePutnam Rivers SimrillG. M. Smith G. R. Smith SouthardStringer Tallon ThayerToole White Willis

Total--45

So, the Veto of the Governor was sustained and a message was ordered sent to the Senate accordingly.

VETO NO. 5-- SUSTAINEDVeto 5 Part IA, Page 80, Section 29, State Museum commission;

II. Programs; New Positions – Program Coordinator II, $40,000 General Funds


Yeas 65; Nays 51

Those who voted in the affirmative are:Alexander Anderson AnthonyBales Bamberg BinghamBowers G. A. Brown R. L. BrownClary Clyburn Cobb-HunterCorley Daning DelleneyDillard Douglas FunderburkGeorge Gilliard GovanHardee Hart HayesHenegan Hodges Horne

4651


Hosey Howard HugginsJefferson King KirbyKnight Limehouse MackMcEachern McKnight M. S. McLeodW. J. McLeod Mitchell D. C. MossV. S. Moss Murphy NealNorrell Ott ParksQuinn Ridgeway RileyRobinson-Simpson Rutherford RyhalSandifer J. E. Smith SpiresStavrinakis Taylor TinklerWeeks Wells WhipperWilliams Yow

Total--65

Those who voted in the negative are:Allison Atwater BallentineBannister Bedingfield BradleyBurns Chumley ClemmonsCole Collins H. A. CrawfordCrosby Duckworth EricksonFelder Finlay ForresterGagnon Gambrell GoldfinchHamilton Henderson HerbkersmanHicks Hill JohnsonJordan Kennedy LoftisLong Lowe LucasMcCoy Nanney NewtonNorman Pope PutnamRivers Simrill G. M. SmithG. R. Smith Sottile SouthardStringer Tallon ThayerToole White Willis

Total--51


4652


VETO NO. 6-- OVERRIDDENVeto 6 Part 1A, Page 36, Section 14, Clemson University

(Education & General); I. Education & General; A. Unrestricted; New Positions – ENG/ASSOC ENG IV, $279,850 General Funds

Rep. WHITE explained the Veto.The question was put, shall the Item become a part of the law, the

Veto of her Excellency, the Governor, to the contrary notwithstanding, the yeas and nays were taken resulting as follows:

Yeas 102; Nays 16

Those who voted in the affirmative are:Alexander Allison AndersonAnthony Bales BallentineBamberg Bannister BedingfieldBingham Bowers G. A. BrownR. L. Brown Burns ChumleyClary Clemmons ClyburnCobb-Hunter Cole CorleyH. A. Crawford Crosby DillardDouglas Duckworth EricksonFinlay Forrester FunderburkGagnon Gambrell GeorgeGilliard Goldfinch GovanHamilton Hardee HartHayes Henderson HeneganHerbkersman Hicks HodgesHorne Hosey HowardHuggins Jefferson JordanKennedy King KirbyKnight Limehouse LoftisLowe Lucas MackMcEachern McKnight M. S. McLeodW. J. McLeod Mitchell D. C. MossV. S. Moss Murphy NanneyNeal Newton NorrellOtt Parks PopePutnam Ridgeway RileyRobinson-Simpson Rutherford RyhalSandifer Simrill G. M. SmithG. R. Smith J. E. Smith Sottile

4653


Spires Stavrinakis StringerTallon Taylor ThayerTinkler Weeks WellsWhipper White WhitmireWilliams Willis Yow

Total--102

Those who voted in the negative are:Atwater Bradley CollinsDaning Delleney FelderHill Johnson LongMcCoy Norman PittsQuinn Rivers SouthardToole

Total--16


VETO NO. 7-- OVERRIDDENVeto 7 Part IA, Page 36, Section 14, Clemson University

(Education & General); I. Education & General; A. Unrestricted; New Positions – Professor, $748,000 General Funds

Rep. WHITE explained the Veto.Rep. CLARY spoke against the Veto.


Yeas 86; Nays 27

Those who voted in the affirmative are:Alexander Anderson AnthonyBales Bamberg BannisterBowers G. A. Brown R. L. BrownClary Clemmons ClyburnCobb-Hunter Cole CorleyH. A. Crawford Crosby Daning

4654


Dillard Douglas DuckworthFinlay Funderburk GagnonGambrell George GilliardGoldfinch Hamilton HardeeHart Hayes HeneganHerbkersman Hodges HorneHosey Howard JeffersonKennedy King KirbyKnight Limehouse LoweLucas Mack McKnightM. S. McLeod W. J. McLeod MitchellD. C. Moss V. S. Moss MurphyNeal Newton NorrellOtt Parks PittsPope Putnam RidgewayRiley Robinson-Simpson RutherfordRyhal Sandifer SimrillG. M. Smith G. R. Smith J. E. SmithSottile Spires StavrinakisStringer Tallon TaylorTinkler Weeks WellsWhipper Whitmire WilliamsWillis Yow

Total--86

Those who voted in the negative are:Allison Atwater BallentineBedingfield Bingham BradleyBurns Collins DelleneyErickson Felder ForresterHenderson Hicks HillHuggins Johnson JordanLong McCoy NanneyNorman Quinn RiversSouthard Thayer Toole

Total--27


4655



(Education & General); I. Education & General; A. Unrestricted; New Positions – Research Associate, $187,000 General Funds

Rep. CLARY explained the Veto.


Yeas 86; Nays 26

Those who voted in the affirmative are:Alexander Anderson AnthonyBales Bamberg BannisterBowers G. A. Brown R. L. BrownClary Clemmons ClyburnCobb-Hunter Cole CorleyH. A. Crawford Crosby DaningDillard Douglas DuckworthFinlay Funderburk GagnonGambrell George GilliardGoldfinch Hamilton HardeeHart Hayes HeneganHodges Horne HoseyHoward Jefferson JordanKennedy King KirbyKnight Limehouse LucasMack McEachern McKnightM. S. McLeod W. J. McLeod MitchellD. C. Moss V. S. Moss MurphyNeal Newton NorrellOtt Parks PittsPope Putnam RidgewayRiley Robinson-Simpson RutherfordRyhal Sandifer SimrillG. M. Smith G. R. Smith J. E. SmithSottile Spires StavrinakisStringer Tallon TaylorTinkler Weeks Wells

4656


Whipper Whitmire WilliamsWillis Yow

Total--86

Those who voted in the negative are:Allison Atwater BallentineBedingfield Bingham BradleyBurns Collins DelleneyErickson Felder ForresterHenderson Hicks HillHuggins Johnson LongMcCoy Nanney NormanQuinn Rivers SouthardThayer Toole

Total--26


VETO NO. 9-- OVERRIDDENVeto 9 Part IA, Page 137, Section 45, Clemson University (Public

Service Activities); IV. Cooperative Extension Service; New Positions – GIS Analyst, $40,000 General Funds

Rep. SIMRILL explained the Veto.


Yeas 101; Nays 14

Those who voted in the affirmative are:Alexander Anderson AnthonyAtwater Bales BambergBannister Bedingfield BinghamBowers G. A. Brown R. L. BrownBurns Chumley ClaryClemmons Clyburn Cobb-HunterCole Corley H. A. Crawford

4657


Crosby Daning DelleneyDillard Douglas DuckworthErickson Finlay ForresterFunderburk Gagnon GambrellGeorge Gilliard GoldfinchGovan Hamilton HardeeHart Hayes HeneganHodges Horne HoseyHoward Huggins JeffersonJohnson Jordan KennedyKing Kirby KnightLimehouse Loftis LoweLucas Mack McEachernMcKnight M. S. McLeod W. J. McLeodMitchell D. C. Moss V. S. MossMurphy Neal NewtonNorrell Ott ParksPitts Pope PutnamQuinn Ridgeway RileyRobinson-Simpson Rutherford RyhalSandifer Simrill G. M. SmithG. R. Smith Sottile SpiresStavrinakis Tallon TaylorThayer Tinkler TooleWeeks Wells WhipperWhite Whitmire WilliamsWillis Yow

Total--101

Those who voted in the negative are:Allison Ballentine BradleyCollins Felder HendersonHicks Hill LongNanney Norman RiversSouthard Stringer

Total--14


4658


VETO NO. 10-- OVERRIDDENVeto 10. Part IA, Page 137, Section 45, Clemson University

(Public Service Activities); IV. Cooperative Extension Service; New Positions – Program Assistant, $35,000 General Funds



Yeas 98; Nays 15

Those who voted in the affirmative are:Alexander Allison AndersonAnthony Atwater BalesBamberg Bannister BinghamBowers G. A. Brown R. L. BrownBurns Chumley ClaryClemmons Clyburn Cobb-HunterCole Corley H. A. CrawfordCrosby Delleney DillardDouglas Duckworth EricksonFinlay Forrester FunderburkGagnon Gambrell GeorgeGilliard Goldfinch GovanHamilton Hardee HartHayes Henegan HicksHodges Horne HoseyHoward Huggins JeffersonJohnson Kennedy KingKirby Knight LimehouseLoftis Lowe LucasMack McCoy McKnightM. S. McLeod W. J. McLeod D. C. MossV. S. Moss Neal NewtonNorrell Ott ParksPitts Pope PutnamQuinn Ridgeway RileyRobinson-Simpson Rutherford RyhalSandifer Simrill G. M. SmithG. R. Smith J. E. Smith Sottile

4659


Spires Stavrinakis TallonTaylor Tinkler TooleWeeks Wells WhipperWhite Whitmire WilliamsWillis Yow

Total--98 Those who voted in the negative are:Ballentine Bedingfield BradleyCollins Daning FelderHenderson Hill LongNanney Norman RiversSouthard Stringer Thayer

Total--15



(Public Service Activities); IV. Cooperative Extension Service; New Positions – Program Manager I, $50,000 General Funds



Yeas 91; Nays 22

Those who voted in the affirmative are:Alexander Anderson AnthonyAtwater Bales BambergBannister Bingham BowersG. A. Brown R. L. Brown ChumleyClary Clemmons ClyburnCobb-Hunter Cole CorleyH. A. Crawford Delleney DillardDouglas Duckworth EricksonFinlay Forrester Funderburk

4660


Gagnon Gambrell GeorgeGoldfinch Govan HamiltonHardee Hart HayesHenegan Herbkersman HodgesHorne Hosey HowardHuggins Jefferson JohnsonKennedy King KirbyKnight Limehouse LucasMack McEachern McKnightM. S. McLeod Mitchell D. C. MossV. S. Moss Murphy NealNewton Norrell OttParks Pope PutnamQuinn Ridgeway RileyRobinson-Simpson Rutherford RyhalSandifer Simrill G. R. SmithJ. E. Smith Sottile SpiresStavrinakis Tallon TaylorThayer Tinkler TooleWeeks Wells WhipperWhite Whitmire WilliamsYow

Total--91

Those who voted in the negative are:Allison Ballentine BedingfieldBradley Collins CrosbyDaning Felder HendersonHicks Hill LoftisLong Lowe McCoyNanney Norman PittsRivers Southard StringerWillis

Total--22


4661



Service Activities); IV. Cooperative Extension Service; New Positions – Extension Associates, $200,000 General Funds



Yeas 104; Nays 9

Those who voted in the affirmative are:Alexander Allison AndersonAnthony Atwater BalesBallentine Bamberg BannisterBedingfield Bernstein BinghamBowers G. A. Brown R. L. BrownBurns Chumley ClaryClemmons Clyburn Cobb-HunterCole Corley H. A. CrawfordDelleney Dillard DouglasDuckworth Erickson FelderFinlay Forrester FunderburkGagnon Gambrell GeorgeGilliard Goldfinch GovanHamilton Hardee HartHayes Henegan HerbkersmanHicks Hodges HorneHosey Howard HugginsJefferson Johnson JordanKennedy King KirbyKnight Limehouse LoftisLowe Lucas MackMcKnight M. S. McLeod W. J. McLeodMitchell D. C. Moss V. S. MossMurphy Neal NewtonNorrell Ott PittsPope Putnam QuinnRidgeway Riley Robinson-SimpsonRutherford Ryhal Simrill

4662


G. M. Smith G. R. Smith J. E. SmithSottile Southard SpiresStavrinakis Stringer TallonTaylor Thayer TinklerToole Weeks WellsWhipper White WilliamsWillis Yow

Total--104

Those who voted in the negative are:Bradley Collins CrosbyDaning Henderson LongNanney Norman Rivers

Total--9



Service Activities); IV. Cooperative Extension Service; New Positions – Extension Agent, $600,000 General Funds



Yeas 105; Nays 12

Those who voted in the affirmative are:Alexander Allison AndersonAnthony Atwater BalesBallentine Bamberg BannisterBedingfield Bernstein BinghamBowers G. A. Brown R. L. BrownBurns Chumley ClaryClemmons Clyburn Cobb-HunterCole Corley H. A. Crawford

4663


Delleney Dillard DuckworthErickson Felder ForresterFunderburk Gagnon GambrellGeorge Gilliard GoldfinchGovan Hamilton HardeeHart Hayes HeneganHerbkersman Hicks HodgesHorne Hosey HowardHuggins Jefferson JohnsonJordan Kennedy KingKirby Knight LimehouseLoftis Lowe LucasMack McEachern McKnightM. S. McLeod W. J. McLeod MitchellD. C. Moss V. S. Moss MurphyNeal Newton NorrellOtt Parks PittsPope Putnam QuinnRidgeway Riley Robinson-SimpsonRutherford Ryhal SandiferSimrill G. M. Smith G. R. SmithJ. E. Smith Sottile SouthardSpires Stavrinakis StringerTallon Taylor TinklerToole Weeks WellsWhipper White WhitmireWilliams Willis Yow

Total--105

Those who voted in the negative are:Bradley Collins CrosbyDaning Henderson HillLong McCoy NanneyNorman Rivers Thayer

Total--12


4664


VETO NO. 14-- OVERRIDDENVeto 14 Part IA, Page 1, Section 1, Department of Education; IV.

Accountability; A. Operations; New Positions – Education Associate, $130,000 General Funds

Rep. BINGHAM explained the Veto.


Yeas 105; Nays 8

Those who voted in the affirmative are:Alexander Allison AndersonAnthony Bales BallentineBamberg Bannister BedingfieldBernstein Bingham BradleyG. A. Brown R. L. Brown BurnsClary Clemmons ClyburnCobb-Hunter Cole CorleyH. A. Crawford Crosby DaningDelleney Dillard DuckworthErickson Felder ForresterFunderburk Gagnon GambrellGeorge Gilliard GoldfinchGovan Hamilton HardeeHart Hayes HendersonHenegan Herbkersman HicksHodges Horne HoseyHoward Huggins JeffersonJordan Kennedy KingKirby Knight LoftisLowe Lucas MackMcCoy McEachern McKnightM. S. McLeod W. J. McLeod MitchellD. C. Moss V. S. Moss MurphyNeal Newton NorrellOtt Parks PittsPope Quinn RidgewayRiley Rivers Robinson-SimpsonRutherford Ryhal Sandifer

4665


Simrill G. M. Smith G. R. SmithJ. E. Smith Sottile SouthardSpires Stavrinakis StringerTallon Taylor TinklerToole Weeks WellsWhipper White WhitmireWilliams Willis Yow

Total--105

Those who voted in the negative are:Chumley Collins HillLong Nanney NormanPutnam Thayer

Total--8


SPEAKER IN CHAIR

VETO NO. 15-- OVERRIDDENVeto 15 Part IA, Page 1, Section 1, Department of Education; IV.

Accountability; A. Operations; New Positions – DPTY/Division Director, $119,000 General Funds



Yeas 104; Nays 8

Those who voted in the affirmative are:Alexander Allison AndersonAnthony Bales BallentineBamberg Bannister BedingfieldBernstein Bingham BowersBradley G. A. Brown R. L. BrownBurns Clemmons Clyburn

4666


Cobb-Hunter Cole CorleyH. A. Crawford Crosby DaningDelleney Dillard DuckworthFelder Forrester FunderburkGagnon Gambrell GeorgeGilliard Goldfinch GovanHamilton Hardee HartHayes Henderson HeneganHerbkersman Hicks HodgesHorne Hosey HowardHuggins Jefferson JohnsonJordan Kennedy KingKirby Knight LimehouseLoftis Lowe MackMcCoy McEachern McKnightM. S. McLeod W. J. McLeod MitchellD. C. Moss V. S. Moss MurphyNeal Newton NormanNorrell Ott ParksPitts Pope QuinnRidgeway Riley RiversRobinson-Simpson Rutherford RyhalSandifer Simrill G. M. SmithG. R. Smith J. E. Smith SottileSpires Stavrinakis StringerTallon Taylor TinklerWeeks Wells WhipperWhite Whitmire WilliamsWillis Yow

Total--104

Those who voted in the negative are:Collins Hill LongNanney Putnam SouthardThayer Toole

Total--8


4667


VETO NO. 16-- OVERRIDDENVeto 16 Part IA, Page 2, Section 1, Department of Education; VIII.

School Effectiveness; New Positions – Education Associate, $175,000 General Funds



Yeas 107; Nays 8

Those who voted in the affirmative are:Alexander Allison AndersonAnthony Bales BallentineBamberg Bannister BedingfieldBernstein Bingham BowersBradley G. A. Brown R. L. BrownBurns Clary ClemmonsClyburn Cobb-Hunter ColeCorley H. A. Crawford CrosbyDaning Delleney DillardDouglas Duckworth EricksonFelder Forrester FunderburkGagnon Gambrell GeorgeGilliard Goldfinch GovanHamilton Hardee HartHayes Henderson HeneganHerbkersman Hicks HodgesHorne Hosey HowardHuggins Jefferson JohnsonKennedy King KirbyKnight Limehouse LoftisLowe Lucas MackMcCoy McEachern McKnightM. S. McLeod W. J. McLeod MitchellD. C. Moss V. S. Moss MurphyNeal Newton NorrellOtt Parks PittsPope Quinn RidgewayRiley Rivers Robinson-Simpson

4668


Rutherford Ryhal SandiferSimrill G. M. Smith G. R. SmithJ. E. Smith Sottile SpiresStavrinakis Stringer TallonTaylor Tinkler TooleWeeks Wells WhipperWhite Whitmire WilliamsWillis Yow

Total--107

Those who voted in the negative are:Collins Hill LongNanney Norman PutnamSouthard Thayer

Total--8



School Effectiveness; New Positions – Administrative Assistant, $38,000 General Funds



Yeas 107; Nays 10

Those who voted in the affirmative are:Alexander Allison AndersonAnthony Atwater BalesBallentine Bamberg BannisterBedingfield Bernstein BinghamBowers Bradley G. A. BrownR. L. Brown Clary ClemmonsClyburn Cobb-Hunter Cole

4669


Corley H. A. Crawford CrosbyDaning Delleney DillardDouglas Duckworth EricksonFelder Forrester FunderburkGagnon Gambrell GeorgeGilliard Goldfinch GovanHamilton Hardee HartHayes Henderson HeneganHerbkersman Hicks HodgesHorne Hosey HowardHuggins Jefferson JohnsonJordan Kennedy KingKirby Knight LimehouseLoftis Lowe LucasMack McCoy McEachernMcKnight M. S. McLeod W. J. McLeodMitchell D. C. Moss V. S. MossMurphy Neal NewtonNorrell Ott ParksPitts Pope QuinnRidgeway Riley RiversRobinson-Simpson Rutherford RyhalSandifer Simrill G. M. SmithG. R. Smith J. E. Smith SottileSpires Stavrinakis StringerTallon Taylor TinklerWeeks Wells WhipperWhite Whitmire WilliamsWillis Yow

Total--107

Those who voted in the negative are:Chumley Collins HillLong Nanney NormanPutnam Southard ThayerToole

Total--10

4670




School Effectiveness; New Positions – Program Manager I, $155,000 General Funds



Yeas 106; Nays 10

Those who voted in the affirmative are:Alexander Allison AndersonAnthony Atwater BalesBallentine Bamberg BannisterBedingfield Bernstein BinghamBowers Bradley G. A. BrownR. L. Brown Burns ClaryClemmons Clyburn Cobb-HunterCole Corley H. A. CrawfordCrosby Daning DelleneyDillard Douglas DuckworthErickson Felder ForresterFunderburk Gagnon GambrellGeorge Gilliard GoldfinchGovan Hamilton HardeeHart Henderson HeneganHerbkersman Hicks HodgesHorne Hosey HowardHuggins Jefferson JordanKennedy King KirbyKnight Limehouse LoftisLowe Lucas MackMcCoy McEachern McKnightM. S. McLeod W. J. McLeod MitchellD. C. Moss V. S. Moss MurphyNewton Norrell Ott

4671


Parks Pitts PopeQuinn Ridgeway RileyRivers Robinson-Simpson RutherfordRyhal Sandifer SimrillG. M. Smith G. R. Smith J. E. SmithSottile Spires StavrinakisStringer Tallon TaylorTinkler Toole WeeksWells Whipper WhiteWhitmire Williams WillisYow

Total--106

Those who voted in the negative are:Chumley Collins HillJohnson Long NanneyNorman Putnam SouthardThayer

Total--10


VETO NO. 19-- OVERRIDDENVeto 19 Part IA, Page 2, Section 1, Department of Education;

VIII. School Effectiveness; Personal Service – Program Coordinator I, $95,000



Yeas 103; Nays 9

Those who voted in the affirmative are:Alexander Allison AndersonAnthony Bales BallentineBamberg Bannister Bedingfield

4672


Bernstein Bingham BowersBradley G. A. Brown R. L. BrownBurns Clary ClemmonsClyburn Cobb-Hunter ColeCorley H. A. Crawford CrosbyDaning Delleney DillardDouglas Duckworth EricksonFelder Finlay FunderburkGagnon Gambrell GeorgeGilliard Goldfinch GovanHamilton Hardee HartHayes Henegan HerbkersmanHicks Hodges HorneHosey Howard HugginsJefferson Jordan KennedyKing Kirby KnightLimehouse Loftis LoweLucas Mack McCoyMcEachern McKnight M. S. McLeodW. J. McLeod Mitchell D. C. MossNeal Newton NorrellOtt Parks PittsPope Quinn RidgewayRiley Rivers Robinson-SimpsonRutherford Ryhal SimrillG. M. Smith G. R. Smith J. E. SmithSottile Spires StavrinakisStringer Tallon TaylorTinkler Toole WeeksWells Whipper WhiteWhitmire Williams WillisYow

Total--103

Those who voted in the negative are:Chumley Collins HillLong Nanney NormanPutnam Southard Thayer

Total--9

4673



VETO NO. 20-- OVERRIDDENVeto 20 Part IB, Page 372, Section 33, Department of Health and

Human Services – Proviso 33.30, Healthcare Workforce Analysis

Rep. G. M. SMITH explained the Veto.


Yeas 78; Nays 25

Those who voted in the affirmative are:Alexander Allison AndersonAnthony Bales BowersG. A. Brown R. L. Brown ClaryClemmons Clyburn Cobb-HunterCole Corley CrosbyDaning Dillard DouglasDuckworth Erickson FinlayFunderburk Gambrell GeorgeGilliard Govan HardeeHayes Henegan HerbkersmanHicks Hodges HoseyHoward Jefferson JordanKing Kirby KnightLimehouse Loftis LucasMack McCoy McEachernM. S. McLeod W. J. McLeod MitchellD. C. Moss V. S. Moss NealNorrell Ott ParksPitts Pope RidgewayRiley Robinson-Simpson RutherfordRyhal Sandifer SimrillG. M. Smith G. R. Smith SottileSpires Stavrinakis TallonTaylor Tinkler Weeks

4674


Wells Whipper WhiteWhitmire Williams Yow

Total--78

Those who voted in the negative are:Ballentine Bedingfield BinghamBradley Burns ChumleyH. A. Crawford Felder ForresterGagnon Hamilton HendersonHill Huggins LongNanney Norman PutnamQuinn Rivers SouthardStringer Thayer TooleWillis

Total--25


VETO NO. 21-- OVERRIDDENVeto 21 Part IA, Page 9, Section 1, Department of Education; XII.

Education Improvement Act; F. Partnerships; 2. Other Agencies and Entities; District Subdivisions – Arts Curricula, $1,000,000 Total Funds

Rep. WHITE explained the Veto.Rep. STAVRINAKIS spoke against the Veto.Rep. HILL spoke in favor of the Veto.


Yeas 102; Nays 16

Those who voted in the affirmative are:Alexander Allison AndersonAnthony Bales BallentineBamberg Bannister BernsteinBingham Bowers G. A. Brown

4675


R. L. Brown Burns ChumleyClary Clemmons ClyburnCobb-Hunter Cole CollinsCorley Crosby DaningDelleney Dillard DouglasDuckworth Erickson FelderFinlay Forrester FunderburkGagnon Gambrell GeorgeGilliard Goldfinch GovanHamilton Hardee HartHayes Henderson HeneganHerbkersman Hicks HorneHosey Howard HugginsJefferson King KirbyKnight Limehouse LoweLucas Mack McCoyMcEachern McKnight M. S. McLeodW. J. McLeod Mitchell D. C. MossV. S. Moss Murphy NealNewton Norrell OttParks Pitts PopeQuinn Ridgeway RileyRivers Robinson-Simpson RutherfordRyhal Sandifer SimrillG. M. Smith J. E. Smith SottileSouthard Spires StavrinakisTallon Taylor ThayerTinkler Weeks WellsWhipper White WhitmireWilliams Willis Yow

Total--102

Those who voted in the negative are:Atwater Bedingfield BradleyH. A. Crawford Hill JohnsonJordan Kennedy LoftisLong Nanney Norman

4676


Putnam G. R. Smith StringerToole

Total--16


VETO NO. 22-- OVERRIDDENVeto 22. Part IB, Page 526, Section 118, Statewide Revenue;

Proviso 118.14(B), Nonrecurring Revenue – Item 43(c) Department of Labor, Licensing and Regulation, Wind and Seismic Residential Building Requirements Study, $40,000

Rep. SANDIFER explained the Veto.


Yeas 90; Nays 26

Those who voted in the affirmative are:Alexander Anderson AnthonyAtwater Bales BallentineBamberg Bernstein BinghamBowers Bradley G. A. BrownR. L. Brown Burns ClaryClemmons Clyburn Cobb-HunterCorley H. A. Crawford CrosbyDillard Douglas DuckworthFinlay Forrester FunderburkGagnon Gambrell GeorgeGilliard Goldfinch GovanHardee Hart HayesHenegan Horne HoseyHoward Huggins JeffersonJohnson Jordan KennedyKing Kirby KnightLimehouse Loftis LoweLucas Mack McEachernMcKnight M. S. McLeod W. J. McLeod

4677


Mitchell D. C. Moss V. S. MossMurphy Neal NewtonNorrell Ott ParksPitts Pope QuinnRidgeway Riley Robinson-SimpsonRutherford Ryhal SandiferJ. E. Smith Sottile SpiresStavrinakis Tallon TaylorTinkler Toole WeeksWells Whipper WhiteWhitmire Williams Yow

Total--90

Those who voted in the negative are:Allison Bannister BedingfieldChumley Cole CollinsDaning Delleney FelderHamilton Henderson HicksHill Long McCoyNanney Norman PutnamRivers Simrill G. M. SmithG. R. Smith Southard StringerThayer Willis

Total--26


VETO NO. 23-- OVERRIDDENVeto 23 Part IB, Page 431, Section 81, Department of Labor, Licensing and Regulation – Proviso 81.14, Wind and Structural Engineering Research Lab


Yeas 86; Nays 28

4678


Those who voted in the affirmative are:Alexander Anderson AnthonyAtwater Bales BallentineBernstein Bingham BowersBradley G. A. Brown R. L. BrownBurns Clary ClemmonsClyburn Cobb-Hunter CorleyH. A. Crawford Dillard DouglasDuckworth Erickson FinlayForrester Funderburk GagnonGambrell George GilliardGoldfinch Govan HardeeHart Hayes HeneganHerbkersman Horne HoseyHoward Huggins JeffersonJohnson Kennedy KingKirby Knight LimehouseLoftis Lowe LucasMack McEachern McKnightM. S. McLeod W. J. McLeod MitchellD. C. Moss V. S. Moss MurphyNeal Newton NorrellOtt Parks QuinnRidgeway Riley Robinson-SimpsonRutherford Ryhal J. E. SmithSottile Spires StavrinakisTallon Taylor TinklerToole Weeks WellsWhipper White WhitmireWilliams Yow

Total--86

Those who voted in the negative are:Allison Bannister BedingfieldChumley Cole CollinsCrosby Daning DelleneyFelder Hamilton HendersonHicks Hill LongMcCoy Nanney NormanPope Putnam Rivers

4679


Simrill G. M. Smith G. R. SmithSouthard Stringer ThayerWillis

Total--28



VETO NO. 24-- OVERRIDDENVeto 24 Part IB, Page 515, Section 117, General Provisions –

Proviso 117.131, Energy Efficiency Repair and Related Maintenance

Rep. WHITE explained the Veto.Rep. HILL spoke in favor of the Veto.


Yeas 82; Nays 32

Those who voted in the affirmative are:Alexander Anderson AnthonyBales Bamberg BernsteinBowers G. A. Brown R. L. BrownClary Clemmons ClyburnCobb-Hunter Corley H. A. CrawfordCrosby Delleney DillardDouglas Duckworth FunderburkGagnon Gambrell GeorgeGilliard Goldfinch GovanHardee Hart HayesHenegan Herbkersman HorneHosey Howard JeffersonJohnson Jordan KingKirby Knight LimehouseLoftis Lowe LucasMack McEachern McKnightM. S. McLeod W. J. McLeod Mitchell

4680


D. C. Moss V. S. Moss MurphyNeal Norrell OttParks Pitts PopeRidgeway Riley Robinson-SimpsonRutherford Ryhal SandiferSimrill G. M. Smith G. R. SmithJ. E. Smith Sottile SpiresStavrinakis Taylor TinklerWeeks Wells WhipperWhite Whitmire WilliamsYow

Total--82

Those who voted in the negative are:Allison Atwater BallentineBedingfield Bingham BradleyBurns Cole CollinsDaning Erickson FelderFinlay Forrester HamiltonHenderson Hicks HillKennedy Long NanneyNewton Norman PutnamQuinn Rivers SouthardStringer Tallon ThayerToole Willis

Total--32


VETO NO. 25-- OVERRIDDENVeto 25 Part IB, Page 522, Section 118, Statewide Revenue;

Proviso 118.14(B), Nonrecurring Revenue – Item 10(a) Commission on Higher Education, University Center of Greenville, $250,000

Rep. WHITE explained the Veto.

4681



Yeas 84; Nays 29

Those who voted in the affirmative are:Alexander Allison AndersonAnthony Bales BambergBernstein Bowers G. A. BrownR. L. Brown Burns ClaryClyburn Cobb-Hunter ColeCorley Delleney DillardDouglas Felder FinlayFunderburk Gagnon GambrellGeorge Gilliard GovanHamilton Hardee HartHayes Henderson HeneganHerbkersman Hodges HorneHosey Howard JeffersonJordan King KirbyKnight Limehouse LoftisLucas Mack McEachernMcKnight M. S. McLeod W. J. McLeodMitchell D. C. Moss V. S. MossNanney Neal NorrellOtt Parks PittsPope Ridgeway RileyRobinson-Simpson Rutherford RyhalSandifer Simrill G. M. SmithG. R. Smith J. E. Smith SottileSpires Stavrinakis TaylorTinkler Weeks WellsWhipper White WhitmireWilliams Willis Yow

Total--84

Those who voted in the negative are:Atwater Ballentine BedingfieldBingham Bradley ClemmonsCollins H. A. Crawford Crosby

4682


Daning Duckworth EricksonForrester Goldfinch HicksHill Huggins JohnsonKennedy Long NewtonNorman Putnam QuinnRivers Southard TallonThayer Toole

Total--29



Proviso 118.14(B), Nonrecurring Revenue – Item (42)(f) Department of Commerce - IT-ology - Coursepower Project, $200,000



Yeas 80; Nays 31

Those who voted in the affirmative are:Alexander Anderson AnthonyBales Bernstein BowersBradley G. A. Brown R. L. BrownBurns Clary ClemmonsClyburn Cole CorleyDelleney Dillard DouglasDuckworth Felder FinlayFunderburk Gagnon GambrellGeorge Gilliard GoldfinchGovan Hardee HartHayes Henegan HerbkersmanHicks Hodges HorneHosey Howard JeffersonJordan King KirbyKnight Limehouse Loftis

4683


Lowe Lucas MackMcEachern McKnight M. S. McLeodW. J. McLeod D. C. Moss V. S. MossNeal Newton NorrellOtt Parks PittsPope Ridgeway RileyRutherford Ryhal SimrillG. M. Smith J. E. Smith SottileSpires Stavrinakis TaylorTinkler Weeks WellsWhipper White WhitmireWilliams Yow

Total--80

Those who voted in the negative are:Allison Atwater BallentineBedingfield Bingham CollinsH. A. Crawford Crosby DaningErickson Forrester HamiltonHenderson Hill HugginsJohnson Kennedy LongMcCoy Nanney NormanPutnam Quinn RiversG. R. Smith Southard StringerTallon Thayer TooleWillis

Total--31


VETO NO. 27-- OVERRIDDENVeto 27 Part IB, Page 524, Section 118, Statewide Revenue; Proviso 118.14(B), Nonrecurring Revenue – Item (29), Prosecution Coordination Commission, SC Center for Fathers and Families, $400,000

Rep. PITTS explained the Veto.Rep. HILL spoke in favor of the Veto.

4684


Rep. WILLIAMS spoke against the Veto.Rep. NORRELL spoke against the Veto.Rep. HENEGAN spoke against the Veto.Rep. PITTS spoke against the Veto.


Yeas 90; Nays 14

Those who voted in the affirmative are:Alexander Allison AndersonAnthony Bales BallentineBannister Bernstein BinghamBowers Bradley G. A. BrownR. L. Brown Burns ClaryClemmons Clyburn Cobb-HunterCole Corley H. A. CrawfordDaning Dillard DouglasDuckworth Erickson FinlayForrester Funderburk GagnonGambrell George GilliardGoldfinch Govan HamiltonHardee Hart HayesHenegan Herbkersman HicksHodges Hosey HowardHuggins Jefferson KingKnight Limehouse LoftisLong Lucas MackMcCoy M. S. McLeod MitchellD. C. Moss V. S. Moss NealNorrell Ott ParksPitts Pope RidgewayRiley Robinson-Simpson RutherfordRyhal Sandifer G. R. SmithJ. E. Smith Sottile SouthardSpires Stavrinakis StringerTallon Taylor TinklerToole Weeks Wells

4685


Whipper White WhitmireWilliams Willis Yow

Total--90

Those who voted in the negative are:Atwater Bedingfield ChumleyCrosby Felder HillKennedy Norman PutnamQuinn Rivers SimrillG. M. Smith Thayer

Total--14


STATEMENT FOR THE JOURNAL

ABSTENTION FROM VOTINGBASED ON POTENTIAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST

In accordance with §8-13-700(B) of the S.C. Code, I abstained from voting on the below reference bill or amendment because of a potential conflict of interest and I wish to have my recusal noted for the record in the House Journal of this date:R. 127, H. 3701, the Fiscal Year 2015-16 General Appropriations Act

Veto Number Veto 27 Part IB, Page 524, Section 118, Statewide Revenue; Proviso 118.14(B), Nonrecurring Revenue - Item (29), Prosecution Coordination Commission, SC Center for Fathers and Families

The reason for abstaining on the above referenced legislation is:a. A potential conflict of interest may exist in that an economic

interest of myself, an immediate family member, or an individual or business with which I am associated may be affected in violation of S.C. Code § 8-13-700(B).

b. A potential conflict may exist under S.C. Code § 8-13-740(C) because of representation of a client before a particular agency or commission by me or an individual or business with whom I am associated within the past year.

4686


c. A potential conflict may exist under S.C. Code § 8-13-745(B) and (C) because a contract for goods or services may be entered into within the next year with an agency, commission, board, department, or other entity funded through the general appropriation bill by myself, an individual with whom I am associated in partnership with or a business or partnership in which I have a greater than 5% interest.Rep. Wallace H. “Jay” Jordan

VETO NO. 28-- SUSTAINEDVeto 28 Part IB, Page 525, Section 118, Statewide Revenue;

Proviso 118.14(B), Nonrecurring Revenue – Item (35)(b), Department of Probation, Parole and Pardon Services, Turning Leaf - Offender Education and Reentry Initiative, $100,000

Rep. PITTS explained the Veto.


Yeas 8; Nays 94

Those who voted in the affirmative are:Gilliard King LimehouseRobinson-Simpson Sottile StavrinakisTinkler Williams

Total--8

Those who voted in the negative are:Alexander Allison AndersonAtwater Ballentine BambergBannister Bedingfield BernsteinBingham Bowers BradleyR. L. Brown Clyburn Cobb-HunterCole Collins H. A. CrawfordCrosby Daning DelleneyDillard Duckworth EricksonFelder Finlay ForresterFunderburk Gagnon GambrellGoldfinch Hamilton Hardee

4687


Henderson Henegan HerbkersmanHicks Hill HodgesHorne Hosey HowardHuggins Jefferson JohnsonJordan Kennedy KnightLoftis Long LoweLucas Mack McCoyMcKnight M. S. McLeod W. J. McLeodMitchell D. C. Moss V. S. MossMurphy Nanney NealNewton Norman OttParks Pitts PopePutnam Quinn RileyRivers Rutherford RyhalSandifer Simrill G. M. SmithG. R. Smith J. E. Smith SouthardSpires Stringer TallonTaylor Thayer TooleWeeks Wells WhipperWhite Whitmire WillisYow

Total--94


STATEMENT FOR THE JOURNAL


In accordance with §8-13-700(B) of the S.C. Code, I abstained from voting on the below reference bill or amendment because of a potential conflict of interest and I wish to have my recusal noted for the record in the House Journal of this date:

R. 127, H. 3701, the Fiscal Year 2015-16 General Appropriations Act

Veto Number Veto 28 Part IB, Page 525, Section 118, Statewide Revenue; Proviso 118.14(B), Nonrecurring Revenue - Item (35)(b),

4688


Department of Probation, Parole and Pardon Services, Turning Leaf - Offender Education and Reentry Initiative

The reason for abstaining on the above referenced legislation is:A potential conflict may exist under S.C. Code § 8-13-740(C) because of representation of a client before a particular agency or commission by me or an individual

Rep. Gary E. Clary


Proviso 118.14(B), Nonrecurring Revenue – Item (24)(c) Department of Disabilities and Special Needs, Savannah’s Playground, $100,000

Rep. WHITE explained the Veto.Rep. RYHAL spoke against the Veto.


Yeas 108; Nays 0

Those who voted in the affirmative are:Alexander Allison AndersonAnthony Atwater BalesBallentine Bamberg BannisterBedingfield Bernstein BinghamBowers Bradley G. A. BrownR. L. Brown Clary ClemmonsClyburn Cobb-Hunter ColeCorley H. A. Crawford CrosbyDaning Delleney DillardDouglas Duckworth EricksonFelder Forrester FunderburkGagnon Gambrell GeorgeGilliard Goldfinch GovanHamilton Hardee HartHayes Henderson HeneganHerbkersman Hicks HodgesHorne Hosey HugginsJefferson Johnson JordanKennedy King Knight

4689


Limehouse Loftis LongLowe Lucas MackMcCoy McEachern McKnightM. S. McLeod W. J. McLeod MitchellD. C. Moss V. S. Moss MurphyNanney Neal NewtonNorman Norrell OttParks Pope QuinnRidgeway Riley Robinson-SimpsonRutherford Ryhal SandiferSimrill G. M. Smith G. R. SmithJ. E. Smith Sottile SouthardSpires Stavrinakis StringerTallon Taylor TinklerToole Weeks WellsWhipper White WhitmireWilliams Willis Yow

Total--108

Those who voted in the negative are:

Total--0


VETO NO. 30-- SUSTAINEDVeto 30 Part IB, Page 523, Section 118, Statewide Revenue; Proviso 118.14(B), Nonrecurring Revenue – Item (21)(e), Department of Health and Human Services, Family Health Solutions of the Low Country - Low Country Healthy Start, $250,000

Rep. WHITE explained the Veto.Rep. SOUTHARD spoke upon the Veto.


Yeas 34; Nays 56

4690


Those who voted in the affirmative are:Alexander Anthony BalesBowers G. A. Brown R. L. BrownClyburn Cobb-Hunter DillardDouglas Erickson GeorgeGilliard Hart HayesHodges Hosey HowardJefferson King KnightMack M. S. McLeod MitchellNeal Norrell ParksRidgeway Robinson-Simpson RutherfordSpires Tinkler WeeksWilliams

Total--34

Those who voted in the negative are:Allison Atwater BallentineBedingfield Bingham BradleyClary Clemmons ColeH. A. Crawford Crosby DaningDuckworth Felder ForresterGagnon Hamilton HardeeHerbkersman Hicks HillHuggins Jordan KennedyLoftis Long LoweLucas McCoy D. C. MossV. S. Moss Nanney NormanOtt Pope PutnamQuinn Riley RiversRyhal Sandifer SimrillG. M. Smith G. R. Smith SottileSouthard Stringer TallonTaylor Thayer TooleWells White WhitmireWillis Yow

Total--56


4691


VETO NO. 31-- SUSTAINEDVeto 31 Part IB, Page 523, Section 118, Statewide Revenue;

Proviso 118.14(B), Nonrecurring Revenue – Item (21)(f), Department of Health and Human Services, Healthy Learners - Greenwood Program, $50,000

Rep. WHITE explained the Veto.Rep. SOUTHARD spoke in favor of the Veto.Rep. PARKS spoke against the Veto.Rep. HOWARD spoke against the Veto.


Yeas 46; Nays 53

Those who voted in the affirmative are:Alexander Anthony BalesBernstein Bowers G. A. BrownR. L. Brown Clyburn Cobb-HunterDillard Douglas EricksonFunderburk Gagnon GambrellGeorge Gilliard HartHayes Henegan HerbkersmanHosey Howard JeffersonKing Knight MackMcEachern M. S. McLeod MitchellV. S. Moss Neal NorrellParks Ridgeway RileyRobinson-Simpson Rutherford J. E. SmithSpires Tinkler WeeksWhipper Williams WillisYow

Total--46

Those who voted in the negative are:Allison Atwater BallentineBedingfield Bingham BradleyBrannon Clary Clemmons

4692


Cole H. A. Crawford CrosbyDaning Duckworth FelderFinlay Forrester HamiltonHardee Henderson HicksHill Johnson JordanKennedy Limehouse LoftisLong Lucas McCoyMcKnight D. C. Moss NanneyNorman Ott PopePutnam Quinn RiversRyhal Simrill G. M. SmithG. R. Smith Sottile SouthardStringer Tallon TaylorThayer Toole WellsWhite Whitmire

Total--53


RECORD FOR VOTINGAfter recusing myself from voting on Veto 31 of H. 3701, the

General Appropriation Bill, I inadvertently voted on this Veto. I wish the record to reflect that I meant to abstain from voting.

Rep. Cezar E. McKnight

RECORD FOR VOTINGI was temporarily out of the Chamber on constituent business during

the vote on Vetoes 27 - 31. If I had been present, I would have voted to override the Governor’s Veto on all those I missed.

Rep. Roger K. Kirby

VETO NO. 30-- MOTION TO RECONSIDER TABLEDRep. G. R. SMITH moved to reconsider the vote whereby Veto No.

30 was sustained.

Rep. G. R. SMITH moved to table the motion to reconsider, which was agreed to.

4693


VETO NO. 31-- MOTION TO RECONSIDER TABLEDRep. G. R. SMITH moved to reconsider the vote whereby Veto No.

31 was sustained.


LEAVE OF ABSENCEThe SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE granted Rep. BANNISTER a leave

of absence for the remainder of the day due to family medical reasons.

VETO NO. 32-- SUSTAINEDVeto 32 Part IB, Page 523, Section 118, Statewide Revenue; Proviso 118.14(B), Nonrecurring Revenue – Item (21)(d), Department of Health and Human Services, Osprey Village, $200,000

Rep. HERBKERSMAN explained the Veto.Rep. ATWATER spoke in favor of the Veto.Rep. HERBKERSMAN spoke against the Veto.Rep. RUTHERFORD spoke against the Veto.Rep. ATWATER spoke in favor of the Veto.


Yeas 63; Nays 41

Those who voted in the affirmative are:Anderson Anthony BalesBernstein Bowers BradleyG. A. Brown R. L. Brown ClaryClyburn Cobb-Hunter CorleyDillard Douglas FinlayFunderburk Gagnon GambrellGeorge Gilliard GovanHart Hayes HeneganHerbkersman Hodges HoseyHoward Jefferson JordanKing Kirby KnightLowe Lucas MackMcEachern McKnight M. S. McLeod

4694


W. J. McLeod Mitchell V. S. MossNeal Newton NorrellParks Pitts PopeRidgeway Robinson-Simpson RutherfordSandifer Simrill G. M. SmithJ. E. Smith Spires TaylorTinkler Weeks WellsWhite Whitmire Williams

Total--63

Those who voted in the negative are:Allison Atwater BallentineBedingfield Bingham BurnsChumley Clemmons ColeH. A. Crawford Crosby DaningDuckworth Felder ForresterHamilton Hardee HicksHill Huggins JohnsonKennedy Loftis LongMcCoy D. C. Moss NanneyNorman Putnam QuinnRiley Rivers G. R. SmithSottile Southard StringerTallon Thayer TooleWillis Yow

Total--41


SPEAKER IN CHAIR


Proviso 118.14 – Nonrecurring Revenue – Item 42(e) Department of Commerce, Community Development Corporations Initiative, $100,000


4695



Yeas 83; Nays 27

Those who voted in the affirmative are:Alexander Anderson AnthonyBales Bamberg BernsteinBingham Bowers G. A. BrownR. L. Brown Burns ClemmonsClyburn Cobb-Hunter ColeCorley H. A. Crawford DelleneyDillard Douglas DuckworthFelder Finlay FunderburkGagnon Gambrell GeorgeGilliard Goldfinch GovanHardee Hart HayesHenegan Hodges HoseyHoward Jefferson JohnsonKing Kirby KnightLimehouse Loftis LoweLucas Mack McCoyMcEachern McKnight M. S. McLeodW. J. McLeod Mitchell D. C. MossV. S. Moss Murphy NealNorrell Ott ParksPitts Pope RidgewayRiley Robinson-Simpson RutherfordRyhal Sandifer SimrillG. M. Smith J. E. Smith SottileSpires Stavrinakis TallonTaylor Tinkler WeeksWells White WhitmireWilliams Yow

Total--83

Those who voted in the negative are:Allison Atwater BallentineBedingfield Bradley ChumleyCollins Crosby Daning

4696


Erickson Forrester HamiltonHill Huggins JordanLong Nanney NormanPutnam Quinn RiversG. R. Smith Southard StringerThayer Toole Willis

Total--27


RECORD FOR VOTINGI was temporarily out of the Chamber on constituent business during

the vote on Veto 33. If I had been present, I would have voted to override the Governor’s Veto.

Rep. Gary E. Clary

VETO NO. 34-- SUSTAINEDVeto 34 Part IB, Page 526, Section 118, Statewide Revenue; Proviso 118.14 – Nonrecurring Revenue – Item 42(h) Department of Commerce, SC Healthy Food Financing Initiative, $250,000

Rep. SIMRILL explained the Veto.Rep. FINLAY spoke against the Veto.Rep. HOWARD spoke against the Veto.Rep. SIMRILL spoke in favor of the Veto.Rep. SOUTHARD spoke in favor of the Veto.


Yeas 51; Nays 61

Those who voted in the affirmative are:Alexander Anderson AnthonyBales Bamberg BernsteinBowers G. A. Brown R. L. BrownChumley Clary ClyburnCobb-Hunter Dillard DouglasDuckworth Finlay Funderburk

4697


George Gilliard GovanHart Hayes HeneganHodges Hosey HowardJefferson Johnson KingKirby Knight MackMcEachern McKnight M. S. McLeodW. J. McLeod Mitchell NealNorrell Parks PittsRidgeway Robinson-Simpson RutherfordJ. E. Smith Stavrinakis TinklerWeeks Williams Yow

Total--51

Those who voted in the negative are:Allison Atwater BallentineBedingfield Bingham BradleyBurns Clemmons ColeCollins H. A. Crawford CrosbyDaning Delleney EricksonFelder Forrester GagnonGambrell Goldfinch HamiltonHardee Henderson HicksHill Huggins LimehouseLoftis Long LoweMcCoy D. C. Moss V. S. MossMurphy Nanney NewtonNorman Ott PopePutnam Quinn RileyRivers Ryhal SandiferSimrill G. M. Smith G. R. SmithSottile Southard SpiresStringer Tallon TaylorThayer Toole WellsWhipper White WhitmireWillis

Total--61


4698


VETO NO. 34--MOTION TO RECONSIDER TABLEDRep. G. R. SMITH moved to reconsider the vote whereby Veto No.

34 was sustained.


VETO NO. 35-- SUSTAINEDVeto 35 Part IB, Page 445, Section 93, Department of Administration – Proviso 93.14, Inspector General Support Services



Yeas 2; Nays 95

Those who voted in the affirmative are:King Whipper

Total--2

Those who voted in the negative are:Alexander Allison AndersonAtwater Ballentine BambergBedingfield Bernstein BinghamBowers Bradley R. L. BrownBurns Clary ClemmonsClyburn Cobb-Hunter ColeCollins H. A. Crawford CrosbyDaning Delleney DillardDuckworth Erickson FelderFinlay Forrester FunderburkGagnon Gambrell GilliardGoldfinch Govan HamiltonHardee Henderson HeneganHerbkersman Hicks HillHosey Huggins JeffersonJohnson Jordan KennedyKnight Limehouse Long

4699


Lowe Lucas McCoyM. S. McLeod W. J. McLeod MitchellD. C. Moss V. S. Moss MurphyNanney Neal NewtonNorman Norrell OttParks Pitts PopePutnam Quinn RileyRivers Robinson-Simpson RutherfordRyhal Simrill G. M. SmithG. R. Smith J. E. Smith SottileSouthard Spires StavrinakisStringer Taylor ThayerTinkler Weeks WellsWhite Whitmire WilliamsWillis Yow

Total--95


VETO NO. 36-- DEBATE ADJOURNEDVeto 36 Part IB, Page 467, Section 104, State Fiscal Accountability Authority – Proviso 104.9, Aeronautics Support Function

Rep. WHITE moved to adjourn debate on the Veto, which was agreed to.

VETO NO. 37-- OVERRIDDENVeto 37 Part IB, Page 526, Section 118, Statewide Revenue; Proviso 118.14, Nonrecurring Revenue – Item 47, Codification of Laws and Legislative Council, Dues, $50,000



Yeas 87; Nays 24

4700


Those who voted in the affirmative are:Alexander Anderson AnthonyBales Bamberg BernsteinBingham Bowers G. A. BrownBurns Clary ClemmonsClyburn Cobb-Hunter ColeCollins Corley H. A. CrawfordCrosby Delleney DillardDouglas Duckworth FinlayForrester Funderburk GagnonGambrell George GilliardGoldfinch Govan HardeeHayes Henegan HerbkersmanHicks Hodges HoseyJefferson Johnson JordanKennedy King KirbyKnight Limehouse LoweLucas Mack McCoyMcEachern McKnight M. S. McLeodW. J. McLeod Mitchell D. C. MossV. S. Moss Murphy NealNewton Norrell OttParks Pitts PopeRobinson-Simpson Rutherford RyhalSandifer Simrill G. M. SmithG. R. Smith J. E. Smith SottileSpires Stavrinakis TallonTaylor Tinkler WeeksWells Whipper WhiteWhitmire Williams Yow

Total--87

Those who voted in the negative are:Allison Atwater BallentineBedingfield Bradley DaningErickson Felder HamiltonHenderson Hill HugginsLong Nanney NormanPutnam Quinn Riley

4701


Rivers Southard StringerThayer Toole Willis

Total--24


VETO NO. 38-- OVERRIDDENVeto 38 Part IB, Page 523, Section 118, Statewide Revenue; Proviso 118.14, Nonrecurring Revenue – Item 22(e), Department of Health and Environmental Control, Water Quality, $5,000,000

Rep. WHITE explained the Veto.Rep. ATWATER spoke in favor of the Veto.Rep. PITTS spoke against the Veto.


Yeas 82; Nays 32

Those who voted in the affirmative are:Alexander Anderson AnthonyBales Bamberg BernsteinBingham Bowers BradleyG. A. Brown R. L. Brown ClaryClyburn Cobb-Hunter ColeCorley Dillard DouglasDuckworth Erickson FinlayFunderburk Gagnon GambrellGeorge Gilliard GovanHardee Hart HayesHenegan Herbkersman HicksHodges Hosey HowardJefferson Jordan KingKirby Knight LimehouseLowe Lucas McEachernMcKnight M. S. McLeod W. J. McLeodMitchell D. C. Moss V. S. MossMurphy Neal Newton

4702


Norrell Ott PittsPope Ridgeway RileyRivers Robinson-Simpson RutherfordRyhal Sandifer SimrillG. M. Smith G. R. Smith J. E. SmithSottile Spires StavrinakisTaylor Tinkler WeeksWells Whipper WhiteWhitmire Williams WillisYow

Total--82

Those who voted in the negative are:Allison Atwater BallentineBedingfield Burns ChumleyClemmons Collins H. A. CrawfordCrosby Daning FelderForrester Goldfinch HamiltonHenderson Hill HugginsJohnson Kennedy LoftisLong McCoy NanneyNorman Putnam QuinnSouthard Stringer TallonThayer Toole

Total--32


VETO NO. 39-- DEBATE ADJOURNEDVeto 39 Part IB, Page 523, Section 118, Statewide Revenue;

Proviso 118.14, Nonrecurring Revenue – Item 23(g) Department of Mental Health, Columbia Area Mental Health Center -Relocation form Bull Street Property (Requires 2:1 Match), $500,000

Rep. G. M. SMITH moved to adjourn debate on the Veto, which was agreed to.

4703




Proviso 118.14, Nonrecurring Revenue – Item 38, Department of Agriculture, “Certified SC” Marketing, $2,000,000

Rep. NORMAN explained the Veto.Rep. SIMRILL spoke against the Veto.


Yeas 109; Nays 9

Those who voted in the affirmative are:Alexander Anderson AnthonyAtwater Bales BallentineBamberg Bedingfield BernsteinBingham Bowers BradleyBrannon G. A. Brown R. L. BrownBurns Chumley ClaryClemmons Clyburn Cobb-HunterCole Collins CorleyH. A. Crawford Crosby DelleneyDillard Douglas DuckworthErickson Felder FinlayForrester Funderburk GagnonGambrell George GilliardGoldfinch Govan HardeeHart Hayes HeneganHerbkersman Hicks HodgesHosey Howard HugginsJefferson Johnson JordanKennedy King KirbyKnight Limehouse LoftisLong Lowe LucasMack McCoy McEachernMcKnight M. S. McLeod W. J. McLeodMitchell D. C. Moss V. S. MossMurphy Neal Newton

4704


Norrell Ott ParksPitts Pope QuinnRidgeway Riley RiversRobinson-Simpson Rutherford RyhalSandifer Simrill G. M. SmithG. R. Smith J. E. Smith SottileSouthard Spires StavrinakisStringer Tallon TaylorTinkler Toole WeeksWells Whipper WhiteWhitmire Williams WillisYow

Total--109

Those who voted in the negative are:Allison Daning HamiltonHenderson Hill NanneyNorman Putnam Thayer

Total--9


VETO NO. 41-- SUSTAINEDVeto 41 Part IB, Page 305, Section 1, Department of Education –

Proviso 1.35, Replacement Facilities



Yeas 32; Nays 73

Those who voted in the affirmative are:Alexander Anthony BalesBamberg Bowers G. A. BrownR. L. Brown Clary ClyburnDillard Douglas Gilliard

4705


Hart Henegan HodgesHosey Howard JeffersonKing Mack McEachernM. S. McLeod W. J. McLeod MitchellNeal Norrell RidgewayRobinson-Simpson Rutherford TinklerWeeks Williams

Total--32

Those who voted in the negative are:Allison Atwater BallentineBedingfield Bernstein BinghamBradley Brannon BurnsChumley Clemmons ColeCollins H. A. Crawford CrosbyDaning Delleney DuckworthErickson Felder FinlayForrester Funderburk GagnonGambrell Goldfinch HamiltonHardee Henderson HerbkersmanHicks Huggins JohnsonJordan Kirby KnightLimehouse Loftis LongLowe Lucas McCoyD. C. Moss V. S. Moss MurphyNanney Newton NormanOtt Pitts PopePutnam Quinn RiversRyhal Sandifer SimrillG. M. Smith G. R. Smith J. E. SmithSottile Southard StavrinakisStringer Tallon TaylorThayer Toole WellsWhite Whitmire WillisYow

Total--73


4706


VETO NO. 42-- OVERRIDDENVeto 42 Part IB, Page 310, Section 1, Department of Education –

Proviso 1.58, Lee County Bus Shop

Rep. G. A. BROWN explained the Veto.


Yeas 88; Nays 24

Those who voted in the affirmative are:Alexander Allison AndersonAnthony Bales BallentineBamberg Bernstein BowersBradley Brannon G. A. BrownR. L. Brown Chumley ClaryClemmons Clyburn Cobb-HunterCole Collins CrosbyDelleney Dillard DouglasDuckworth Finlay ForresterFunderburk Gagnon GambrellGeorge Gilliard HardeeHart Hayes HeneganHerbkersman Hicks HodgesHosey Howard HugginsJefferson Johnson JordanKing Kirby KnightLowe Lucas MackMcCoy McEachern McKnightM. S. McLeod W. J. McLeod MitchellV. S. Moss Murphy NealNewton Norrell OttPitts Pope QuinnRidgeway Robinson-Simpson RutherfordRyhal Sandifer SimrillG. M. Smith Sottile SpiresStavrinakis Tallon TaylorTinkler Toole WeeksWells Whipper White

4707


Whitmire Williams WillisYow

Total--88

Those who voted in the negative are:Atwater Bedingfield BinghamBurns H. A. Crawford DaningErickson Felder GoldfinchHamilton Henderson HillKennedy Loftis LongD. C. Moss Nanney NormanPutnam Rivers G. R. SmithSouthard Stringer Thayer

Total--24


VETO NO. 43-- SUSTAINEDVeto 43 Part IB, Page 314, Section 1, Department of Education –

Proviso 1.73, Alternative Fuel Transportation



Yeas 34; Nays 72

Those who voted in the affirmative are:Anderson Bernstein G. A. BrownR. L. Brown Clyburn Cobb-HunterDillard Douglas GilliardGovan Henegan HodgesHosey Jefferson KingKirby Mack McEachernMcKnight M. S. McLeod W. J. McLeodMitchell Neal NorrellOtt Parks Ridgeway

4708


Robinson-Simpson Rutherford StavrinakisTinkler Weeks WhipperWilliams

Total--34

Those who voted in the negative are:Allison Atwater BallentineBedingfield Bingham BowersBradley Brannon ChumleyClary Clemmons ColeCollins H. A. Crawford CrosbyDaning Delleney DuckworthErickson Felder FinlayForrester Funderburk GagnonGambrell Goldfinch HamiltonHardee Hart HendersonHerbkersman Hicks HillHuggins Johnson JordanKennedy Knight LimehouseLong Lowe LucasMcCoy D. C. Moss V. S. MossMurphy Nanney NewtonNorman Pitts PopePutnam Quinn RiversRyhal Sandifer SimrillG. M. Smith G. R. Smith SottileSouthard Spires StringerTallon Taylor ThayerToole Wells WhiteWhitmire Willis Yow

Total--72


VETO NO. 44-- OVERRIDDENVeto 44 Part IB, Page 393, Section 38, Department of Social

Services – Proviso 38.28, Child Care Facilities Floor Beds

4709


Rep. FUNDERBURK explained the Veto.


Yeas 97; Nays 18

Those who voted in the affirmative are:Alexander Anderson AnthonyBales Bamberg BernsteinBingham Bowers BrannonR. L. Brown Burns ClaryClemmons Clyburn Cobb-HunterH. A. Crawford Crosby DaningDelleney Dillard DouglasDuckworth Erickson FinlayFunderburk Gagnon GambrellGeorge Gilliard GoldfinchGovan Hamilton HardeeHart Hayes HendersonHenegan Herbkersman HodgesHosey Jefferson JohnsonJordan Kennedy KingKirby Knight LimehouseLoftis Lowe LucasMack McCoy McEachernMcKnight M. S. McLeod W. J. McLeodMitchell D. C. Moss V. S. MossMurphy Neal NewtonNorman Norrell OttParks Pitts PopeQuinn Ridgeway RileyRivers Robinson-Simpson RutherfordRyhal Sandifer SimrillG. M. Smith G. R. Smith J. E. SmithSottile Spires StavrinakisStringer Taylor ThayerTinkler Toole WeeksWells Whipper White

4710


Whitmire Williams WillisYow

Total--97

Those who voted in the negative are:Allison Atwater BallentineBedingfield Bradley ChumleyCole Collins FelderForrester Hicks HillHuggins Long NanneyPutnam Southard Tallon

Total--18


VETO NO. 45-- OVERRIDDENVeto 45 Part IB, Page 450, Section 93, Department of Administration – Proviso 93.33, Classification and Compensation System Study

Rep. HERBKERSMAN explained the Veto.Rep. COBB-HUNTER spoke against the Veto.Rep. PITTS spoke against the Veto.


Yeas 100; Nays 15

Those who voted in the affirmative are:Alexander Allison AndersonAnthony Bales BambergBernstein Bowers BradleyBrannon G. A. Brown R. L. BrownBurns Chumley ClaryClemmons Clyburn Cobb-HunterCole Collins CorleyH. A. Crawford Crosby DillardDouglas Duckworth Erickson

4711


Finlay Forrester FunderburkGagnon Gambrell GeorgeGilliard Goldfinch GovanHamilton Hardee HartHayes Henderson HeneganHerbkersman Hicks HillHodges Hosey HowardJefferson Johnson JordanKing Kirby KnightLimehouse Loftis LoweLucas Mack McCoyMcEachern McKnight M. S. McLeodW. J. McLeod Mitchell D. C. MossV. S. Moss Murphy NealNewton Norrell OttParks Pitts PopeRidgeway Riley Robinson-SimpsonRutherford Ryhal SandiferG. R. Smith J. E. Smith SottileSouthard Spires StavrinakisStringer Tallon TaylorTinkler Toole WeeksWells Whipper WhiteWhitmire Williams WillisYow

Total--100

Those who voted in the negative are:Ballentine Bedingfield BinghamFelder Huggins KennedyLong Nanney NormanPutnam Quinn RiversSimrill G. M. Smith Thayer

Total--15


4712


STATEMENT FOR HOUSE JOURNAL


In accordance with Section 8-13-700(B) of the S.C. Code, I abstained from voting on the below referenced election because of a potential conflict of interest and wish to have my recusal noted for the record in the House Journal of this date:

Veto No. 45The reason for abstaining on the above referenced legislation is:

A potential conflict of interest may exist in that an economic interest of myself, an immediate family member, or an individual or business with which I am associated may be affected in violation of S.C. Code Section 8-13-700(B).

Rep. Joseph S. Daning

VETO NO. 46-- SUSTAINEDVeto 46 Part IB, Page 320, Section 1, Department of Education – Proviso 1.95, First Steps Study Committee

Rep. ALLISON explained the Veto.


Yeas 5; Nays 105

Those who voted in the affirmative are:Anderson Douglas HoseyKing Williams

Total--5

Those who voted in the negative are:Alexander Allison AnthonyAtwater Bales BallentineBedingfield Bernstein BinghamBowers Bradley BrannonG. A. Brown R. L. Brown BurnsChumley Clary Clemmons

4713


Cole Collins H. A. CrawfordCrosby Daning DelleneyDillard Duckworth EricksonFelder Finlay ForresterFunderburk Gagnon GambrellGeorge Gilliard GoldfinchGovan Hamilton HardeeHart Henderson HeneganHerbkersman Hicks HillHodges Howard HugginsJefferson Johnson JordanKennedy Kirby KnightLimehouse Loftis LongLowe Lucas McCoyM. S. McLeod W. J. McLeod MitchellD. C. Moss V. S. Moss MurphyNanney Neal NewtonNorman Norrell OttParks Pitts PopePutnam Quinn RidgewayRiley Rivers Robinson-SimpsonRutherford Ryhal SandiferSimrill G. M. Smith G. R. SmithJ. E. Smith Sottile SouthardSpires Stavrinakis StringerTallon Taylor ThayerTinkler Toole WeeksWells Whipper WhiteWhitmire Willis Yow

Total--105


VETO NO. 47-- SUSTAINEDVeto 47 Part IB, Page 435, Section 84, Department of

Transportation – Proviso 84.11, Horry-Georgetown Evacuation RouteRep. HARDEE explained the Veto.

4714



Yeas 2; Nays 99

Those who voted in the affirmative are:Anderson King

Total--2

Those who voted in the negative are:Allison Anthony AtwaterBallentine Bedingfield BernsteinBradley Brannon G. A. BrownR. L. Brown Chumley ClaryClemmons Clyburn ColeCollins H. A. Crawford CrosbyDaning Delleney DillardDouglas Duckworth EricksonFelder Finlay ForresterFunderburk Gagnon GambrellGeorge Gilliard GoldfinchGovan Hardee HartHenderson Henegan HicksHill Hosey HowardHuggins Jefferson JohnsonJordan Kennedy KnightLimehouse Loftis LongLowe Lucas McCoyMcKnight M. S. McLeod W. J. McLeodMitchell D. C. Moss V. S. MossMurphy Nanney NealNewton Norman NorrellOtt Pitts PopePutnam Quinn RidgewayRiley Rivers Robinson-SimpsonRutherford Ryhal SandiferSimrill G. M. Smith G. R. SmithSottile Southard SpiresStavrinakis Stringer TallonTaylor Thayer Tinkler

4715


Toole Weeks WellsWhipper White WhitmireWilliams Willis Yow

Total--99


STATEMENT FOR HOUSE JOURNAL


In accordance with Section 8-13-700(B) of the S.C. Code, I abstained from voting on the below referenced election because of a potential conflict of interest and wish to have my recusal noted for the record in the House Journal of this date:

Veto No. 47The reason for abstaining on the above referenced legislation is:

A potential conflict of interest may exist in that an economic interest of myself, an immediate family member, or an individual or business with which I am associated may be affected in violation of S.C. Code Section 8-13-700(B).

Rep. Roger K. Kirby

VETO NO. 48-- SUSTAINEDVeto 48 Part IB, Page 406, Section 57, Judicial Department –

Proviso 57.19, Active Retired Judges

Rep. PITTS explained the Veto.


Yeas 2; Nays 104

Those who voted in the affirmative are:King Neal

Total--2

4716


Those who voted in the negative are:Alexander Allison AndersonAnthony Atwater BallentineBamberg Bedingfield BernsteinBingham Bradley BrannonG. A. Brown R. L. Brown BurnsChumley Clemmons ClyburnCobb-Hunter Cole CollinsH. A. Crawford Crosby DaningDelleney Dillard DouglasDuckworth Erickson FelderFinlay Forrester GagnonGambrell George GilliardGoldfinch Govan HamiltonHart Hayes HendersonHerbkersman Hicks HillHodges Hosey HowardHuggins Jefferson JohnsonJordan Kennedy KirbyKnight Limehouse LoftisLong Lowe LucasMcCoy McKnight M. S. McLeodW. J. McLeod Mitchell D. C. MossV. S. Moss Nanney NewtonNorman Norrell OttParks Pitts PopePutnam Quinn RidgewayRiley Rivers Robinson-SimpsonRutherford Sandifer SimrillG. M. Smith G. R. Smith SottileSouthard Spires StavrinakisStringer Tallon TaylorThayer Tinkler TooleWeeks Wells WhipperWhite Whitmire WilliamsWillis Yow

Total--104


4717


STATEMENTS FOR HOUSE JOURNAL




Veto No. 20, Part IB, Page 372, Section 33, Department of Health and Human Services- Proviso 33.30, Healthcare Workforce Analysis

The reason for abstaining on the above referenced legislation is:A potential conflict of interest may exist in that an economic

interest of myself, an immediate family member, or an individual or business with which I am associated may be affected in violation of S.C. Code § 8-13-700(B).

Rep. Todd Atwater




Veto No. 27, Part IB, Page 524, Section 118, Statewide Revenue; Proviso 118.14(B), Nonrecurring Revenue - Item (29), Prosecution Coordination Commission, SC Center for Fathers and Families

Veto No. 30, Part IB, Page 523, Section 118, Statewide Revenue; Proviso 118.14(B), Nonrecurring Revenue - Item (21)(e), Department of Health and Human Services, Family Health Solutions of the Low Country- Low County Health Start

4718


Veto No. 31, Part IB, Page 523, Section 118, Statewide Revenue; Proviso 118.14(B), Nonrecurring Revenue - Item (21)(f), Department of Health and Human Services, Healthy Learner- Greenwood Program

Veto No. 32, Part IB, Page 523, Section 118, Statewide Revenue; Proviso 118.14(B), Nonrecurring Revenue - Item (21)(d), Department of Health and Human Services, Osprey Village

The reason for abstaining on the above referenced legislation is:A potential conflict of interest may exist in that an economic interest

of myself, an immediate family member, or an individual or business with which I am associated may be affected in violation of S.C. Code § 8-13-700(B).

A potential conflict may exist under S.C. Code § 8-13-740(C) because of representation of a client before a particular agency or commission by me or an individual or business with whom I am associated within the past year.

A potential conflict may exist under S.C. Code § 8-13-745(B) and (C) because a contract for goods or services may be entered into within the next year with an agency, commission, board, department, or other entity funded through the general appropriation bill by myself, an individual with whom I am associated in partnership with or a business or partnership in which I have a greater than 5% interest.

Rep. Bruce W. Bannister





Veto No. 30, Part IB, Page 523, Section 118, Statewide Revenue; Proviso 118.14(B), Nonrecurring Revenue - Item (21)(e), Department

4719


of Health and Human Services, Family Health Solutions of the Low Country- Low County Health StartVeto No. 31, Part IB, Page 523, Section 118, Statewide Revenue; Proviso 118.14(B), Nonrecurring Revenue - Item (21)(f), Department of Health and Human Services, Healthy Learner- Greenwood ProgramVeto No. 32, Part IB, Page 523, Section 118, Statewide Revenue; Proviso 118.14(B), Nonrecurring Revenue - Item (21)(d), Department of Health and Human Services, Osprey Village



A potential conflict may exist under S.C. Code § 8-13-745(B) and (C) because a contract for goods or services may be entered into within the next year with an agency, commission, board, department, or other entity funded through the general appropriation bill by myself, an individual with whom I am associated in partnership with or a business or partnership in which I have a greater than 5% interest.

Rep. Beth E. Bernstein




Veto No. 48, Part IB, Page 406, Section 57, Judicial Department- Proviso 57.19, Active Retired Judges

The reason for abstaining on the above referenced legislation is: A potential conflict of interest may exist in that an economic interest


Representative Gary E. Clary

4720


4721













A potential conflict may exist under S.C. Code § 8-13-745(B) and (C) because a contract for goods or services may be entered into within

4722


the next year with an agency, commission, board, department, or other entity funded through the general appropriation bill by myself, an individual with whom I am associated in partnership with or a business or partnership in which I have a greater than 5% interest.

Rep. F. Gregory “Greg” Delleney





The reason for abstaining on the above referenced legislation is: A potential conflict of interest may exist in that an economic interest of myself, an immediate family member, or an individual or business with which I am associated may be affected in violation of S.C. Code § 8-13-700(B).

Rep. Laurie Slade Funderburk





4723






The reason for abstaining on the above referenced legislation is: A potential conflict may exist under S.C. Code § 8-13-740(C)

because of representation of a client before a particular agency or commission by me or an individual or business with whom I am associated within the past year.

Rep. Jenny Horne






4724


4725


The reason for abstaining on the above referenced legislation is: A potential conflict of interest may exist in that an economic interest



Rep. Peter McCoy







The reason for abstaining on the above referenced legislation is:A potential conflict may exist under S.C. Code § 8-13-740(C)

because of representation of a client before a particular agency or commission by me or an individual or business with whom I am associated within the past year.

Rep. Walton J. McLeod

4726


4727











The reason for abstaining on the above referenced legislation is: a. A potential conflict of interest may exist in that an economic interest


b. A potential conflict may exist under S.C. Code § 8-13-740(C) because of representation of a client before a particular agency or

4728


commission by me or an individual or business with whom I am associated within the past year.

c. A potential conflict may exist under S.C. Code § 8-13-745(B) and (C) because a contract for goods or services may be entered into within the next year with an agency, commission, board, department, or other entity funded through the general appropriation bill by myself, an individual with whom I am associated in partnership with or a business or partnership in which I have a greater than 5% interest.

Rep. Christopher J. “Chris” Murphy







The reason for abstaining on the above referenced legislation is:a. A potential conflict of interest may exist in that an economic interest


b. A potential conflict may exist under S.C. Code § 8-13-740(C) because of representation of a client before a particular agency or

4729


commission by me or an individual or business with whom I am associated within the past year.

c. A potential conflict may exist under S.C. Code § 8-13-745(B) and (C) because a contract for goods or services may be entered into within the next year with an agency, commission, board, department, or other entity funded through the general appropriation bill by myself, an individual with whom I am associated in partnership with or a business or partnership in which I have a greater than 5% interest.

Rep. Leonidas “Leon” Stavrinakis

HOUSE TO MEET AT 10:00 A.M. TOMORROWRep. MCKNIGHT moved that when the House adjourns it adjourn to

meet at 10:00 a.m. tomorrow, which was agreed to.

Rep. MCKNIGHT moved that the House do now adjourn, which was agreed to.

Further proceedings were interrupted by adjournment, the pending question being consideration of Veto items.

MOTION NOTEDRep. ERICKSON moved to reconsider the vote whereby Veto No.

44 was overridden and the motion was noted.

ADJOURNMENTAt 5:08 p.m. the House, in accordance with the motion of Rep.

WEEKS, adjourned in memory of Reginald D. English of Sumter, to meet at 10:00 a.m. tomorrow.

***

4730

Documents

South Carolina General Assembly · Web view2015/07/06 · Indicates Matter Stricken. Indicates New Matter. The House assembled at 1:00 p.m. Deliberations were opened with prayer