House Chamber Notes

Jan. 19, 2023 10:00am

INVITATIONS
SPECIAL INTRODUCTIONS/ RECOGNITIONS/ANNOUNCEMENTS
Rep. Santiford SC– Hurricane Damage Program — LCI Com
Rep. Erickson– Train Station ? — Ed and Public Works Com
Rep. Erickson– Highway Code — Ed and Public Works Com

Rep. Oremus: “Fetal Heartbeat bill was unconstitutional and just one decision can endanger
the lives of thousands of our children. Men and Women of SC we can do better and we can
give future children a fighting chance of life. We are SC, a state of Freedom and Prosperity.”

SECOND READING STATEWIDE UNCONTESTED BILLS

H. 3604 (Word version)--Reps. Bannister, G. M. Smith and Murphy: A JOINT

RESOLUTION TO AUTHORIZE THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS FROM THE
CONTINGENCY RESERVE FUND FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS AND
FEDERAL FUNDS DISBURSED TO THE STATE IN THE AMERICAN RESCUE PLAN
ACT OF 2021, AND TO SPECIFY THE MANNER IN WHICH THE FUNDS MAY BE
EXPENDED.

(Introduced--January 11, 2023)

(Ways and Means Com.--January 11, 2023)

(Favorable With Amdt.--January 17, 2023)

Rep. Anderson on amendment #1: “The DOC had a record year last year and the state has
issued bonds… 586 million allocated to the rural infrastructure authority. This money will go
to continue funding those grant applications. Total of 2 billion dollars on water and sewer
projects if we do this about 70% of the application will be funded.”

Rep. Magnus *requests debate*

- Bill Moves to the contested calendar

Rep. Anderson moves for adoption of amendment 1

- Amendment 1 is adopted

Rep. Magnuson on amendment 2: simple amendment that says from the rural infrastructure
authority the money that is being spent can only go to grant applications to rural areas or
municipalities where the population is less than 5,000. This involves 586 million dollars so
we want to make sure the rural areas are represented.

Rep. Anderson moves to table amendment 2 — Rep. Magnuson requests roll call

- Amendment is tabled by vote 92-20

Rep. Magnuson on Amendment 3: This amendment, of the 86 million of your tax payer funds
we are appropriating to the projects excavated by the Secretary of Commerce as what
deems necessary. I wanted to add a sentence to limit the use of these funds being
influenced by lobbyists and no one will get a piece of 86 million because the Sec of
Commerce wants to secretly give it away.

Rep. Yao: It is above board we have meetings and we vote on. Everyone has the equal
opportunity to get their money. This is a public meeting and will be voted on publicly. Please
vote against this.

- Moves to table the amendment, Magnuson requests roll call

- Amendment is tabled by vote of 86-23

Rep. Magnuson on Amendment 4: this is simply striking the 86 million we are talking about
that is going to the Secretary of Commerce. It is not defined and I am sure there is other
people who will tell you it is above board but it is not and this wouldn’t even affect the 586
million.

Rep. West: I’d like to bring to the body this is an interesting dilemma, in that process the
speaker has set forth a plan for economic development in this state. But I can promise you
there are companies in this state right now who need to hire thousands of employees. We
have had such a large influx of business coming into this state. The process is not going to
be perfect. The DOC has brought in a lot of jobs, and if you want to continue to have high
paying jobs then vote for the bill as is.

Rep. Magnuson: Republicans believe that the free market creates jobs without the
government doing it for us. I will point you to the fact the 586 million is being dropped. This
amendment only strikes the portion that we do not know where is going.

Rep. Rutherford: You are the spokesperson for republicans?

Rep. Magnuson: No but I am a republican legislature taking a republican perspective.

Rep. Rutherford: Is it fair to say that you are not saying what republicans think but rather
what you believe. This shady government agency being the DOC?

Rep. Magnuson: If you want to make the case that everything is above board then go ahead.
It is not disclosed what they do all the time and that is what shady is.

Rep. Rutherford: So you are not saying that they are doing anything illegal or unethical, you
are just saying that they operate in a room that not everyone is privy to.

Rep. Magnuson: There is a member who is not in this room anymore who worked against a
stadium in his district and that person claimed to be a Republican leader, so yes I am
skeptical of where we have one sentence in law where we do not know where this will end
up.

Rep. Rutherford: This someone you are speaking about I suggest he would rather win as a
republican leader, over you due to his service.

Rep. Magnuson: So just because they are a power player means they reflect the ground

Rep. Rutherford: I just don;t think you can speak for people as a whole group and then when
you talk about the member who is not here its disparaging. When you give an example you
were using that to attack former leader Simrell. Is that right?
Rep. Magnuson: You are supposed to be against big corporations controlling the
government, and that was an example of just that. I am not going to be told by the Dem
Minority leader what is republican.

Rep. Cobb Hunter: Mr. Magnuson I agree with you on transparency and knowing where the
money is going. TGhat is why those of you who consider yourselves fiscal conservatives,
you had an opportunity 3 times, to watch where the money is going. This legislation would
have created an oversight committee Magnuson made up of agencies chaired by reece of
DHEC the rural infrastructure authority all of these agencies who had 1st hand knowledge
whatever the needs are. But the pots of money that would address crime, long standing
issues in marginalized communities are on the table. NC has leveraged 900 million but here
in SC we can’t do that because that’s a Biden program. What has the response been for
those of you here last year? You had the opportunity to create an oversight committee, and
each and every one of you voted to sustain the veto. The problem you all have and
continuously cutting off your nose despite your face. You are so partisan and caught up with
whose going to get credit, and not wanting the Biden administration to get credit. The
hypocrisy is right in this room and y’all ought to be ashamed of yourselves. Mr. Speaker I am
not going to take any questions. Actually yes I will

Rep. Ott: It is not lost on me the rousing spark we are off to today. I wanted to ask
Magnuson some questions also but I didn't get that. Did you know that we have had a lot of
points being made from the podium and not necessarily debate. Do you think that it is good
that people are making political statements, or would you rather debate?

Rep. Cobb-Hunter: This time the campaign is over, its time to do business, I said this in the
organizational session. There are so many other things that we need to talk about. I have no
problem with Mr. Magnuson raises issues he has every right to. But I want people to
understand the power of leverage, because what you find is there are fragments and
fractions in here. If you are serious about policy you would do wise to give some thought to
community organizing around issues.

Rep. Ott: I don’t disagree, I have no problem with someone articulating their point and it is
incumbent about this body to defend their point. I don't want this body to get to that point.

Rep. Cobb-Hunter: Not to interrupt you but we are already at this point.

Rep. Ott: Do you think it is concerning that in picking communities, he was picking rural
communities as a winner?

Rep. Cobb-Hunter: For him to do that it is all for the polls. Holding ribbon cuttings, press
releases touting what they have done.

Rep. R. Williams: You laid ground for what is going around in this state. This 86 million
dollars that Magnuson was speaking of. I think that as far as econ dev is concerned we all
need more of it. These funds that you were speaking of Ms. Cobb-Hunter, can it be used in
every county?

Rep. Cobb-Hunter: Yes I think it can, I am sorry that Magnuson didn’t realize I agree with
him on this oversight matter. It is kind of like broadband money. People are more concerned
with maintaining power than making good policy. I would love to be here in a body that is
independent of its thinking and not like lemmings falling off a cliff.

Rep. Landing: As former econ dev chair of Mt. Pleasant council, one of the things I hjad the
honor of participating in numerous times, was sitting in on the packages. Commerce Dept’s
process involves a very complicated mathematical equation of how much the business is
invested, how many jobs and what the future plans are. It also has to affect the whole
community in a way. I think we should table this amendment.

- Moves to table, rep Magnuson calls for roll call

- By vote of 98-16 amendment 4 is tabled

Rep. Pace on amendment 5: My amendment sets the investigative general to give us reports
on all the funds and give us a report on any unintended consequences. I would like a little
more transparency.

Mr. Bannister: Mr. Pace has a legitimate desire for oversight that is already there, specific
grant allegations is reviewed and sent over to us already and I ask that we table this.

- Mr. Bannister moves to table, Pace requests roll call

- Amendment 5 is tabled by vote 92-19

Rep. Morgan on amendment 6: Today is a little more tense than other days, I do think that it
is important we focus on policy and not personality. The amendments we put up here are
amendments of substance and even today. Last couple speech I heard commented on
shady deals, I know the public thinks and believes there are shady deals that go down here
whether its elections or whatever, if you have never heard that then you— republicans and
democrats both question that and believe that— it is our duty to show them that it is not true.
We should show them that we do not tolerate or at least are making an effort to have
oversight. If you live in the upstate, people have some opinions about what happened to that
stadium. We general are pretty fiscally conservative, this amendment in front of you makes
sure that anyone who gets contracted to do work with their money. It makes sure that we in
this room cannot profit from this. It is good policy to ensure that this money does not profit us
our family members or our close business associates. Safeguards should be bipartisan so I
hope you vote for this amendment.

Rep. Caskey: I appreciate the eloquence that you delivered this civics lesson. Are you aware
that it requires 64 people to adopt an amendment? How many people did you talk to before
today?

Rep. Morgan: You can read, you can all read the assertion that we have to get permitted to
submit an amendment

*Cheers from legislators* *Mr. Morgan steps away from well*

Rep. Caskey: I am disappointed that we had to end. We should seek at every opportunity to
provide transparency with the public. However, we are a legislative body that requires
working with other, and that is a concept that some members of this body consider foreign. I
propose that collaboration is the best… If you want to be successful then there are ways to
do that but I do not know why it strikes some members as difficult to learn. This bill came out
of committee a week ago and no one knows any of these amendments aside from a very
small group who did not work with anyone and does not have that 63 number. Working
together can give us what the public needs and deserves. Standing on some hill of
righteousness here or on social media is not what needs to be done.

- Mr. Bannister moves to table, roll call requested

- Amendment 6 is tabled by vote 85-24

Rep. Morgan on amendment 7: you didn’t like that amendment, this only limits us as
individuals from being able to profit from this money. Let’s not have a situation where there is
any way we can profit from this money allocation. The comments about getting approval for
amendments is appalling and even more appalling that some of you clapped because that is
what is wrong with this body today. This limiting it to just us it just hit me today. Because that
sometimes happens. Rep. Caskey said— and that's what you just clapped too. We shouldn’t
be hating each other or caring that much about caucuses and parties, we should be focused
on the people’s work and the policies. I think this is a clear bipartisan amendment that we
can all agree on and work together for the betterment of SC.

Rep. Ott: We signed up to work, so we should not be afraid to stay here. I am going to vote
for your amendment. Do you think that when you put up this amendment that you’re
insinuating what you are trying to prevent is happening?

Rep. Morgan: The public believes it, and in my opinion I have seen things that do look bad.
Whether it violates the ethics statute doesn’t necessarily make it ethical.

Rep. Ott: I am going to vote for this, I was trying to make sure there if there was shadiness
that we can identify and take it down. Are there processes in place that you and I both
participate in that accomplish what I deem is rampage across this body?

Rep. Morgan: We do have processes in place but we need to do better.

Rep. Ott: Are these 100% about policy for you or is it about politics.

Rep. Morgan: This is one of the few things I put up in this body. You’ve served with me for 4
years. I can absolutely tell you when I bring something to the body it is policy nature that will
improve this state. I think a majority of the body does that.

Rep. Ott: I think if this isn’t apart of the game I will bite and I will vote for this.

Rep. Morgan: the answer to your question would be to read the amendments posted, the
second answer is politics are present in everything we do but we should look past that.

Rep. Pace: Are you aware in the past that the body across the way had a member who did
do what you are talking about?

Rep. Morgan: yes and that’s what I am trying to avoid but I will not attack anyone personally.

Rep. Caskey: I do not attend to make this a habit but I think it is important to highlight. I did
not say that there needs to be approval to submit things. Mr. Morgan is talented and he has
twisted things for what profit I do not know. I want to be clear on what I said I want people in
this chamber to work together. I didn't see any indications that this was a spontaneous
amendment. I want the public and the recond to know what we have said, we need to work
together.

Rep. Morgan: point of order under the decorum rules I do believe the intent of that remark
was to question my integrity and honesty and we need to respect each other.

Rep. Bamberg: Just to be quick here I think it was mentioned earlier that XYZ exhibits a
problem in this body. I think the biggest problem is when national agendas invade our state. I
thought it was important to let you all know I am just here so I don’t get fined.

Rep. Landing: You can read all the way through this amendment and I have promised my
constituents I wouldn’t vote on anything I did not read. I will say for the record that it disgusts
me that anyone would want to profit.
Rep. King: Everything is on our computers and laptops so it may not be on the screen but it
is available on the laptops.

- amendment 7 is adopted

Rep Jones on amendment 8: transparency is great. The federal government is spending

more money and the people are paying the price. Look at the price right of eggs right now.
People have had a hard time putting gas in their cars. This isn’t free money but if we are
gonna spend the 586 million dollars we need to give some back to the taxpayers. I know this
amendment isn’t germain and will get ruled down but to the conservatives here this is gonna
have an affect on future generations.

Rep. Rutherford: in fact you recognize what we are doing is changing law is that correct?

Rep jones: I’m just saying we should give money back to the people who payed it in the first
place.

Rep Rutherford: in passing this bill there became a direct movement in trying to not use this
money and violate federal law. When u talk about supporting the constitution but you are
talking about violating federal law. You can’t try and slide it in that voting for this we are
violating the law. Which are you?

Rep Jones: you take this contrary view we would the people to allow to keep their money
and give it back.

Rep Rutherford: we can’t talk about transparency and not be transparent. You know this
violates federal law and you didn’t say that. YES OR NO does this amendment say that it
violates federal law?

Rep Jones: No it sends the money back to….

Rep Rutherford: You cannot talk about transparency and then not be transparent. The
money wouldn’t make it back. How is that transparent when you walk away from the
podium….

- Bannister moves to table, Jones (roll call)

- amendment 8 is tabled by vote 85-18

Rep Morgan: Rep Caskey and I had a good discussion and I thought the rules were violated.
Sometimes you hear things that could’ve been interrupted, either way we totally respect
each other and I truly believe that all of us are here to represent our district and serve this
state. Thank you Mr. Speaker

- adoption of the bill as amended

- Receives second reading by vote 101-14

H. 3741 (Word version)--Rep. W. Newton-A BILL TO ADOPT REVISED CODE VOLUME

13A OF THE SOUTH CAROLINA CODE OF LAWS, TO THE EXTENT OF ITS
CONTENTS, AS THE ONLY GENERAL PERMANENT STATUTORY LAW OF THE STATE
AS OF JANUARY 1, 2023.

(Without reference--January 18, 2023)

 - 109-0, receives second reading
- Taken up for third reading tomorrow— Rep May Objected

WITHDRAWAL OF OBJECTIONS/REQUEST FOR DEBATE

UNANIMOUS CONSENT REQUESTS

Rep. Murphy moves that H.3254 to place it on the calendar— Rep. May objected
MOTION PERIOD