Effort to force roll calls begins

COLUMBIA — A lack of recorded votes by the House and Senate is the most critical issue facing democracy in the state, Ashley Landess, president of the South Carolina Policy Council, said Wednesday.

She was joined by Gov. Mark Sanford and Reps. Nikki Haley, R-Lexington, and Nathan Ballentine, R-Irmo, after the group spent the day traveling the state to call attention to the matter.

"We need the public to understand that this is a fight," Landess said. Her conservative think tank put out a study in August that found the House took roll-call votes on 8 percent of the bills that became law this year, while the Senate did so only 1 percent of the time.

That leaves the with public little way to know how their legislators voted or who's accountable for many bills.

Most of South Carolina's neighboring states, and nationally, have

requirements for recording votes.

Haley is drafting a bill to file in advance of the Legislature's January return that would require roll-call votes on the second reading for every bill, and again on third and final reading if the bill is amended, on conference committee reports and on every individual section of the state budget.

"I've been increasingly disheartened by the environment in which we work," Haley said. "It always comes back to one thing: re-election."

Senate President Pro Tem Glenn McConnell, R-Charleston, is supporting the proposal and preparing a similar bill to be filed in the Senate.

Not everyone is in agreement, though. Many argue that roll is called for important votes already, no roll call indicates unanimous support and that putting in place a requirement for procedural matters would be timely and costly.

House Speaker Bobby Harrell's office estimated that roll calls cost $55 for every vote on the electronic board when factoring in the cost of paper, printing, staff time, maintenance, power and technology fees.

Supporters said the reasons not to record the votes are excuses.

"I can promise the taxpayers this: It is going to cost more if they don't," Landess said. If it's time constraints legislators are worried about, Landess offered to be the "time management consultant for the General Assembly."

Speaking: On the record

The Post and Courier called legislators in the Berkeley, Charleston and Dorchester delegations, and asked, "Would you support requiring roll be called on every bill passed by the Legislature? Yes or no, and why?"

-- Rep. Robert Brown, D-Hollywood: "When it comes to spending taxpayers' money, I think we should be accountable. I wouldn't agree on every bill."

-- Sen. Paul Campbell, R-Goose Creek: "I would certainly support roll call votes. I think the more sunshine we have in the process, the citizens have a better understanding of what's going on up there. You probably don't need roll call votes for everything."

-- Sen. Ray Cleary, R-Murrells Inlet: Not necessarily. He favors a requirement to take roll on major legislation and proposals that spend money.

-- Rep. Joe Daning, R-Goose Creek: "Yes, I think it's important that the people know where we stand."

-- Sen. Robert Ford, D-Charleston: "No, that's silly." It is not necessary because bills passed without a roll call vote signify agreement.

-- Sen. Larry Grooms, R-Bonneau: "Yes. Very seldom do we have roll call." More roll call votes would rein in spending.

-- House Speaker Bobby Harrell, R-Charleston, released a statement: "I have always supported more transparency and responsibility in government. But we must be fighting for true transparency and not just pandering to voters and grabbing for headlines."

-- Rep. Joe Jefferson, D-Pineville: "That's economically unfeasible. Anytime any constituent wants to know what we are doing up there, they have access to that."

-- Rep. Patsy Knight, D-St. George: "Yes. I think the more credibility we can put in things, the better."

-- Rep. Chip Limehouse, R-Charleston: "Yes, I am supportive of that as long as it doesn't become cost-prohibitive."

-- Rep. David Mack, D-North Charleston: "No. The reason being, it would just be too time consuming." He will keep an open mind.

-- John Matthews, D-Bowman: "I would not commit yea or nay until I see what they're talking about."

-- Senate President Pro Tem Glenn McConnell, R-Charleston: "No. It would be a waste of time. Whenever you have unanimous consent, it means that everybody is for it." He is sponsoring a bill that would change the rules in the Senate to require roll be called on all bills pertaining to taxation, ethics and those with a fiscal impact.

-- House Majority Leader Jim Merrill, R-Daniel Island: "I am absolutely happy for my votes to be recorded on absolutely anything, anytime, anywhere. There has to be a distinction made as to whether the naming of a road in Florence County or proclaiming Tuesday state bake-off day is worthy of recording a vote and using money and taking time."

-- Rep. Vida Miller, D-Pawleys Island, could not immediately be reached for comment but she has committed to being a co-sponsor of the bill.

-- Rep. Wallace Scarborough, R-James Island: "Yes, 100 percent. I believe that we should have openness and a seamless understanding of where everybody stands."

-- Rep. Leon Stavrinakis, D-Charleston: "I haven't read the bill. I have no problem having recorded votes and accountability with my voting records."

-- Rep. Seth Whipper, D-North Charleston: "Not on every bill. That is a waste of money." But he supports the concept and wants to see more debate.

-- Rep. Annette Young, R-Summerville: "No. It would be too expensive. I have no problem when it comes to a fiscal impact, doing a roll call." Any 10 House members can call for a roll to be taken on any issue, something which she does frequently.

Reach Yvonne Wenger at 803-799-9051 or ywenger@postandcourier.com.