The bill took its long and winding way through the General Assembly, but finally S. 351, the State Ports Authority restructuring bill, made it back from Gov. Mark Sanford’s veto with the House voting to override 102-3 (nays: Reps. Nikki Haley, Herb Kirsh and Tim Scott) and the Senate overriding 35-9 (nays: Sens. Lee Bright, Kevin Bryant, Chip Campsen, Ray Cleary, Tom Davis, Shane Massey, Mick Mulvaney, Mike Rose and Greg Ryberg).

Of course, the Governor wanted to maintain his (and his office’s) ability to fiddle with the SPA at will. As is Sanford’s frequent want, he will stay doctrinaire on many things, but when it comes to something near his Lowcountry plantation, he’s not averse to meddling and micro-managing. This was already seen once with the ridiculous Tumpy Campbell brouhaha. The issue came down to Sanford and Campbell disagreeing on the privatization of the port, and Sanford canned him. One would think that a board that serves an economic engine of the state shouldn’t be subject to the political whims of one man. So, Sen. Larry Grooms, Senate President Pro Tem Glenn McConnell and Sen. Robert Ford set out to change that.

Of course, one of the best arguments justifying the bill is the exchange between Grooms, who was at the podium, and McConnell, before the vote to override, part of which is below.

McConnell: Do you think that separation of powers requires us to put a blindfold on our head and give everything, downstairs to the Governor?
Grooms: We shouldn’t give everything to the Governor. But, what we should do is recognize and understand the separation of powers issues. Who develops policy, and who executes that policy. That’s what separation of powers is about. The governing board sets the policies.
McConnell: So, that must be my next question to you. We’re not talking about a cabinet agency, are we?
Grooms: No, we’re not.
McConnell: Isn’t it true that we’re talking about a state ports authority set up by the state of South Carolina as an enterprise to develop jobs and economic opportunities for the businesses and the people of this state?
Grooms: Absolutely correct, Senator. Because, if we were talking about a cabinet-level agency, then the General Assembly would be the policy makers of that agency. I don’t think we are capable to be able to adequately meet the business demands by analyzing the balance sheet, the growth trends, the customer relations, when you need to put in the post-panamax cranes, what your time frame is, what are your amortization tables. All those are examined by a governing board, which sets policy. That’s what the board does. The board sets policy, as the General Assembly sets policy.
McConnell: Doesn’t this bill set up high qualifications for people to make those kind of decisions?
Grooms: It does. It absolutely does.
McConnell: Now, let me ask you this….
Grooms: I think it’s a little bit lacking with the current enabling legislation.
McConnell: Does the South Carolina Constitution or the code of laws require a single governor to have a background in international shipping, and economics and banking, and all of this expertise to make these decisions?
Grooms: Our constitution doesn’t require our governor to have all those.
McConnell: It doesn’t, does it?
Grooms: No.
McConnell: And, this is the type, from experience, the type of depth and background that you need with an enterprise board, would you agree?
Grooms: Sir, Senator, I wholeheartedly agree. I’ll give an example. Our Department of Revenue has a cabinet-level executive. And, the cabinet-level appointee is our DoR secretary. He executes the policies that are put into law by this General Assembly. If we had that model for the State Ports Authority, you would have a cabinet-level State Ports Authority director implementing policy set by the General Assembly. I want the governing board to set the policies for our State Ports Authority, and also, I think that governing board should hire the executive director to keep tabs to make sure the policies that they direct are implemented. That was the model that worked, that was the model that we’ve gotten away from, that’s the model that we should return to.
McConnell: Isn’t it true, that after the court case, those board members served at the political whim of any sitting governor?
Grooms: After the court case, that is correct.
McConnell: And so, if the Governor wanted to call those board members and say, “I want you to vote this way, or I want you to do this, or I want you to sell all or a piece of the Port of Charleston, to X or Y, or I’ll remove you,” isn’t that now what can happen in the environment we’ve set up? Or the court set up?
Grooms: That is what can happen, in the environment the court set up.
McConnell: Do you think that’s a good business model for the people of the state? A port authority that can be run like a political plum orchard?
Grooms: It is a horrible business model, and that is why our state’s manufacturers, some of the shipping communities, worldwide shipping communities, have lost a little bit of faith in our ability to stick with what we say or where we want to go.

This week, a couple high-profile bills made their way from the State House to the Governor’s Mansion, proving that the first half of the 2009-2010 session wasn’t a total loss, though work remains to be done.

One bill was the much-ballyhooed payday lending reforms. Another is the State Ports Authority restructuring bill.

The PDL bill will restrict borrowers to one loan at a time, and a $600 limit. Unfortunately, because of extensive lobbying by the industry, and the industry’s cozy relationships with a number of lawmakers, the final bill left many unsatisfied, which most likely means a return to the topic next year.

Among other things, the ports bill gives stability to the SPA board, which had been seen as an unstable entity, subject to the political whims of the governor. With the new legislation, board members will have six-year terms and cannot be removed at executive fiat. Gov. Mark Sanford, who wanted to keep absolute authority with the governor, has indicated that he may veto the bill, which would leave the General Assembly with having to take it up again on June 16.

“He has indicated that he has problems with the bill, he says it takes authority away from the governor’s office and places it in the General Assembly, and that’s simply not the case, it does not add anything to the General Assembly,” Sen. Larry Grooms, chief sponsor of the bill, said to SCRN.

In a matter tertiary to the ports bill, Hardeeville Mayor Bronco Bostick has applied for federal stimulus dollars to pay for a new exit on I-95 and the infrastructure needed for the project, in advance of the creation of a port in Jasper County.

TUESDAY
HOUSE
Introduction of bills

• H. 3540, by Rep. Garry Smith, the “South Carolina Truth in Spending Act,” mandating that each agency, department and institution of state government, and each local government entity must maintain a transaction register and post it online.
• H. 3541, by Rep. David Hiott, regulating bear hunting.
• H. 3543, by Rep. Joan Brady, requiring the state Department of Education develop a dating violence policy, providing for reporting and publication requirements.
• H. 3554, by Rep. Harold Mitchell, to provide that the General Assembly accepts the stimulus funds from the American Recovery & Reinvestment Act of 2009.

SENATE
Introduction of bills

• S. 428, by Sen. Larry Martin, memorializing Congress to make permanent the E-Verify program.

WEDNESDAY
HOUSE
Introduction of bills

• H. 3556, by Rep. Dwight Loftis, to rename the Western Carolina Sewer Authority to Renewable Water Resources.
• H. 3572, by Rep. David Umphlett, repealing shark catch limits.

Reported favorably out of committee

• H. 3305, by Rep. Eric Bedingfield, to ensure representation in union elections is done by secret ballot.
• H. 3042, by Rep. Jimmy Merrill, legalizing mixed martial arts combat.

Interrupted debate

• H. 3067, by Rep. Alan Clemmons. Rep. Bakari Sellers moved to adjourn debate until Feb. 24, which failed 24-47. Rep. David Weeks moved to recommit the bill to the Judiciary Committee, which failed 36-69. Debate was interrupted by the House recurring to the morning hour.

Quotes
During debate on the school district spending flexibility bill.
House Reading Clerk Bubba Cromer: Amendment No. 9 was passed over, which brings us to Amendment No. 10, Ott and Crawford.
Speaker of the House Bobby Harrell: OK, we’re on Amendment No. 10, offered by Mr. Ott and Mr. Crawford? [laughter from the chamber] Somebody better read this one. Mr. Ott is recognized.
Rep. Harry Ott: Mr. Speaker, don’t let this tarnish what little reputation I have left in this body. But, you know, you have to pick your friends carefully, and I want to thank Dr. Crawford for agreeing to work with me on this particular amendment.

===

Harrell: Mr. Ott is recognized for his second 10 minutes. Mr. Rice is recognized for a question.
Rep. Rex Rice: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I want you to know Mr. Cato over here says he feels your pain, he’d be glad to take the chair.
Harrell: I’m probably going to bring him up here in a minute. [laughter from the chamber]

===

Debate on H. 3418
Harrell: …Mr. King objects to the bill. Mr. Rutherford?
Rep. Todd Rutherford: Wants to kill it! [laughter from the chamber]
Harrell: Mr. Rutherford wants to kill it. I assume you object to the bill.

SENATE
Introduction of bills

• S. 436, by Sen. Lee Bright, for police to seize real and personal property related to prostitution.
• S. 437, by Sen. Shane Massey, the Senate version of the House’s 24-hour waiting period for an abortion.
• S. 445, by Sen. Ray Cleary, establishing a flounder population study program and other regulations pertaining to flounder fishing in Murrell’s Inlet, Pawley’s Island and Litchfield.
• S. 450, by Sen. Bright, a bill which says life begins at conception and said zygote is covered by the rights of due process and equal protection.
• S. 305, by Sen. Ronnie Cromer, requiring that President Barack Obama rescind his order to close the detention camp at the naval base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. After extensive debate, the bill was sent back to general committee.

Quotes
On the State Ports Authority bill.
Sen. Glenn McConnell: I hope he would embrace what this bill is about. It’s about moving our state forward. He still has the power of appointment. He still has the power to remove. … I would submit to you, I would hope he would not stand over on the side of the road of progress. But instead, join us out there, and help us move this port forward, and don’t stop and wring your hands and say, “Well, I didn’t get my way and I didn’t get more power, so change isn’t coming.” Change is coming. I would hope he would be a part of that exciting change, that he would be a part of the discussions of are there different models that we need to look at, and not look at the old political battles of yesteryear, and say that somehow he’s been cut off from change. His opportunity is there with the rest of us, with the House of Representatives, together to try to take this economic engine and move it forward. And, that is where I see, senator from Berkeley, you have given us a great opportunity, a new beginning, a new start, as we take these tremendous assets. I’ll take any questions.
Sen. Hugh Leatherman: Senator yield for a question?
McConnell: Yes, sir.
Leatherman: Thank you, Senator. Senator, all the meetings we had with the railroad people, the Maersk people, did we one time see the Governor in any of those meetings?
McConnell: Not a one.
Leatherman: You would think he would be out front trying to convince Maersk to stay there, just like you and Sen. Grooms and others did. But, I didn’t see anything, I didn’t hear a word out of the Governor’s Office….
McConnell: Maybe he was out of state.
Leatherman: He’s been out of state a lot, I think, recently.

…

McConnell: I didn’t want this left, I didn’t want to say this, but he put it in the Charleston paper. Said we had cut off his opportunity. We’ve created a great opportunity, if he decides to take it.

…

Sen. Brad Hutto, on the Guantanamo Bay resolution: Let me tell you something about South Carolina. We don’t back down from responsibility. When our country calls, we’ve been there. And, if you don’t think that we’ve been fighting terrorism from the beginning, you need only look back to the fact we hung pirates, the first terrorists, in White Point Gardens. South Carolina doesn’t back down from terrorists. If they need to come to South Carolina, if I’ve got to load up a truck full of my buddies with shotguns from Orangeburg to guard ‘em, we will be there.

THURSDAY
HOUSE
Reported favorably out of committee

• H. 3121, by Rep. James Smith, to make it unlawful in South Carolina to remove more than 10 turtles of a certain named species.

An irregular commentary.

Much like the barn pictured above, South Carolina has been in a state of neglect, and our governor has cast his lot elsewhere.

It is shocking, to say the least, the extent that Gov. Mark Sanford has been on television in the past couple weeks. Depending on the day, it could be any of the traditional broadcast networks, or cable news venues. Fox News has practically camped out in Columbia, waiting for the latest missive from the Governor on the federal stimulus package.

That is not to say that his opinion on the stimulus money doesn’t matter. It does. But, should we be expecting our top statewide elected official to be a regular talking head on national news about the plan? Should we expect the chief executive to be penning columns every other day about the stimulus bill? South Carolina has many pressing problems that do not originate from, or are being dealt with, by Congress.

This week, the S.C. Senate passed a sweeping reform of the State Ports Authority. At other times, this would have been one of Sanford’s top policy priorities. Unfortunately, all South Carolinians got was a short paragraph of a quote in the form of a news release. And, he got rolled. While the Governor might back a different bill, the plan passed by the Senate seems to be the one that will become law, if one does. But, while the debate was going on, Sanford was busy making appearances on Fox News and writing op-eds for the Wall Street Journal.

Also, he has been shouting from the rafters, not only about the stimulus bill, but also issues with the state Employment Security Commission. And, despite his talk, it looks like Sanford will capitulate on both issues, taking the stimulus money and more cash to pay the unemployment checks of numerous South Carolinians.

Much is made of the enmity between Sanford and the General Assembly, both from Democrats and members of his own party. This is, in part, because the Governor does not seem to be concerned with actual passage of laws and regulations. He looks to be more at home in a libertarian salon, and more apt to be a political philosophy professor at a university than a governor.

If Sanford wants a future beyond 2010, he will have to change his strategy, and fast. You can fool the WSJ and Fox News all you want, but when the rest of the national press and commentariat gets a hold of you, you are going to be just another presidential primary candidate left in the roadside ditch of history. As of right now, it appears Sanford’s legacy will be one of being able to win two elections, but not being able to do much else, except cause problems.

And, as a politician with a similar record will tell you, that only opens up the door for big gains by Democrats.

Wednesday, the Senate passed Sen. Larry Grooms‘ bill to restructure the administration and governance of the State Ports Authority, effectively stripping the Governor of most of his power over the SPA and providing greater legislative oversight.

The bill mandates that gubernatorial appointments to the nine-member board meet certain qualifications, provides for seats for a number of community and industry interests that are involved with the ports and requires that the Governor show cause if removing a member of the board.

“Change is coming,” Sen. Glenn McConnell said in a statement. “Let’s not look back at old political battles. Let’s be about the businesses of creating opportunity, hope, and quality of life. Our port has distinct advantages and unique features that make it attractive to customers across the globe. We’ve refocused the port and set it on a new course where professionalism is the rudder.”

In addition, there are provisions that have the SPA continue in creating the North Charleston container port and a port in Jasper County.

Gov. Mark Sanford has repeatedly said that he does not support this bill, and reiterated his case when the bill passed second reading on Tuesday.

“For all the talk in the Senate about the importance of accountability at the Ports Authority, it’s hard to imagine something doing more harm to the responsiveness and transparency of that agency than this change,” Sanford said in a statement. “It’s very interesting that the very same people who make the argument that the Ports Authority needs a change of direction are the same people who want so much to take away a governor’s role in indeed making those changes. On the other hand, we’d give great credit to Sens. [Tom] Davis, [Chip] Campsen, [Mike] Rose and many others who stood firm for the idea of accountability and clear lines of authority. To that end, we’re hopeful that Rep. [Jimmy] Merrill’s idea of getting rid of the board structure entirely and simply having a governor appoint the director of the Ports Authority advances on the House side.”

The State Ports Authority restructuring bill, introduced by Sen. Larry Grooms, finally got through Tuesday, though debate carried on until 6 p.m. The issue delaying the bill was Sen. Tom Davis’ amendment to the bill, Amendment No. 2.

According to the amendment, “A study committee is established to study public private partnerships regarding ports in South Carolina. The study committee is composed of nine members. The President Pro Tempore shall appoint three senators, the Speaker of the House of Representatives shall appoint three members of the House of Representatives, and the Governor shall appoint three citizens with relevant professional experience. Members of the study committee at may only receive the mileage reimbursement as provided by law for members of state boards, committees, and commissions.”

The biggest change to the bill on Tuesday happened when Majority Leader Harvey Peeler took up issue with the advisory committee being mandated to have a representative of the longshoremen’s union on the panel. Peeler, who was opposed to having the union have such control, quashed the proposal and that type of committee.

A motion was made to pass the bill on second reading, which passed 28-15.

TUESDAY
Bills introduced

• H. 3446, introduced by Speaker of the House Bobby Harrell, to express the gratitude of the House to Debbie Parker Hankins on her retirement as the House journal clerk.
• H. 3470, introduced by Rep. B.R. Skelton, to increase the cigarette tax to 50 cents per pack, with money to go to a smoking cessation and prevention fund, a marketing fund for state crops, the Medicaid trust fund and a health care trust fund.
• H. 3471, introduced by Rep. Richard Chalk, to raise the cigarette tax to 45 cents per pack.
• H. 3478, introduced by Rep. Don Bowen, to institute a performance bonus for public school teachers, not to exceed five percent of the teacher’s salary.
• H. 3483, introduced by Rep. Brian White, to propose a constitutional amendment to protect hunting, trapping and fishing.
• S. 392, introduced by Sen. Tom Davis, restructuring the State Ports Authority with a director appointed by the governor.
• S. 398, introduced by Sen. Lee Bright, the Senate companion to the House “born alive” bill.

Other action
Both the fusion voting bill (H. 3067) and the abortion ultrasound bill (H. 3245) were placed on the contested calendar for the House.

S. 4, the “Teacher Protection Act,” which was chief sponsored by Senate President Pro Tem Glenn McConnell, was passed by the Senate 40-0 on the third reading.

Scenes from the floor
Rep. Jimmy Merrill, asking questions on the rural telephony bill.
Merrill: Could these guys move out of the way? Whoever is handing out stuff, so that we could see? Hey, excuse me, get ou…I can’t even see. Thank you.
Rep. Michael Thompson: You have a way with words, Mr. Merrill.
Merrill: It’s all I got, man.
Thompson: I know the feeling.

Rep. Grady Brown on Rep. Carl Anderson’s birthday.
Brown: Thank you Mr. Speaker, House members, ladies and gentlemen. If you would give me your attention please, just a moment. Today is a very special day for my deskmate. He wouldn’t tell me how many, but when you see Carl Anderson today, Rep. Carl Anderson, you would want to, especially…SHHHHHHHHHH. It always works. Even for adults, it works. I learned that, when I DJ. People want to hush. But, anyway, Carl Anderson has a birthday today. So, Carl, would you please stand? He is 39 years old today. Happy birthday, Carl.

And, tonight, when you leave the judges reception, we will be at Rust again, behind the Motor Supply, doing beach music for four hours. So, for those of you who would like to, we’d like to have you drop by. Thank you.

Harrell, on lunches.
Harrell: The Democratic Caucus has a cold sandwich lunch, according to your leader [laughter from the chamber], in Room 305 of the Blatt Building. The Republicans, during our regular lunchtime, have a hot lunch available in Room 105 of the Blatt Building.

WEDNESDAY
Bills introduced
S. 400, by Sen. Creighton Coleman, congratulating Tyler Thigpen, the first quarterback for Coastal Carolina, on his accomplishments with the Chanticleers and on becoming the starting quarterback for the Kansas City Chiefs.

Bills reported out of committee

• H. 3342, by Rep. Greg Delleney, the House “born alive” bill.
• H. 3418, by Harrell, the House voter ID bill.

Second reading

• H. 3463, chief sponsored by Rep. Garry Smith, which eliminates the provision that electronic traffic tickets have to be printed in different colors, depending on the offense.
• S. 1, McConnell’s bill on spending caps, carried over per the resolution of Sen. Larry Grooms.
• S. 12, Sen. Hugh Leatherman’s Tax Realignment Commission bill, carried over per Leatherman, not to be considered before Feb. 19.

Judicial elections
The following people were elected to state courts.
Kaye Hearn, Court of Appeals, Seat Five
Thomas Cooper, Fifth Judicial Circuit, Seat Three
Roger Young, Ninth Judicial Circuit, Seat Three
Carmen Tevis Mullen, Fourteenth Judicial Circuit, Seat Two
Benjamin Culbertson, Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Seat Two
Rupert Markley Davis Jr., Circuit Court At-Large, Seat Two
Clifton Newman, Circuit Court At-Large, Seat Three
Edward Miller, Circuit Court At-Large, Seat Four
J. Mark Hayes II, Circuit Court At-Large, Seat Five
Jesse Cordell Maddox Jr., Circuit Court At-Large, Seat Seven
Michelle Childs, Circuit Court At-Large, Seat Nine
James R. Barber III, Circuit Court At-Large, Seat Ten
Edgar Warren Dickson, First Judicial Circuit, Seat One
William Jeffrey Young, Circuit Court At-Large, Seat One
William Henry Seals Jr., Circuit Court At-Large, Seat Six
Edgar Henderson Long Jr., Family Court, Tenth Judicial Circuit, Seat One
Alex Kinlaw Jr., Family Court, Thirteenth Judicial Circuit, Seat Six
Deborah Brooks Durden, Administrative Law Court, Seat Four

Scenes from the floor
Former Sen. John Drummond made an appearance at the State House.

Rep. Ken Kennedy, referring to debate under cloture of the payday lending bill.
Kennedy: If they would just refer all of their time to me, I will do the speaking against it for them.
Harrell: As long as no one raises a point of order, and when you’re through with 10 minutes, as long as the Chair doesn’t just say, “Mr. Kennedy, you’re at the end of your time,” then that would be OK. But, I’m guessing one of those two things will happen, Mr. Kennedy. Ms. Young is assuring me that one of those two things will happen [laughter from the chamber].

Rep. Chris Hart, on issues with legislative power and the payday lending bill.
Hart: None of ‘em made it out, in the six months that we were in session. We’re now in session, second week, February. This bill is on the floor. Look at the lead sponsors of the bill. That tells you why this bill is on the floor. We have 15 different bills in LCI committee right now, dealing with deferred presentment. Not one got a hearing.
::Inaudible due to overloading of the LPITS server.::
How come the bills from last year did not get out of subcommittee, but this one is on the floor? Can somebody please raise a hand and tell me why is this bill on the floor? [laughter from the chamber]
Unidentified legislator: Look behind you! [laughter from the chamber]

Rep. Bakari Sellers, on his amendment to the payday lending bill.
Sellers: Why am I only giving them a dime?
Acting Speaker Jim Harrison: Ms. Cobb-Hunter is recognized for a question.
Sellers: Mr. Speaker, may I answer her? Rep. Cobb-Hunter, in my heart, I would love to give them a dollar, or a dollar and fifty cent. I think financial literacy programs are programs that need to be taught throughout the state more often. I do realize that leaving this body $400,000 may be a coup. It’s something that we need to take over to the Senate, and see if we may be able to, one day, be able to offer more. But, at this time, $400,000 a year, if we can move for adoption….
Harrison: Mr. Sellers, you have a question from Mr. …. Mr. Gunn. Mr. Gunn has a question, Mr. Sellers.
Rep. Anton Gunn: Rep. Sellers, is this your attempt to drop a dime on the industry?
Sellers: I like that language. We’re going to, I guess.
Gunn: Is that a yes?
Sellers: Yes.
Gunn: OK. Thank you.

Following the Q&A between Cobb-Hunter and Rep. Eric Bedingfield on the EFCA resolution.
Harrell: Gentlemen….
Sellers: [joking] It’s a Black Caucus meeting! [laughter from the chamber]
Harrell: Mr. Rutherford [chuckles], and Mr. Gunn, and Rev. Neal, and Mr. Hart, Mr. Kennedy has complained that you have congregated over there. [chuckles] All right. Mr. Kennedy is recognized.

Tweeting the payday lending bill debate.
Rep. Thad Viers: there are 30 freaking amds on the desk….time for the cloture kitty to come out and play!!!
Rep. Nathan Ballentine: good thing Rep Chris Hart is already on 3M committee….speaking truth to power can be costly around here
Rep. Dan Hamilton: only 30 more amendments on the payday lending bill…great. Honey, I won’t be home for dinner
Rep. Joey Millwood: I wish I brought an overnight bag. This is seriously going to be late. I learned that lesson!
Hamilton: Its the Alan Clemmons amendment show today at the State House.
Millwood: We’re saving jobs and the free market in the House today!
Gunn: Got the Hell beat out of me on Pay Day Lending. Good guys lost one today.

THURSDAY
Bills introduced

• H. 3509, introduced by Rep. Michael Pitts, to affirm the rights of all states, and South Carolina, under the Ninth and Tenth Amendments.
• H. 3521, introduced by Sellers, to establish a committee to more fully investigate the Orangeburg Massacre and submit a report on its findings.
• H. 3523, introduced by Skelton, to institute a statewide smoking ban, excepting private clubs.
• H. 3526, introduced by Rep. Liston Barfield, to institute the “Right to Life Act”. The act would, “establish that the right to life for each born and preborn human being vests at fertilization, and that the rights of due process and equal protection, guaranteed by Article I, Section 3 of the constitution of this state, vest at fertilization for each born and preborn human person.”
• H. 3527, introduced by Barfield, the 2009 version of the infamous “fetus statue” monument.
• H. 3537, introduced by Millwood, requiring that the Legislative Audit Council conduct an annual audit, choosing randomly, on one-fifth of the state’s school districts. The bill grants the LAC power to contract out to an independent firm. The school district, in this cash-strapped time, is required to pay for the audit, whether it is by the state or an independent firm. The bill does not say where the districts are supposed to come up with this money.
• S. 424, introduced by Bright, to affirm South Carolina sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment. Wade Hampton approves.

The General Assembly resumes on Feb. 17.

After getting approval in subcommittee on Monday, Sens. Larry Grooms‘ and Glenn McConnell’s bill to restructure the State Ports Authority got the OK from the Senate Transportation Committee on Tuesday.

As reported here previously, the bill brings significant changes to the SPA, including requirements for serving on the board and mandating that a board member could only be removed for cause.

Another change is the addition of an advisory committee, which will act as the eyes and ears of the public and report back to the General Assembly.

“The S.C. Senate realizes that we need to run the SPA more like a business with the strictest accountability, stability, and transparency,” Grooms said in a statement. “This restructuring bill ensures that we have a long-term strategic plan to create jobs for South Carolina.”

As for Democratic support once the bill hits the Senate floor, that is still up in the air.

“We’re still kind of going through it,” Phil Bailey, of the Senate Democratic Caucus, said. “Everybody agrees that there’s a massive problem with the State Ports Authority. There’s some thought, even within the Democratic Caucus, that privatization might be an answer. There’s other thoughts floating around that the entire board just needs to be scrapped and be replaced.”

Bailey said that the Democrats are waiting for a plan from the stakeholders in the port before they move on a position.

The bill still has a long way to go. Gov. Mark Sanford has already expressed his displeasure with the proposals, and if the bill makes the long journey to his desk, it could set up another veto fight.

“Whatever the issues are with the port, taking away the governor’s ability to fire board members doesn’t fix anything and makes it potentially worse,” Sanford spokesman Joel Sawyer said to The Post and Courier.

At a special Senate Transportation subcommittee meeting on Monday, the senators assembled approved the State Ports Authority restructuring bill and sent it to the full committee, where it will be taken up today.

The majority of the speakers at the hearing represented business and economic interests in the Port of Charleston, and, while each suggested some tweaks of the bill, they were, for the large part, satisfied with what was before them.

However, a number of issues came up, which were considered in an amendment to the bill which will be attached at today’s meeting. One of the top concerns was the proposed advisory board.

Early in the hearing, Sen. Hugh Leatherman expressed his problems with the committee, and it having power over the main SPA board. By the end, the consensus among senators and business representatives seemed to be that the main board should meet with the advisory board on a regular basis, but that the advisory board should not have any governing power.

“They can’t be involved in the management of the board,” Lewis Gossett, president of the S.C. Manufacturers Alliance, said. “That would be two managing boards, and I don’t think that would work.”

Another hot topic was how the board had operated in the past, and how it should operate in the future. Larry Young, president of the S.C. Stevedores Association, said that requiring board members to be removed for cause would let the members be more independent and better able to serve.

“I believe what you’re saying is that we don’t need any more board members that are political hacks,” Leatherman asked.

“You heard that loud and clear,” Young answered.

Billy Adams, chairman of the Maritime Association of South Carolina, felt similarly.

“What happens is that a lot of these people seem to serve under duress or under the fear that if they do not go along with the thought of the governor, then they can be removed from the board,” he said. “There have been different times that different members have been asked to resign.”

Major industrial projects naturally draw the eye of environmental groups, and Nancy Vinson of the Coastal Conservation League testified that it would be important to have someone on the SPA board that had a background in public health. For two years running, she said, the American Lung Association gave Charleston an F for high levels of fine particulate matter.

“We believe it would benefit the SPA board to have a requirement that one board member have a background in public health and the environment, to track and interpret health impact data for the board and for the public,” she said. “The economics are there. The EPA estimates that if we spend $2-4 billion in this country in the next 10-15 years cleaning up port pollution, we’d save $70 billion in health and environmental costs.”

Gossett, though, said business had been butting heads with environmentalists over the port for some time, and the proposal would be a mistake.

“We do not believe that it is necessarily motivated by a threat to the environment. We are concerned that it has been, in many instances, to delay, if not stop, expansion,” he said. “We don’t think that would be appropriate. I don’t want to be flippant about it, but it’s almost like creating an advisory board for USC athletics, and putting Clemson people on it, based on what we’ve seen for the last five or six years.”

Gov. Mark Sanford is on the record opposing the bill, preferring instead an alternative restructuring proposal put forward by Rep. Jimmy Merrill.

The bill will be taken up by the full Transportation Committee at 1 p.m. in Room 105 of the Gressette Building.

The State Ports Authority. Most South Carolinians would be hard-pressed to know that it existed, much less what it does or its role in the battles between members of the General Assembly and Gov. Mark Sanford.

Still, the Port of Charleston has been integral to South Carolina’s economy since the state was a British colony, so whatever happens on the coast becomes a top state priority.

A new bill, introduced by Sen. Larry Grooms, seeks to reorganize SPA to push Charleston from the fourth largest port on the East Coast back to No. 1, and bring in some accountability standards.

“The port is too important to the economic vitality of our state to be used as a political tool,” Sen. Glenn McConnell, a cosponsor of the bill, said in a statement. “We’ve got to take the politics out of the port’s operations and demand that it be run like a business. Job creation comes with long term planning, not political trade winds.”

Among changes to the SPA would be establishing a 20-year strategic plan, which would be reviewed by the General Assembly, the establishment of a screening process for potential board members and the stipulation that cause has to be shown for the removal of a board member.

The changes to how the board is organized is considered by some political observers to reappropriate some of the power that the governor currently exerts over the SPA.

“We think this ports bill is the opposite of accountability,” Sanford spokesman Joel Sawyer said. “By taking away the governor’s only tool for effecting change on the board, it further insulates the board and the agency from answering to the public. We think Rep. [Jimmy] Merrill’s bill would be a much better way to ensure accountability on the board.”