Click on the video for an update from the Senate… and then contact your state senator (803-212-6200) and tell him to stop the delay tactics and bring H. 3418 to a vote.

My friends at Conservative.SC have an updated story with the details of Tuesday’s late night debate, and I promise to keep you informed from the Senate floor as this debate continues.

Larry

“This is the most welcome economic news for the Lowcountry and our State in a long time,” says Senator Grooms, chairman of the Senate Transportation Committee.  “It’s a vote of confidence in the Port, and proves what we’ve been saying  – Charleston’s unique location, natural amenities and productive waterfront are of great value to the international shipping community.  Maersk and Charleston make a great team”

The decision is one of several similar announcements made by the private sector in recent weeks.  Grooms’ expertise in financing, infrastructure and transportation was sought by the companies throughout these earlier negotiations.

“The world’s biggest cruise line recently announced that one of its most popular ships will call Charleston home.  The nation’s largest tire manufacturing and distributing company is locating near Summerville.  I’ve met and negotiated with the leaders of these and other companies over the past year and that work is paying off.”

“When it comes to cutting red tape and bringing in sustainable, well-paying jobs, I stand on my record.  Others in this race only bring rhetoric,” Grooms says.

Grooms notes he has been closely involved in the Maersk talks.  ”There were definitely some moments of uncertainty, but we stuck to it.  Because our talks went on so long, and because many items we discussed were sensitive, we came away with a strong trust.  I’m thankful for that bond and am fortunate to call the good people of Maersk my friends.”

The Port of Charleston is one of busiest in along the Southeast and Gulf coasts.

More than 150 nations are served through the Port, and the Port of Charleston’s dockside operations teams are among the most efficient in the business.   With cargo moving through the port valued at more than $60 billion annually, “the Mearsk announcement means we will continue to build on our string of successes,” Grooms says.

“Now, we move forward and continue to position the SPA for the 21st Century. This wonderful announcement, combined with the recent passage of the port reform bill that I authored, will ensure that our state is well-positioned for similar, future announcements.”

Grooms thanked Maersk leaders for their patience in negotiating the complex deal.  “We appreciate the Port’s largest customer, and are delighted that they will continue to call Charleston home.”

Grooms, R-Bonneau, represents portions of Berkeley, Charleston, Dorchester and Colleton counties in the Senate.

http://groomsforgovernor.com/blog_post/show/39

The nonprofit education foundation recognized Grooms for playing a role in “every pro-family piece of legislation” the Legislature made law during its last session, said Oran P. Smith, council president.

Grooms said, “The Family Council represents the ideals I’ve supported from my first day in office — faith, family, traditional values.”

The council lists it primary issues of concern to include life-long committed marriage, the relationship between parent and child, sexual responsibility in youth and adults, the definition of marriage, life issues, legal issues and public and private gaming.

Grooms, first elected in 1997, serves parts of Berkeley, Charleston, Colleton and Dorchester counties. He is chairman of the Senate Transportation Committee.

Grooms and his wife have three sons.

The Post & Courier
October 4, 2008

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.

By Yvonne Wenger
The Post and Courier
September 25, 2008

Wants Property Valuation Notices to be Mailed Prior to End of Fiscal Year

Senator Kevin Bryant (R-Anderson) continues to fight for greater transparency in state and local government. Senator Bryant wants county tax officials to send out new property value notices at least 60 days before the end of a county’s fiscal year, so taxpayers can have a better understanding of how much money is being collected due to an increase in property values.

“I am working on legislation that would require counties to send reassessment notices to taxpaying homeowners 60 days prior to the end of the county’s fiscal year,” says Senator Bryant. “Many taxpayers in Anderson County are still in the dark about the reassessed value of their property and the potential impact on their personal finances.”

Senator Bryant wants taxpayers to have a greater understanding of how their hard-earned tax dollars are being spent. “It is all about information. The more people understand about how government is using their money, the more likely they are to hold elected officials accountable for fiscal responsibility.”

South Carolina law (Section 12-43-217) requires counties to “appraise and equalize” property once every five years and send notice to the property owner if the value or classification increase is more than $1,000. Although the notice is required, there is no specific time frame of when notice of the increase should be provided. The legislation being drafted by Senator Bryant would put a specific time frame in place. The reassessment valuation notice differs from the annual tax notice that is sent out annually.

Senator Bryant is joined in his desire to see legislation requiring a time schedule for reassessment notices by fellow Senators Larry Grooms (R- Berkeley), Greg Ryberg (R-Aiken), and Danny Verdin (R-Laurens).

Senator Bryant expects to pre-file the legislation in December ahead of the 2009 legislative session.

###

At least 26 percent of the state’s major roads are in poor or mediocre condition, and 25 percent of the state’s bridges show significant deterioration or don’t meet current design standards, according to the study, done by TRIP, a national nonprofit research group, for the South Carolina Alliance to Fix Our Roads.

Among the top 10 most deficient bridges, according to the study, are three in the Upstate, two of them crossing the Enoree River in Greenville County.

“We can fix our roads,” said Sen. Larry Grooms, chairman of the Senate Transportation Committee. “But too many members of the General Assembly are saying no, we’re not going to do it. That’s unacceptable.”

Grooms is pushing a House-passed bill that would transfer revenue from the sales tax on cars from the general fund to the state Department of Transportation. The bill would split the revenue between DOT and the State Transportation Infrastructure Bank, eventually raising $100 million a year for road and bridge work.

The bill has yet to get a hearing in the Senate, so House leaders have placed it in their version of the budget. Senate leaders said Wednesday that Senate rules don’t allow them to consider a law placed inside a budget, but Grooms said the rules only keep senators from placing a law inside the budget.

Grooms said even if the sales tax bill passes, the state will have to find other solutions to its infrastructure needs, including diversifying the state’s revenue stream for road work, most of which now comes from the gas tax.

“If we can fund Elvis impersonators, green bean museums and piggy festivals with General Fund dollars, why can’t we fund highways?” he asked.

He said a study committee will meet this summer to look at privatization alternatives and what other states have done to fund road projects. He said toll roads, high-occupancy lanes and toll lanes are among the possibilities for building or widening roads.

Wednesday’s report estimates that the average South Carolinian pays $265 a year in additional repair costs, tire wear, increased fuel consumption and other costs associated with driving on roads in need of repair.

The state’s traffic fatality rate is the sixth highest in the nation, according to the report, and 44 percent above the national average.

Published in the Greenville News
by Tim Smith
May 15, 2008

As part of a multifaceted approach to illegal immigration, the state Senate on Wednesday issued a call for a national constitutional convention in a strategy aimed at forcing Congress to act.

Senate President Pro Tem Glenn McConnell first introduced the concept in October after Washington negotiators failed to agree on a new immigration policy. The goal is not to see a convention convene, McConnell said. Rather, it’s to pressure Congress.

“Our hope is that this will be a call that will start to gain steam across America and it will put some heat under Congress and they will do what they’ve been sent there to do,” said McConnell, R-Charleston.

The resolution will be sent to the House for consideration where it has the support of Speaker Bobby Harrell, R-Charleston.

If it passes the South Carolina Legislature, 33 other states would have to sign on and agree to meet only as it pertains to giving states the right to deny benefits to illegal immigrants and have them forced out of the country. The resolution would be repealed if Congress addresses the issue.

“We’ll be the first state in the union, but I suspect we won’t be the last” to call for a convention, McConnell said.

While the resolution received key approval in a voice vote, several Lowcountry legislators noted their support, including Sens. Larry Grooms, R-Bonneau; Randy Scott, R-Summerville; and Paul Campbell, R-Goose Creek.

Not all the senators agreed. Some said they were worried the resolution would give states free reign to amend the U.S. Constitution in a number of other ways.

“I submit to you that what this does is set us on the path to do something dangerous,” Sen. Brad Hutto, D-Orangeburg, said Tuesday in the first of two legislative days the Senate spent primarily debating the resolution.

“I know we want to send Congress a message, but I don’t want to send them a hand grenade,” he said.

McConnell said the founding fathers designed the format for constitutional conventions in “extraordinary times” while putting safeguards in place. Besides, he said, before enough states would sign on for a convention McConnell thinks Congress will act.

“The one thing that will catch their attention is the concern that they will lose their power,” McConnell said. Hutto suggested it would be more effective to find election-time challengers for incumbents in Congress.

Also on Wednesday, the House gave key approval to an immigration reform package. Last week, the Senate sent the House a bill that would require government documents, specifically the state’s driving manual, be printed in English only.

By Yvonne Wenger

The Post and Courier

January 31, 2008

“Sen. Grooms has been an amazingly effective leader on education reform, property tax relief and transportation restructuring,” said Ed McMullen, president of the policy council. “He has positively impacted the lives of all South Carolinians, and for that we recognize him with our highest honor.”

The Policy Council is a nonprofit, nonpartisan public policy research organization in Columbia committed to individual liberty, free enterprise and limited government.

Previous recipients include U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia and state Senate President Pro Tempore Glenn McConnell, R-Charleston.

Grooms represents District 37, which includes portions of Berkeley, Charleston, Colleton and Dorchester counties.

Grooms and his wife have three young sons.

Sen. Grooms receives 2007 leadership award
Post and Courier
Friday, November 16, 2007

Our great national debate about illegal immigration is hardly new to the American experience. Today the controversy has reached a fever pitch, but over 200 years ago Alexander Hamilton offered his take. He wrote that the safety of a nation depends “on the energy of a common national sentiment, on a uniformity of principles and habits, on the exemption of the citizens from foreign bias and prejudice, and on that love of country which will almost invariably be found to be closely connected with birth, education and family.”

I support legal immigrants and believe, as most Americans do, that they bring with them new talents, a strong work ethic, and a genuine desire to achieve the American dream. But now, by some reports, there are as many as 38 million illegal immigrants here.

The notion of a great “melting pot” is tossed out the window when we have a half-million new, undocumented men, women and children pouring across our borders every year. There’s no way a nation, even a nation as large as ours, can assimilate them quickly enough. By the very act of stepping across our border, illegals are at once tramping on the principles that have traditionally kept America strong — our abiding sense of fair play and the rule of law. The sheer number of them, by necessity, means that our national principles and habits are weakened. Hamilton’s notion of “a common national sentiment” is diluted with each passing day.

We experience the problem even in small, non-border states like South Carolina. Our schools are overwhelmed. The S.C. Department of Education can’t even tell me the number of undocumented children we have; a court decision requires that we provide for their education and prevents asking students about their immigration status. Our health care system is strained, too. An estimated 20 percent or more of the uninsured are illegal immigrants. Hospitals are required to provide care in many cases, and Medicaid reimburses providers. In schools and emergency rooms, it’s the taxpayer who foots the bill. Meanwhile, recent news reports point out that the wages of hardworking South Carolinians are falling because of illegal immigrants in our workforce.

The issue, however, has now transcended the old debates about government entitlements, cheap labor and even a common language. These great, unchecked waves are fostering a festering resentment in Americans. In this event Hamilton warned the very fabric of society becomes endangered, since ‘the harmony of the ingredients is all important.’ We are facing what he feared would come to pass. The problem is now so acute it should become a national security priority.

Since the most fundamental and important function of government is to ensure the safety of its citizens, what then can we do? South Carolina’s ability to effectively deal with the problem is hamstrung by provisions in the U.S. Constitution that leave immigration law solely within the jurisdiction of the federal government. The states have very few mechanisms available for meaningful reform. What limited legislation the South Carolina Legislature may be able to pass risks being shot down by federal judges. Yet Congress has not acted. While the states burn, Congress fiddles. A new and more basic, some would say radical, approach is needed.

S.C. Senate President Pro Tempore Glenn McConnell has introduced an ingenious plan that addresses the issue head on. Under Article V of the Constitution, the S.C. General Assembly can petition Congress to call a convention for the sole purpose of giving states the ability to address illegal immigration. This exceptional and unprecedented resolution, if approved by two-thirds of the states, would require Congress to call this convention, where the issue could be dealt with once and for all. The purpose would be straightforward: states would be given the ability to permit or deny benefits to illegal immigrants, as well as the ability to enforce federal immigration laws within their borders. States would also be given the ability to apprehend and expel violators and the provision would mandate that the federal government provide timely assistance with deportation.

The fact that apparently no one has thought of this move before reflects not only Sen. McConnell’s creative thinking, but also shows how far we have moved away from the notion of republicanism and states’ rights. The beauty of the proposal lies in its reliance on the most basic principles of our founding. It also has the practical effect of forcing action and could very well mean the states will get relief.

I am a co-sponsor of this resolution and will do everything I can to help ensure its passage. The call for a constitutional convention is a plea for help. If Congress can’t see the handwriting on the wall and do its duty, the states are obligated to do theirs.