 "Photo: C. Aluka Berry/The Associated Press")
The South Carolina House adopted rules Tuesday that will require more roll-call votes after months of criticism that legislators aren't held accountable enough for actions on bills.
The House's new rules, adopted at the start of a two-day organizational session, are similar to what Senate leadership is discussing ahead of the session's start in January. Gov.
Mark Sanford, a handful of legislators and the South Carolina Policy Council all had pushed for more recorded votes, but said the change falls short of what's needed.
The rules require roll-call votes on nearly every amendment and bill before it leaves the House if it involves spending at least $10,000, anything tied to the state budget, taxes or fees; ethics and campaign finance laws; elections and redistricting are included.
The policy council's research shows South Carolina, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire and Vermont are the only states with no recorded vote requirements to pass bills.
The rules change passed on a 77-34 vote after the House became mired in a three-hour debate. While some legislators said they supported more roll-call votes, they questioned a new practice: recording all voice votes as "yes" and requiring people who voted "no" to tell the House clerk that's how they voted.
Rep. Todd Rutherford. D-Columbia, said that would allow people who aren't even present in the House to be recorded as voting "yes" while forcing people who voted "no" to remember to tell the clerk how they voted. Rutherford said House members shouldn't have to talk to the clerk every time they leave the chamber to take a phone call, get a cup of coffee or go to the restroom.
"What other body in the world would allow people to vote when you are not here?" Rutherford asked.
But the rules had a powerful backer: House Speaker Bobby Harrell, a Charleston Republican who only months ago was fending off calls for more roll call votes and on Tuesday was telling the House he had written the rule changes. He said objections like Rutherford's were attempts to stall visibility on voting.
"Every member is responsible for what goes on in this chamber and what this rule will do is require that every member tell the public what their position was on everything that was debated by this body when they were present," Harrell said.
If they leave the chamber, it's their responsibility tell the House clerk how long they'll be gone so they won't be recorded as voting, Harrell said.
But the most vocal supporters of increased roll-call voting weren't happy.
Rep. Nikki Haley, R-Lexington, took up the roll-call voting issue last year when legislators sweetened their retirement pay on a voice vote. She's filing a roll-call voting bill this month and says the rules change falls short of requiring the mandatory roll-call vote on second reading. "The people that we represent deserve the right to see every vote that we make," Haley said.
"They scammed the public by pretending to pass transparency - they didn't, and no responsible elected official should go home and say otherwise," Policy Council President Ashley Landess said in a prepared statement. "This rule change did nothing to fix a broken system."
Sanford called on legislators to revisit the issue in January. "It should be really simple - every bill should get a roll-call vote on second reading, period," Sanford said in a statement.
But Harrell thinks the House has gone far enough.
"There is nothing stronger than saying everything this body takes up is on the record," Harrell said.
Be the first to comment on this article!