Successor law
catches lawmakers off guard Many S.C.
leaders unaware of 1962 provision designed for
emergencies By AARON GOULD
SHEININ Staff
Writer
Blank stares. Open mouths. Furrowed brows.
Those were the common reactions of lawmakers when asked one
simple question last week: “Who are your emergency interim
successors?”
Among more than a dozen House and Senate members interviewed,
only one had even heard of the “Emergency Interim Legislative
Succession Act,” which has been state law since 1962.
The provision, section 2-5-10 of the S.C. Code of Laws, requires
each lawmaker to name three to seven people who would fill in for
him or her in case the state or nation is under attack and the
elected lawmaker is unable to tend to his or her legislative
duties.
Not a single lawmaker could be found who has actually created
such a list. The law requires each legislator to file a list with
the S.C. secretary of state.
“My wife always keeps my lists, you’ll have to ask her,” said
Sen. David Thomas, R-Greenville.
“Are you available?” asked Sen. Brad Hutto, D-Orangeburg.
“Well, good gosh,” said Sen. Linda Short, D-Chester.
ARE YOU SURE?
Even the top leaders of the House and Senate were left without an
answer.
House Speaker David Wilkins, R-Greenville, was incredulous.
“It’s still on the books? How do you know if it’s on the books?
It might have been repealed.”
According to current state code books, and the state code of laws
on the Internet, the provision was never repealed.
“Yeah, I’ve done that,” Wilkins said jokingly. “I’ve got it in my
safe deposit box. I’ve got seven names because I think it will take
at least that many people to do what I do.”
He suggested his list includes Christy Cox, his chief of staff.
When informed Cox would not qualify because she does not live in his
district, it was suggested that Wilkins put his wife, Susan, on the
list.
“Yeah, we’ll give it to Susan,” he said.
Senate President Pro Tem Glenn McConnell, R-Charleston,
considered to have a deep knowledge of state law and procedure, also
had never heard of the obscure provision.
“You showed me something I’d never seen and never knew about,”
McConnell said.
Senate Minority Leader John Land, D-Clarendon, was tickled to
learn something new about state law.
“I thought I knew everything in that book,” he said, referring to
the law book he was shown. “But I guess I don’t.”
IN TIMES OF FEAR
Most lawmakers assumed the law had been passed amid fears of a
growing Communist threat in Cuba and worldwide nuclear proliferation
during the Cold War.
After facing the same query as his colleagues, Rep. John Graham
Altman, R-Charleston, thought for a moment and declared that he
remembered the act.
In 1962, Altman was press secretary to then-Gov. Fritz
Hollings.
“We were crazy over fallout shelters,” Altman said. “This was
crazy times. You just don’t know.”
As the Legislature returned to work in January 1962, headlines in
The State warned that “Red Agents Paid Visits To Clemson” and “State
Laws Recommended to Combat Red Activity.”
USC history professor Dan Carter said he was not familiar with
the law but did recall the worries of the time.
“I can remember it very vividly,” said Carter, a graduate student
in Wisconsin during the Cuban Missile Crisis of fall 1962.
“My parents called three nights in a row,” Carter said. “I was
1,100 miles from home. They were convinced the missiles were going
to start flying.”
The law, Carter said, “has to be a response” to Cold War
fears.
In the post-9/11 world, with renewed fears of attack and concerns
about the continuity of government, the law might have new
relevance.
But Sen. John Hawkins, R-Spartanburg, who said the law is “an
anachronism,” rejects a “post-9/11 bunker mentality. This nation is
going to be safer. We can take ourselves a little too seriously down
here.”
JUST AS WELL
S.C. lawmakers are not alone in this case. Several other states
have similar laws.
Delaware first adopted the provision in 1953, Louisiana, in 1963.
Texas adopted it in 1985, and South Dakota considered a similar bill
in 2003.
USC law professor Eldon Wedlock said he cannot imagine the
provision would ever survive scrutiny by the courts. He and
McConnell agree that because the state constitution bestows the
powers of an office only to the person elected, the act is probably
unconstitutional.
That’s just as well, said Rep. Gilda Cobb-Hunter, D-Orangeburg,
who did not relish having to put together such a list.
“I don’t know anybody who’d want the job,” she said.
Reach Gould Sheinin at (803) 771-8658 or asheinin@thestate.com. |