Even lawmakers called it the "kitchen sink" and the "Christmas tree" bill. By any name it is terrible legislation and Gov. Mark Sanford did his duty by turning thumbs down. In doing so, the governor outlined, in convincing detail, the very serious consequences of letting this bill become law. But there weren't enough lawmakers in either the House or Senate willing to give up their piece of the "Christmas tree." Failure to sustain the governor's veto was a blow to a responsible legislative process.
The fact is the so-called Life Sciences bill never should have gotten out of the Senate. As finally passed, the bill violates in multiple ways the legislative rules against bobtailing, a ploy that involves adding controversial riders onto popular legislation as a way to get them passed. Obviously that's bad business, particularly in this instance when some of the bobtails were added by the conference committee without benefit of any semblance of debate.
Even worse, it would appear to violate the constitutional provision that every act "relate to but one subject." The prime reason the governor's veto was overridden is that this act relates to multiple subjects, thus giving so much to so many. Here are just a few of the act's many subjects: It gives all 33 state institutions of higher learning the chilling new power of eminent domain, expands the state's bonding capacity, makes a new convention center for Myrtle Beach eligible for funding and expands the criteria for LIFE Scholarships. Further, it bypasses the state's Commission on Higher Education by allowing USC-Sumter to become a four-year college, establishing a culinary arts program at Trident Technical College, and establishing a study committee to determine the need for a new law school at South Carolina State University.
The bill started out as an economic development measure with provisions that enjoyed widespread support, including incentives to pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, increased bonding capacity for the state's three research universities and the creation of a venture capital fund. It ended up, as the governor noted in his veto message, a very flawed piece of legislation with numerous "tack-ons" and "each containing their own complex policy consideration." Unfortunately, most of those "tack-ons" didn't get proper legislative consideration, particularly the wholesale granting of the power of eminent domain to institutions of higher learning, subject only to the approval of the Budget and Control Board.
The latter could be the act's fatal flaw. A property owner whose land is taken by a college without his consent could well decide to challenge the validity of this "kitchen sink" piece of legislation in court, and win. The Legislature should have heeded the governor's concerns and started this legislative process over again.
Click here to return to story:
http://www.charleston.net/stories/031804/edi_18edit1.shtml