This is a printer friendly version of an article from
www.goupstate.com
To print this article open the file menu and choose
Print.
Back
Article published Apr 29, 2004
Seat belt debate is over
ROBERT W.
DALTON
Staff Writer
COLUMBIA -- The great Senate seat belt
stalemate is over, but probably not soon enough to save other legislation that
has languished during the months-long debate.The gridlock came to an end
Wednesday afternoon when the state Senate voted 23-21 to continue the bill,
essentially killing it for this year. The bill would have allowed law
enforcement officers to stop adult drivers for not wearing their seat belts.
Currently, drivers can only be ticketed for not wearing a seat belt if they are
stopped for another violation.The Senate took up the bill when the session
opened in January, and a filibuster by opponents kept it from coming to a vote.
The filibuster included Sen. Glen McConnell, R-Charleston, pondering whether it
was more dangerous to drive while eating a grilled or fried chicken sandwich,
and Sen. Jake Knotts, R-Lexington, espousing his love for "yellow"
cheese.Supporters, such as Sen. Jim Ritchie, R-Spartanburg, couldn't gather
enough votes to end the filibuster and force a vote."I'm disappointed that this
bill failed this year," Ritchie said. "I hope there will be an opportunity to
make improvements and see that it passes next year."While the debate raged, the
Senate calendar grew to 55 pages and other legislation -- including Gov. Mark
Sanford's income tax reduction plan, a property tax elimination plan and a
comprehensive tort reform package – gathered dust."We've got bills that are
going to die this week because we didn't get them to the House (by the May 1
deadline)," said Sen. Larry Martin, R-Pickens. "That's not effective government,
and that's why I've been trying to move (the seat belt bill) on."Sanford said
the lingering fight frustrated him because his income tax plan was in limbo in
the Senate Finance Committee. The committee will meet this morning and could
send the proposal to the full Senate."I think it's important to take a clear up
or down vote, where it's win or lose, and then move on to other issues that are
important to people's lives," Sanford said. "There's a difference between
deliberation and holding other ideas hostage."McConnell said the bill became a
convenient vehicle for senators to keep other controversial legislation from
being debated on the Senate floor. He didn't say whether he was one of the
senators who used that vehicle."This is the way the process works," McConnell
said. "I think it should have been disposed of several weeks ago. When it
wasn't, we should have moved on."Sen. John Hawkins, R-Spartanburg, an opponent
of the bill who voted to continue it, said the logjam was just the process
working the way the "framers of the state Constitution set it up.""I don't know
if it's effective, but I'm happy we stopped this bill," Hawkins said. "It would
have infringed upon people's rights. In that case it was effective."There should
have been a point in time when we should have moved to continue it. This has
cost us some other very important bills."Ritchie also voted to continue the bill
to break the impasse. He, too, said the process worked – and that's what
concerns him."I think the problem in getting it up for a vote, when everyone
knew it had the votes to pass, is a clear signal that we need to modernize the
rules of the Senate," Ritchie said.Robert W. Dalton can be reached at 562-7274
or bob.dalton@shj.com.