So that you’ll know where to direct your ire — or your appreciation, in some cases — here’s how S.C. House members voted on whether to close Republican (and other) Caucus meetings to the public:
{BC-SC-Closed Meetings-Roll Call,0384}
{By The Associated Press}=
The 59-52 roll call by which the South Carolina House adopted a Republican-backed plan to allow caucuses to meet behind closed doors.
On this vote, a "yes" vote was a vote to adopt the change.
Voting "yes" were 2 Democrats and 57 Republicans.
Voting "no" were 42 Democrats and 10 Republicans.
Not voting were 6 Democrats and 7 Republicans.{Democrats Voting Yes}
Bales, Eastover; Neilson, Darlington;{Republicans Voting Yes}
Ballentine, Irmo; Bannister, Greenville; Barfield, Conway; Bedingfield, Mauldin; Bingham, West Columbia; Bowen, Anderson; Brady, Columbia; Cato, Travelers Rest; Ceips, Beaufort; Chalk, Hilton Head Island; Chellis, Summerville; Clemmons, Myrtle Beach; Cooper, Piedmont; Dantzler, Goose Creek; Delleney, Chester; Gambrell, Honea Path; Gullick, Lake Wylie; Haley, Lexington; Hardwick, Surfside Beach; Harrell, Charleston; Harrison, Columbia; Haskins, Greenville; Herbkersman, Bluffton; Hinson, Goose Creek; Hiott, Pickens; Kelly, Woodruff; Leach, Greer; Limehouse, Charleston; Littlejohn, Spartanburg; Loftis, Greenville; Lowe, Florence; Lucas, Hartsville; Mahaffey, Lyman; Merrill, Daniel Island; Mulvaney, Indian Land; Owens, Pickens; Pinson, Greenwood; M.A. Pitts, Laurens; Rice, Easley; Sandifer, Seneca; Scarborough, Charleston; Shoopman, Greer; D.C. Smith, North Augusta; G.M. Smith, Sumter; G.R. Smith, Simpsonville; J.R. Smith, Langley; W.D. Smith, Spartanburg; Spires, Pelion; Taylor, Laurens; Thompson, Anderson; Umphlett, Moncks Corner; Viers, Myrtle Beach; Walker, Landrum; White, Anderson; Whitmire, Walhalla; Witherspoon, Conway; Young, Summerville;{Democrats Voting No}
Alexander, Florence; Anderson, Georgetown; Battle, Nichols; Bowers, Brunson; Branham, Lake City; Brantley, Ridgeland; Breeland, Charleston; G. Brown, Bishopville; R. Brown, Hollywood; Clyburn, Aiken; Cobb-Hunter, Orangeburg; Funderburk, Camden; Govan, Orangeburg; Hart, Columbia; Harvin, Summerton; Hayes, Hamer; Hodges, Green Pond; Hosey, Barnwell; Howard, Columbia; Jefferson, Pineville; Jennings, Bennettsville; Kennedy, Greeleyville; Kirsh, Clover; Knight, St. George; Mack, North Charleston; McLeod, Little Mountain; Miller, Pawleys Island; Mitchell, Spartanburg; Moss, Gaffney; J.H. Neal, Hopkins; J.M. Neal, Kershaw; Ott, St. Matthews; Parks, Greenwood; Rutherford, Columbia; Scott, Columbia; Sellers, Denmark; F.N. Smith, Greenville; Stavrinakis, Charleston; Vick, Chesterfield; Weeks, Sumter; Whipper, North Charleston; Williams, Darlington;{Republicans Voting No}
Agnew, Abbeville; Edge, North Myrtle Beach; Frye, Batesburg-Leesville; Hamilton, Taylors; Huggins, Columbia; Perry, Aiken; E.H. Pitts, Lexington; Simrill, Rock Hill; Talley, Spartanburg; Toole, West Columbia;{Those Not Voting}
Democrats: Allen, Greenville; Anthony, Union; Coleman, Winnsboro; Moody-Lawrence, Rock Hill; Phillips, Gaffney; J.E. Smith, Columbia;
Republicans: Cotty, Columbia; Crawford, Florence; Davenport, Boiling Springs; Duncan, Clinton; Hagood, Mt. Pleasant; Skelton, Six Mile; Stewart, Aiken;
Related Posts
I don’t really care about the process. What’s important is the legislation that comes out of the process.
Brad, any time that you want to propose rational solutions to actually change the necessity of political parties– instead of wasting our time with self-admittedly quixotic quests– we’re listening.
Thanks for the info.Glad to see that Mac Toole(my district)didn’t go along with the crowd.Closing the process effects legislation.
Although they’re really not much fun,I can’t remember a time when political parties weren’t around,and I don’t see them ending anytime soon.The “lives” of the parties(politicians)
are just having way too much fun,while all we get is a lousy cup of punch.
I am grimly unsurprised to see that Kit Spires (my district) voted for this… Ken Clark (our former representative) would never stoop so low… another reason to mourn his loss.
“The necessity of political parties.” There’s no such thing. All there is is a human weakness that causes them to form, and then to dominate. They serve no purpose to the system, or to the nation. They only do harm.
You hear about the “necessity” from people who use them to advance their personal goals or careers. A better word would be “expedience” or “convenience.” They are absolutely not necessary.
As for those of you who actually believe parties are about ideas and ideals — a party cannot become and remain a functioning entity that actually elects people to office without its members beginning to compromise their individual thought processes to accommodate the group. Soon, they’re not thinking for themselves at all.
From there arises the intellectual dishonesty and personal corruption that are inherent in political parties.
Of course, the issue above is about sleaziness and the lack of transparency in government, NOT political parties. I just went off on that tangent because the word “necessity” provoked me…
And Lily — “unsurprised” is the perfect word.
Yes, Lily is the blogger’s pet. I admit it. Her voice is a welcome addition.
Or, to put it another way — RTH, why can’t you be more like Lily?
And bill — I, too, was proud of my rep (Ted Pitts).
If you are so anti-party, Mr. Warthen, why do you support the Dems/Reps so strongly in elections? Can you say “endorsements”? Each candidate the State endorsed in 2006 was a Dem/Rep with maybe an independent or two in the mix. Perhaps the above should have said “change the EXISTENCE of political parties”. Now that would be too good if change meant ELIMINATION.
Why don’t you lead a grassroots movement to vote for any and all non-Dems/Reps in future elections and get rid of the parties? You have the power, the “bully pulpit”. With actual representatives (instead of politicians) perhaps the slime and sleaze of secret meetings as noted could be eliminated.
Aw, shucks…..
(… but I still haven’t forgotten about the women and the draft thing!! 😉
Spencer, I haven’t had that opportunity since the last time Bubba Cromer — an independent — ran for the House.
And don’t tell me I could endorse a Libertarian. I would disapprove more of Libertarians than Democrats or Republicans, if they were worth taking note of. Talk about ideologues. But fortunately, they have no chance of winning anything anyway.
Think about what you said — leading a crusade to vote for anyone but a member of those parties would be as mindless as voting for only the members of a certain party.
A thinking voter looks at each individual candidate, and assesses him or her without regard to party affiliation. The great harm that parties do is that they persuade too many people to look at party, without regard to anything else. That way lies madness.
Notice that I don’t criticize Democrats and Republicans as individual human beings. We all fall short of perfection. Even Joe Lieberman was once a member of a party.
You could say that when it comes to partisanship, my policy is to hate the sin, love the sinner.
It seems to me you “speak with forked tongue”. You say parties “only do harm” and I think that is totally accurate. Then you support the Dem/Repub who is the “best candidate” in your opinion. Yet these candidates are simply pawns of the parties you abhor.
Just because a candidate may be an Independent, Liberterian or Joe Sixpak from down the street doesn’t mean they are an unqualified candidate. I’d rather have all new reps with no party affiliation whatsoever than what we have now.
Anyone who can walk and chew gum at the same time meets the qualifications for running for office, IMO. Anyone on this board, actually. Even you. Even me.
You’ve convinced me. I’ve decided to start a real party, since they’re so great.
Go check it out.
Brad, it’s too bad that you can’t participate directly in a non-partisan election. Try a school board election outside of Richland and Rich-Lex District 5.
As it is, your opinion concerning abolishing political parties is much like a eunuch’s advice on proper sexual techniques.