UPDATE on Gov Lite Driver: The House by a smaller margin overrode the veto of the PROVISO for the chauffeur. The possible logic: The money line included other stuff; as long as the PROVISO was removed, there would be no security detail (Just an extra $90,000 in the lt gov’s office with no particular use, and possibly unavailable to be spent, although I’m not sure) … So here’s THe vote to override the PROVISO:
VETO 95– OVERRIDDEN
Part 1B, Section 72.110, General Provision, page 502; Lt. Governor Security Detail.
The question was put, shall the Item become a part of the law, the veto of his Excellency, the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding, the yeas and nays were taken resulting as follows:
Yeas 77; Nays 21
Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Agnew Allen Anderson
Anthony Bales Bannister
Barfield Battle Bingham
Bowen Bowers Brady
Branham Breeland G. Brown
Chalk Chellis Clemmons
Clyburn Cooper Cotty
Davenport Delleney Edge
Frye Gambrell Govan
Gullick Hardwick Harrell
Harrison Harvin Haskins
Hayes Hiott Hodges
Hosey Jefferson Jennings
Kelly Knight Leach
Mack Mahaffey Merrill
Miller Mitchell Moss
J. H. Neal J. M. Neal Neilson
Parks Perry Pinson
M. A. Pitts Rice Sandifer
Scarborough Scott Sellers
Simrill Skelton F. N. Smith
G. M. Smith G. R. Smith J. R. Smith
Spires Talley Taylor
Toole Umphlett Vick
Weeks Whipper White
Williams WitherspoonTotal–77
Those who voted in the negative are:
Ballentine Bedingfield Crawford
Duncan Funderburk Hagood
Haley Hamilton Huggins
Kirsh Loftis Lowe
Lucas McLeod Mulvaney
E. H. Pitts Shoopman D. C. Smith
Stewart Thompson ViersTotal–21
So, the Veto of the Governor was overridden and a message was ordered sent to the Senate accordingly.
Related Posts
Wait, so 92 House members voted not to give him the driver but only 77 voted not to pay for it? Now that really is dumb.
Whoops, I guess it should be “to give” and “to pay” without the nots. Now I’ve confused myself.
And I say again…are we supposed to believe you are serious about informing the people of SC about the important issues of the day?
The State eiter missed the most important issues of the session, or covered them incorrectly.
We need a serious 4th estate. We suffer because we dont.
Should this really be called a security detail when in actuality it has nothing whatsoever to do with protection of the Lt. Governor and has been authorized and debated only because the pompous kid who currently serves as our Lt. Gov. can’t seem do operate his motorized vehicles with due care?
This is “SC2” you copy? Yes sir! “NOW BACK OFF! “SC2”, “SC2” BACK OFF!