How lawmakers voted on their pension COLA

Cindi sent me the following stuff to post as a supplement to her column today:

    Here’s the recorded vote from last Wednesday, when the House sent the bill that contained the legislative COLA back to committee, in hopes that the committee will remove the legislative COLA and report the bill back out, so it can be passed. This is a convoluted way of doing things, but it’s the only option representatives had available at this point other than 1) killing the entire bill or 2) passing it.
    A yes vote was to send the bill back to committee. A no vote was to allow it to pass with the legislative COLA included.
    The bill is H.4673.

Yeas 58; Nays 51

Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Agnew                  Allen                  Anthony
Ballentine             Bannister              Bedingfield
Bingham                Bowen                  G. Brown
Cato                   Chalk                  Coleman
Crawford               Delleney               Erickson
Frye                   Funderburk             Gullick
Hagood                 Haley                  Hamilton
Harrell                Harrison               Haskins
Hiott                  Hodges                 Hutson
Kelly                  Kirsh                  Leach
Limehouse              Lowe                   Lucas
McLeod                 Miller                 Mitchell
Moss                   Mulvaney               Neilson
Owens                  E. H. Pitts            Rice
Sandifer               Shoopman               Simrill
D. C. Smith            F. N. Smith            G. M. Smith
G. R. Smith            J. R. Smith            Spires
Stavrinakis            Talley                 Thompson
Toole                  Walker                 Witherspoon


Those who voted in the negative are:

Alexander              Anderson               Bales
Battle                 Bowers                 Brady
Branham                Brantley               Breeland
R. Brown               Clemmons               Clyburn
Cobb-Hunter            Cooper                 Daning
Dantzler               Duncan                 Gambrell
Govan                  Harvin                 Hayes
Herbkersman            Hosey                  Howard
Jefferson              Kennedy                Littlejohn
Loftis                 Mack                   Mahaffey
Merrill                J. H. Neal             Ott
Parks                  Perry                  Phillips
Pinson                 M. A. Pitts            Scarborough
Scott                  Sellers                Skelton
Stewart                Taylor                 Umphlett
Vick                   Weeks                  Whipper
White                  Whitmire               Williams


21 thoughts on “How lawmakers voted on their pension COLA

  1. Doug Ross

    > Why doesn’t the newspaper publish this news?
    Because then we’d miss out on the front page story about the boy and his tuba. I kid you not.
    The State could really serve its subscribers by printing a page with the names and photos of all the House members who voted “No” along with their office telephone numbers and email addresses. Shine the light on them… that’s the only way to stop the behavior.

  2. Jim Nelson

    Sadly, I don’t see my representative’s name on the list. Chip Huggins must have missed this very important vote. Wonder why?

  3. david

    Fair enough Brad, you did publish the info here, and “here” means that anyone who visits The State website could get it if they thrashed around long enough and stumbled over it.
    But Lees’ point is still valid. If this info were put on the front page (or editorial page) of the newspaper it would be like holding up a cross to a vampire. The legislature would melt in the face of the public outcry your print exposure of this info would bring.
    Talk about public service. This would be one in my mind. David

  4. Bill C.

    Uhhhh, I’m sorry… but, was this in the PRINTED version? I’m pretty sure that’s what the person was commenting on.

  5. david

    I said NEWSPAPER Bill, just how much clearer can that be? I’m talking newsprint. Paper. P-A-P-E-R. Dave

  6. Brad Warthen

    You know what I love about dealing with readers? I love it when you go the extra mile to give them additional information, on account of how you appreciate them and want to be of service and all, and then they gripe about it.
    This is what keeps me going, day and night, without cease…
    So, would y’all have run this instead of Cindi’s column explaining the whole thing, or what? I mean, pretend for a moment that you’re actually an editor dealing with finite space (and don’t bring up the news space — if you were the editorial page editor, you would not, and should not, have any say over that).
    Basically, lists of how-they-voted is about as perfect a use of the Web as I can think of. It’s copy-and-paste stuff, AND it’s available to you already if you take the time to look. But Cindi’s analysis and explanation (her column today), which you sort of need before the how-they-voted makes sense, is something you can’t get anywhere else — so THAT’s what I put in the finite space in the paper. Copying and pasting this list into the paper, and making you go to the Web for Cindi’s explanation of what happened… now THAT would be a bad call.

  7. david

    Well…when you say it like THAT…I mean if you want to get all sensible and logical on us and stuff. Dang. David

  8. Brad Warthen

    Sorry, man.
    Also, if I sounded a bit peevish… chalk it up to my busting my butt trying to make the new Saturday Opinion Extra work, and getting NOTHING BUT COMPLAINTS about it.
    The thing about those complaints is that they are really, truly compliments. In complaining about losing the Saturday opinion pages in the paper, people are saying they appreciate what we do, that it has value in their lives. And I truly do appreciate that sentiment. But when you’re doing what you can to make up for the readers’ loss in the best way you can think of, the complaints do start to wear on you after awhile… even though I really should see them as flattering…

  9. david

    Brad, no one else cares about this, (I doubt you care particularly either), but for the record I understand that a lot of what I write here is very sarcastic and snippy. Especially at you. I used to be personal about my jabs at you, but I stopped that because it is wrong. On the other hand, I do try to be pretty direct and merciless in pointing out what I see as the weaknesses, wrongs and hypocrisies embodied in many of the positons that you take. I mean no harm.
    My comments in this string about putting the voting records in the print edition amounted to little more than piling on, as I clearly hadn’t thought it through. You and Cindi had thought it through though, which I suppose is why you’re where you are and I’m sitting here in my jammers eating cheetos out of the bag and taking cheap shots. Just wanted to let you know that I get it. David

  10. Doug Ross

    The number of people who read the blog is probably 1% of the number of people who read the paper. And if you subtract non-residents of SC, it’s even smaller.
    It’s my opinion that if you put more of this information into the print edition, it will drive up the number of subscribers. I am doubtful that the story of the boy and his tuba will lead to increased subscriptions.
    That is the goal of a newspaper, right? Or is McClatchy’s business plan to drive up revenue via ads on the blog?
    A full editorial page on this one topic would be more useful in my opinion than another column from a paid talking {writing} head on Iraq, the economy, or some other generic topic.

  11. Lee Muller

    Brad, if you think this is going the extra mile, I have news for you.
    This list is basic news, the content your paper lacks, and there is lots more of these basic facts that The State just doesn’t make the effort to report. When they do report something, it is using long after the dirty deed was done, in a whining editorial.

  12. anne arbor

    I found the list of who voted up and who voted down MUCH more interesting than the Scoppe column.
    It should have been in the paper. The legislature is in Columbia; The State should keep its eyes and ours focused on what our duly elected representatives do.
    Who voted how is NOT a superfluous detail.

  13. anne arbor

    To be more specific, who votes how is MUCH more important than what Ms. Scoppe thinks. It’s not the extra mile; it’s the nuts and bolts. It’s not Web material. It’s news. It’s not the sidebar; it’s the mainbar.
    But, apparently, interpretation has replaced information in the modern newspaper. I’d prefer my food for thought weren’t predigested. A column as sauce — that’s fine. But not as the main dish.

  14. anne arbor

    The question, simply, is why wasn’t the vote Wednesday in the paper Thursday? In 8-point type, it wouldn’t take up more than or five column inches, and it matters a lot more than celebrity birthdays and all the quick-fix graphic gobbledygook The State wastes space on.

Comments are closed.