Tag Archives: S.217

(The Times Examiner) SC Legislature: Redefining How to Kill Babies

Published by:

Christians for Personhood ( CP )
Columbia, South Carolina
March 25, 2018

The Times Examiner ( Greenville, SC ), March 21, 2018:

INDEPENDENT CONSERVATIVE VOICE OF THE PALMETTO STATE

General Assembly: Redefining How to Kill Babies

_____________________
_____________________

The Times Examiner, Greenville, SC
INDEPENDENT CONSERVATIVE VOICE OF THE PALMETTO STATE

‘General Assembly: Redefining How to Kill Babies’  [ three pages ]
March 21, 2018
http://christianlifeandliberty.net/2018-03-24-General-Assembly-Redefining-How-to-Kill-Babies-Times-Examiner-Mar-21-2018.pdf

_______________________
_______________________

Excerpts:

[ SC House Rep. Linda ] Bennett, the bill’s sponsor, was reported in The State saying her bill [ H.3548 ] would not stop physicians from performing the procedure [ dismemberment ].  It would, however,  require doctors to kill the fetus before it is removed, she said.  [ emphasis, hyperlink to The State added ]

“All this bill does is require them to euthanize the baby before they rip it apart in the mother’s womb,”
Bennett said.  [ emphasis added ]

“I don’t like that we even do this procedure,” the Charleston Republican said.  “But if we can at least make it more humane, less painful, to the unborn child … I want to remove as much pain as I possibly can.” [ emphasis added ]  [ CP Note: The preborn child is still exterminated.  Proverb 12:10b, KJV ]

Will the Senate Republican Leadership leapfrog the incremental abortion regulation dismemberment bill (H3548) over the Personhood Bill (S217) and promote giving Special Order status to H3548 ahead of S217?

The State article exposes more of the depraved nature of the bill where sponsor Representative Linda Bennett of the dismemberment bill discusses the “humaneness” of the bill because it requires euthanizing of the baby, inside the womb, BEFORE he or she can be dismembered… Ponder on that for more than a moment…  This is a result of National Right to Life and their SC chapter, SC Citizens for Life‘s ability to dilute the idea of what it means to be “pro-life.”  [ emphasis added ]

Somehow, in this godless universe, lawmakers and pastors have rationalized incrementally regulating murder. If the “process,” the ripping apart of a human child from the womb, is sanitized, then it is acceptable to these same lawmakers and pastors to murder the child.  It is truly the time of calling evil, good and good, evil; putting darkness for light and light for darkness; bitter for sweet and sweet bitter.  (Isaiah 5:20)  Lawmakers, pastors and pseudo pro-life organizations are continuing in a dedicated battle to keep murder, legal.  [ emphasis added ]

SC Senate Leadership, specifically Leatherman (R-Florence) and Massey (R-Edgefield) once again, did not move for Special Order for S217 on March 14, 2018.  Senate President Pro Tem Leatherman moved for closing the Motion [P]eriod  which is the place on the Senate calendar when Senator Massey could have moved for a 2/3rds floor vote Special Order despite the apparent obstruction of Leatherman, Campsen (R-Charleston) and Reese (D-Inman) on Massey’s Rules Committee but, Massey did not so move.”  [ CP Note: By Leatherman moving to close the Motion Period, and by the Republican-majority body of Senators in the chamber then going along with Leatherman’s motion, neither Massey nor any other Senator is able to make a motion during the Motion Period.  However, if the Republican-majority body of Senators would by a simple majority vote object to Leatherman’s motion, then Senator Massey OR ANY OTHER SENATOR could move for Special Order for S217.  This has not been done NOT because it cannot be done procedurally, but because the Republican-majority Senate has NOT WILLED it to be done. ]

This country’s intentionally misdirected attention to gun issues distracts from this moral dilemma being experienced as the country moves further from being virtuous and righteous: requirements recognized more than 200 years ago by the framers as being essential to maintaining freedom and liberty.  [ emphasis added ]

The legal pretexts for the ongoing slaughter inside the womb where the most innocent reside without due process of law or equal protection of the laws is directly connected to the horrific violence occurring outside the womb where by extension: why would anyone expect life to be respected?

Hosea 4:6:  My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge:  because thou hast rejected knowledge, I will also reject thee, that thou shalt be no priest to me: seeing thou hast forgotten the law of thy God, I will also forget thy children.
[ emphasis added, Hosea 4:6, KJV ]

Those who wish to appear pro-life are using their very visible votes for dismemberment to portray themselves as being humane yet there will still be dead children whose lives are being sacrificed to insulate those who legislate incremental murder from having to take a principled stand against bad law. [ emphasis added ]

The Supreme Court opinions are not synonymous with the U.S. Constitution and Judicial Supremacy is not god.
When is the General Assembly going to recognize that supporting a pretended good is defeating what is best?
[ emphasis added ]

Matthew, Mark and Luke all share this reminder that it is better for a millstone to be hanged about one’s neck and be cast into the sea [than] that one should offend one of the little ones… It could be supposed that murder might be considered somewhat offensive, terrifying, frightening, and permanent.  Incremental murder is no less offensiveMutilation is offensive. This State’s debate on what the right way to kill a child is, is… offensive.  This has to stop.  [ emphasis added ]

________________________
________________________

From Christians for Personhood:

The SC Personhood Bill S.217 is competing with the “Dismemberment Bill” H.3548 for the attention of the SC Senate for being set for Special Order and actually getting debated on the floor of the Senate.

Christians, please contact SC Republican Senators, and SC Democrat Senators Jackson, Reese, and Williams, and ask them to support setting S.217 Personhood Bill for Special Order FIRST, immediately, before considering H.3548 “Dismemberment bill” for Special Order.

The April 10 “cross over” date under regular order for bills to be sent from the Senate to the House ( or from the House to the Senate ) may be just four legislative working days away ( March 27, 28, 29; April 10 ) if the SC Senate takes a week off the first week in April ( April 3, 4, 5 ).

Contact info for all SC Senators at: http://www.scstatehouse.gov/, click on ‘Senators

_____________________________
_____________________________

Christians for Personhood SC Senate Lobbying Memo
March 14, 2018 – Re: S217 Personhood Act of SC
The Son of God, “Jesus said, Thou shalt do not murder, …” Matthew 19:18, KJV / “Abortion” is Murder.
ALL Human Beings are Persons.  Fear God.  Proverb 1:7   Proverb 8:13   Proverb 9:10   Proverb 16:6b, KJV
Obey your Oath, So Help you God, to Establish Justice.  PASS PERSONHOOD NOW!

(Photo)
‘I AM A PERSON’ – 7 weeks from conception
 and “How To Receive Salvation of the Spirit”
http://christianlifeandliberty.net/2018-03-12-I-AM-A-PERSON-7-weeks-from-conception.pdf

(The State) Personhood Bill vs. Dismemberment Bill

Published by:

Christians for Personhood ( CP )
Columbia, South Carolina
March 18, 2018

The State ( Columbia, SC ), March 16, 2018 ( online) / March 18, 2018 (print):

Personhood Bill vs. Dismemberment Bill

‘With 2 options in SC Legislature, activists split on best way to stop abortion’
http://www.thestate.com/news/politics-government/politics-columns-blogs/the-buzz/article205294704.html
March 16, 2018
Updated March 18, 2018

____________________________
____________________________

From Christians for Personhood:

Personhood Bill vs. Dismemberment Bill

In order listed in the online article in The State:

1) Holly Gatling, SC Citizens for Life (SC chapter of National Right to Life): lobbying for “dismemberment bill” / H.3548;

2) Steve Lefemine, Christians for Personhood: lobbying for Personhood bill / S.217; opposes H.3548;

3) Dr Oran Smith (PhD), Palmetto Family Council: opposes Personhood bill / S.217; supports incremental bills regulating child-murder / e.g., H.3548;

4) Dr Matthew Clark (MD), Personhood SC, lobbying for Personhood bill / S.217

The SC Personhood Bill S.217 is competing with the “Dismemberment Bill” H.3548 for the attention of the SC Senate for Special Order and actually getting debated on the floor of the Senate.

Christians, please contact SC Republican Senators, and SC Democrat Senators Jackson, Reese, and Williams, and ask them to support setting S.217 Personhood Bill for Special Order FIRST, before the H.3548 “Dismemberment bill” gets set for Special Order.

Contact info for all SC Senators at: http://www.scstatehouse.gov/, click on ‘Senators

___________________________
___________________________

(Photo)
‘I AM A PERSON’ – 7 weeks from conception
 and “How To Receive Salvation of the Spirit”
http://christianlifeandliberty.net/2018-03-12-I-AM-A-PERSON-7-weeks-from-conception.pdf

__________________________
__________________________

The State ( Columbia, SC )

With 2 options in SC Legislature, activists split on best way to stop abortion
http://www.thestate.com/news/politics-government/politics-columns-blogs/the-buzz/article205294704.html
March 16, 2018
Updated March 18, 2018

[ CP: Correction, comments, added, portion omitted ]

To hear what abortion rights [ CP: sic ] supporters have to say about South Carolina’s abortion bills, read this.

Pro-life activists are optimistic that new abortion restrictions will become law in South Carolina this year.

But with not one but two pieces of legislation that could restrict abortion options ­ or potentially ban the procedure completely ­ opponents of abortion have to decide just how far they think the Palmetto State is willing to go.

Supporters of a ban on so-called “dismemberment” abortions say that measure offers a chance to eliminate a “gruesome” procedure with legislation that will hold up in court.

But some supporters of a so-called “personhood” bill say that proposal offers a more comprehensive measure that would open the door to banning all abortions ­ something even some pro-life activists see as a long shot.

Both measures are headed to the floor of the state Senate but face obstacles to becoming law, not the least of which is that the legislative session wraps for the year in mid-May.

Supporters are optimistic the dismemberment ban could become law, especially after it passed the S.C. House by a wide margin last year.

“This is very similar to the partial-birth abortion ban,” said Holly Gatling with S.C. Citizens for Life, referring to another abortion restriction that survived a court challenge. “That’s why we believe it will be upheld. … It doesn’t regulate women. It regulates the abortion industry.”

Gatling said the ban would end a “barbaric, inhumane procedure” ­ a procedure that doctors call “dilation and evacuation.” The procedure involves removing a fetus “one piece at a time from the uterus,” using instruments to “slice, crush, and/or grasp a portion of the unborn child’s body to cut or rip it off,” according to the language of the bill.

Pro-choice [ CP: sic – Pro-“abortion” ] opponents of the bill say the procedure is the safest and most common form of second-trimester abortion.

But some abortion opponents think the dismemberment bill doesn’t go far enough. Steve Lefemine with Christians for Personhood doesn’t see the virtue in preferring one method of ending a pregnancy to another.

“It would be like a German parliamentarian in the ’40s  regulating the Zyklon B in the (concentration camp) showers,” Lefemine said. “The [ CP: Sixth ] [C]ommandment says, ‘[T]hou shalt not kill,’ not ‘thou shall incrementally limit murder.'”

A personhood bill legally would define an embryo as a person from the moment of conception, with all the rights that go along with it. However, since that would go against the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in Roe v. Wade, critics worry a personhood bill would face a long and costly legal challenge that the state ultimately could lose.

“It could be stayed through a long legal battle,” said Oran Smith with the Palmetto Family Council, which supports the dismemberment bill. “The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals is not the Strom Thurmond-Jesse Helms circuit any more. There are a lot of Obama appointments on the court.”

Some make the same case against the dismemberment ban.

Smith says his organization’s philosophy always has been to “chip away at abortions in the state.”

Matthew Clark with Personhood S.C. is confident the GOP-controlled Legislature can advance the personhood bill into law this year. However, the bill has yet to pass the House and the Senate.

“The purpose is to recognize the God-given, inalienable right to life for every human being,” Clark said. “No one is safe if the government determines who does and doesn’t have rights.”

continued…

(The Times Examiner) ‘Personhood Act Passes Senate Judiciary Committee By 12Y – 9N’

Published by:

Christians for Personhood ( CP )
Columbia, South Carolina
March 11, 2018

The Times Examiner ( Greenville, SC ), Feb. 28, 2018:

INDEPENDENT CONSERVATIVE VOICE OF THE PALMETTO STATE

‘Personhood Act Passes Senate Judiciary Committee By 12Y – 9N’

_____________________________
_____________________________

The Times Examiner, Greenville, SC
INDEPENDENT CONSERVATIVE VOICE OF THE PALMETTO STATE

‘Personhood Act Passes Senate Judiciary Committee By 12Y – 9N’
February 28, 2018
http://christianlifeandliberty.net/2018-03-12-Personhood-Act-Passes-Senate-Judiciary-Comm-By-12Y-9N-The-Times-Examiner-Feb-28-2018.pdf
 

____________________________________
____________________________________

Excerpts:

“Now a Special Order status for S.217 is needed so that it will actually be debated on the floor of the Senate.”

“Please contact the Republican Senators in the SC Senate (http://www.scstatehouse.gov) and urge them to advocate among their Republican Senate colleagues for Special Order status for S.217.”

________________________________________
________________________________________

Additional postings provided by Christians for Personhood:

By definition, there are no “exceptions” to Human ( Natural ) Personhood:

Personhood Report: In Law, No Exceptions to Human Personhood
http://christiansforpersonhood.com/index.php/2018/01/30/personhood-report-in-law-no-exceptions-to-human-personhood/

Personhood Report: No Exceptions to Personhood
http://christiansforpersonhood.com/index.php/2018/01/29/personhood-report-no-exceptions-to-personhood/

If there are  any “EXCEPTIONS” to Personhood, then we no longer have Personhood, nor a Personhood Bill.

The Times Examiner ( Greenville, SC )
INDEPENDENT CONSERVATIVE VOICE OF THE PALMETTO STATE

‘Personhood and 2018 SC Legislature’
‘Pass Personhood Now !’
http://christianlifeandliberty.net/2018-01-09-Personhood-and-2018-SC-Legislature-Pass-Personhood-Now!-The-Times-Examiner-Jan-03-2018.pdf
January 3, 2018

SOUTH CAROLINA GOVERNOR HENRY McMASTER LETTER
South Carolina Governor Henry McMaster :
“Please know that I strongly support the Personhood Act (H.3530 and S.217) and look forward to signing it into law.”
Letter to Dr. Matthew Clark, Chairman of the Board, Personhood South Carolina
October 2, 2017


‘GOD Has Shown US Great MERCY…What Will We Do with the OPPORTUNITY?
Letter to the Editor / Opinion Editorial
Steve Lefemine, Christian pro-life missionary
dir., Columbia Christians for Life
exec. dir. Christians for Personhood
November 12, 2016 / Edited, Revised November 14, 2016
http://christianlifeandliberty.net/2016-11-12-GOD-Has-Shown-US-Great-MERCY-Letter-to-the-Editor.pdf


Personhood is Abolition
Personhood is abolition.  Here in South Carolina, we have advocated passage of State personhood legislation continuously for the last 19 years since 1998
[ History of Personhood Legislation in South Carolina ( 1998 – 2016 )  ].
The current 2017 legislation in the SC Legislature is called the Personhood Act of South Carolina ( S .217 / H.3530).
– South Carolina Personhood legislation recognizes the Creator God-given, unalienable right to life of every human being as a “person” beginning at fertilization, in SC law.
Steve Lefemine
exec. dir., Christians for Personhood
March 15, 2017 [ Edited July 15, 2017 ]
http://christianlifeandliberty.net/2017-03-15-Personhood-is-Abolition-edited-July-15-2017.pdf


‘For the Murdered Unborn, Incrementalism is Not Justice’
http://christiansforpersonhood.com/index.php/2017/04/11/for-the-murdered-unborn-incrementalism-is-not-justice/
http://christianlifeandliberty.net/2017-04-10-Incrementalism-is-Not-Justice-Incrementalism-is-Evil.pdf


Black’s Law Dictionary (2009): Person = “A Human Being”

“person. … 1. A human being. – Also termed natural person.
http://christianlifeandliberty.net/2013-12-09-Blacks-Law-Dictionary-Person-3.pdf
http://christianlifeandliberty.net/2013-12-11%20%20Blacks%20Law%20Dictionary%202009;%20Person%20=%20A%20Human%20Being.docx


LEGAL EXPERTS SUPPORTING THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF STATE-LEVEL PERSONHOOD LEGISLATION
IN SC (2001), MISS (2009), ALA (2011), and OK (2012):
 – Herb Titus is an attorney, constitutional scholar, author, the founding Dean of College of Law/Gov’t at Regent University
Mathew Staver is former Dean of the School of Law at Liberty University; and Liberty Counsel founder and chair
– Judge Roy Moore, Chief Justice of the Alabama Supreme Court, is President Emeritus of Foundation for Moral Law
   April 5, 2016
http://christianlifeandliberty.net/2016-04-05-Legal-experts-supporting-constitutionality-of-State-level-Personhood-legislation-SC-MISS-ALA-OK-edited-Jan-27-2017.pdf

Glory to God ! – SC PERSONHOOD ACT (S.217) passes full Senate Judiciary Committee favorably by 12Y – 9N vote – February 20, 2018

Published by:

Christians for Personhood ( CP )
Columbia, South Carolina
February 25, 2018



Glory to God !
SC PERSONHOOD ACT ( S .217) passes full Senate Judiciary Committee favorably by 12Y – 9N vote – February 20, 2018
____________________________
____________________________

S.217 SC Personhood Bill PRAISE REPORTGLORY TO GOD !  S.217 favorably passed by SC Senate Judiciary Committee as Amended ( without “exceptions” ) on Tuesday, February 20. The vote was 12 Y – 9 N, and one abstention, and one absence without proxy ( total of 23 members on Senate Judiciary Committee – 14 R, 9 D ). The LORD did a marvelous work today, responding to the prayers of His people, and using His servant Senator Richard Cash, who was the chief spokesman for the bill in a tremendous way, as Senator Cash responded to the points of attack on the Personhood Bill by several Democrats and one “Republican”.  S.217 SC Personhood Bill primary sponsor Senator Rex Rice also stepped up and made important parliamentary moves at the end of the meeting when the actual voting took place.

Let’s give thanks to the LORD for what HE has done, as HE worked through even the confusion, and repeated votes, and repeated vote counts at the end of the meeting, to bring this favorable result, and place the bill, as amended with a principled amendment, on the Senate calendar.

Now we need to pursue Special Order status for S.217 so that it will actually be debated on the floor of the Senate. Please now contact the Republican Senators in the SC Senate ( http://www.scstatehouse.gov ) and urge them to advocate among their Republican Senate colleagues for Special Order status for S.217.

Praise God for what HE did this day, February 20, 2018 !

________________________________
________________________________



Eleven Republican Senators raised their hands on this Third of three repeated votes in favor of Motion for a Favorable Report [ as Amended ] of S.217 Personhood Act of SC out of SC Senate Judiciary Committee, Tuesday, February 20, 2018, at 1:12 pm [ 1:52:55 video time ].
L to R, beginning with back row:
Senators Young, Shealy, Rankin
(raised hand obscured in photo above, visible on video ***), Massey, Turner [ back row ]
Senators Cash, Gambrell, Climer, Goldfinch, Rice, Talley [ front row ]
[ Plus, Senator Cash announced he had proxy vote for Senator Timmons ]

TOTAL: 12 Yes votes, for Favorable Passage [ as  Amended ]

*** Note: On the first two votes conducted on the Motion for a Favorable Report, Judiciary Committee Chairman Luke Rankin vote AGAINST Favorable Passage [ First vote of three votes: 1:51:00 video time; Second vote of three votes: 1:51:55 video time ].  Therefore, it appears by exercising his authority and power as Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman, Senator Rankin was able to conduct multiple re-votes on the same Motion, and changed his vote after he learned Senator Senn was abstaining ( which meant there would not be sufficient votes to defeat the measure ).  So on the Third vote of the three votes [ 1:52:55 video time ], Senator Rankin changed the way he had just voted twice, and voted for Favorable Passage.  This is all visible on the video of this series of three re-votes on the Motion for Favorable Passage, beginning at 1:50:25 video time.

________________________________
________________________________

South Carolina Legislature [ Video ]

Video Archives by meeting time
http://www.scstatehouse.gov/video/archives.php
Select Year:  2018

Tuesday, February 20, 2018  11:00 am
Senate Judiciary Committee — Full Judiciary

Agenda

Gressette Senate Office Building, Room 105
SC State House complex
Video – 1:54:05

[ Note: Meeting began late (11:19 am) and took up a different bill first; Committee deliberation on SC Personhood Bill S.217 began 11:43 am (24:00 video time), and continued until 1:13 pm (1:54:00 video time)  [ 1 1/2 hrs spent on S.217 ]

_______________________________
_______________________________




Nine Democrat Senators raised their hands on this Third of three repeated votes opposed to Motion for a Favorable Report [ as Amended ] of S.217 Personhood Act of SC out of SC Senate Judiciary Committee, Tuesday, February 20, 2018, at 1:13 pm [ 1:53:10 video time ].
L to R, beginning with back row:
Senators Sabb, Johnson, Hutto
(raised hand at right angle to camera view, more visible on video), Malloy, McElveen, Kimpson, Bright Matthews [ back row ]
Senators McLeod, Fanning [ front row ]

TOTAL: 9 No votes, against Favorable Passage [ as  Amended ]

______________________________
______________________________

– The SC Personhood Act ( S .217) passed favorably, as Amen ded, by a vote of 12 Yes to 9 No, out of the full SC Senate Judiciary Committee, on Tuesday, February 20, shortly after 1 pm.

12 Yes [ all Republicans ]
Cash, Climer, Gambrell, Goldfinch, Massey, Rankin**** , Rice, Shealy, Talley, Timmons, Turner, Young

9 No [ all Democrats ]
Fanning, Hutto, Johnson, Kimpson, Malloy, Bright Matthews, McElveen, McLeod, Sabb

… plus one abstention ( Senn (R)**** ), and plus one absent without proxy ( Campsen (R)**** ).
[ Total of 23 Senators on Senate Judiciary Committee ( 14 R, 9 D ).

Prior to the three separate ( repeated ) votes on the Motion for Favorable Passage of S.217, as Amended, there were three other matters voted upon earlier **** [ Begin 1:42:30 video time ]:

1) On the friendly AmendmentAdopted 12 – 10 [ Senn joining 11 Republicans, Rankin joining 9 Democrats ]

2) On (Rice) Motion to Table the (Senn) Motion to Recommit ( Bury / Kill ) the Bill to Subcommittee: Failed on 11 to 11 tie vote [ Rankin and Senn joining 9 Democrats ]

3) On (Senn) Motion to Recommit ( Bury / Kill ) the Bill to Subcommittee: Failed on 11 to 11 tie vote [ Rankin and Senn joining 9 Democrats ]


**** Chairman Rankin first voted against the friendly Amendment proposed by supporters of S.217; then he voted against the Motion to Table the Motion to Recommit; and then he voted for the Motion to Recommit.  So in other words, Rankin voted with the nine pro-“abortion” Democrats against the friendly Amendment offered by five Republican Senators ( including the primary sponsor of S.217, Rex Rice, and the chief spokesman, Richard Cash ) supporting the Personhood Act; and then Rankin voted twice with the nine pro-“abortion” Democrats and with one of Charleston’s “Republican” S.217 Personhood opponents Sandy Senn, to send ( bury / kill ) S.217 back into the Subcommitte.

The (Rice) Motion to Table the (Senn) Motion to Recommit had failed 11-11, and the Motion to Recommit had failed 11-11, and so things did not look good for the final Motion on Favorable Passage to succeed.  Pro-“abortion” Senator Malloy (D) then made a Motion for Favorable Passage [ 1:50:08 video time ] so the vote would be taken at that time.  If that Motion failed 11-11 also, that meant the S.217 Personhood bill would fail to be passed favorably out of Committee.

However, on the voting on the Motion for Favorable Passage of S.217, as amended, Charleston “Republican”, S.217 Personhood opponent, Sandy Senn, was abstaining.  This vote on the Motion for Favorable Passage of S.217, as amended, was taken by Chairman Rankin THREE SEPARATE TIMESOn the first two votes conducted on the Motion for a Favorable Report, Judiciary Committee Chairman Luke Rankin vote AGAINST Favorable Passage.
[ First vote of three votes: 1:51:00 video time; Second vote of three votes: 1:51:55 video time ].  On the Third vote of the three votes [
1:52:55 video time ], Senator Rankin changed the way he had just voted twice, and voted for Favorable Passage.  This is all visible on the video of this series of three re-votes on the Motion for Favorable passage, beginning at 1:50:25 video time.

[ Begin video 1:52:00 ]

Senator Luke Rankin ( after the first two of three votes on the Motion for Favorable Passage, As Amended ):
“Did anybody abstain from voting on the last vote?”

Senator Sandy Senn:
“I did.  Mr Chairman, I did because if we’re moving the entire bill forward, I cannot go with it as is, because it’s, in my view, unconstitutional. So without my further amendments, and other amendments, I’m gonna have to abstain … I don’t wanna vote, I don’t wanna vote against a pro-life measure, and I’ve already said that, but as is, this one, is totally, in my view, unconstitutional.  So, rather than vote against a pro-life measure, I will abstain.”

Senator Luke Rankin
“Allright … appreciate that Senator.  We gonna do this vote again [ Note: Third time ].  All those in favor of the Motion for a Favorable report, let’s see a show of hands … [ continued ]

       Therefore, it appears by exercising his authority and power as Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman, Senator Rankin was able to conduct multiple re-votes on the same Motion, and changed his vote after he learned Senator Senn was abstaining ( which meant there would not be sufficient votes to defeat the Motion for Favorable Passage, as Amended ).

With Charleston “Republican” Sandy Senn abstaining, and with the other Charleston “Republican” S.217 Personhood opponent, Chip Campsen, absent without proxy, even if Rankin continued to vote against Favorable Passage, his negative vote would not have been able to stop the bill from being reported favorably out of the Judiciary Committee.  So instead, the slippery, serpentine Luke Rankin now, on the Third vote of three repeated votes in favor of Motion for a Favorable Report [ as Amended ] changed his negative vote in opposition which he had just cast twice in the last couple of minutes or so,
       and now voted in favor of the Motion for Favorable Passage of S.217, as amended with the other 11 Republicans voting in favor of S.217 Personhood, resulting in an official final vote on Favorable Passage of 12 Yes to 9 No ( instead of 11 Yes to 10 No, if Rankin had again voted against S.217, as he had done on all his previous votes ! ).

It should be noted also, in Judiciary Committee Chairman Rankin’s announcement of the result of that THIRD vote taken on the Motion for Favorable Passage of S.217 as amended, he said, “11 to 9, the Bill is reported out favorably, as amended” [ SC Legislature archive video, video time 1:53:30, Tuesday, February 20, 2018  11:00 am, Senate Judiciary Committee — Full Judiciary ], that 11 to 9 count does not take into account his own vote[ Only takes into account the 11 Republican S.217 Personhood Bill supporters, and the 9 Democrat S.217 Personhood Bill opponents, and Senn’s abstention, and Campsen’s absence without proxy ].  So Chairman Rankin announced a vote of 11 – 9 in the Committee, however the official Senate Judiciary Committee Minutes read “the bill was reported out favorable with amendment 12 – 9“, which 12 – 9 vote result is correct.

[ Conway, Myrtle Beach, Horry County voters, please remember this in June 2020, in the next Republican SC Senate Primary !!! ]

___________________________

Summary analysis of four votes taken [ the last vote was actually taken three different times ! ]:

Basically, there was a block of 11 Republican supporters who always voted favorably for the bill; and there was another block of 9 Democrat opponents who always voted in opposition to the bill.

Then there was Senator Sandy Senn ( R – Charleston ), who voted “for” the friendly Amendment; but then voted twice in favor of Recommitting ( burying / killing ) the Bill to Subcommittee; and then, on the last vote for Favorable Passage, she chose to Abstain, rather than vote against a pro-life bill.

Finally, there was the crafty, serpentine Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Senator Luke Rankin ( RINO – Horry ), who voted “against” the friendly Amendment with the 9 Democrat pro-“abortion” Senators; and then, like Sandy Senn, voted twice ( again with the 9 Democrat pro-“abortion” Senators ), in favor of Recommitting ( burying / killing ) the Bill to Subcommittee.

Then, using his power as Chairman to conduct
THREE SEPARATE VOTES on the final Motion for Favorable Passage of the bill, as Amended, Chairman Rankin actually voted AGAINST the bill on the first two of these three repeated votes on the same Motion for Favorable Passage, as Amended. THEN, after learning Senn was abstaining, Senator Rankin CHANGED HIS VOTE and voted for
Favorable Passage, as Amended.  In Committee, Senator Rankin erroneously announced the vote was 11 – 9, not accounting for his own vote.  However, in the official  Minutes of the Committee Meeting, the official final vote was recorded as 12 – 9, and indicating Rankin voted Yes for the bill’s passage.

It appears after Senator Sandy Senn abstained, and the votes were not there anyway to prevent the Motion for Favorable Passage, as Amended, from succeeding, Senator Rankin chose not to be the only “Republican” [ sic ] on the Judiciary Committee to vote against the SC Personhood Act S .217 in a failed effort to prevent Favorable Passage.

_________________________________
_________________________________

Attendees in SC Senate Gressette Building Committee Room 105 prior to start of February 20, 2018 Senate Judiciary Committee Meeting with Personhood Act of SC ( S .217) on the Agenda

__________________________________

Attendees in SC Senate Gressette Building Committee Room 105 prior to (late) start of February 20, 2018 Senate Judiciary Committee Meeting with Personhood Act of SC ( S .217) on the Agenda   ( scheduled to begin 11 am )

___________________________________


After Adjournment of Senate Judiciary Committee:

___________________________________

SC Senate Gressette Bldg Rm 105, following Favorable Passage of S217 Personhood Bill, as Amended, out of Senate Judiciary Committee
Charles Butler, Senator Richard Cash, Eva Edl, Kathy Gardner, Johnny Gardner
Tuesday, Feb 20, 2018
Praise the LORD !

[ Note: Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Luke Rankin (RINO – Horry) with his hand on his head in background on left – this photo was taken at 1:14pm, just one minute after adjournment of the meeting at 1:13 pm. ]

___________________________________

SC Senate Gressette Bldg Rm 105, following Favorable Passage of S217 Personhood Bill, as Amended, out of Senate Judiciary Committee
Johnny Gardner, Steve Lefemine, Senator Richard Cash, Charles Butler
Tuesday, Feb 20, 2018
Praise the LORD !

_________________________________



SC Senate Gressette Bldg Rm 105, following Favorable Passage of S217 Personhood Bill, as Amended, out of Senate Judiciary Committee
Johnny Gardner, Kathy Gardner, Senator Richard Cash, Charles Butler
Tuesday, Feb 20, 2018
Praise the LORD !

______________________

______________________

– The SC Personhood Bill ( S .217) was reported out to the full SC Senate the next day,
Wednesday, February 21:

REPORTS OF STANDING COMMITTEE

Senator RANKIN from the Committee on Judiciary submitted a favorable with amendment report on:

S. 217 ( Word version) — Senators Bryant, Rice, Cromer, Martin, Corbin, Verdin, Turner, Young, Timmons, Davis, Talley, Shealy, Grooms, Peeler, Goldfinch, Climer, Gambrell, Williams, Gregory, Cash and Hembree: A BILL TO AMEND CHAPTER 1, TITLE 1 OF THE 1976 CODE, RELATING TO THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE GOVERNMENT GENERALLY, BY ADDING ARTICLE 5, TO ENACT THE PERSONHOOD ACT OF SOUTH CAROLINA, TO ESTABLISH THAT THE RIGHT TO LIFE FOR EACH BORN AND PREBORN HUMAN BEING VESTS AT FERTILIZATION AND THAT THE RIGHTS OF DUE PROCESS AND EQUAL PROTECTION, GUARANTEED BY ARTICLE I, SECTION 3 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THIS STATE, VEST AT FERTILIZATION FOR EACH BORN AND PREBORN HUMAN BEING.

Ordered for consideration tomorrow.

____________________________
____________________________

– The SC Personhood Bill ( S .217) appeared on the calendar of the full SC Senate,
Thursday, February 22:

CALENDAR OF THE SENATE
OF THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
REGULAR SESSION BEGINNING TUESDAY, JANUARY 9, 2018
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 22, 2018

SECOND READING
CONSENT CALENDAR

**Indicates Subject to Rule 39

**S. 217 ( Word version)–Senators Bryant, Rice, Cromer, Martin, Corbin, Verdin, Turner, Young, Timmons, Davis, Talley, Shealy, Grooms, Peeler, Goldfinch, Climer, Gambrell, Williams, Gregory, Cash and Hembree:
A BILL TO AMEND CHAPTER 1, TITLE 1 OF THE 1976 CODE, RELATING TO THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE GOVERNMENT GENERALLY, BY ADDING ARTICLE 5, TO ENACT THE PERSONHOOD ACT OF SOUTH CAROLINA, TO ESTABLISH THAT THE RIGHT TO LIFE FOR EACH BORN AND PREBORN HUMAN BEING VESTS AT FERTILIZATION AND THAT THE RIGHTS OF DUE PROCESS AND EQUAL PROTECTION, GUARANTEED BY ARTICLE I, SECTION 3
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THIS STATE, VEST AT FERTILIZATION FOR EACH BORN AND PREBORN HUMAN BEING.
(Read the first time–January 10, 2017)
(Reported by Committee on Judiciary–February 21, 2018)
(Favorable with amendments)

SC Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Luke Rankin (RINO-Horry) continues his 2017-2018 obstruction of SC Personhood Bill S .217

Published by:

Christians for Personhood ( CP )
Columbia, South Carolina
February 12, 2018

(Audio / Video)

SC Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Luke Rankin (RINO-Horry) continues his 2017-2018 obstruction of SC Personhood Bill S .217:

1) Truncated Senate Judiciary Committee meeting Feb 6; did not reach S .217 on Agenda
2)
Cancelled Senate standing Judiciary Committee meeting Feb 13

____________________________________
____________________________________

In the six Tuesdays since the 2018 Session of the SC Legislature convened on January 9, as of tomorrow February 13, Chairman Luke Rankin will have called Senate Judiciary Committee meetings on only two ( Jan 30 and Feb 6 ) of these six dates, and S .217, the SC Personhood Bill, will have been discussed in only one – Jan 30.

So instead of passing the bill out of the Senate Judiciary Committee when it first appeared on the Agenda on May 2, 2017, Senator Rankin has now successfully delayed passage out of his Judiciary Committee until at least February 20, 2018 – using the committee process to kill the bill while minimizing his legislative record “fingerprints” on its death.

Read more details of Senator Luke Rankin‘s delaying tactics, “slow-walking” S .217 last year through the entire 2017 Legislative Session here and here and here.

Before the beginning of the 2018 Session, stated goals were to have S .217 favorably passed out of Senate Judiciary Committee by January 16; assigned Special Order status under Senate Rules Committee by January 30; passed with no “exceptions” amendments by full SC Senate by April 10, and passed with no “exceptions” amendments by full SC House by the last day of the regular 2018 Session, May 10.  However, we are now about one month behind this timetable.

__________________________________
__________________________________

More SC Personhood Bill S217 News:

1) Brave, bold, Recall Motion by Senator Shane Martin (R-Spartanburg), Christian, Baptist Deacon, SC Personhood Bill S .217 co-sponsor, on Tuesday, Feb 6 in full Senate chamber, to pull S .217 directly out of the Republican-majority [ 14 R, 9 D ] Senate Judiciary Committee, and onto the Senate calendar.  The Recall Vote failed: 10 Ayes [ 10 R, 0  D ] – 34 Nays [ 16 R, 18 D ].

2) Amendment to SC Personhood Bill S .217 proposed by five Senators co-sponsoring S .217 intended to “clarify” certain “cases” ( life of the mother, contraceptives, in vitro ) broadcast publicly by e-mail on Feb 8 by Personhood South Carolina, described as a “GOOD CLARIFYING AMENDMENT TO BE SUPPORTED”, is actually flawed and if attached to S .217 as written would undermine Personhood principle in the bill.
[ Christians for Personhood’s initial recommendation ( Feb 2 ) for Amendment language was sent to these same Senators ahead of the Feb 6 Senate Judiciary Committee meeting; revised recommended Amendment language ( Feb 8 ) was sent to these same Senators ahead of the anticipated (now cancelled) Feb 13 Senate Judiciary Committee meeting. ]  Christians are asked to please pray only principled Personhood amendment language will actually be offered at the next meeting of the Senate Judiciary Committee ( February 20th ? ) by Senators co-sponsoring SC Personhood Bill S .217.

Note: By definition, there are no “exceptions” to Human ( Natural ) Personhood:

Black’s Law Dictionary (2009): Person = “A Human Being”

“person. … 1. A human being. – Also termed natural person.
http://christianlifeandliberty.net/2013-12-09-Blacks-Law-Dictionary-Person-3.pdf


Personhood Report: In Law, No Exceptions to Human Personhood
http://christiansforpersonhood.com/index.php/2018/01/30/personhood-report-in-law-no-exceptions-to-human-personhood/

Personhood Report: No Exceptions to Personhood
http://christiansforpersonhood.com/index.php/2018/01/29/personhood-report-no-exceptions-to-personhood/

If there are  any “EXCEPTIONS” to Personhood, then we no longer have Personhood, nor a Personhood Bill.

_______________________________
_______________________________

Further reporting on February 6 Judiciary Committee meeting:

Truncated Judiciary Committee meeting February 6; did not reach S .217 on Agenda:

– Instead of the normal two-hour meeting, 11am – 1 pm, at the very beginning of calling the meeting to order ( late ), Chairman Luke Rankin announced an early adjournment at 12 noon to accommodate the Senate Democrat Caucus being able to listen to a speaker on taxes, at the request of Senate Minority ( Democrat ) Leader Senator Nikki Setzler ( D-Lexington ).  This may be heard on audio and seen on video below.  The meeting lasted less than one hour.  While most had likely expected the meeting to last the normal length ( two hours ), some knew of the shortened meeting in advance.

Audio – Beginning of February 6 Senate Judiciary Committee Meeting: Chairman, Senator Luke Rankin
http://christianlifeandliberty.net/DS_21285 (2).WMA   [ Must copy and paste web address into browser ]
[ Audio – 0:57 ]

____________________________________

South Carolina Legislature

Video Archives by meeting time
http://www.scstatehouse.gov/video/archives.php
Select Year:  2018

Tuesday, February 6, 2018  11:00 am
Senate Judiciary Committee — Judiciary Committee
 
Agenda

Gressette Senate Office Building, Room 105
Video – 55:55

_____________________________________

– In addition, instead of being first, as S .217 was on the January 30 Judiciary Committee Meeting Agenda, on the February 6 Judiciary Committee Agenda, set under the authority of Chairman Luke Rankin, S .217 was listed for consideration after three Workers’ Compensation Commission appointments, and after two bills related to the failed VC Summer nuclear plant project.  The consequence of this lower priority for S .217 on the Agenda in combination with the truncated meeting and early adjournment, was S .217 was never
taken up at all on February 6th.

_______________________________
_______________________________

Further reporting on February 6 Recall attempt to pull S.217 out of Judiciary Committee and place the bill on the Senate calendar:

– Brave, bold, Recall Motion by Senator Shane Martin (R-Spartanburg), Christian, Baptist Deacon, SC Personhood Bill S .217 co-sponsor, on Tuesday, Feb 6 in full Senate chamber, to pull S .217 directly out of the Republican-majority [ 14 R, 9 D ] Senate Judiciary Committee, and onto the Senate calendar.  The Recall Vote failed: 10 Ayes [ 10 R, 0  D ] – 34 Nays [ 16 R, 18 D ].

– In the afternoon, Tuesday, February 6, in the full SC Senate chamber, experienced (3rd term in office), Christian, pro-Personhood Senator Shane Martin made a bold, surprise motion during the daily Motion Period to RECALL S .217 Personhood Bill directly out of the Senate Judiciary Committee and onto the full Senate calendar.  Unfortunately, only 10 Senators supported this courageous act to bypass the obstruction of Senator Luke Rankin and others.

The 10 Senators (all Republicans) who voted Feb 6 FOR the Recall ( Ayes ) of S217 are:
Alexander, Cash, Corbin, Cromer, Davis, Gambrell, Martin, Peeler, Rice, and Timmons.

The 34 who voted AGAINST the Recall ( Nays ) were 16 Republicans and 18 Democrats:

16 Republicans
Bennett, Campbell, Campsen, Climer, Goldfinch, Gregory, Grooms, Hembree, Leatherman, Massey, Rankin, Senn, Shealy, Talley, Turner, Young

18 Democrats
Allen, Fanning, Hutto, Jackson, Johnson, Kimpson, Malloy, Matthews (John), Matthews (Margie), McElveen, McLeod, Nicholson, Reese, Sabb, Scott, Setzler, Sheheen, Williams

This Roll Call vote is recorded in the February 6, 2018 Senate Journal here.  [ Senator Verdin had leave. ]

______________________________________
______________________________________

The Official Archived Video of the SC Senate for February 6, 2018 can be viewed here:

South Carolina Legislature

Video Archives by meeting time
http://www.scstatehouse.gov/video/archives.php
Select Year:  2018

Tuesday, February 6, 2018  2:00 pm
Senate — Senate
 
SC State House – Senate Chamber
Video – 1:39:50

Begin viewing 1:14:45 – Lt Gov Bryant: “We are now in the Motion Period. Senator from Spartanburg, for what purpose do you rise?”

Senator Shane Martin: “Rise to make a Motion.

Lt Gov Bryant: “Please state your Motion.”

Senator Shane Martin: “My Motion is to pull Senate Bill 217, the Personhood Bill, out of the Committee on Judiciary, and place it on the calendar.”

______________________________________

continued… [ Includes a Roll Call vote on a Motion to Adjourn, which failed 19 Ayes – 21 Nays ]

Begin viewing 1:20:15 – Senator Luke Rankin [ To speak in opposition to Senator Martin’s Recall Motion ]

[ Excerpts: Senator Rankin comments 1:20:15 – 1:24:20 ]

– “… I’m not here to speak for or against the merits of this bill, but what I am here to speak on, are the merits, or perhaps if you don’t like what has developed thus far, the demerits, of the effort to consider this bill.”

“The effort thus far, has been to have a Subcommittee, which met a number of times,…”
[ Correction: The Subcommittee actually met TWO TIMES:  March 30, 2017 and April 26, 2017. ]

“The Subcommittee reported its bill in the first full Committee meeting which we had last Tuesday [ Jan 30 ] …”
[ Correction: The S.217 Subcommittee report was first on the Agenda of the Senate Judiciary Committee meeting on May 2, 2017, during the week before the end of the regular 2017 Session on May 11, 2017. ]

OVER NINE MONTHS EARLIER. ]

[ Re: Jan 30 Jud Comm meeting ] “We had an hour and I think 30 minutes of discussion on this bill, and if you didn’t like what happened at the end of that hour and 30 minutes of discussion on that bill, which was to carry over further consideration of that bill, by a vote of 19 to 4, then you don’t like the committee process, perhaps, and you want to bypass that, and you want to come straight to the floor.”
[ Correction: The official minutes of the Senate Judiciary Committee record the carry over vote was 18 to 5. ]

“I’m not here for or against.the merits of the bill.  I am against an effort, to effectively, to hijack the committee process. If we can’t wait ONE WEEK to have a bill considered in the Committee, which is vested with the jurisdiction to consider that bill, then you may as well check out of the Committee process.  Let’s bypass the Committee, and let’s just bring it all to the floor.”
[ Comment: The Judiciary Committee last considered S.217 on January 30, and now it looks like it will not be considered again, at the earliest, until February 20, THREE WEEKS later ! ]

“I submit to ya, that’s what this [ Recall ] effort is, bypassing the committee process.”
[ Comment: This bill S .217 was filed January 10, 2017.  Senator Rankin took well over two months until March 22, 2017 to even assign the bill to a Subcommittee, and he appointed a pro-“abortion” Subcommittee Chairwoman, who then took almost the rest of the 2017 Session to conduct TWO Subcommittee hearings, March 30 and April 26, 2017. ]

“A vote to carry this over today, rather to set this and recall it, is a slap to this Senate, and a slap to the committee process .”

[ Senator Rankin END – 1:24:20 ]

___________________________________

continued…

Begin viewing 1:25:00 – Senator Shane Martin [ To speak in favor of his Recall Motion ]

[ Excerpts: Senator Martin comments 1:25:00 – 1:29:00 ]

“… I saw an opportunity today to be recognized in the Motion Period, which I may never get again, but I took the opportunity, I didn’t have a chance to talk to anybody about it.”

“So I rise today, I didn’t know this was gonna happen, but I’ve been here in this Senate long enough, and one of my issues is protecting life and protecting unborn children.  That’s what this bill does.  Senator Cash, I believe, Senator from Anderson, is here mainly for that issue, … a lot of people are.  I’ve watched the committee process, I respect the committee process, but I also watch filibusters by committee happen all the time.  This issue of personhood has been around ever since I’ve been in the Senate. … We can’t continue to wait, and go through more filibusters by committee.”  [ emphasis added ]

“So that’s why I rise today. I want to get this out of committee where it’s languished for years and years.  I know we’re just in 2018, and we had one meeting, and I appreciate that, but I feel the next meeting is gonna be more of the same, so until we take the time to debate this issue, that’s why I’m doing what I’m doing.  I apologize for not giving you notice, because I couldn’t give you notice.  If I gave you notice, I wouldn’t have gotten recognized in the Motion Period.”

“So that’s why I rise today. I just ask, continue my Motion, Mr. President, and ask for a roll call vote.”

[ Senator Martin END – 1:29:10 ]

___________________________________

continued…

Begin viewing 1:25:00 – Senator Margie Bright Matthews [ To speak in opposition to Senator Martin’s Recall Motion ]

[ Excerpts: Senator Bright Matthews comments 1:29:10 – 1:31:25 ]

“… I was the Subcommittee Chair for this committee.  Last year we had several, extensive, two hour plus meetings where we heard citizens and persons for and against S.217.
[ Correction: The Subcommittee actually met TWO TIMES: March 30, 2017 ( almost 1 1/2 hours of testimony ) and April 26, 2017 ( approx. 1 3/4 hours of testimony ).  NEITHER Subcommittee hearing took over two hours of testimony.  During the Subcommittee meeting on April 26, 2017, Senator Bright Matthews (attorney) abused her power as Chair and skipped over at least two Pro-Personhood speakers on the sign-up list, including a Christian woman with 34 years experience as Director of the Care Pregnancy Center, who was prepared to speak on her experience dealing with clients regarding the DAMAGE DONE TO WOMEN BY “ABORTION”. So this Pro-Personhood testimony was blocked from being heard in the April 26, 2017 Subcommittee Hearing by Senator Rankin’s pro-“abortion” chairwoman. ]

“I think what we’re doing here is a disrespect to our own deliberative process. We’ve only had this in our Committee once. It was at the top of the agenda this morning [ Feb 6 ] behind the Workers’ Compensation folks that we had to approve.
[ Correction: The S.217 Subcommittee report was first on the Agenda of the Senate Judiciary Committee meeting on May 2, 2017, during the week before the end of the regular 2017 Session on May 11, 2017. ]
OVER NINE MONTHS EARLIER. ]

“… Let me explain to you, … it came out in the first committee meeting that there’s a lot of confusion about what a fertilized egg is, versus an embryo, and a .. fetus.  This bill specifically says, and it was brought out in subcommittee and committee, that this bill, if you look at science, is fraught with a lot of problems.  It says that a fertilized egg should be given the rights of a person.  Don’t you realize that a fertilized egg happens when a man and a woman come together, and only a small percentage of those enter the uterus? They have to enter the uterus before they can even become an embryo and then a fetus.  It became apparent to me, and my Subcommittee meetings, that a lot of people didn’t understand the science of what this bill says.  It’s fraught with a lot of problems.  I ask you to allow the process to work and send this, make this stay in committee until we work out the problems.”
[ Note: The SC Personhood Act ( S .217) passed favorably out of the S217 Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Wednesday, April 26, shortly before 11am, by a vote of 3 Yeas ( Rice , Gambrell, Talley) to 2 Nays (Bright Matthews, McLeod). ]

Glory to God !
– SC PERSONHOOD ACT ( S.217) passes Senate Judiciary Subcommittee favorably by 3Y-2N vote – April 26, 2017
http://christiansforpersonhood.com/index.php/2017/04/28/glory-to-god-sc-personhood-act-s-217-passes-senate-judiciary-subcommittee-favorably-by-3y-2n-vote-april-26-2017/
April 27, 2017 / Revised April 28, 2017 / Revised July 5, 2017

[ Senator Bright Matthews END – 1:31:25 ]

______________________________

continued… [ Includes a second Roll Call vote on a Motion to Adjourn, which failed 21 Ayes – 22 Nays ]
http://www.scstatehouse.gov/sess122_2017-2018/sj18/20180206.htm#p25

The vote on the Recall Motion then took place, which failed 10 Ayes – 34 Nays
http://www.scstatehouse.gov/sess122_2017-2018/sj18/20180206.htm#p25

Having failed to received the necessary votes, the Senate refused to recall S. 217.

Statement by Senator GROOMS

Let me be clear — I support S. 217 and want it to become law. My vote today was against a procedural motion only. The motion, while noble in its intent, was misguided. Unfortunately, because of the nature of the Senate, had today’s sudden attempt to bypass the committee process over the objection of the committee chairman would have ensured one thing only — the certain failure of S. 217. Full, open, and transparent vetting of the people’s business is essential to good government, and is a bedrock principle upon which our state and our very nation were founded. I remain in favor of the Bill, and in our common goal of protecting the life of the most innocent among us.