The S.C. General Assembly is going to have to find a way to provide reform measures for the state’s retirement system, said S.C. Rep. Tom Young, R-Aiken.

He and S.C. Rep. Bill Taylor, R-Aiken, discussed the 2012 legislative session, which starts today, at an Aiken Rotary Club meeting on Monday.

A study by Clemson University several years ago projected that the unfunded mandate for the retirement system would be $6.2 billion by 2010. Actually, it’s now closer to $17 billion, Young said, and such shortfalls are occurring in 46 states. In the fairly recent past, there were 3.36 state employees working for every retiree. Now the number is 1.71 employees.

“People are living longer, and the system wasn’t designed for that,” Young said. “That’s one of the reasons so much is unfunded.”

Using the telephone greeting imposed on state employees by Gov. Nikki Haley, Taylor said, “It is a great day in South Carolina.” He noted that the economic forecast is not nearly as pessimistic as it was a year ago. Revenue could increase in 2012 by $950 million to $1.3 billion, he said.

“If the U.S. economy rebounds somewhat, South Carolina is in a position to take advantage of that,” Taylor said. “Bridgestone (expansion) was one of the biggest buzzes in 2011, and manufacturing is coming back in large amounts.”

During the last session, the House approved an ambitious conservative agenda. Many didn’t make it through the Senate, but those that did were important, said Taylor. They include government transparency, point-of-sale changes to bring more fairness to property taxes and voter ID measures.

South Carolina has provided $1.3 billion toward the prospective Yucca Mountain site for radioactive waste disposal, including spent fuel at the Savannah River Site. However, that project has been shelved, at least for now. The state’s legislative delegation has asked President Barack Obama and Secretary of Energy Steven Chu about returning those funds to ratepayers, Young said.

“If you have paid utility bills for many years, a portion of that money has gone to develop the Yucca Mountain site,” he said. “We think the federal government should return that money if it’s not going to be used as originally intended.”

People know that Democrats oppose Yucca Mountain, “but the Republican candidates have not responded to this question, either,” Taylor said.

Courtesy of the Aiken Standard

Conservative Republican Tom Young once again comes through with a strong showing in the annual legislative scorecard. This year, Representative Young received an “A+” rating of 100.

This latest report only confirms how dedicated Representative Young is to tackling the important issues facing our state and district. Please visit his Facebook page now to leave a comment or question.

Click here to view the full report!

There is a nationwide push for a new bill called Caylee’s Law. It’s creating a buzz in state capitols around the country.

It may be the most telling piece of evidence when Casey Anthony failed to report her missing daughter for more than a month. Now, people across the country want to make that a felony offense and state lawmakers are listening.

The images of Casey Anthony partying in the days of Caylee’s disappearance and this week’s surprising verdict have people asking for a change.

Rep. Tom Young Jr., R-Aiken, said he’s received emails from people in his district that have asked him to consider Caylee’s Law.

This law would make it a felony if a parent or legal guardian fails to report a missing child within 24 hours or a child’s death within an hour.

“That’s the proposal I’ve received by several folks in the wake of the verdict, and the question is if that will that be filed in South Carolina and if so, when?” Young said.

Young said there are still many things to consider.

“Does it apply just to children who are under the age of 10 or does it apply to children who are 16, 17, 18 years old who may run away from home, who may be away for a long period of time. Do you go and prosecute the parents?” Ford asked.

Some argue that we may not really need another law like Children’s Place Executive Director Peggy Ford.

“I just think we need a minute to look,” Ford said. “Do we need more laws before we think we need another law? Were the laws not applied in this particular case? Could they have applied them differently?”

As the director of a nonprofit group, Ford sees this often. She thinks what was done was neglect, and acts of neglect and abuse are already against the law.

“There is a law, it’s just not a law specifically about reporting,” Ford said. “It’s a law about taking care of your children and knowing where they are.”

People are signing petitions online for a federal and/or state law.

Some of these websites like Change.org have seen hundreds of signatures for a Caylee’s Law in a matter of minutes, resulting in a national campaign.

Support it or not, if we were going to see anything in Georgia or South Carolina, the new session doesn’t start until January so it would be several months before a bill could even be filed.

Some Florida lawmakers are drafting a version of Caylee’s law. Representatives in Oklahoma, New York, and West Virginia have also announced they will be proposing a similar bill.

Courtesy of WRDR.com

People form Aiken, Augusta, even Washington, D.C. piled into the Bell Auditorium Thursday night for a meeting about Savannah River Site. Meanwhile, nuclear waste continues to pile up at SRS.

“We’ve got about 10 metric tons thus far,” said David Moody. He’s the Department of Energy Manager at Savannah River Site. He says the public hearing tonight was to discuss what to do with all that waste.

One of the old answers is off the table now.

“H Canyon is not only important to this area, but it’s important to the United States. It’s a national resource,” said Representative Tom Young, Jr. (R – Aiken).

H Canyon is a massive facility at SRS with a special goal.

“It’s the only facility in the United States that has the ability to reprocess certain types of used nuclear fuel,” said Young.

In its 2012 budget, the U.S. Department of Energy removed $100 million of funding from H Canyon. Young fears the impact it’ll have on this area.

“There are approximately 655 people, I believe, that work at H Canyon, and all of these are very good high-paying jobs. Many of these people live in Aiken County and in Richmond and Columbia Counties in the CSRA,” said Young.

Young says the lay-offs will come at a bad time. SRS is already facing lay-offs after the stimulus money dried up this year. Moody, however, is optimistic.

“We are going to enable a nuclear future for this country,” he said.

As for the future, Moody says we’ll have to find other ways of getting rid of the nuclear waste piling up at SRS. H Canyon would have taken care of some of it, but with it off the table, what’s the alternative?

“There isn’t one,” says Moody “Unless someone has in the neighborhood of $10 billion to build a new one. It really is a national resource.”

He says the H Canyon facility won’t be torn down. It’ll instead be used for Research and Development purposes.

Representative Young says there’s already a place laid-off workers can go in Aiken to find related work. The to that information is below.

From Representative Tom Young, Jr.:

“Help for Displaced SRS Workers: If you or someone you know lost a job at SRS, there is a One-Stop Transition Center open in downtown Aiken at Park Avenue and Laurens Street to assist workers displaced at SRS with finding new work. The Center is open from 7:30 am to 4:30 pm Monday through Friday. For more information, visit www.workforce.psa-inc.com.”

Courtesy of WRDW.com

South Carolina teens younger than 18 will lose driving privileges if they drop out of school or skip too many classes under a bill heading to the House floor for debate.

The House Education and Public Works Committee unanimously approved on Tuesday a measure that would suspend licenses until the student reaches 18.

Members of the committee said the legislation will encourage students to think seriously about the consequences they’ll face if they don’t stay in school.

The House passed the same legislation last year. But that action came too late to meet a procedural deadline for bills to reach the Senate.

Courtesy of The Post & Courier

Teens who drop out of school or miss too many classes could lose the right to drive under a bill working its way through the S.C. General Assembly.

A House subcommittee Tuesday approved a proposal to revoke the driver’s licenses or learner’s permits of teens – ages 15, 16 and 17 – who are expelled or drop out of school. North Carolina and Georgia already have similar laws.

Students who have seven or more unexcused absences from school also would lose their driving rights.

Waivers would be granted to teens who drop out to go to work and support themselves or their families, as well as teens enrolled in high-school equivalency – or General Educational Development – programs.

Any teen would be eligible for a driver’s license once he or she turns 18.

The bill was one of three concerning driving that came before House subcommittees. Panels also:

• Rejected a proposal to ban S.C. smokers from lighting up in cars when children are present

• Agreed to reclassify mo-peds as motor vehicles so that mo-ped drivers could be charged with driving under the influence

However, the drop-out driver bill received the most attention.

“This is not the silver bullet to the drop-out problem,” said state Rep. Tom Young, R-Aiken. “But if we can stop just some kids from dropping out, it benefits society.”

About one in four S.C. high school students does not graduate four years after entering high school, according to 2010 state Department of Education data released last month.

The bill, which passed the House last year but failed to get a hearing before the state Senate, is backed by new state Superintendent of Education Mick Zais.

Still, some Democrats and Republicans have concerns.

“This is more government regulation, and everyone is going to say, ‘It’s a hardship (and request a waiver),’” said state Rep. Anne Thayer, R-Anderson, who voted against the bill.

The bill squeaked through, by a 3-2 vote. It next heads to a full House Education Committee for consideration.

State Rep. Harold Mitchell, D-Spartanburg, the other dissenting voter, said the bill only would affect middle- and upper-class families. “If you’re poor and living in the projects, nine times out of 10 you don’t have a car anyway,” Mitchell said.

Families should discipline their drop-out children, rather than ask the state to do it, he added. “As much as we say to not let government rule the family, here we’re talking about letting the government teach a certain class of kids lessons.”

House subcommittee members unanimously opposed a proposal by state Rep. Joan Brady, R-Richland, to ban drivers and passengers from smoking when a child younger than 6 in a car seat is present.

Four states and Puerto Rico have similar laws.

Brady unsuccessfully argued the bill would help educate parents about the increased risks of asthma, ear infections and other childhood illnesses caused by second-hand smoke.

“We have to educate parents that it’s not just what they’re doing to themselves but what they’re doing to children,” Brady said.

But panel members called the bill overreaching and unenforceable.

“It would just clog the courts, trying to decide if they were smoking,” said state Rep. Ralph Norman, R-York. “If parents don’t know that smoking is bad (by) now, passing a law isn’t going to change that.”

But the panel unanimously approved closing a loophole in the state’s drunken-driving laws.

The bill would reclassify mo-peds as motor vehicles so that mo-ped drivers could be charged with driving under the influence.

“They (law enforcement) need to have this tool in their arsenal … to keep the roads safe,” said the bill’s sponsor, state Rep. Derham Cole, R-Spartanburg.

“You can be impaired and drive a mo-ped, and we can’t charge you with a DUI,” said Department of Public Safety Director Mark Keel, who supports the bill. “It doesn’t make sense to me you can get charged (with a DUI) while driving a tractor or a riding lawn mower but not when you’re on a mo-ped.”

Mo-peds have been involved in more than 1,300 wrecks in the past three years in South Carolina, according to data from Public Safety Department. Those wrecks left 41 dead. It is not known how many of the wrecks involved a drunken person.

Courtesy of The State

If a student wants to drop out of high school or just not go to class, he can do so, but it could come at the cost of losing his driver’s license.

South Carolina Rep. Tom Young, R-Aiken, hopes a bill he’s co-sponsoring can get through the General Assembly during the current session in order for it to take effect during the 2012-13 school year.

Under the provisions of the proposed legislation, a 15- to 17-year-old student with a full or restricted driver’s license would lose driving privileges if he leaves his public, private or home school or has seven unexcused absences in a specific time frame.

Students attending adult education classes and making progress toward their GEDs would not be considered dropouts.

“It’s a short-term answer to a long-term problem,” said Young. “It’s not the silver bullet by any means but is part of a long-term solution.”

The District 81 House member talked with students in third through 12th grades. The responses from middle and high school students were especially illuminating, Young said.

“I asked them if losing their driving privileges would keep their peers from dropping out of school,” he said. “The response was amazing. Students in the Junior Leadership program agreed that they knew children who would think twice about dropping out.”

School attendance would also be a condition of getting a beginner’s permit, a conditional or special restricted license or a regular license for teenagers younger than 18. The person could not be expelled from school. The bill does provide opportunities for parents to appeal such an action.

If a student has a personal or family hardship that requires him to have a driver’s license, a waiver could be granted by the Office of Motor Vehicle Hearings. Such hardships would include a job held by the student that is needed to support himself or his family. Similarly, a waiver could be issued if the student or a family member has a medical condition that requires him to provide transportation for treatment.

“I think it’s a great idea,” Aiken County School District attendance supervisor Lise Birak said of the bill. “Teenagers don’t always look at a lack of education and how it will impact the rest of their lives. This will affect them now.”

Birak has spoken with school officials in other areas with such a law. All agreed that the legislation makes a significant difference in dropout rates, she said.

The school absences provision doesn’t apply to medically excused absences. Students who have three consecutive unexcused absences or a total of seven such absences are considered habitually truant and can get referrals to Family Court.

Dropout and absentee numbers are beginning to decrease with the implementation of school-based intervention programs, Birak said. She hopes the new legislation, if approved, will extend that impact.

Young’s bill was approved by the S.C. House in 2010 but bogged down in the Senate. The proposal now in the House is the same and will come up for a subcommittee hearing on Tuesday.

The idea actually dates back to a Governor’s Commission report on the state’s future, which was ordered by Gov. Carroll Campbell in 1989.

The report, in part, called high school dropouts a drag on the economy, with many of them ending up in prison or having families living in poverty. The state could not afford that in 1989 and can’t afford it now, Young said.

Courtesy of The Aiken Standard

South Carolina students who drop out of school or skip too many classes would lose their driving privileges until they’re 18 under a bill back up for debate.

A House subcommittee is set to consider the bill Wednesday. It would suspend the driver’s license of teens who drop out, are expelled or accumulate more than seven unexcused absences.

Schools would be required to report the absences of 15- to 17-year-olds to the Department of Motor Vehicles. The idea died in the Legislature last year.

Republican Rep. Tom Young of Aiken calls the bill he authored a short-term solution to the state’s long-term problem of not enough students graduating.

In South Carolina, teens can begin driving at 15 with a permit. They can get a regular license at 17.

Courtesy of The Herald

Penalties pile up over nondisclosure

By Stephen Largen
stephen.largen@shj.com

Published: Sunday, February 20, 2011 at 3:15 a.m.
Last Modified: Sunday, February 20, 2011 at 1:14 a.m.
A large group of current and former lobbyists, political candidates, university and elected officials owe the state more than $6 million in unpaid ethics fines and late penalties — an increase of about $4 million since 2009.

They are on the S.C. Ethics Commission’s debtors list and facing the fines because they have not filed mandatory statements of financial interest or campaign disclosure forms, according to the ethics commission.

Outstanding fine amounts range from $10 to $732,400, the latter being accrued by Richard E.R. Johnson, a former member of Eastover City Council. Johnson’s fines have been piling up for more than five years and he has refused to pay, said ethics commission attorney Cathy Hazelwood.

Hazelwood said those being fined have received ample warning. The initial late filing penalty for a missing ethics form is $100, and fine recipients are sent reminders to turn in outstanding forms.

After 20 days, the ethics commission sends a certified letter to the home address of the late filer, and the fine increases by $10 per day for the first 10 days, followed by $100 for each subsequent day.

Fine recipients are given the opportunity to submit letters of appeal to the nine-member ethics commission, but if no appeal is granted and ethics fines continue to go unpaid, the ethics commission eventually will file a complaint with the clerk of court in a debtor’s home county that seeks to have a lien placed on any properties the person owns.

Additionally, at the end of each calendar year, the ethics commission sends a list of debtors to the state Department of Revenue, which can garnish debtors’ wages if they file state tax returns.

A search of several national databases for Johnson’s telephone number yielded only disconnected lines, but he told the Charleston Post and Courier in 2009 that he was disabled in a workplace accident more than a decade ago and has not been able to work since. Johnson won a council seat in 2000 and lost his seat in 2006.

Hazelwood said Johnson has not filed a state tax return for many years. She said the ethics commission has no expectation it will ever see most of the money Johnson owes.

“There’s no way Mr. Johnson is going to able to do this,” she said.

According to the commission, as of Jan. 26, there were 105 other six-figure debtors.

Spartanburg County has three residents on the commission’s list. Those individuals, followed by their positions and debt amounts, are:

Earl A. Bridges Jr., former member of the S.C. State University Board of Trustees, $1,700;

Mike E. Dixon, commissioner of the Patriots Point Development Authority, $100; and

Derrick Pierce, former lobbyist for the Spartanburg Area Chamber of Commerce, $270.

According to the ethics commission, Bridges has not filed his 2010 annual Statement of Economic Interests, Dixon was late in filing the same form, and Pierce, who Hazelwood said lobbied for the chamber in 2005, also was late in filing the form.

Most of the individuals with outstanding debts to the commission are former public officials or political candidates, but some are current sitting officials.

They include:

Jonathan N. Pinson, chairman of the S.C. State University Board of Trustees, $100;

Joyce A. Blackwell, vice president of academic affairs at S.C. State University, $2,200;

Patricia H. McAbee, member of the Clemson University Board of Trustees, $100; and

Timothy F. Norwood Sr., member of the Francis Marion University Board of Trustees, $1,700.

Hazelwood said the money the ethics commission receives from fines is used for purposes including rent, supplies and computer contracts — everything except personnel costs.

Room for reform?
Since a law capping late-filing fines for a single form at $500 was lifted in 2003, legislators have attempted to reform the commission’s fine system.

In each instance, the cap-reinstating legislation passed only one chamber of the General Assembly or was vetoed by former Gov. Mark Sanford.

Legislators will have another opportunity to rein in fine amounts in the current session.

House Bill 3183, which would limit late-filing fines to $5,000 per form, was prefiled in December and has been referred to the House Judiciary Committee.

The bill also proposes that first and second late-filing offenses may be tried in magistrates court after the maximum fine has been levied, with the possibility of jail time upon conviction.

According to the legislation, should an offender reach the maximum fine amount, he or she would be guilty of a misdemeanor triable in magistrate court for a first offense, and upon conviction would be fined up to $500 or receive up to 30 days in jail.

Subsequent offenses would combine misdemeanor guilt with harsher penalties.

For a second offense, an offender would be fined between $2,500 and $5,000 or receive no less than 30 days in jail.

For a third or subsequent offense, an offender would be fined up to $5,000 or jailed for up to one year, or both.

State Rep. Tom Young, R-Aiken, introduced the bill and said it was drafted by the ethics commission.

“I do think the cap would improve the collection rates,” Hazelwood said in an e-mail message. “Certainly a late-filing penalty could be large if you needed to file multiple forms, but it couldn’t be $750,000 large. We have wanted a cap since the law changed in 2003.”

John Crangle, executive director of the watchdog group Common Cause of South Carolina, said a cap on fine amounts is a good start. He also said there should be other mechanisms put in place to help the ethics commission collect on fines such as the filing of lawsuits, turning over the fines to a collection agency or allowing offenders to negotiate a debt settlement with the commission.

“I don’t see the kind of aggressive debt collection that’s needed,” he said. “The ethics commission is terribly under-resourced. Certainly they could use the money because they need to expand their staff.”