SC lawmakers seek oversight over government emergency statements

COLOMBIA, SC (AP) – On Wednesday, some lawmakers called for a more comprehensive plan to control the coronavirus pandemic, including legislative oversight of the series of emergency statements issued by Governor Henry McMaster since mid-March.

“How long will these limitations last? Is there a case number that we should look for? Maybe hospitalizations, is that what we’re looking at? ”Senate majority leader Shane Massey said in a speech. “What’s the point? Is there a goal? What do Southern Carolinians need to achieve to get their lives back to normal? “

Massey said that a review should include examining the law that authorizes a governor to declare a state of emergency, but technically requires legislative approval to extend one. McMaster issued 13 separate statements – each lasting 15 days. They often incorporated circumstances from previous orders, but he did not ask for permission to extend the General Assembly, arguing that each is distinct and does not require approval.

Given the enduring nature of the pandemic – which infected more than 130,000 and has killed nearly 3,000 people in the 5 million state so far – Massey and other Republicans argued on Wednesday that the law needs clarification. Lawmakers also pointed out that the General Assembly has not been meeting for more than half of the year, so requiring lawmakers to approve an emergency declaration every 15 days is probably not feasible.

“Our emergency statutes are clearly designed for natural disasters of limited duration,” said Massey.

Senate Judiciary Committee chairman Luke Rankin said his committee members would examine the emergency declaration clause when the new session begins in January.

Massey also said that lawmakers need to carefully monitor state agencies, praising workers at the state Department of Health and Environmental Control, but pointing out that the agency has been without a director for five months, and lawmakers have not been updated on any progress in the search. for a new one. The governor’s office did not immediately comment on the speeches.

Lawmakers will be in Columbia in the next two weeks to consider a variety of measures related to the pandemic. On Tuesday, senators approved changes to the state budget that would provide a small increase for most teachers and a hazard bonus for some lower-paid civil servants. The chamber also set aside $ 425 million of COVID-19 federal funds to reimburse the fund that distributes unemployment insurance, in addition to the existing $ 500 million already placed in the fund.

In another measure related to the outbreak, McMaster was set on Wednesday to sign a bill allowing all voters to vote absent in the November elections, a measure that his spokesman called “a good balance between the protection of the people of South Carolina and the integrity of the voting process.

According to a poll released on Wednesday by Quinnipiac University, 72% of prospective South Carolina voters said they plan to vote in person on election day.

Some activists are raising objections about virus-related restrictions directly to lawmakers. On Tuesday, about 50 people affiliated with conservative organizations, including the Greenville TEA Party and the South Carolina Patriots for Liberty – bearing U.S. flags and almost all of them unmasked – took action for the Statehouse. They asked government leaders to end restrictions on business and meetings and mask the mandates.

Many of the rally participants did not wear face covers when they gathered outside. But about a dozen of these unmasked people also entered the Statehouse, a building covered by an executive order from McMaster which requires face coverings in state government buildings.

Asked about the application of the decree, officials from the Bureau of Protective Services – the law enforcement agency on Statehouse grounds – said that visitors claimed health-related exemptions, which broadly cover people “with a physical, mental or health condition. behavioral or disability ”that prevents the use of face cover.

According to the order, people claiming this exemption “should not be required to provide documentation or any other form of proof of such a condition.”

___

Meg Kinnard can be contacted at http://twitter.com/MegKinnardAP.

___

Jeffrey Collins contributed to this report.

.Source