Recent South Carolina newspaper editorials:
The Index-Journal
March 24
South Carolina open-door laws for concealed weapon license holders
Suddenly, or so it seems, South Carolina lawmakers want to make our state appear to be at the forefront and progressive, in tune with the nation as a whole.
Like this?
By allowing concealed license holders to openly carry their weapons in public. It is true that lawmakers are not setting aside all laws related to firearms. The open post does not grant the license holder the right to pull a gun out of the holster and swing it, just as he would not have the right to pull the gun out of the hidden holster. South Carolina bars and restaurants serving alcoholic beverages would not be the bars of the old west. We expect.
We are still not convinced that this change is necessary, although it supports the Second Amendment and fully favors that people who wish to carry a weapon with them do so by taking and passing a concealed weapon permission class. We must be and thank that this measure is at least limited to licensees and is not open to anyone who has a weapon. But that is not much consolation.
In general, CWP holders are law-abiding residents who have a perceived need or need to have a weapon for personal protection. In fact, they are the ones that shop owners should be less concerned about. Even so, many shop owners put up signs with the words “Hidden weapons are not allowed”, as if that would remove an alleged armed robber.
But the open carry can be a bit – sorry for the pun here – disarming in public. Will this stop with a gun? Probably not. Imagine the crowd of shoppers in big stores walking up and down the aisles with AR-15s slung over their shoulders. Instead of children complaining about the toy or candy they want, they can cry and cling to Mom and Dad in fear. And let’s not think about what can happen as we approach the Christmas shopping season and only one of those items on sale remains on the shelf.
If South Carolina wants to show how progressive it really is, it will do more to remove some of its stigmas that make it look like it is still involved in the civil war; can take into account legislation against hate crimes. Perhaps if South Carolina could reach the point where many of its residents fear being stopped for driving while black, it could also reach the point where a legally armed black man or woman was not afraid of being shot while he was black.
Instead of carrying weapons openly, we will endeavor to openly carry our sense of decency, respect for others, the outpouring of our racist past that still flies in the face of visitors and residents. It is called the battle flag, and the racism it represents is hidden in the phrase “inheritance, not hatred”.
The Post and Courier
March 23
Tightening the SC unemployment rules
As Hanna Raskin reported last week in our Food section, restaurant owners in Charleston are “having a hard time” finding employees to meet the growing demand for their services.
The staffing problem is not just local and is not limited to working in restaurants. In South Carolina, with an unemployed population of 126,000, there are 87,000 jobs begging on the Department of Employment and Workforce website. Across the country, there are 10 million unemployed and 6.9 million unfilled jobs, according to the U.S. Department of Labor.
Employers’ inability to fill jobs is among the bottlenecks that may be slowing the economic recovery of COVID-19 and driving up prices.
Part of the problem is a mismatch between education and the skills needed and those available in the unemployed group. But part of the problem may also be the size of the unemployment benefits guaranteed by the federal response to the pandemic.
The federal government initially supplemented state unemployment benefits with $ 600 a week. Arguments that the size of the benefit could become an obstacle to economic recovery have persuaded Congress to reduce the supplement to $ 300 a week. The recent $ 1.9 trillion pandemic relief bill extended that aid until September 6.
When the maximum SC unemployment benefit of $ 326 per week is added, the result is $ 626 per week, which is in the range of estimates for the state’s average income. Many beneficiaries would not have survived the crisis financially without this support; many went back to work when jobs were opened.
But Dan Ellzey, executive director of the SC Department of Employment and Workforce, said that a “disturbing” aspect of unemployment numbers is the low number of job searches conducted by many people who receive benefits. As a result, he will soon reestablish a rule – suspended a year ago at the start of the pandemic – that unemployed people must verifiably report that they are looking for work regularly in order to remain eligible for unemployment insurance. This is a good idea.
In a separate lawsuit, Ellzey’s department is happily participating in a federal program to discourage the rampant unemployment insurance fraud that hit tens of billions of dollars across the country last year. Fraudsters in the United States and abroad steal personal information and make fraudulent claims that many state employment agencies are not well equipped to detect.
The US Department of Labor has contracted with ID.me to verify claims for unemployment insurance. South Carolina has also signed a contract with the company to examine all future claims, but the state employment agency has already been proactive in preventing fraudulent claims, including an attempt in February to create some 20,000 fake accounts. Fortunately, there was no monetary loss in this case.
Investigations from agencies ranging from the United States Department of Labor inspector general to the California state unemployment agency have put fraud losses at between $ 50 billion and $ 200 billion, suggesting up to 30 % of the money the federal government paid for unemployment insurance. it was stolen through identity theft and other crimes. It is time to stop this outrageous abuse.
The Times and Democrat
March 22
The state’s Freedom of Information Act
The First Amendment ensures that there will be no prohibition on press freedom, but it does not guarantee that the government should cooperate in any way with a free press. That’s where laws like the South Carolina Freedom of Information Act are essential for the press and the public to have access to information.
Seen last week across the country, Sunshine Week draws attention to the principle of openness that is the backbone of our government system. Now it starts another 51 weeks until we reach observance again – a year during which every day will be important to an audience that must be aware of the functioning of their government to be able to govern themselves.
In passing the South Carolina Freedom of Information Act in 1978, the General Assembly stated: “It is vital in a democratic society that public affairs are conducted in an open and public manner, so that citizens are informed about the performance of public officials and the decisions that are reached in public activity and in the formulation of public policies. ”’
But there are real-life problems:
– A board meeting is held without notice to the public that elected its members.
– A request for information about taxpayer-funded salaries for public officials in a school district is rejected, with officials telling the media and a group of citizens that they will have to go to court to obtain such information.
– A car accident incident report involving a police vehicle is not available until reporters are aware of the incident and make a formal request. It takes weeks for the report to become public.
– A public body votes to enter a closed session, citing only “personnel issues” as the reason. Authorities appear two hours later to announce a “deal” on a course of action.
– A school board discusses a document that is before the curators’ meeting in public session. Reporters and all those present cannot receive a copy of the document.
Hypothetical examples? Only names, places, agencies, media and citizens are not included. Ignoring or ignoring the principles of open government is not uncommon – in the T&D region, across the state and across our country.
In South Carolina, we have a better-than-average Freedom of Information Act, a law designed to ensure that the government operates openly. Lawmakers made major improvements in 2017:
– Criminal penalties for FOIA violations, which were never imposed, have been removed. Offenders are now subject to damages and attorneys’ fees.
– The waiting period for responding to a request for access to public records is reduced from 15 to 10. If the records in question are more than two years old, an agency has 20 days to respond to a FOIA request. Before the move, there was no time limit on the supply of documents.
– Agencies are required to post fees for searching and copying documents. This fee schedule replaces the “reasonable cost” clause, which has come to mean anything from an agency charging thousands of dollars for a person’s research to amounts well above market rates for making copies of documents. The account requires that agency fees not exceed the prorated hourly wage of the lowest paid agency employee. Copying fees would have to be in line with the commercial fee and cannot be charged if documents are transmitted electronically.
– If a public record exists digitally, a person has the right to request and receive it via electronic transmission.
Not to be missed during Sunshine Week and every week is the importance of FOIA, which is not just a law for journalists. It provides government access for all citizens, including many who have never sought a public record or attended a public meeting. The law exists to guarantee your right to know.