A RESOLUTION affirming States’ rights based on Jeffersonian principles.

Whereas the Constitution of the State of New Hampshire, Part 1, Article 7 declares that the people of this State have the sole and exclusive right of governing themselves as a free, sovereign, and independent State; and do, and forever hereafter shall, exercise and enjoy every power, jurisdiction, and right, pertaining thereto, which is not, or may not hereafter be, by them expressly delegated to the United States of America in congress assembled; and
……….
That the several States composing the United States of America, are not united on the principle of unlimited submission to their General Government; but that, by a compact under the style and title of a Constitution for the United States, and of amendments thereto, they constituted a General Government for special purposes, — delegated to that government certain definite powers, reserving, each State to itself, the residuary mass of right to their own self-government; and that whensoever the General Government assumes undelegated powers, its acts are unauthoritative, void, and of no force; that to this compact each State acceded as a State, and is an integral party, its co-States forming, as to itself, the other party: that the government created by this compact was not made the exclusive or final judge of the extent of the powers delegated to itself; since that would have made its discretion, and not the Constitution, the measure of its powers; but that, as in all other cases of compact among powers having no common judge, each party has an equal right to judge for itself, as well of infractions as of the mode and measure of redress; and read the full text

Sen. Greg Ryberg (R-Aiken), chairman of the Senate Labor Commerce & Industry, gave me the opportunity of chairing a sub committee Thursday morning (01.22.09). The sub committee gave a favorable report to regulations proposed by the State Fire Marshall, John G. Reich. Below is a summary:

Pending LLR Office of the State Fire Marshal Regulations (3214, 3215, 3216, 3217, 3218, 3219, 3220) February 12, 2009
These regulations replace 12 regulations known previously as the SC Fire Marshal Rules & Regulations.
The last time these regulations were extensively modified 1999
The regulations encompass multiple areas of responsibility of  the OSFM including 1) Day Care & Foster Homes 2) Basting and explosives 3) Pyrotechnics and Fireworks 4) LP Gas 4) Fire Equipment Dealers 5) Local Detention Facilities & Prisons
The proposed regulations: 1) Reduce the numbers of regulations 2) Reference national consensus standards 3) Eliminate obsolete rules, standards and codes 4) Reduces confusion and contradiction to contractors, design professionals, code enforcement community and the public
The proposed regulations provide a simpler shorter format
Stakeholders were extensively involved in the process ensuring that the needs of all South Carolinians were satisfied.
The proposed regulations do not increase fees or fines but directs the OSFM to follow 40-1-50(D).

So far, we haven’t found anything objectionable in these regs, but we’ll continue to comb through them. As you know, I’m reluctant to regulate only if necessary. Most would agree, that things like fire codes in public facilities & pyrotechnics are areas where regulation is necessary.

S. 12 commonly know as the “trac” bill stands for the Tax Realignment Commission. I blogged on this bill a few days ago here. S. 12 was voted out of the Senate Finance Committee last week without my support. We made several unsuccessful attempts to amend the bill to be more palatable. I’m all for reforming our tax code to make South Carolina more competitive, BUT as you’ve heard, the devil is in the details. For S. 12 to get my support, we need to exorcize a few demons in hiding:
            
1-delegates legislative power to an unelected body – Many question the constitutionality (or at least irresponsibility) of this legislation. The commission will submit a report to the legislature for a straight up or down vote. Amendments will require 60%.
                
2-could add to your property taxes – Act 388 gave you property tax relief on your home. I’ll admit that we need to correct some unintended consequences resulting from Act 388 (like the point of sale reassessment), but I can’t support anything that could result in the homeowner getting more property taxes.

               
3-designed to raise taxes – S. 12 has no revenue neutral requirement. Imagine an unelected commission of bureaucrats with the power to raise your taxes! The make-up of the commission will be primarily government spenders looking into your wallet. Placing the sales tax back on your food is already being talked up.
           
I’ve joined 10 other conservative members of the Senate in putting my name as “desiring to be present” on S. 12. This is a procedure we sometimes use to slow down a bill with objections. If the Senate does not get to the “contested” calander (schedule) S. 12 would require a “special order” slot. Special order needs 26 votes and there are only 3 special order spots.
            
If you’re not interested in all this procedural stuff, we’re trying to slow down or maybe derail trac.

Republican Senator Proposes Amendment to Overturn Ban on Cash for Schools Hosting Faith Forums
Republican Sen. Jim DeMint proposed an amendment Thursday to overturn a provision in the stimulus bill that prohibits renovation funding for schools that allow religious worship in their facilities.

By Cristina Corbin

FOXNews.com

Republican Sen. Jim DeMint proposed an amendment Thursday to kill a provision in the Senate stimulus bill that prohibits renovation money for schools that allow religious groups to meet on campus.

DeMint proposed the amendment after the provision was passed in the Democratic-controlled House despite unanimous Republican opposition. The amendment is expected to be voted on Thursday, an aide to the senator told FOXNews.com.

DeMint and others who object to the provision say Democrats in Congress have declared war against prayer in the stimulus bill, which currently prohibits funds from being used for the “modernization, renovation, or repair” of facilities that allow “sectarian instruction, religious worship or a school or department of divinity.”

“This provision is a clear attack on people of faith and it must be removed,” DeMint’s spokesman, Wesley Denton, told FOXNews.com Thursday.

“Why is an economic stimulus bill being used to kick religious groups off college campuses? It is a clear violation of students’ constitutional rights and it should disturb Americans that they are trying to slip this through while people are concerned about the economy. The real question is who inserted this discrimination into the bill, and why,” Denton said.

The language in the provision is so vague that it could prevent students from gathering to pray in their dorm rooms or inviting a speaker to campus to discuss religion, DeMint says.

The senator said it is part of federal law that schools cannot limit access to facilities or discriminate against people of faith — citing federal law that states:

“It shall be unlawful for any public secondary school which receives federal financial assistance and which has a limited open forum to deny equal access or a fair opportunity to, or discriminate against, any students who wish to conduct a meeting within that limited open forum on the basis of the religious, political, philosophical, or other content of the speech at such meetings.”

The House provided $20 billion for the infrastructure improvements, of which $6 billion would go to higher education facilities where the limitations would be applied.

But civil liberty groups like the ACLU defend the stimulus bill’s provision, arguing that it in no way violates the Constitution.

“It’s almost a restatement of what the Constitution requires so there’s nothing novel in what the House did in its restriction,” said Christopher Anders, senior legislative counsel to the ACLU. “For 37 years, the law of the land is that the government can’t pay for buildings that are used for religious purposes.”

And according to some constitutional law experts, any complaint filed against the provision will gain little ground in court.

“Certainly the provision is treating the act of religious organizations differently from the activities of the school itself,” Harvard University constitutional law professor Mark Tushnet told FOXNews.com.

“It’s not frivolous to say there’s a constitutional problem with excluding religious facilities from these grants, but I think the way of the law is in the other direction,” he said.

Dear Friends,

The lakes along the Savannah River Basin are a vital part of our community. Lakes Hartwell, Thurmond, and Russell attract thousands of visitors each year. In addition to serving as economic engines for the region, these three lakes provide clean, safe drinking water to thousands of residents. Unfortunately, the severe drought facing the Upstate is threatening our lakes and negatively impacting our local economies.

Record low rainfall in the area has pushed our lakes to their lowest levels in more than two decades. There appears to be no relief in sight as the National Weather Service has predicted that temperatures over the next three months will be unusually warm while precipitation will remain below average.

To make matters worse, the Army Corps of Engineers, who oversees the outflow of water from these lakes into the Savannah River, is required to operate under what I believe is an outdated and broken set of policies known as the
Drought Contingency Plan. According to the Drought Contingency Plan for a level three drought, Lakes Hartwell, Thurmond, and Russell must release 3600 cubic feet of water per second into the Savannah River.

The question on my mind and on the minds of many in our District is a simple one; why can’t the Corps reduce the outflow from these lakes that are already at dangerously low levels?

Several months ago our office started looking into the issue. Finding the answer to that relatively simple question was a slow and frustrating process, but what we discovered was surprising. Essentially, the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), under authority of the Endangered Species Act, prohibits the Corps of Engineers from reducing outflow rates below 3600cfs in order to protect the short-nosed sturgeon, an endangered species of fish that lives in the Savannah River.

Once we knew what the problem was, our goal became finding a solution. Through numerous letters, phone calls, and meetings, our office worked to get NOAA to allow for a temporary reduction in the outflow rate by 500cfs for all three lakes from November 2008 to February 2009. This temporary reduction bought us some time to find a more permanent solution.

On December 22, 2008, I sent a letter to the Corps asking that they continue the reduced outflow rate for as long as possible past January. Additionally, the states of South Carolina and Georgia echoed my request in formal letters to the Corps. The Corps responded stating that they would do everything they could to ensure the reduced outflow rate continued beyond January.

Last week, we received word that NOAA refused the Corps’ request to continue the lower release rate of 3100cfs. I am extremely disappointed and frustrated with this decision given that NOAA has no conclusive evidence that the short-nosed sturgeon would be adversely affected by the reduced outflows. While NOAA may be uncertain of how its actions affect the
short-nosed sturgeon, I am certain that their refusal to comply with our request to continue reduced outflows will have a serious negative impact on our lakes and the surrounding communities. NOAA’s protectionist view fails to meet the standards of good stewardship found in collaboratively conserving precious resources. Unlike the citizens of our state who are wisely conserving water, NOAA is showing little regard for making similar short-term sacrifices for a resource that impacts all our interests.

Today, I sent a letter to Mary Glackin, Acting Director of the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration, asking her to reconsider NOAA’s decision requiring the Corps’ to increase release levels from 3100cfs. NOAA’s action jeopardizes the safety of our families and the economy of each community surrounding the lakes. If you would like to read
this letter in its entirety, you can do so by clicking
here<http://barrett.houseenews.net/mail/util.cfm?mailaction=clickthru&gpiv=2100031749.111749.338&gen=1&mailing_linkid=3664>.

In addition to looking for continued temporary relief, I am working towards a long-term solution. To that end, I met with General Schroedel, regional leader for the Army Corps of Engineers, on January 11, 2009 to address my concerns about flaws in the Drought Contingency Plan. General Schroedel and I had a productive meeting, and I remain optimistic that much-needed reforms to the Drought Contingency Plan will be made. However, adjustments to the Drought Contingency Plan are only part of the solution. I am considering introducing legislation that will amend the Endangered Species Act in a manner that would allow for the protection of our lakes and water supplies.

As we continue to make progress on this important issue, I am committed to keeping you up-to-date and informed. I will issue regular updates via email and post important information regarding the situation on our website,
www.barrett.house.gov<http://barrett.houseenews.net/mail/util.cfm?mailaction=clickthru&gpiv=2100031749.111749.338&gen=1&mailing_linkid=3665>.

I want you to know that I understand and share the frustration surrounding the drought, and I will continue to do all that I can to find an immediate and temporary fix while working towards a long-term solution. Should ever have any question about this issue and our efforts, please feel free to contact our office at (202) 225-5301.

Sincerely,

J. Gresham Barrett

Member of Congress

P.S. To make your opinion known on this important issue, please call Mary Glackin, the Deputy Under Secretary for NOAA, at (202) 482-4569 or email her at
mary.glackin@noaa.gov<http://barrett.houseenews.net/mail/util.cfm?mailaction=clickthru&gpiv=2100031749.111749.338&gen=1&mailing_linkid=3666>.