‘Nuclear option’ invoked on bill that would allow carrying of firearms without permit
An effort to thwart debate on an already controversial bill that would allow South Carolinians to carry a concealed firearm without a permit has left some House members crying foul.
State Rep. David Hiott invoked cloture, a procedural move that limits the time a bill can be debated on the House floor. “Concentrated” debate, limited to about two hours, is expected to take place on Tuesday.
The vote for cloture enraged House Democrats, who already have accused Republican members of fast-tracking the bill through the committee process to limit debate and public input.
The move, several say, resembles the current atmosphere of federal politics, with Republicans taking advantage of being in the majority. It’s something Rep. James Smith, D-Richland, says he has never seen in his 20 years as a state legislator.
“Literally before debate even began, it was shut off,” Smith said. “That offends the very nature of what this institution is supposed to be about, and that is an opportunity for thorough debate on the issues facing our citizens.”
“You can call that (vote) the nuclear option,” he added.
The bill in question calls for what is often referred to as “constitutional carry.” It allows for people who legally can own a firearm to carry a weapon concealed without having to obtain a permit from the government.
Unlike previous bills that have passed the House calling for constitutional carry, this proposal also allows for open carry, which grants weapons holders the ability to carry their firearms on their person for everyone to see.
The bill, introduced by Laurens Republican Rep. Mike Pitts, was already expected to breeze through the House with little to no opposition from the chamber’s Republicans. But the legislative session is running out of time, with May approaching, and the bill was too important to the Republican Caucus to allow it to be stymied, said House Majority Leader Gary Simrill, R-York.
“Second Amendment rights are a cornerstone of the Constitution, and they are extremely important to many in this body,” Simrill said. “There will be no opportunity for this bill to be stymied where it cannot pass within the time constraints that we have.”
But Democrats like Smith and Russell Ott – who represents parts of Calhoun and Lexington counties – dismissed the time line argument, insisting Republicans were instead retaliating for debate on an earlier bill.
For about five hours on Wednesday, the chamber debated a bill that would criminalize dismemberment abortions. Some Republicans accused Democrats of abusing the rules and carrying that debate for far too long.
In the face of another debate that could run for hours, Republicans voted for cloture immediately after they moved on to the constitutional carry bill.
“Usage of parliamentary procedure and usage of the rules to advance one’s cause or delay another’s cause is a tactic as old as this institution,” Pitts said. “And it is not a tactic owned by either side.”
Ott, however, said cloture is there to be used when debate has gone on and on – not to obstruct it. And regular debate should have been allowed on this issue, which he said too many people feel “very deeply and passionate about.”
“I would challenge anyone to have more ownership of guns than I do,” Ott said. “But I also think that people who may not have my views should have the ability to make their arguments.”
Before Wednesday, Republicans already were facing accusations of attempting to obstruct public input on the constitutional carry bill. The proposal was filed on a Tuesday and scheduled for a hearing two days later.
The two Democrats assigned to the five-person panel that first heard the bill also were absent that Friday, which Pitts said has created a perception that there was an effort to limit debate.
“But those two Democrats got the same notice of the meeting that the three Republicans did,” Pitts said. “I find it ironic that all three Republicans showed up and the two Democrats did not, which would beg the question (on) the representation of their constituency.”
Opponents of the bill are expected to make a last-ditch effort to send the bill back to the committee level when debate resumes on Tuesday. If no other options are available, a vote will likely take place the same day.
“I just simply don’t think it’s right,” Ott said. “It just seems like this is a move by the majority party to say, ‘See what we can do to you.’”
This story was originally published April 1, 2017 at 11:08 AM with the headline "‘Nuclear option’ invoked on bill that would allow carrying of firearms without permit."