SC Senate coming back to Columbia. But not to deal with K-12 school mask rule
The South Carolina Senate is returning to Columbia next month, but not to deal with undoing a state budget measure that aims to ban mask mandates in schools.
The 46-member chamber plans to return to session at 1 p.m. Oct 12 to talk about the once-in-a-decade process of redistricting and decide how to divvy out millions of dollars in federal COVID-19 relief and money from the Savannah River Site settlement, according to a memo sent to senators Thursday from Senate President Harvey Peeler, R-Cherokee.
Peeler’s memo does not include whether the chamber will tackle a controversial measure included in the budget that seeks to prohibit mask mandates in K-12 schools. But the subject is likely to come up as South Carolina is still recording record COVID-19 case and death numbers and lawmakers, including senators, are still pushing the issue.
“As President, I am calling for the Senate to return so we may finish the business of the body, including supplemental appropriations and redistricting,” Peeler wrote. “We will only take up matters included in the sine die resolution.”
The measure, which Republican lawmakers attached to the budget with little debate shortly before the spending bill’s passage this year, prevents schools from using state money to require that students or employees wear facial coverings.
With COVID-19 cases on the decline and vaccinations ticking up, few districts at the time were considering mask mandates. The subsequent emergence of the highly contagious delta variant and spike in coronavirus cases and hospitalizations to near-record levels has changed the calculus for many school officials.
Due to the budget measure, however, education and health officials are unable to impose mask requirements in schools.
Some cities, such as Columbia, have enacted mask ordinances that apply to schools, but the legality of such measures remains an open question.
The original ordinance Columbia passed was struck down by the South Carolina Supreme Court, which ruled it conflicted with state law. The city subsequently passed a mask ordinance that specified city fire inspectors, not school officials, would be tasked with enforcement in schools. That order remains in place, but could still be challenged.
The S.C. Department of Health and Environmental Control has called for a mask requirement in K-12 schools, but has declined to invoke its emergency powers to impose one.
DHEC Director Edward Simmer has said the budget measure prohibiting school mask requirements makes a public health order mandating facial coverings impractical and unenforceable, but that if individual districts wanted to work with his agency to institute mask requirements that were within the law he would entertain that.
Simmer has called on the Legislature to revise the state’s anti-mask mandate provision, and recently spoke with Peeler about doing so, but there does not appear to be willingness on the part of enough lawmakers for that to happen.
Part of the reason has to do with politics. But another major piece to the legislative maneuvering is that State House leaders would need a two-thirds vote in the House and Senate chambers to amend the sine die agreement — a measure that sets what lawmakers can discuss after session ends in May.
“I think somebody will try (to bring up), (but) the question is how do you do it and can we take it up?” Senate Majority Leader Shane Massey, R-Edgefield, Told The State. “I think you probably need a two-thirds vote to have that debate. And, look, my assessment based on conversations, based on lots of different senators over the last week, (the) votes are not there to repeal that proviso.”
State Sen. Katrina Shealy, who Tuesday joined Richland County House Democratic Rep. Jermaine Johnson in calling for a special session to repeal the measure, told The State Thursday she wasn’t surprised by Peeler’s letter leaving out masks.
“I understand why he’s doing that because once you get into that there’s no way out. I mean, there’s not an escape plan,” the Lexington Republican said. “That’s not a cliche. Nobody wants to go and stay until January and it’s going to be filibustered.”
State health officials’ unwillingness to exert their emergency authority to impose masks has rankled some Democratic lawmakers, who have accused Simmer of failing to lead and kowtowing to political considerations.
“He’s simply shirking his responsibility,” said Sen. Marlon Kimpson, D-Charleston, a member of the Senate Medical Affairs committee. “His actions signal that he is willing to be a bystander while we continue to fall off a huge cliff.”
Simmer has defended his actions and denied that politics factored into the agency’s decisions.
“We speak to the science, we speak to the very best evidence and we recommend actions, both by individual citizens and by our government, based on what we believe is going to be most effective looking at the research, looking at the science,” the director said. “That’s not a political decision. And I think we’ve really stuck to that.”
The office of House Speaker Jay Lucas, R-Darlington, declined to comment on Peeler’s letter, and House leaders have not publicized when they plan to return to session but looking at later this year to deal with redistricting.
This story was originally published September 16, 2021 at 2:20 PM.
