Columbia City Paper

By Baynard Woods

“It’s the Boss,” Barvetta Singletary whispered away from her mouthpiece when we walked in the room. That’s how people in his office refer to Jim Clyburn—either as the Whip, or the Boss.

Kristie Greco, his Communications Director, quickly ushered me back out into the hallway.

“The Whip is back in South Carolina today, but he has Barvetta on the phone to talk about something. Healthcare, probably,” she guessed.

It was a good guess.

A lot of people wonder what happened to healthcare. Not Barvetta Singletary. She carries it around with her in a big white binder.

“I should have better biceps,” Singletary joked when she finished her call.

As Clyburn’s Policy Director, a health policy specialist, and a trained nurse, Singletary is partly responsible for crafting the bill that the Whip will bring to Obama’s February 25 bi-partisan meeting with members from both houses of Congress. Like the President’s proposal, the binder that Singletary has been lugging around is modeled after the Senate’s previous bill, without some of the things “that the public is obviously not happy with.”

One of these things—also scuttled by Obama’s proposal—is the generally unpopular “Cadillac” tax on fancy insurance policies. “But the major areas are very similar in that we want to improve insurance for those who currently have it,” she said. “Companies won’t be able to rescind coverage-”

Singletary’s cell-phone rang. I took the opportunity to look down at the binder. (continue reading…)

Legislators making liberal use of constitutional amendment process

Anybody care to guess how many bills are in the legislative hopper to amend the state constitution?

A dozen?  Twenty? Thirty?

Try more than 80.  By our count, state lawmakers since last year have filed 83 bills that seek to amend the state constitution.

These bills seem to fall into three categories:

Legitimate uses of amendments. Several proposals seek structural changes to the constitution, a flexible document that sets a general vision of our state government.  This category of proposals can’t move forward by just passing a new law.  There needs to be a change to the constitution.  Example:  Changing the process involving constitutional officers, such as adjutant general or agriculture secretary.  Some say these officers should be appointed and become part of a governor’s cabinet because it’s time to modernize government.  But because these are constitutionally-mandated offices, the only way for them to become appointed is for the constitution to change.  Currently, there are 17 bills that would impact various constitutionally-elected offices.

Lazy amendments. Several bills seek to change the constitution for measures that could really be handled by law.  Examples:  Proposals to limit government spending or increase use of reserve funds.  State lawmakers don’t really need the crutch of a constitutional amendment for these kinds of ideas.  They just need to have fiscal and legislative discipline to stick to priorities.

Political amendments. Several constitutional proposals are political ideology or legislative matters cloaked as amendments.  (continue reading…)

Why does Tiger Woods owe us an apology?

by Ted Rall

Let’s assume that all the accusations of serial philandering are true. That no waitress was safe from his charms. What right do we, the public, have to be upset?

Woods never presented himself as a pillar of moral virtue. He marketed himself as a great golfer. His job was to knock balls into holes–which he did. He didn’t cheat at golf.

Nowhere in America lives a kid who looked up to Tiger because he thought he was faithful to his wife.

Woods wasn’t some right-wing hypocrite. He didn’t preach. His church was the Chapel of Sports Excellence.

Apologize? What for?

I’m not even sure he owes his wife an apology. According to various reports (although I fathom not how said accounts were sourced), Woods’ wife lost interest in sex after having kids. If she turned colder, oh well. Things happen. Tiger didn’t have the right to demand that she put out. But he had every right–the duty, even, if there was to be any chance of his keeping his family intact from divorce–to have some fun on the side.

If Mrs. Woods wanted it ten times a day, on the other hand, he owes her an apology. Her. Not us.

Yet the media is tearing Tiger a new one. “The fact that he isn’t allowing questions and is positioning his friends and handpicked reporters as props [at his tele-apology] is the height of arrogance,” publicist Nick Ragone told The New York Post. “At some point, he’ll be shamed into doing a true mea culpa.” Another PR flack said: “He didn’t think enough of his fans back then [three months ago, when the scandal broke] to do the right thing.”

“Mea culpa”? What for? “Think enough of his fans”? How is Tiger’s sex life the business of his fans? Although, personally, I was surprised to find out he was straight. But I digress. (continue reading…)

The real voter fraud is going on in the Statehouse

By Will Moredock

By Will Moredock

It’s as predictable as the first robin in the spring. The General Assembly is in session and Republicans are squealing like monkeys in a mango tree to pass some kind of voter ID bill.

We’ve been down this road before. It was a bad idea last year and the year before and the year before. And it looks like a good way to get the state embroiled in a big, hairy no-win lawsuit and spotlighted again on the “Daily Show.”

But damn the logic! Damn the expense! The GOPers are moving ahead with reckless abandon. And they’re serious this time! The 2008 election scared hell out of them with a record black turnout and they are not going to let that happen again.

What we are talking about here is a bill that would require registered voters to show a picture ID at the polling place before they are allowed to vote. And why would the Wise Ones in Columbia do such a thing?

Ask a GOPer and he will tell you that it’s to prevent voter fraud – you know, where somebody pretends to be somebody he’s not in order to vote. Ask him to show you an example of said voter fraud in South Carolina and he will give you the kind of deer-in-the-headlights stare that Sarah Palin gave Katie Couric when the CBS anchor asked the vice presidential candidate what newspapers she read.

You see, there are no known cases of voter fraud in South Carolina in recent decades. And you could count all the cases of false-identity voter fraud in the whole country on your hands. Despite all the ranting and railing of the right wing media, despite all the allegations and imputations against ACORN, no one has ever said that the community organizing group was trying to commit false-identity voter fraud. The worst thing they were found doing was getting false signatures on voter lists – names like Donald Duck and Minnie Mouse. I think these frauds would be stopped with or without a voter ID.

As Charleston attorney Armand Derfner told Statehouse Report recently, “We’ve never had a complaint of that kind of fraud.” The real fraud, he said, is this proposed law. (continue reading…)