Such notifications happened in South Carolina 10 times in the past year. Families like the Fowlkes of Gaffney still struggle with the grief. Dominick Fowlkes wrote about it after his brother Lance Corporal Christopher Fowlkes was mortally wounded in Afghanistan.

(Listen to Fowlkes’ poem, “The War” MP3 :40)

Today Sen. Jake Knotts hosted the annual Fallen Soldiers Ceremony and luncheon across from the Statehouse. The Senate will also pay tribute to the families of soldiers who have died in military service in the past year.

Events like this do make a difference, says Chris Fowlkes father, Steve: “For me, personally, talking to other people helps me with, well, getting back to where I should be…but I’m still proud.”

Steve and Donna Fowlkes were with their son in the hospital in Germany when he passed away. Donna Fowlkes offers to other military parents, ” Just be proud of him. that’s all you can do is rest on the pride that you have for your children when they do that.”

Senator Knotts says even though he hosts this event every year, he’d love to never have to again: “That would be a great day for South Carolina if we didn’t lose someone.”

Honored today were: Specialist Larry Curtis Applegate, Private First Class Jason R. Watson, Specialist Justin Antisdel, Staff Sergeant Raphael A. Futrell, Captain Mark McDowell, Specialist Abraham S. Wheeler III, Lance Corporal Christopher Fowlkes, Sergeant Demetrius Void, Lance Corporal Mills Palmer Bigham, and Private First Class Robert E. Foster.

South Carolina Radio Network

This year’s Fallen Soldiers ceremony and luncheon honored ten young men and their families.

Each family was presented with a concurrent resolution from the state House and Senate honoring the fallen soldier, along with The Order of the Palmetto Patriot and a state flag that was flown in their honor over the Statehouse.

WSPA

South Carolina’s Republican Senators are pushing a bill on the State Senate floor that guarantees a worker’s right to a secret ballot election in the workplace, but liberal Democrats are continuing to block that right. H.3305, introduced by Rep. Eric Bedingfield, is a constitutional amendment that would guarantee a worker’s right to voting by secret ballot during union organization.

The legislation is a reaction to the deceptively named federal “Employee Free Choice Act,” which would strip workers of their right to vote for unionization by secret ballot, opening them up to intimidation and harassment by unions. The legislation is being pushed on the federal level by union bosses and their liberal allies in Congress.

In arguing for the constitutional amendment, Senate President Pro Tempore Glenn McConnell (R-Charleston) said “I don’t know of anything more basic to the essence of our nation than the right to a secret ballot election.”

Just last week Jim Albaugh, chief executive of Boeing Commercial Airplanes, told the Seattle Times “The overriding factor was not the business climate. And it was not the wages we are paying today. It was that we can’t afford to have a work stoppage every three years. And we can’t afford to continue the rate of escalation of wages.”

Senate Majority Leader Harvey Peeler (R-Cherokee) is the lead sponsor of a Senate companion bill. ” Boeing’s decision to expand its facility near Charleston serves as a reminder why we must protect our tough right-to-work laws. We are sending a strong message to the world: We want your business, and we’re committed to getting it. I want to continue sending that message by defending workers’ rights to secret ballots when deciding whether to unionize,” said Senator Peeler.

Peeler continued, “We’ve seen what happens when unions control the economy. It’s called Detroit. And we’ve seen what happens when unions fail. Congress bails them out on the backs of hardworking taxpayers. It’s unfortunate that the Democrats can’t see this clear fact.”

The Democrats argue that the bill is unconstitutional, but Senate President Pro Tempore argues otherwise. “The fourteenth amendment of the United States constitution creates a floor for protections. It does not prevent South Carolina from reaching for the stars in protecting our citizens. In fact, it lets us give our citizens more freedoms than guaranteed by the federal government. We have soldiers fighting overseas to grant others rights that are being filibustered at home.”

At first, he appeared to me to be writing merely to express his opposition to the idea of erecting a monument at Patriots Point to the 171 South Carolinians who signed the Ordinance of Secession in 1860, a document that represents a tragic and transformative time in the history of our nation.

Rev. Darby called all those who signed that document 150 years ago “traitors” who deserted their country.

However, a careful reading of Rev. Darby’s guest column causes me to opine his agenda had more to do with modern politics than it did with his views on history.

He bitterly criticized the two African-American political leaders, Sen. Robert Ford and Rep. Tim Scott, who have endorsed the proposed monument at Patriots Point.

Without saying so directly, Rev. Darby, in my opinion, rather clearly suggested that Sen. Ford and Rep. Scott were also traitors who somehow deserted a cause they should be serving.

From my view, nothing could be further from the truth. Sen. Ford, a Democrat, and Rep. Scott, a Republican, knew they would be criticized by more than just those who seek to fan the flames of bitterness.

Fortunately, Sen. Ford and Rep. Scott had the moral courage to approach the issue like statesmen, with tolerance and respect for conflicting views. Their goal was to bring people together and to foster mutual respect for a diverse heritage.

On the issue of secession, the facts open a rich and fascinating chapter in our state’s history, with varying perspectives all our citizens can share with each other in civil conversation.

Yes, the issue of slavery was indeed involved. And today, we all celebrate the end of slavery and the tremendous progress we have made as a people in bridging the racial divide in America.

But the issue of secession also dealt with other issues like state sovereignty and the legal nature of the American union. During the early and mid-19th century, the dominant view was that every state that freely entered the union had the right to freely leave it. Both Northern and Southern states had claimed the right to secede.

It is interesting to note that no Southerner — not the president of the Confederacy nor any soldier or politician who served in the Confederacy — was ever tried and convicted of treason for secession. Indeed, it is likely that the right to secede was lost on the battlefield at a time when the seceding states probably could have won the issue in federal court, where it was never tested.

Rev. Darby would be well-advised to study the history of the War Between the States a little more carefully. It is my view that he could take a lesson in compassion and understanding from those who shot at one another on the field of battle. After the war, they put their weapons down and extended to each other the hand of friendship.

Union Gen. Joshua Chamberlain said it well when the Army of Northern Virginia surrendered at Appomattox. “… In the march of man,” he said, “they (the Confederates) fought as they were taught, true to such ideals as they saw. We could not look into those brave bronze faces and those battered flags we had met on so many fields … and think of personal hate and mean revenge.”

Today, Rev. Darby seems to me less willing to extend the hand of mutual respect than the men whose blood was actually spilled on the field of battle 150 years ago.

A song that was popular a few years ago has meaning we urgently need to apply today as we seek to get along with each other and celebrate our diverse heritage.

“When we open up a quarrel between the present and the past,” the song goes, “we only sacrifice the future. It’s the bitterness that lasts.”

Ironically, Sen. Ford and Rep. Scott, two politicians, seem, in my opinion, to have a better grasp than Rev. Darby of a spiritual lesson we all remember:

“Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall inherit the earth.”

by Glenn McConnell
Post and Courier

Tate Mikell, a young Charleston police officer, had just finished a long run on the beach with his dog in 2005 and was sitting down to lunch with his mom and dad when the symptoms set in.

The Citadel graduate felt dazed as a massive headache clouded his mind. It was a brain aneurysm, and it would leave him paralyzed on his left side and permanently wheelchair-bound.

Today, Mikell, 31, hopes lawmakers will get serious about passing an increase in the state’s cigarette tax. The revenue – potentially $145 million – would be used to offset budget cuts to Medicaid programs and services that Mikell and other disabled South Carolinians rely on.

In Mikell’s case that’s an aide who bathes and administers his medication daily and a life skills coach who stops by twice a week to help him rebuild socialization skills.

“It took me an hour and a half just to give him a bath before he qualified for the (Medicaid) voucher. He’s a big guy,” laughed Marsha Mikell, Tate’s mom. “The services have been a lifesaver.”

Without the cigarette tax money, South Carolina, grappling with a half-billion-dollar budget hole because of dwindling state revenues, could cut some of those services.

Wednesday, members of AARP South Carolina and a dozen other organizations rallied at the State House, asking lawmakers to raise the 7-cents-a-pack cigarette tax, which is the lowest state levy on tobacco in the nation.

Various organizations have pushed for an increase for much of the past decade.

South Carolina’s budget woes have bolstered supporters. They predict lawmakers, in dire need of new revenue, will finally approve the measure to fill the Medicaid hole.

“This is the year our Medicaid programs will see the cuts we’ve been fearing,” said Sue Berkowitz, director of Appleseed Legal Justice Center. “Lawmakers will get serious.”

While the House is set to once again support the bill, it likely will run into trouble in the Senate.

“Will it pass? It’s too early to say,” said Sen. Glenn McConnell, R-Charleston, on Wednesday.

As in past years, McConnell predicts senators will disagree on how the tax proceeds should be spent, a disagreement that could kill the bill. Some lawmakers will vote against it because they oppose any type of new tax. And still others disagree with funding Medicaid programs with a declining revenue source like the cigarette tax.

Even supporters of a tax increase disagree on how the proceeds should be spent.

State Superintendent of Education and Democratic gubernatorial candidate Jim Rex made a case Wednesday at a Senate budget hearing that the money should be split between public education and health care until the budget crisis subsides. Then, all of the funds should go to health care, he said.

Rex said his agency is proposing unpaid leave for teachers, shortening the school year or cutting employee work – and pay – to the nine months schools are open. Rex said the budget could create an “amputated” education system, and that raising revenue was a “responsible response to the crisis.”

One option to avoid those choices, he said, is to raise the state cigarette tax and use the revenue for education.

“This is a no-brainer,” Rex told a Senate subcommittee. “The vast majority of South Carolinians support it. It’s long past due.”

But members of AARP South Carolina say the money should go solely to Medicaid.

“In the past, lawmakers have argued about splitting the money,” said Bill Greenhill of Charleston. “We need to avoid those hangups this time and send it all to Medicaid.”

Personally, McConnell said, he supports the increase only if it all goes to filling the Medicaid hole.

On the House side, Speaker Bobby Harrell, R-Charleston, predicts representatives will, once again, approve a tax increase that supports Medicaid.

Votes during the past two years have proved a majority of lawmakers in both chambers agree the tax should be raised by at least 50 cents a pack. But Gov. Mark Sanford’s veto has halted final passage.

Sanford has said he’ll veto any cigarette tax increase again this year that does not include an equivalent tax cut in some other area.

That could prove an obstacle for a cigarette tax increase, even in the House.

“I don’t know if we could override a veto,” said Harrell, doubting House supporters could get the two-thirds majority needed to override a veto.

The State

SCETV

WSPA.com

South Carolina is currently the only state in the nation that requires someone to be 21 to get a tattoo.

Senate President Pro Tempore Glenn McConnell, R-Charleston, sponsored the bill because he thinks the current law is unconstitutional since it doesn’t treat all adults equally. Someone is considered an adult at 18 and can sign contracts, vote and join the military, everything except drink alcohol, so he thinks they should be able to get a tattoo.

Greenville native Laura Brown got a tattoo when she was 18 and doesn’t regret it.

“Right after I graduated from high school, we were on a senior trip and, since we couldn’t do it in South Carolina, we stopped in Alabama and we were on our way to a cruise so we just stopped at a tattoo shop and just did it,” she says.

Frank McKenzie, owner of Body Rites Tattoos in Columbia’s Five Points area, says USC students come in just about every week wanting to get a tattoo, but he has to turn them away if they’re not 21.

“They’re getting them in people’s houses or they’re taking their money to Georgia or North Carolina, where it is 18,” he says.

He also got his first tattoo when he was 18.

But Rep. Liston Barfield, R-Conway, was one of 37 who voted against the bill when it came up in the state House of Representatives last week. Even though people are considered adults at 18, he doesn’t think people that young should make a decision as permanent as a tattoo.

“I think if you go back and talk to a lot of people who had those tattoos, if they could take ‘em off they would,” he says.

Rep. Lanny Littlejohn, R-Spartanburg, disagrees. “If they’re responsible to go out and shoot somebody in a war, I think they’re responsible to have a tattoo,” he says.

A spokesman for Gov. Mark Sanford says the bill is on his desk and it’s being studied carefully, but he did not give any indication whether the governor intended to sign the bill into law.

Independent Mail