Bills
Solar Jobs
Bill #: H.4421
Session: 2017-2018
Topics:
Energy
H.4421 was introduced to eliminate the net metering cap on residential solar and allow our state’s solar energy sector to continue to produce thousands of good-paying clean energy jobs, lower power bills, and eliminate payment to utilities for “lost revenue” due to solar growth. This bill was broadly supported by legislators, the conservation community, solar industries, and a wide range of other stakeholders.
The bill came up on the floor of the House immediately after the defeat of a utility-written solar sabotage bill that was put there to derail it (see H.5045).
We scored several votes on H.4421 to show voters the true illustration of legislators’ varying levels of support.
How Legislators Voted on H.4421
Votes:
- + Pro Conservation Vote
- - Anti Conservation Vote
- EA Excused Absence
- NV Not Voting
- NA Not in Office
- A Abstained (Conflict of Interest)
H.4421 Solar Jobs (Third Reading)
On the third reading of H.4421, Rep. Thayer raised a parliamentary inquiry concerning the bill – asking if 2/3 of the House would be needed for passage of the bill because the bill contained property tax exemptions and the SC Constitution requires 2/3 approval of the House and Senate for additional property tax exemptions. After lengthy discussions with Reps. James Smith, Mandy Powers Norrell, and others, Speaker Lucas ruled that a 2/3 vote would be required for passage. This set the threshold for approval at 82 votes.
Rep. James Smith and other clean energy champions like Peter McCoy, Katie Arrington, Gilda Cobb-Hunter, Russell Ott, Gary Clary, and Mandy Powers Norrell took steps to try and remove the property tax provisions of the bill and reduce the need for an 82 vote supermajority. The only way to remove the offending section was to move the House into a “Committee of the Whole,” a tactic that had not been used in over 30 Years in the SC House.
Anti-solar Representatives moved to table a motion by James Smith to move into the Committee of the Whole. The tabling motion succeeded by a vote of 54-51, preventing amendment of the bill. This vote is not scored.
Rep. Arrington then moved to reconsider the tabling vote in order to try again to enter the Committee of the Whole. This vote failed 55-54.
With all efforts to fix the bill exhausted, the bill proceeded to third reading with the supermajority vote requirement still in place. While the bill received a majority of votes with 61-44, it did not reach the 82 vote supermajority and therefore was defeated on third reading.
- This vote is a vote on a Pro-Conservation Bill.
- The Pro-Conservation Vote was YEA for third reading.
- + Pro Conservation Vote
- - Anti Conservation Vote
- EA Excused Absence
- NV Not Voting
- NA Not in Office
- A Abstained (Conflict of Interest)
H.4421 Solar Jobs (Table Motion to Reconsider)
On the third reading of H.4421, Rep. Thayer raised a parliamentary inquiry concerning the bill – asking if 2/3 of the House would be needed for passage of the bill because the bill contained property tax exemptions and the SC Constitution requires 2/3 approval of the House and Senate for additional property tax exemptions. After lengthy discussions with Reps. James Smith, Mandy Powers Norrell, and others, Speaker Lucas ruled that a 2/3 vote would be required for passage. This set the threshold for approval at 82 votes.
Rep. James Smith and other clean energy champions like Peter McCoy, Katie Arrington, Gilda Cobb-Hunter, Russell Ott, Gary Clary, and Mandy Powers Norrell took steps to try and remove the property tax provisions of the bill and reduce the need for an 82 vote supermajority. The only way to remove the offending section was to move the House into a “Committee of the Whole,” a tactic that had not been used in over 30 Years in the SC House.
Anti-solar Representatives moved to table a motion by James Smith to move into the Committee of the Whole. The tabling motion succeeded by a vote of 54-51, preventing amendment of the bill. This vote is not scored.
Rep. Arrington then moved to reconsider the tabling vote in order to try again to enter the Committee of the Whole. This vote failed 55-54. This tabling the motion to reconsider is the focus of this scored vote.
With all efforts to fix the bill exhausted, the bill proceeded to third reading with the supermajority vote requirement still in place. While the bill received a majority of votes with 61-44, it did not reach the 82 vote supermajority and therefore was defeated on third reading.
- This vote is a procedural vote on a Pro-Conservation Bill.
- The Pro-Conservation Vote was NO for tabling the motion to reconsider.
- + Pro Conservation Vote
- - Anti Conservation Vote
- EA Excused Absence
- NV Not Voting
- NA Not in Office
- A Abstained (Conflict of Interest)
H.4421 Solar Jobs (Second Reading)
As part of series of 10 votes on H.4421 on April 5, 2018, clean energy champions (such as Representatives Stavrinakis, Ballentine, Clary, Caskey, Williams, and J.E. Smith) worked to secure a 64-33 victory on second reading. This second reading vote is the focus of this scored vote.
- This vote is a vote on a Pro-Conservation Bill.
- The Pro-Conservation Vote was YEA for second reading of the bill.