S. 92 is an attempt to nullify the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012 (NDAA). The NDAA provides for the assertion of the President’s authority to arrest, detain and determine whether a trial will be held for the following subjects:

A person who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored those responsible for those attacks.

A person who was a part of or substantially supported al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners, including any person who has committed a belligerent act or has directly supported such hostilities in aid of such enemy forces.

The National Defense Authorization Act of 2013 only exempts citizens from the requirement that detainees be detained in military custody.

No one person in government should have that much power. The solution is in the allocation of power amongst more elected officials or we will risk putting the fate of a suspected subject in the hands of one person. Republican or Democrat, it doesn’t matter because it’s not constitutional. The subject should have the opportunity to provide evidence either way.

If the language isn’t changed or clarified, we are just playing with fire. If the door is wide open for the otherwise unconstitutional detainment of American citizens based upon the definitions of bureaucrats, then anything is possible. As Ryberg always says, “it’s not a problem until it’s a problem.”

Thoroughly defining the language “belligerent act” and “supported,” would better protect U.S. citizens from overzealous officials who have the ability to define these terms for themselves.
In an effort to address the controversies of 2012, Senators Diane Feinstein and Mike Lee proposed an amendment that seemed to satisfy critics on both sides of the political spectrum in the Senate and passed by a vote of 67-29.

An authorization to use military force, a declaration of war, or any similar authority shall not authorize the detention without charge or trial of a citizen or lawful permanent resident of the United States apprehended in the United States, unless an Act of Congress expressly authorizes such detention.
The President does not have independent authority to suspend habeas corpus, or the. At best, he can instruct agencies to address the issue in a manner consistent with his interpretation of the constitution.
Individuals can file a petition seeking a writ. If the custodian cannot provide adequate legal justification for detention, the court can order the petitioner’s release. The only branch of government that has authority to suspend habeas corpus is Congress.

S. 335 was introduced this week in the Senate. This is simply a set of proposals that may be changed during the legislative process. I look forward to the debate.
CYBER SECURITY AND IDENTITY THEFT PROTECTIONS BILL
I. Whereas Clauses Sets forth the necessity for the bill (primarily relating to the cyber security breach at DOR) based on subcommittee findings, including:
The period of time that lapsed between the beginning of the hackers attack and discovery of the breach and the disconnect in the organizational structure of DOR; The need for “identity theft” protections for affected citizens beyond the expiration of the one-year Experian contract; and The need for a centralized statewide cyber security program with the authority to establish standard practices and policies among all state agencies related to information security.
II. Section 1-Lifetime Protection & Fraud Resolution Services to Eligible Persons as a result of the DOR Cyber Security Breach
Requires the Governor to develop a protection plan with “identity theft” services free of charge to eligible citizens affected by the DOR breach. Taxpayers, excluding those enrolled in free state protection or those claiming as business expense (can’t double dip), are eligible for a tax deduction if they purchase their own protection (capped at $200 or individuals and $300 for joint returns or returns with dependents). This deduction sunsets after the 2018 tax year.
Requires the Governor to develop a policy to protect personally identifiable information at DOR.
Mandates that no service may be procured for a cost if the same service is available to eligible persons for free under state or federal law.
Requires that any contract entered into by the Governor not exceed a term of 5 years and requires the Governor, upon expiration of any contract, to issue a report to the General Assembly with findings and recommendations concerning the ongoing risk to eligible persons. Based on the report, the Governor may extend services for an additional period of up to 5 years. The bill, therefore, authorizes the provision of services and protection for up to 10 years.
Requires any contract entered into by the Governor to be procured through MMO following standard procurement processes.
Requires the Governor to include the estimated costs of implementation in the executive budget and any agency charged with implementing any portion of the plan to account for its estimated expenses in their annual budget request.
III. Section 2-Creation of an Identity Theft Unit within the Department of Consumer Affairs
Establishes the Identity Theft Unit in order to educate the public regarding identity theft and fraud and provide identity theft and fraud resolution services to victims.
Provides that the Identity Theft Unit will work with law enforcement agencies, track statistical data relating to instances of identity theft and fraud, and will submit an annual report with recommended changes to law, including the State’s Consumer Protection Code, that would reduce instances of identity theft and fraud.
IV.Section 3-Creation of the Department of Information Security
Establishes the Chief Information Security Officer (CISO) of the State as the Director of the cabinet-level Department of Information Security, who shall serve for 4-year terms.
Requires the Department to develop statewide policies, standards, programs and services related to cyber security and information systems.
Authorizes the CISO to develop salaries and compensation plans for IT employees at the Department to be competitive with the private sector.
Requires all agencies to adopt and implement the policies established by the CISO and to provide all information requested of the CISO.
V. Section 4-Creation of the Technology Investment Council
Establishes a seven-member council consisting of the director of DSIT, the CISO, and appointees of the Governor, Pres. Pro Tempore of the Senate, Speaker of the House, Chairman of Senate Finance and Chairman of House Ways and Means.
Responsible for the publication of an annual statewide technology plan with recommendations regarding funding of technology for each fiscal year.
Responsible for overseeing the enforcement of active projects and developing minimum standards required for technology projects.
VI. Section 5-Creation of the Joint Information Security Oversight Committee

Establishes a nine-member joint oversight committee consisting of the CISO and appointees of the Governor (2), Pres. Pro Tempore of the Senate, Speaker of the House, Chairman of Senate Finance (2) and Chairman of House Ways and Means (2).
Requires the Committee to continually study state cyber security laws in order to make recommendations, through an annual report, for modifications to such laws.

Thanks to the Obama administration’s Department of Labor (usdol) we have some interesting statistsics on the mismangement of resources at the SC Department of Employment and Workforce (dew).

A private vendor approached dew recently and performed a sample audit for fraudulent claims. They found unemployment benefits going to incarcerated inmates, children, non matched ssn’s, and out of state residents. The firm then approached dew to sell their services for a full audit of all the books. Simple right? The cost of the audit would be pennies on the dollar for the potential savings. Not at dew. The answer was “we’re not interested”. Thanks but no thanks. This firm then offered another free sample audit. Dew’s response: not interested, we have our own internal auditors for fraud that’s got us ranked 4th in the country for fraudulent claims. Here’s a great way for SC to be at the top of another bad list. Take a look at the United States Department of Labor’ own assessment of SC dew: http://www.dol.gov/dol/maps/state/SC.htm

So $54 million in fraudulent claims in 2012, geeze, how can our employers keep footing the bill for this, it is their money remember! How can our employers afford to hire more workers when dew keeps spending their money on fraudulent claims?

2.6.13 Higher Education Committee
CFO of USC, Ed Walton
​Main Discussion: When looking at future projects at the university, two main costs are ​calculated.
​​Renewal Costs (which include Deferred Maintenance) and Improvement Costs. When an ​​old building is gutted, and renovated, it depletes the deferred maintenance costs and ​​​enables use for the next 40 years or lifetime of that building.
​Minor topic- considering charging for more parking on campus as a new source of income. Cutting spending? Colleges are always broke and always building.
2.6.13 LCI Sub Committee
Erica Von Nesson
​Removing staff people from DEW offices statewide based on a lower workload in some areas. ​Unemployment rate is down, and less staff is needed. Estimated 2 million dollars will be saved.
​90% of claims made online, therefore not as many staff needed in offices.
​follow ups on claimants are being done, but they are in the process of working on a more ​consistent way to ensure claimants are job searching. We’re awaiting a response as to why SC is the 4th worst in the US in fraudulent claims. Another bad list we are at the top!
2.7.13 LCI
Bob White & Jeff Griffen (representing contractors)
​ not in favor of raising bonding capacity without raising networth. ex. “can’t buy a house ​without ​equity”
S.75 (Real estate license bill)
​Proposed $12.50 increase in the real estate license fee to cover SLED and FBI background ​checks. However, the LLR regulates title 40, and have opposed fee increases.
​Recommendation: Instead of significantly increasing the number of real estate investigators, ​increase training for current real estate investigators instead of increasing numbers.
Music Therapy Licenses
​Concern: Too many people are practicing in the field that are not certified or trained. It is ​potentially harmful for psychiatric patients as well as nicu babies. Plan to research whether reimbursements are given from insurance agencies or if they would ​need a license to reimburse. I have a tremendous amount of respect for music therapy, I made the point that it is even Biblical, however, is it the role of government to license and regulate music therapy? Is the free market not capable of regulating this industry with consumers supporting good therapists? I think so.

just gave “words of wisdom” to Riverside Middle in Pendleton. Dr. Albert Schweitzer said “happy are those who will have sought and found ways to serve”.

I Appreciate Dr. Black, his staff, and students for a great visit.