Kevin Bryant

• Competitiveness Transparency
  Monday, July 11, 2011
  252 Edgar Brown Building
  State House Grounds
  3:30 PM – 5:00 PM
• Consumer Protection/Medical Liability
  Tuesday, July 12, 2011
  252 Edgar Brown Building
  State House Grounds
  9:30 AM – 11:30 AM
• Information Technology
  Tuesday, July 12, 2011
  252 Edgar Brown Building
  State House Grounds
  2:00 PM – 5:00 PM
• Consumer Driven Health Plans
  Monday, July 18, 2011
  252 Edgar Brown Building
  State House Grounds
  1:30 PM –  3:30 PM

This 3-D printer is the coolest thing I’ve ever seen.

Dear Friends,

As my first session in the House ends, I find myself with mixed emotions. I am pleased with many of the accomplishments we made in the House, however, there is still much that needs to be done.

This year the House worked hard to begin the process of restructuring government, restructuring per pupil funding, placing spending caps on state government and reforming the regulatory process. Unfortunately the Senate failed to move on these very important pieces of legislation.

Next session, we must address the State’s Retirement System and the issues with our current tax structure.

I am, however, pleased with the transparency the entire General Assembly brought to the State with roll call voting, the higher education transparency act and the voter ID bill. Our businesses should benefit from the $146 million we paid toward our unemployment debt and from the passage of tort reform.

Each week I receive a report from the Department of Commerce. Each week we see signs of improvement as new businesses open or relocate to our state. We are also seeing the expansion of many businesses in our state and in Anderson County.

I am also happy to report that after 5 years of decline, our state saw an increase in GDP. The growth rate in SC was 1.3% which is almost double the national average of .7%. The Professional & Business Service sector grew in SC at a rate of 4.2% compared to the nation’s 2.2%. This is a tough economy which makes these numbers even more impressive for the state of South Carolina.

At the close of this session, I would like to thank each of you for giving me the opportunity to serve as your representative. I will be busy during the next several months working in the community and serving the needs of my constituents. Please feel free to email me at ajthay@charter.net or annethayer@schouse.gov. My cell phone number is (864)940-1696. Please know I am here to serve you.

As you know, freedom is not free. With the upcoming 2012 elections, I would encourage each of you to educate yourselves on the issues and get involved.

I wish you all a safe and fun-filled summer.

Sincerely, Rep. Anne Thayer

The authors of Obamacare believe that a decision by you not to buy health insurance — in effect, sitting on your couch — is “interstate commerce” that Congress can regulate.

Those of us who question that authority have wondered: If the federal government can require you to buy a product — and decree that your refusal to do so is an act of “commerce” that it will punish — then what can’t Congress do? What are the limits, if any?

If there are no limits, then why did the writers of the Constitution enumerate some? And what will have happened to the America you grew up in?

It’s frightening enough that some courts have essentially ruled that there are no limits to the federal government’s power. Pray the Supreme Court stops the insanity.

But now it appears Americans themselves have gone totally soft and wholly ignorant of their rights as individuals.

Columnist George Will, incisively getting to the point in terms all of us can understand, posed this question to fellow panelists last Sunday on ABC-TV’s This Week : “Does Congress have the constitutional power to require obese people to sign up for Weight Watchers? If not, why not?”

If you know anything about the founding and structure of this country and its federal government, it’s a superbly inane question. But — and this should make your jaw drop, along with your heart — his fellow panelists either didn’t know, or seemed to think the answer was yes!

“I don’t know the answer to that,” admitted Richard Stengel of Time magazine.

“It’s open,” added Professor Michael Eric Dyson of Georgetown University. “If they decide that they will, they will have the power to do so.”

We presume the first “they” he was referring to was the Supreme Court.

Stengel argues that the government already “asks” us to pay taxes, register for the draft, get car insurance. Of course, as Will pointed out, the government isn’t asking these things; it’s mandating them. Moreover, you only have to buy car insurance if you choose to drive a car — which, as you’re supposed to be taught by age 16, is a privilege, not a right.

In addition, that’s a state matter.

These people really think it’s an open question as to whether Congress can order obese people into Weight Watchers? If so, what individual rights could they possibly believe remain?

How can you explain such thinking — on a respected network news show, and from a national magazine and renowned university? How can any American be so cavalier with another’s rights? And how widespread is this dangerously puerile thinking?

If the government has the power to force you to be responsible, as this law seeks to do, then why stop there? Why not outlaw single parenthood, considering all its costs to society? Why not ban cigarettes and alcohol and runny eggs and rare hamburgers? If we can be forced into Weight Watchers, what else should the government do to us for our own good and for the good of the whole?

That George Will’s question was met with shrugs and even taken seriously by others tells you just how teetering this country is.

Isn’t it clear by now that if we allow the government to expropriate the power to force us to buy something, and punish us for not doing it, there is little it could not do to us — and that plenty of otherwise rational Americans would go along with it?

For your children’s sake, pray this law is stopped, as well as the mentality that gave it birth.

You can file this under the heading of “what they do in government, has consequences for all of us.”

EAT MORE CHIKEN!!

CHICK – FIL- A

Chick-fil-A is an American success story. Founded by Georgian entrepreneur Truett Cathy in 1946, the family-owned chicken-sandwich chain is one of the country’s largest fast-food businesses. It employs some 50,000 workers across the country at
1,500 outlets in nearly 40 states and the District of Columbia . The company generates more than $2 billion in revenue and serves millions of happy customers with trademark Southern hospitality.

So, what’s the problem? Well, Chick-fil-A is run by devout Christians who believe in strong marriages, devoted families, and the highest standards of character for their workers. The restaurant chain’s official corporate ; mission is to “glorify God” and “enrich the lives of everyone we touch.” The company’s community-service initiatives, funded through its WinShape Foundation, support foster-care, scholarship, summer-camp, and marriage-enrichment programs. On Sunday, all Chick-fil-A stores close so workers can spend the day at worship and rest.

Over the past month, several progressive-activist blogs have waged an ugly war against Chick-fil-A. The company’s alleged atrocity: One of its independent outlets in Pennsylvania donated some sandwiches and brownies to a marriage seminar run by the Pennsylvania Family Institute, which happens to oppose same-sex marriage.

In the name of tolerance, the anti-Chick-fil-A hawks sneered at the company’s main product as “Jesus Chicken,” derided its no-Sunday-work policy, and attacked its operators as “anti-gay.” Petition drives on & gt; websites are demanding the company change and disavow their standards. Facebook users dutifully organized witch hunts against the company on college campuses.

Progressive groups are gloating over Chick-fil-A’s public-relations troubles. This is not because they care about winning hearts and minds over gay rights or marriage policy, but because their core objective is to marginalize political opponents and chill Christian philanthropy and activism. The fearsome “muscle flexing” is being done by the hysterical bullies trying to drive them off of college grounds and out of their neighborhoods in the name of “human rights.”

Please pass this on if you believe companies with religious principles have a right to freely conduct business in the U.S. In God We Trust.