Historical Newspapers of South Carolina

Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page. It is also available as plain text as well as XML.

VN K VOL. LXIV NO. 35 UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA, COLUMBIA. S.C. 29208 NOVEMBER 29, 1973 Senate / BY CARL BAAB Gamecock Staff Writer The controversial "no-smoking" bill, passed two weeks ago by the Student Senate, was vetoed Monday by Student Government President Rita McKinney. However, McKinney's veto of the "no-smoking" bill lasted only two day's as the student senate voted over whelmingly in Wednesday's meeting to override the veto. In a prepared statement delivered to the Wednesday senate meeting, McKinney announced her decision to veto the "no-smoking" legislation and the "bikes in dorms" bill. Senate President Leigh Leventis delivered McKinney's veto message, which said, "I found it necessary to veto this bill (because) it became obvious to me that very little pooling of constituencies had been done by the senators on this legislation." McKinney's message said her peferene for a rewritten version of Df the Poet' highlights local No-Smo the bill would be "allowing individual classes the right to decide if smoking will be allowed." Debate concerning the veto was marked by strong emotions. Those favoring to override the veto, lead by Sens. Jeffrey Greene, who authored the bill, Joe Huddleston, and Ed Ewing, challenged McKinney's veto on several counts. As part of McKinney's effort to get the senate to sustain her veto she quoted .results of the recent Gamecock plebiscite on the "no smoking" issue. "These results do not indicate overwhelming support of the bill, and obviously we do not know the majority's feelings," McKinney said. However, Greene challenged the findings of the plebiscite, saying, "'Ihe Gamecock's poll was lunscientific." Huddleston, who seemed to oppose the veto yet later voted to sustain it, said, "The question is not the rights of smokers or of non-smokers, the question is one of human health." theatre productions. See P ing Bl L Shortly after that statement, Hud dieston added, "We (the senate) don't want to be pushed around by Rita (McKinney) or the Gamecock." McKinney said in her veto message she felt the "non smoking" bill as passed did not include provisions for enforcement. However, one opposition spokesman, Ewing, told the senate if the senate were really serious about this matter, enforcement would be no problem. According to Ewing, enforcement could be easily accomplished if President Thomas F. Jones signed the bill. Ewing said, if Jones signs the bill, the university provost office would take it from there, and it would sim ply'become a rule that everyone would have to obey. McKinney's other veto, concerning the "bikes in dorm" bill, had more success in "he senate. The motion to override the veto was defeated. The reasnsn for the presidential veto 2ge 7 ives On >f this bill was also delivered to the enate by Leventis as he read MlcKinney's prepared statement. The statement read, "One statement n this bill completely destroys the ;trength and wishes of the student position concerning bicycles in dor rnitories. "I vetoed this bill because of the :lause giving approval to the housing lepartment ," McKinney said. Except for this single clause, McKinney said she favored the bill without reserv vation. The clause to which McKinney ob jected to was an amendment tacked onto the bill by one of its co-authors, Andy Sansbury. According to San sbury, the amendment allowing Housing some say in the storage of bikes in dorms was inserted into the bill as a concession to the housing Abot tishowever, McKinney said, See SENATE, Page3'