Palmetto Progressives Interview Series Part 5 of 5: Senator Marlon Kimpson
Kimpson has also been a big help to the organization that I am a part of, Lowcountry Students for Political Action. Besides supporting us at our events, he has advised us during the legislative session as we tried to get gun reform passed. I sat down with him to discuss a few topics including his eight hour filibuster of a proposed abortion ban this past May as well as the possibility of a new state constitution.
Without further ado, here is the interview:
You posted a picture last week with Bakari Sellers, Todd Rutherford, and Mark Sanford. It turned a lot of heads because it�s not very often that we see Democrats and Republicans interact outside of their chambers. What�s the context around that picture?
�Well we were at a dinner party hosted by Bakari and his wife. I had nothing to do with the invitation list and it was just a sort of gathering. I think Congressman Sanford does some stuff for CNN and I can only suspect that he and Bakari have a relationship through that as well as Bakari was a legislator during the time and they know each other. But there was no political agenda. It was a gathering of friends to celebrate their anniversary. It turned a lot of heads but there was really no story there.
Republicans and Democrats need to do more of sitting across the dinner table and talking. It doesn�t have to be about politics but I believe that relationships are key. You�re more likely to listen to them about a policy or in political discussion when there is a relationship there.�
Take me inside your thoughts when you were filibustering the abortion ban in May. Did you know going in that you might be up there for eight hours?
�Not at all. How that happened was, we had been discussing abortion for the last few days of session. The day before the filibuster, Senator Hutto inserted what he thought would be a poison pill to the bill. His amendment would have essentially outlawed abortion in South Carolina because that is what the conservative Republicans really wanted to do. But the underlying bill was more narrow than that. It only banned certain types of abortions generally given during the second trimester using an evasive procedure. Very few of those occur. So, if the bill in its original form had passed, it really would have been meaningless to be honest with you. When I say meaningless, there were very few abortions that the bill pertained to.�
 |
| Kimpson filibustering the proposed abortion ban |
Would you have filibustered that bill if it had gone up or would you have let it go?
�I can�t say that I would have filibustered but my plan was to block any bill that tinkered around with Roe v. Wade. The Supreme Court has been clear. We have already tinkered with Roe v. Wade in South Carolina and now you cannot have an abortion after 19 weeks. Roe v. Wade was longer than that. What we are doing is constantly eroding what the Supreme Court precedent is very clear about.
When Brad (Senator Hutto) offered the amendment, none of us thought that they would vote for it because who would�ve thought that it was an agenda item? The way the amendment was written, conceivably, we could be talking about banning birth control as well. It was so broad and so intrusive of women�s rights that none of us thought that they would vote for it. But they did.
I was very upset. If you check the record I was the only person to vote against that amendment. But many of us thought, �They aren�t going to pass this bill.�
The next day, Brad came to me and said, �Listen, I want you to go to the podium.� It was during lunch and somebody needed to be on the floor in case the bell rang. I was that designated person while the others ate. He said, �You sit there. You probably won�t be up there more than fifteen minutes because it�s not going to come up. But if it does, you talk until I can get there.�
Fifteen minutes turned into eight hours.�
What did you say to him when you saw him after that? What was your first statement to him?
�I was communicating with him the whole time I was standing there. But I knew that if I lost the floor, potentially they could call for the vote. So, I was not in the position to sit down at that time. I was not concerned with what Brad had to say. I was focused on the thousands of women who would have not their constitutional right available to them should they choose to have an abortion. I just did not believe that the government had any business telling a woman what to do with her body. So, I did it for the women and I never knew I would be up there that long.
I was prepared, by the way, to go about another hour. I could�ve gone another hour.�
You tweeted out in March that if a constitutional convention were to happen in South Carolina, that you would push for reparations for the descendants of slaves. How large would that reparation be and how many people would that effect?
�There�s a lot of talk about re-writing the state�s constitution. The last time it was written was in 1895 and the primary author at that time was Ben Pitchfork Tillman who professed his belief that African-Americans were not equal to whites. He was known for the torture of black people. The prevailing view was that blacks outnumbered whites in South Carolina, primarily due to slavery, and if they ever got the right to vote, they could elect a governor. So, they zapped all of the governor�s powers. That�s why now the governor is essentially reserved to signing bills that we pass. He or she has cabinet agencies that they control but legislatively, the power rests in the hands of the legislature.
Many of the conservative Republicans want to do away with that. They�ve held the governor�s seat for over a decade and they control the legislature. They wanted the governor to have more power so they could get more done without people like me filibustering bills.
The bottom line is, in that constitution that I referred to, there were many impediments to black people voting. But the system at the time was of disenfranchisement of black people. It wasn�t just politically. It was economic. If you had a farm, they took it from you. It was my view that I would be willing to have that conversation. And let�s not just address the surface change of giving more power to the governor, but let�s address it structurally because the oppression and disenfranchisement of black folk politically, economically, socially and educationally emanated in pertinent part by that document.
So what areas would I like to see addressed? Adequate funding for the corridor of shame schools that are predominantly attended by people of color. Substantially funding the only historically state supported school in South Carolina, South Carolina State. Getting procurement opportunities for black-owned businesses that continue to be left out of the process in a meaningful way right here in Charleston. Those are some of the things that I would like a re-write and I would be open to having that discussion. I thought it was important to raise the issue and I am serious about reparations.�
You mentioned that the primary motivation for re-writing the state�s constitution would be to give the governor more power. Where do you stand on that?
�I would be open to that. You�ve had good governors who, if they had more power, could have moved South Carolina forward. Dick Riley, for example, he got some good things done but he probably would have gotten a lot more done had he had the powers granted to him that currently don�t exist. But the pendulum swings.�
What is your message to young people (18-24) who are not registered to vote, don�t understand the importance of voting and they don�t care about politics? Why should they register and vote?
�I would not conclude that they don�t care. I know your question was about the ones that don�t care. You care, obviously. But I would hope that your group and what we have seen nationally by the students in Parkland and other places that have galvanized around an issue that is important. I would add economic inequality to that list of issues. That was the central theme of Occupy Wall Street. I would add that to your agenda. There is an increasing inequity in corporate America where the rich continue to get richer and the poor get poorer.
I�m optimistic that your group and people like you are forcing us to do something. As you know, many people will just ignore you. Y�all have a powerful voice and if you can galvanize, the change will happen.�
Comments
Post a Comment