Category Archives: Legislature

Sen. Glenn McConnell takes a bullet for SC, accepts the useless, nothing job of being Gov Lite

As I said earlier today, the only way Glenn McConnell would give up power to be lieutenant governor would be if he felt that his personal honor as a gentleman was at stake. And it appears that that is just what has happened:

Stepping into the role is McConnell, who is giving up one of the most powerful positions in all of state government for a mostly ceremonial role whose only duties are to preside over the Senate and run the state Office on Aging.

Speaking with reporters after a closed-door meeting in his State House office, McConnell said becoming lieutenant governor is “a personal sacrifice” but his reading of the state constitution makes it clear that the Senate President Pro Tem has a duty to become lieutanant governor when the post is permanently vacated.

“After much thought, prayer and discussion, I have decided that I have a moral obligation to my oath of office and to the constitution of this state,” McConnell said in a prepared statement. “It is an obligation that compels me to do the right thing no matter how difficult it may be to me personally.”

McConnell said he expects be sworn in on Tuesday. McConnell would not say who his preference was to replace him as the leader of the Senate, and he did not rule out the possibility of running for his state Senate seat again in four years.

Wow. What a weird, back-handed way for the mighty to fall.

This is the one really significant thing to have happened in all of this. Whether Ken Ard had continued to be lieutenant governor or not was of no consequence (which is why you never caught me paying much attention to the matter one way or the other). It doesn’t matter who the Gov Lite is, unless the governor dies or leaves office suddenly. But the most powerful man in the Senate, who has done more than anyone else to set the course for the General Assembly for the last couple of decades, has just walked away from power (for now).

That’s really something.

Whatever happens next, I must say — my hat’s off to you, senator.

Fall from grace says something about being Ken Ard, but almost nothing about being Republican

The State tried this morning to foreshadow the Ard resignation with two stories. One speculated on how Glenn McConnell will dodge the unthinkable fate of being demoted to the useless, meaningless job of lieutenant governor. The other dealt with the phenomenon we’ve seen plenty of over the last couple of years — the state Democratic Party’s Sisyphean efforts to somehow turn recent scandals to its advantage. An excerpt from the second one:

An agriculture commissioner indicted for cockfighting. A state treasurer indicted for cocaine use. A married governor caught lying about an international affair. A lieutenant governor spending campaign contributions on iPads. A state House member indicted on tax-evasion charges. Another state House member arrested on harassment charges.

What do all of those politicians have in common? They are all SC Republicans…

A brief comment on that (which I had on my mind before the Ard development): I’ve heard that litany over and over from SC Dems over the last couple of years, and it hasn’t gotten traction yet. Perhaps this latest development will give it a boost, but probably not. Nor should it.

There’s a simple reason why so many scandals affect Republicans: Most state officeholders are Republicans. If the Democrats dominated the way the Repubs do, most scandals would involved Democrats. There is nothing inherent in being a Republican that makes a person more likely to be a crook (or whatever), and it’s disingenuous of Democrats to pretend that there is.

Of course, they’re counting on the way voters have been fooled into thinking about politics to help them. Far too many people today believe what the parties, interest groups and tell them — that something that happens involving one member of a party somehow reflects on all member of that party. This is an absurd proposition, but like sleep-teaching in Brave New World, it has been repeated so often — with no competing views being heard — that most people accept it implicitly.

There is only one sense in which there might be an actual cause-and-effect relationship between being Republican in SC and being a the sort who would do something unsavory: People who are attracted to politics for the wrong reasons are more likely to pick the dominant party, to ease their path into office. People who choose the hapless, minority party are generally True Believers and less likely to be hustlers. Right now the Republicans are the dominant party. To suggest that Democrats would be more virtuous if they had all the power strains belief.

But  my ultimate point is this: Each person who behaves badly in office does so in his own way, and for his own reasons — not as a logical, direct result of his party affiliation. And its silly to pretend otherwise.

Ken Ard to resign; Alan Wilson to hold presser

Lt. Gov. Ken Ard says he’s resigning this morning. His statement:

“I want to thank the great people of South Carolina for the incredible opportunity to serve as their Lieutenant Governor. It truly has been an honor and an experience I will never forget. The love and support you have shown my entire family has been humbling and something I will always remember.

“I also want to thank my family, especially my wife, Tammy, and my three children, Jesse, Mason, and Libby. You have lived this experience with me. There were challenges and setbacks, but you were steadfast in your support and were there for me at every turn.

“To those who volunteered and worked on our campaign, thank you from the bottom of my heart. You were always there and never expected anything in return.

“To my staff, I have nothing but praise. Your professionalism and work ethic have been exemplary from day one. You have remained focused on carrying out the duties of our office in spite of other distractions.

“To all of the above and more, I owe a great apology. During my campaign, it was my responsibility to make sure things were done correctly. I did not do that. There are no excuses nor is there need to share blame. It is my fault that the events of the past year have taken place.

“I regret the distraction this has caused for the people of this state, my family, my staff, and other elected officials in South Carolina. It is because of these mistakes that I must take full ownership and resign from the Office of Lieutenant Governor. Once again, I am deeply sorry and take full responsibility for the entire situation.”

Meanwhile, there’s this as well:

State Attorney General Alan Wilson will hold a 1 p.m. news conference today at the State House along with State Law Enforcement Division Chief Mark Keel.

The media event follows the announcement this morning from embattled Lt. Gov. Ken Ard’s office that he will step down from his second-in-command post in the Senate.

Ard, a Florence Republican, is the focus of a state Grand Jury investigation related to his spending of campaign cash.

The assumption is being made (and perhaps confirmed off the record; I don’t know) that the AG’s presser deals with Ard. Maybe it does; maybe it doesn’t. Could be something else. We’ll see.

The rush begins for Jim Harrison’s seat

Tyler Jones brings our attention to the above placeholder page indicating Joe McCulloch’s jumping into the melee to replace Rep. Jim Harrison.

Boyd Summers, who ran against Jim several years ago (a video clip from his endorsement interview has the distinction of being one of the first two — tied with Harrison’s — I ever put up on a blog), is almost certain to get into it. If I see him at Rotary today, I’ll try to confirm.

According to The State, we might see the following as well:

Mercifully, I had forgotten this incident

Talking to Kara Gormley Meador yesterday, I momentarily drew a blank when she mentioned her run-in with John Graham Altman some years ago. She reminded me of the details, which made me go, “Oh, yeah.” Here’s a summary of the incident:

Excerpts from the exchange between WIS-TV reporter Kara Gormley and Rep. John Graham Altman, R-Charleston, over a S.C. House committee’s vote to make cockfighting a felony while tabling a bill that would toughen criminal domestic violence laws

Gormley: “Does that show that we are valuing a gamecock’s life over a woman’s life?”

Altman: “You’re really not very bright, and I realize you are not accustomed to this, but I’m accustomed to reporters having a better sense of depth of things, and your asking this question to me would indicate you can’t understand the answer. To ask the question is to demonstrate an enormous amount of ignorance. I’m not trying to be rude or hostile, I’m telling you.”

Gormley: “It’s rude when you tell someone they are not very bright.”

Altman: “You’re not very bright, and you’ll just have to live with that.”

So basically, when she talks about the lack of civility in politics, she’s speaking from personal experience.

Kara should go ahead and run for SOMETHING

She said that most of her original desire to run arose from a wish to raise the overall tone of politics. Only THIS much had to do with her personal encounters as a TV reporter with Jake Knotts.

As previously mentioned, I met Kara Gormley Meador over at Starbucks for coffee today, to talk about whether she is going to run for the state senate.

As you’ll recall, Ms. Meador had intended to oppose Jake Knotts in the GOP primary in District 23, but learned that she had been misinformed by officials who told her that she lived in that district, under the new lines. She thought she had done due diligence — she had even requested a new voter registration card, so she could have it in writing — but what she was told was wrong. Under the reapportionment, she will be in District 18, currently occupied by Ronnie Cromer.

So will she run against Sen. Cromer? She hasn’t decided. She said she even thought that maybe she would make up her mind while talking to me. I don’t know whether the talk with me helped, but in the end, for what it’s worth, I told her she should run — for something.

I say that not to endorse her over Mr. Cromer or anyone else. I just think she is a positive, energetic, knowledgeable young person who would be a positive force in our General Assembly.

Does that mean that I agree with her on everything? Hardly. As she wrote on this blog recently:

I’d like to try and propagate real individual income tax relief.

I’d like to dismantle or revamp the House and Senate ethics committee. As they stand, neither body has any teeth to penalize legislators when they act in an unethical or illegal manner.

I am for complete transparency.

I don’t believe our legislators should offer certain companies back room deals that include huge incentives and tax breaks to try and lure them to our state, while folks who have been doing business here for years get nothing.

I have a lot of thoughts when it comes to education. We need to analyze administrative costs and see where we can scale back or consolidate and make sure we pay our teachers a fair wage.

I believe in school choice to include the creation of more charter schools; and to allow children in rural public schools to have the same choices offered to students in other districts in their counties. For example: students in Batesburg-Leesville have only one elementary school in the district, but students in Lexington One have the chance to attend any of the districts elementary school if there is availability. I think a student should be able to cross district lines– especially if they are located in the same county.
(there’s a lot more to this– if you are interested I’d be happy to tell you more)

We need to cap government growth.

I feel that across the board cuts are a cop out. As a legislator in times like these, you need to make some tough cuts in order to pay the bills. I don’t use credit cards to pay for things I can’t afford. I don’t believe our legislators should spend money that way.
One way we could save money is by shortening the legislative session.

I also believe legislators should have term limits.

Those of you who know me can see some significant disconnects with my own positions on issues. For instance, as an ardent believer in representative democracy, I would neither unduly limit the voters’ ability to elect whom they like (term limits) nor use a mathematical formula to supersede the representative’s powers to write a budget (“cap government growth”).

Further, I see inconsistencies in her vision. Today, she indicated that she believed enough waste could be found in state spending to both fully fund the essential functions of state government (which she correctly describes as currently underfunded) and return enough money to taxpayers to stimulate our economy.

In a state as tax-averse as this one, there’s just not enough money there to have your cake and eat it, too, barring a loaves-and-fishes miracle. (OK, enough with the clashing metaphors.)

But she’s smart, she’s energetic, and she seems to have no axes to grind. I think she’d quickly see that you can’t do it all, and make realistic assessments of what can and should be done. Her disgust with the pointless conflicts of modern politics, and the way they militate against a better future for South Carolina’s people.

She worries about spending time away from her kids, but she wants a better South Carolina for them. And she made a point that I particularly appreciated. She said that when she wants a better future for her kids, she actually means that she wants a better one for all of the state’s kids — unlike so many other who say that. I nodded at that, because it took me way too long to realize years ago that when Mark Sanford wanted a South Carolina in which his sons could stay and have a bright future, he wasn’t referring to the boys as a microcosm — he literally meant that he wanted a better future for his sons, period. That’s the libertarian way.

Kara says she knows she sounds like a Ms. Smith Goes to Columbia, and she does. But I like that.

While she feels the pull of her children, “God has given me one life,” and “I’m extremely driven, and I love people.” She was bowled over by the enthusiastic response she got on Facebook that one day that people thought she was opposing Knotts. She told me that some of the folks she heard from were people she had reported on over the years, some of them crime victims (a particular interest for her) who appreciated having their stories told.

She likes the idea of being a voice for those who think they have no voices. “Maybe I should get in to prove to somebody that they could get in, too.”

There’s one thing that she and I agree on, based on our years of observing politics. In the end, character is everything — far more important than ideology or specific policy proposals. My impression is that Kara has the character to be a positive force in politics, whatever her current notions of specific policy proposals.

So I’d like to see her run — for something.

Throughout the interview, I could see the light of enthusiasm in her eyes as she spoke of the possibility of making a difference.

That’s not ALL that’s wrong with that picture, ladies

When I saw the headline, “What’s wrong with this picture?” and noticed that it was from the “Southeastern Institute f…,” I didn’t have to open the email, or even see the picture, to know what the answer was.

When you see the full name of the Institute, you won’t wonder, either. Nor will you wonder if you look at the picture in question (at right). But knowing full well the point, I watched the video anyway, and was rewarded by seeing my old colleague Andy Haworth, who shot video for thestate.com when I was there (what does it say that the one person I knew in the video was the one male, eh?).

But ultimately, we get to the place where we knew we were going — the fact that there are no women in the S.C. Senate. And I’m totally with the makers of the video that this is weird, not to mention not good.

The problem is when you talk about what to do about it. My problem is with what one young woman says at the end: “When they do find the courage to run, make sure you vote for them.”

No can do. Not if you put it that way. I just can’t vote for anyone because of gender or race. Or political party, for that matter. Either someone is the better candidate (such as when Inez Tenenbaum was running for superintendent of education — or for the U.S. Senate) or not (such as when Nikki Haley was the only woman running for governor).

You vote for the woman in the first instance, and not in the second. And if you do anything else, you shouldn’t be voting. The Senate can be all male, or all female — I’m not going to suspend judgment to address the imbalance, either way. Let the best woman win, but otherwise not.

Besides, if you ask me what’s wrong with the SC Senate, gender wouldn’t be the first concern I’d mention. If you’d give me a Senate, and a House, that would truly reform our government and our tax system and institute policies that would make our state healthier, wealthier and wiser, I wouldn’t care if they were all little green hermaphrodites from Mars. Or Venus, if you prefer.

But when you start picking them based upon demographics, or party as Harvey Peeler would have it, then you’re going down that Nikki Haley road.

Gee, Harvey — let the guy get started, why don’t you?

Wow. South Carolina creeps a little closer to Washington-style partisanship every day. Here’s one step in that direction…

Earlier today, I received a release saying that Thomas McElveen, a Sumter attorney and son of Sumter Mayor Joe McElveen, was running for the state Senate seat to be vacated by Phil Leventis. The release was a PDF file that won’t let me copy text (I hate PDFs!), but here’s a picture of a portion of the release…

Then, less than two hours after that release came out, I received this from Senate Majority Leader Harvey Peeler, under the headline, “Senate Majority Leader Harvey Peeler on Democrat Thomas McElveen’s Entry into Senate District 35 Race:”

Columbia, SC – February 21, 2012 – South Carolina Senate Majority Leader Harvey Peeler today issued the following statement on Democrat Thomas McElveen’s entrance into the race for state Senate District 35:

“Folks in Sumter are ready for change,” Peeler said. “This will be a prime opportunity for the Senate Republican Caucus to add to its growing majority. Democrats in the Senate still have the numbers they need to impede conservative reforms that people across South Carolina have spoken loud and clear on, and that’s something we need to change. Time and time again, Senator Phil Leventis has fought against the conservative agenda, and has led the effort to make sure the Senate is where conservative ideas go to die. After 33 years, we have the opportunity to wrestle away control of District 35 from liberal trial lawyers, and our Caucus will do everything necessary to make it happen.”

###

Yeah, Harvey, I understand why you want more Republicans in the Legislature, but why should the people of this Sumter district care about whom you, a resident of Cherokee County, want them to elect to represent them?

It would be one thing if you were offering them some insights into Mr. McElveen’s suitability, and suggesting another, specific person whom you believe, for specific reasons, would be a better choice for them. That might be useful. But you don’t even bother for a second to take stock of Mr. McElveen and his qualifications, or lack thereof, for this office, much less demonstrate that there exists a better candidate. No, you just instruct them that any Republican would be better than this guy, just because he has a D after his name.

Which is just beyond offensive.

How about next time you want to butt into somebody else’s district, you have something useful to offer? Or at the very least, let a guy begin his campaign and say something you object to before you attack him.

Sheesh…

Will the Budget & Control Board really go away?

It would be nice to think so. Senate Republicans are rightly touting that possibility:

Columbia, SC – February 16, 2012 – The South Carolina Senate today passed the most significant piece of restructuring legislation in the past two decades, passing a bill that completely eliminates the state Budget and Control Board.

The new bill puts most of the functions of the Board under a new, Cabinet-level Department of Administration, and devolves the rest of the Board’s functions elsewhere. The end result is a more efficient, accountable structure for the state’s administrative functions, rather than the current system of having a five-member board control those functions. The bill had been a top priority for Gov. Nikki Haley, and now goes back to the House for approval.

“There’s an old saying that when everybody is in charge, no one is in charge, and that’s been true for too long with too much of state government,” said Senate Majority Leader Harvey Peeler. “This bill will let the people of South Carolina hold their leaders accountable for the results of state government.”

The bill’s two primary Republican sponsors, Senators Tom Davis and Shane Massey, issued the following statements:

“This bill has been a long time coming, and it’s gratifying to now see it so close to the finish line,” Davis said. “Our government has been plagued by an unaccountable structure that breeds inefficiencies. Today, we took a significant step toward correcting that.”

“This bill strikes a good balance between giving the executive branch control and accountability over administrative functions, while requiring the legislature to perform critical oversight,” Massey said. “This bill is all about a better, more efficient government that allows voters to hold elected officials accountable.”

Of course, since it’s a party document, it conveniently ignores that the most insistent advocate of replacing the Board with a department of administration in recent years has been Democrat Vincent Sheheen.

Oh, well. It’s not like the idea was anyone’s personal property. The release says, “The bill had been a top priority for Gov. Nikki Haley.” Well, yeah. And Mark Sanford. And The State newspaper, since at least the point when I started writing about it in 1991. And Carroll Campbell. And anyone who respects the American concept of separation of powers, which the Board’s existence blatantly violates.

Jake’s annual skate party coming up

Maybe Kara’s not running against him, but Katrina Shealy is (again). Whoever runs, they won’t catch Jake Knotts napping. His particular brand of constituent service continues apace. It’s time for his annual skate party:

Sen. Jake Knotts to host 18th annual honor roll skate party

Lexington, SC – February 15, 2012 – Senator Jake Knotts today announced that his annual honor roll skate party will be held this Saturday (February 18, 2012).

An 18-year tradition in Senate District 23, Sen. Knotts sponsors a skate party each year for 23 elementary schools in Lexington School Districts 1-4.

Senator Knotts has made recognizing and rewarding academic excellence a tradition for 18 years in his Senate district. For students making the academic honor roll for this nine weeks, they’ll receive a personal skate party invitation from the Senator. It’s become something that students look forward to from the beginning of the school year – and such a tradition that many parents now remember their attendance at the skate party.

Between 300 and 400 students attend each year. Senator Knotts coordinates student and parent skate races, awarding prizes to winners and refreshments to all honorees.

The party takes place Saturday, February 18, 2012, from 9:00 am- noon, at Three Fountains Skating Rink, 2724 Emanuel Church Road in Lexington County.

Jake’s always taken a lot of pride in his skate party. And hey, it doesn’t hurt at the ballot box.

Kara says she’s out for good, may run in Dist. 18

This just came in from Kara Gormley Meador, as a comment on the previous post about her:

Good morning folks. I checked with an attorney who is working on the redistricting suit. It sounds as if I am out of 23 for good. The suit underway is based on race. The attorney told me that gerrymandering is not illegal, unless there is a racial component. It is another sad truth about our elected officials; they can draw the lines in a way that helps keep them in office. Just one more reason I am for term limits for our legislators. I still have some decisions to make, like whether or not to run in District 18. It’s something that I am strongly considering.

If she runs in 18, that would mean opposing Ronnie Cromer. I can’t offer much of a read on her chances. She could have been a real threat to Jake Knotts, I think. Anyone have a read on 18?

And she’s right — the courts have long held that incumbency protection is allowed in redistricting. No, that doesn’t seem right, but that’s what the courts have said.

Kara Gormley Meador running against Jake Knotts. No, wait, she’s not…

Speaking of Republican women and media…

There was a flurry of excitement earlier in the day when word was going around that Kara Gormley Meador, formerly of WIS, was preparing to run for the Senate against Jake Knotts. As Jack Kuenzie reported:

COLUMBIA, SC (WIS) – The race for state Senate District 23 was thrown a major curveball Thursday with the announcement from a former WIS anchor and reporter that she intends to enter the race.

Kara Gormley Meador enters an already crowded field of contenders in the form of former Lexington County GOP chair Katrina Shealy and incumbent Sen. Jake Knotts.

Meador says she had been considering the decision for a while and planned on rolling out her campaign on March 1, but rumors began to spread that she was looking to make a run at the  seat….

And when I say excitement, I mean excitement. Check this sampling of comments from her Facebook page:

  • I am SO PuMpEd! You go Kara! I know you’re gonna win this! I’m your biggest fan!
  • Iam in tears…tears of joy. Kara I am so proud of you words in this status could never express it. I have already put you on a prayer list. As I shared with Jim Matthews when he ran: Proverbs 29:2, “When the righteous increase(rule in other versions), the people rejoice, But when a wicked man rules, people groan.” I love you!
  • YES!!! YesYesYesYesYesYES!!!! We’re buying property in Lexington County JUST so we can VOTE! GO KARA!!!!

See what I mean? Mitt Romney would kill for a tenth of that enthusiasm for his candidacy. That sort of enthusiasm makes the excitement about Obama in 2008 look like tepid dislike. In fact, I don’t think I’ve ever run across that much enthusiasm for anybody. If anyone hurled it at me, I think I’d back away in fright. Fortunately, that’s not likely.

In any case, it was all for naught, as this was reported later in the day by a certain rival news organization:

The Lexington Election Commission says the recent redrawing of state Senate districts means former WIS anchor Kara Gormley Meador can not run for the state Senate seat held by Jake Knotts.

Instead, Meador will be in district 18, held by Sen. Ronnie Cromer. That race is already crowded, with former Lexington County Republican party chairman Rich Bolen saying he plans to run.

Filing for state Senate seats does not open until March…

So I guess Jake has escaped having a tidal wave of enthusiasm wash over him…

Here’s a new wrinkle in campaigning for non-elective office in SC

Have you ever seen a public, media campaign in SC for an appointive office? Neither have I. But we just had one.

An ex-colleague (as in, someone else who used to work at the newspaper) brought this to my attention. It came to him yesterday as a solicitation e-mail. It featured that “View Full Image or Donate Now” feature that I’ve seen on a number of GOP solicitations recently. When you carefully avoid the “Donate Now” and click on “View Full Image,” you go to this site, where you read:

Conservative women, we need your help in Columbia tomorrow.

Democratic Senators are attempting to stop the nomination of a strong, conservative woman to lead an important state agency.

Qualified women are too often discouraged from seeking public office by the entrenched “good old boy” interests. You can read more about this issue an op-ed by our founder, Karen Floyd, that was published in The State newspaper today. Scroll down for the complete text of Karen’s piece.

Don’t let it happen this time – Let’s stand with Catherine Templeton during her Senate screening hearing tomorrow.

If you care about making sure qualified women are encouraged to serve, STAND WITH US!

Set aside where Republican appeals to feminist sensibilities have gotten us in the past, and focus on what an unusual approach this is. I hadn’t seen it before, but perhaps I just wasn’t paying attention.

Anyway, whether this helped or not, those behind it got their way today:

A Senate committee approved the nominee to run South Carolina’s environment and health agency at a hearing today.

Catherine Templeton will be the next Department of Health and Environmental Control commissioner following the 13-0 vote, pending final approval by the Senate next week.

Democratic senators Brad Hutto, Joel Lourie and Clementa Pinckney abstained, raising questions about her experience…

Forget Ferris Bueller. Zais was absent 29 days

Edward R. Rooney would forget Ferris and his measly nine absences if he had Supt. Mick Zais in his school, according to this report over at Palmetto Public Record:

South Carolina Superintendent of Education Mick Zais took twice as much personal time during 2011 as the average state employee is allowed, according to an exclusive look at the schools chief’s schedule.
Zais’ personal calendar, which was made available to Sen. Phil Leventis (D-Sumter) through an open records request in November and later obtained by Palmetto Public Record, shows that Zais took 234 hours of personal time (the equivalent of 29 full workdays) between Jan. 12 and Nov. 17, when the schedule was turned over to Leventis. That number doesn’t include medical leave, of which Zais took the equivalent of six workdays during the same period. The schedule also doesn’t include the final five weeks of 2011, when Zais may have taken even more personal time for the Christmas holidays.

In sharp contrast to Zais’ considerable number of absences, a state employee with 10 or fewer years of experience is allowed 15 days of personal leave per year — about half of what Zais took during the 44 weeks covered in his schedule.

Education Department spokesman Jay Ragley said the state superintendent, as a constitutional officer, is held to a different standard than regular employees. “Because of their unique status in state government, constitutional officers are presumed to be on duty 24 hours a day, 7 days a week and are not allotted sick days or annual leave time as standard state employees accrue,” he said…

Democrats are making a big thing of this. I got this link from an advisory from Phil Bailey with the Senate Dems (under the headline, “Senators to Discuss Zais’ Truancy”), telling me that Sens. Leventis and Brad Hutto are having a press conference to talk about it at 3 today at the State House. No, I don’t know why Sen. Leventis didn’t bring it up in November, when he got the info.

Nikki has a budget idea… no, the other Nikki

Phil Bailey (Senate Democrats, Pub Politics) sent out this release yesterday, and I’m just getting to it:

Legislation to Transform State Budget Process Introduced

Columbia, SC – Lexington State Senator Nikki Setzler has introduced legislation to transform the state budget process and ensure the public knows how all dollars collected from South Carolina taxpayers by state government are spent.

Senator Setzler’s legislation targets so-called ‘other funds’ and treats money from those accounts like other state dollars in the budget. The legislation, introduced by Setzler on Tuesday, takes spending authority for billions of dollars held in special accounts away from a single government official and rightfully places it with lawmakers.

Currently, the state budget is divided into three types of funds: general funds, federal funds and other funds. General funds are tax dollars collected by the state. Federal funds are dollars from Washington that the state does not control. And ‘other funds’ are the dollars that are not general or federal fund dollars, primarily generated from fees charged to those who use the agency’s services.

Over the past 10 years, with lessening state tax revenues, state agencies have grown more reliant on ‘other funds’.  For example, one agency in 2000 spent $35 million in general funds and $4.0 million in other funds.  By 2009, that agency spent $29 million in general funds and $20 million in other funds.

Until two years ago, the Legislature had little to no oversight over “other funds” in state government. For years, a single government official would grant state agencies authority to spend those funds. The Joint Other Funds Oversight Committee was formed to review these funds and agencies’ request to spend these dollars. Setzler’s legislation would permanently transform the budget process.

Setzler said serving on this committee has been a wake-up call. “The taxpayers of South Carolina were being left in the dark. The budget process was nowhere near as transparent as it should be,” said Setzler.

The legislation introduced by Setzler and co-sponsored by Republicans and Democrats directs all ‘other funds’  to be deposited in the state’s General Fund and appropriated by the General Assembly.

“This makes the budget more transparent and state agencies more accountable to the taxpayers. This is common sense reform and I’m happy to have the bi-partisan support of my colleagues in the Senate,” said Setzler.

###

Sounds intriguing. I’d like to know more — what  sorts of fees we’re talking about, how and why they came into being — before I could make up my mind about it. I’ve asked Phil for some examples.

Mr. Speaker, that’s not tax reform. That’s legislative business as usual in South Carolina…

SC House Speaker Bobby Harrell addresses the Columbia Rotary Club Monday. At far left is Joel Sawyer, who introduced him. It struck me as ironic for Mark Sanford's former press secretary to introduce the former governor's nemesis.

Trying to remember how long I’ve been pushing for comprehensive tax reform in South Carolina. It’s at least two decades. Maybe a year or two past that.

The eerie thing about it is that almost every politician I’ve talked to during that period, especially those running for office, have earnestly assured me that they’re all for it. But somehow, it never happens.

Many, many committees and blue-ribbon panels have been set to coming up with a plan that will be rational, equitable, and adequate to meeting the state’s revenue needs. And all have either wandered off into a swamp somewhere, never to be heard from, or have filed plans that have promptly been dumped in the trash. And whenever enough of a hue and cry arises — such as the one from business leaders over the execrable Act 388 — lawmakers have sworn to deal with it, and appointed another panel to study the matter yet again, etc.

Speaker Bobby Harrell has apparently decided to end the farce by abandoning the concept of comprehensive tax reform altogether.

That’s the gist of what he told us at Rotary yesterday.

He said that when you try to get rid of all the irrational bits of our tax code — such as the $300 ceiling on the automobile sales tax, or the tangle of other exemptions that lead us to exempt more in sales tax than is actually paid — then everybody comes out of the woodwork and opposes you, and you fail.

So he proposes to pass bits and pieces of reform. On the grounds that that’s doable.

Which means, in South Carolina, business as usual. Because that’s what our lawmakers always do — pass a new law affecting some small piece (or for that matter, large piece) of our overall tax system, with little regard for how it affects other parts. So we get, for instance, multiple “reforms” that essentially remove the burden of supporting public school operations entirely from the backs of homeowners (that is to say, on the home that they live in), which means that businesses — including owners of rental property — are forced to pay much more in property taxes to make up the difference.

At least on the most recent such massive shift, some of the burden was put on the sales tax — which is now too high, really, especially considering that we don’t tax everything, or even close to everything, meaning that the things we do tax are taxes disproportionately. Which is not fair; nor is it a sustainable way to finance government.

So here’s what’s going to happen, based on knowing the guys who have been running the General Assembly (and especially the House) since I’ve been watching them (and no, Doug, term limits are not the answer, because if anything newer members have a greater propensity to do this, in my experience — largely because of their greater ignorance of the effects of what they do)…

We’ll see bills to cut more taxes, narrowly defined aimed at whichever categories of taxpayers are hollering the loudest at a given moment. And most likely, nothing will be done elsewhere in the tax code to offset that hole in the general fund. Or if something is done, it won’t be sustainable, and/or will create a new injustice that will later be addressed by more piecemeal “reform.”

What should happen instead? The following:

  1. Lawmakers should figure out, from scratch, what state government needs to do (build roads, run schools, enforce laws, keep air and water clean, etc.).
  2. They should then determine what it will cost to do those things.
  3. They should devise a tax system for raising that amount that is rational, fair, and sustainable. One that places no more restriction on economic activity than absolutely necessary, with the burden spread as widely as possible, and yet raises the needed amount reliably, with a minimum of peaks and valleys.

That’s what should happen. It is lawmakers’ duty to make those things happen. Because snipping here and putting on a patch there has never worked.

How many times have I written that now? I don’t know. Lots and lots…

SC Tweet of the Day, from Harvey Peeler

As you know, the best Tweeter in the SC House is Nathan Ballentine. His counterpart in the Senate is Harvey Peeler. And while it might be a stretch to call anything coming out of our General Assembly avant garde, Harvey’s Tweets at least strain at the bounds of the usual prosaic expressions one expects from a Republican legislative leader.

Kudos to him for this offering this morning:

I think the saying “at the end of the day” has reached the end of the day !

Thank you, senator, for reminding us that we no longer have the perpetrator of that particular verbal tic to kick around any more!

And now, it’s a great day in South Carolina!

Arts advocates gearing up to fight again

Based on the emails I get, one of the best-organized lobbies in South Carolina is the one that promotes the arts. Of course, they need to be if their favored programs are to survive, since it appears that each year that Nikki Haley is governor is going to be a battle for existence for the state Arts Commission and related recipients of state funding.

Following up on the governor’s State of the State address last night (which I missed — anyone have anything to share about that?), they’ve sent out the following release. There will be many more, of last year is any guide:

STATE ARTS FUNDING:

Governor Nikki Haley has now given her State of the State Address and presented her Executive Budget. She has once again recommended NO state appropriations for the South Carolina Arts Commission. However, the agency will continue to move through the budget process which is now in the S.C. House.

Sub-committees of the House Ways & Means (HWM) Committee – the budget writing committee – are holding budget hearings from the various agencies and will later make recommendations for state agency funding in their own version of the state budget. The Arts Commission is scheduled for a budget hearing on Thursday afternoon, January 26th. Their HWM sub-committee consists of:

Rep. Chip Limehouse (Charleston, Berkeley) 803-7342977 ChipLimehouse@schouse.gov

Rep. Joe Neal (Richland, Sumter) 803-734-2804 JoeNeal@schouse.gov

Rep. B.R. Skelton (Pickens) 803-734-3036 BRSkelton@schouse.gov

Rep. Garry Smith (Greenville) 803-734-3141 GarrySmith@schouse.gov

Arts supporters should continue to thank their legislators for their past support and request that they continue to support state funding for the Arts Commission – especially if your Representative serves on the above Subcommittee. Don’t forget that many legislators have their own web site, Facebook pages and Twitter accounts. The state’s web site has been redesigned making it easier to locate and contact your legislator, follow the House and Senate meeting calendars and legislation at: www.scstatehouse.gov

ARTS EDUCATION FUNDING:

There is some GOOD news regarding arts education funding within the Governor’s Executive Budget. Governor Haley has reinstated approximately $1.2 million for the Arts Curricula Innovation Grants Program within the Department of Education’s budget, which Superintendent Mick Zais recommended for elimination.

Arts advocates should thank the Governor for her support of these critical funds that are not only used for initiatives that support innovative arts education programs that improve student achievement, but provide quality professional development for arts and classroom teachers.

Governor Nikki Haley

Office of the Governor 1205 Pendleton Street

Columbia, SC 29201

Ph: 803-734-2100

Fx: 803-734-5167

www.Facebook.com/NikkiHaley

www.Twitter.com/scgovoffice

www.governor.sc.gov

Email at:  www.governor.sc.gov/Pages/sendMessage.aspx

SCAA’s ARTS ADVOCACY DAY is Tuesday, February 7th!

Join us at the Statehouse in support of continued state funding for the arts and arts education. Attend the Legislative Appreciation Luncheon in honor of the Legislative Arts Caucus. Join your legislators over lunch and be informed about the latest issues affecting the arts in our schools and in our communities. Reservations are a must and please consider being an “underwriter” of the event! Registration information can be found below. A form is also attached for your convenience.

Yo, Lee: David Yepsen says “Hey”

Above you see David Yepsen and me, looking relieved and happy that we’re done with our panel presentation at the Senate Presidents’ Forum in Key West over the weekend, and that it went well. Funny how those kinds of things — just talking — can take a lot out of you.

It was an honor to meet David, the legend of Iowa political journalism. And of course when we met, he asked after another legend of political journalism, a man whom everyone knows — and, more remarkably, everyone likes and respects — my longtime friend and colleague Lee Bandy.

I’m lucky to have worked with both Lee and the Tennessee legend, John Parish. And while it was brief, I was honored to share the panel with David Yepsen, who is now director of the Paul Simon Public Policy Institute (he left The Des Moines Register about the same time I left The State), Saturday. And to get to know a couple of political pros I had not met before, who also served on the panel: First, John Marttila, longtime friend and ally of Joe Biden ever since he was elected to the U.S. Senate in 1972. John continues to be a senior political adviser to the vice president. From the Republican side, we had Mike DuHaime, who ran Chris Christie’s successful run for governor of New Jersey in 2009.

We had a great discussion, both during the panel and at meals and events before and after.

What did I say during the presentation? Well, not anything I haven’t shared here. I essentially scrapped my prepared remarks, as mentioned previously — which is probably a good thing, because things flow better when I’m winging it. But preparing — not only the writing, but all the conversations I had with top Republicans in SC, right up to a couple of minutes before the program — did help me get my thoughts in order. Hey, if I hadn’t made all those panicked calls Friday night and Saturday morning after seeing those poll numbers, I wouldn’t have known to call Romney a “Plastic Banana Rock ‘n’ Roller,” which still cracks me up — the idea of Romney as ANY kind of rock ‘n’ roller, actually.

Anyway, I’m back from Key West. And it’s going to be a busy week…

Mike DuHaime (or the back of his head, anyway), David Yepsen and John Marttila, during the panel discussion.

There goes the Senate GOP, picking on dead people…

Wesley and the gang at the Senate Republican Caucus are making sure that you didn’t miss this story:

DMV: 900 Dead People May Have Voted

Columbia, SC (AP, WLTX) — The director of South Carolina’s Department of Motor Vehicles has told the State Law Enforcement Division that more than 900 people who were recorded as having voted were actually dead.

DMV Director Kevin Shwedo told legislators about the issue Wednesday as the U.S. Justice Department questions a new state law requiring people to show photographic identification when they vote in person.

In response, South Carolina Attorney General Alan Wilson asked SLED to review the evidence.

“Director Shwedo’s research has revealed evidence that over nine hundred deceased people appear to have ‘voted’ in recent elections in South Carolina,” said Wilson in a statement. “This is an alarming number, and clearly necessitates an investigation into potential criminal activity. I have asked SLED Chief Keel to review Director Shwedo’s research.”…

First, of all, technically, the dead people didn’t actually vote. So they are innocent in this.

So I am shocked that the GOP senators are using this unfortunate incident to insist that their Voter ID law be reinstated. I mean, think about it — these dead people didn’t do anything wrong, and the senators want to penalize them. Do you have any idea how much harder it is for a dead person to get a picture ID than it is for you and me? I mean, have a heart…