* Disclaimer - If ad is a click thru and you are having problems please click on link to download latest version of flash player.Flash Player

ON THE WEBSITE:

• GOVERNOR'S RACE: News & candidate info
• PET CORNER: Your home for news & PET IDOL
• DOWN ON THE FARM: News, videos and more
• SWINE FLU: News & info
• T&D DATATRACK: In-depth news and reports

Advanced Search
You are not logged in. | Login | Register

Log in to TheTandD.com

*Member ID:
*Password:
Remember login?
(requires cookies)
  Forgot Your Password?
 

Legislature 2007 - good and very bad

By MARK SANFORD  Monday, July 23, 2007

1 comment(s) | Default | Large

Legislative sessions represent a way of bringing change to our state - and given that our last one ended a few weeks ago, I write to give you my take on what happened and what it means going forward.

It strikes me that three major things came out of this year's legislative term. One, we took concrete steps toward making our economy more competitive. Two, we took several small but important steps toward enhancing quality of life in this state. And three, despite the good work on the other two, we continued a troubling rate of spending that is beyond our means and will cause considerable problems down the road.

On the first point, I continue to believe that we are in the midst of enormous global change that requires we update the way we do things in South Carolina if our state is to offer greater opportunity to each of us. There were a number of things that happened this year on this front, the most important of which was the largest tax cut in state history.

I'd give credit to the majority in the House, and a handful of reform-minded senators, who were instrumental in passing this $221-million-per-year recurring tax cut. We believe lower taxes are key to making our economy more competitive globally, and during our administration, cuts have now been made to residential property taxes, small business income taxes, personal income taxes and sales taxes.

In bettering our business climate, we were also able to reform things ranging from workers' compensation laws, this year's number one legislative objective of the business community, to coastal insurance and in this mix consider the following: With insurance we avoided some of the pitfalls seen in other states. We passed market-based coastal wind insurance reforms hailed as a model for the country by the Wall Street Journal -- and we believe these changes will be key to protecting both the consumer and taxpayer in the long run. Additionally, things like the agreement we signed with Georgia to cooperatively develop a new port in Jasper County will have profound long-term implications in bettering our connection to the global economy.

In improving quality of life, the passage of the Priority Investment Act, DOT reform and virtual schools are all examples for the way they will directly impact people's lives in our state. DOT reform represented the first structural reforms at the state transportation department since it was created in 1917, and brings with it the promise of impacting everyday problems like traffic congestion. The Priority Investment Act provides a way for the public and the government to work more judiciously in placing infrastructure investments -- key to preserving the taxpayer's wallet and the look and feel of our state. Virtual schools will allow students to be connected via the Web and cutting-edge technology to courses previously out of their grasp.

There are plenty of other examples of activities that mark this year -- ranging from 100 more troopers on the highways to updated penalties for underage drinking or even the first African-American in state history to be named executive director of the Budget and Control Board. As much as they are positive, they bring us to my last observation on this legislative year, which is on spending -- and decidedly negative.

We are spending beyond our means. It is unsustainable and when it comes to an end, both those who depend on government and those who pay for government will be hurt. State government this year grew by about 15 percent, and we believe it makes no sense to grow government faster than the growth of people's paychecks and wallets -- and not to pay for existing promises before making new ones. Our state has a remarkable $18 billion in existing political promises outstanding. Would it not have made more sense to have more seriously addressed these debts before adding more than $9 million to a grants program The State newspaper calls a legislative slush fund -- or a driving service for the lieutenant governor's office that former Lt. Gov. Bob Peeler himself disbanded 16 years ago because he found it to be a waste of taxpayer money?

On this point South Carolina ranks third in the United States in percentage growth in government over the last few years. That's remarkable. We have tried everything available to us to slow this spending -- from entering the budget process in a way that has never been done before -- to a few vetoes, to lots of vetoes and even the veto of the entire budget, and yet nothing has seemed to work in slowing this spending train.

Only your voice can change this. There was some good work done this year -- and more work left to be done in handling the money you send to Columbia -- so please make your voice heard between now and January on what you would like to see more and less of in next year's session.

Mark Sanford is governor of South Carolina.

To subscribe to the print edition of The Times and Democrat, click here.

 
1 comment(s)
The following comments are reader submitted. They do not represent the views of The T&D or Lee Enterprises.

pedingsgang wrote on Jul 23, 2007 6:08 AM:

" Our state owes a big thank you to Gov. Sanford for trying to teach us to live within our means. And it certainly makes more sense to pay off outstanding debt before incurring more. As for programs that may suffer without these additional grants, groups receiving this grant money may need to look into other sources of funding, such as actually getting out and working to earn it. I don't want to see good programs cut from communities either, but what grant money often does is make the community less appreciative of the program being offered. My daddy used to say that you can only get as much out of something as you put into it. All grants should certainly not be discontinued, but a hard look needs to discern where the most need is and fulfil it while saving the rest of the money to help bring our budget back under control. The one item that most concerns me that Gov. Sanford is pushing for is school vouchers. I have had children in public education in Calhoun County for the last twenty years and plan to utilize public education for the next five. My children have/are receiving an excellent education. Vouchers would hurt the poorest of the poor in our state and destroy the public education system. As conscientious community members, we cannot allow this to happen. When people in cities start talking about choices offered by vouchers, they need to realize that those choices will not be available to all children due to socioeconomics. A poor child in a rural community would not have transportation to another school in a different area. Additionally, there is a real need to equally distribute industrial taxes across the school districts. We talk about the importance of the farmer, yet we refuse to offer his children the same educational opportunities as urban dwellers. As voters, we can insure that all children receive an equal opportunity by opposing vouchers in education which move public funds into private facilities. - Melody Pedings "



» Post a comment Thanks for your comment! Once approved, your comment will appear on the site.

You must be logged in to comment.

Click Here To Sign in

Click here to get an account
it's free and quick
Please note: The Times and Democrat provides our story commenting feature in order to solicit feedback, debate and discussion on topics of local interest. Please keep in mind that civility is a necessary component of productive conversation. All blatantly inflammatory or otherwise inappropriate comments (i.e. vulgarity, marketing, etc.) are subject to rejection and/or removal. Comments will appear if and when they are approved. Thanks for reading, and thanks for participating.




More Opinion