The Other Brooks Brothers and Their Sister, Too. — “Suddenly-relevant”

There are some in the South Carolina Senate that apparently didn’t see Wilson’s thought-provoking Pulitzer-worthy (this Pulitzer, not this one) commentary on Monday, which is kind of funny since so many others did — including the folks at FITSNews, SC Hotline and The Shot.

NOTE TO THE FITS GIRLS: OK, so the other guys around here didn’t send your Founding Editor a “nudie pic.” I think Bo posted a shot of my ripped skirt from this year’s Cup. That’s gotta count for something.

In case you’re like the Senate and missed what he said, it was pretty much that the state and its local government counterparts are largely irresponsible when it comes not only to taxation, but to spending.

Well, the self-described “deliberative” body of our legislature had a chance this week to make some changes and move toward limiting state spending.

Boy, did they blow it.

Senator McConnell’s bill (S.718) for a constitutional amendment referendum failed on third reading by a vote of 30-13. In case you’re wondering, it needed 31 votes to pass. Why would any legislator vote against a referendum like that in an election year — especially with the primary coming up in just a couple of weeks?

Here’s who voted how.

The 30 “Yes” votes came from:

Alexander, Bryant, Campbell, Campsen, Ceips, Cleary, Courson, Cromer, Drummond, Elliott, Fair, Gregory, Grooms, Hawkins, Hayes, Knotts, Leatherman, Martin, Massey, McConnell, O’Dell, Peeler, Rankin, Ritchie, Ryberg, Scott *, Setzler, Sheheen, Thomas, and Verdin.

The 13 “No” votes came from:

Anderson, Hutto, Jackson, Land, Leventis, Lourie, Malloy, Matthews, McGill, Patterson, Pinckney, Reese, and Williams.

Congratulations, South Carolina. We’ll continue to have a government that spends money like drunken sailors.

Cheers!

– Mary Claire Forrester

I don’t understand. What’s not to get?

The editorial team at The State recently wrote that, “There is simply no need for a state spending cap.“

Why not?

Don Weaver of the SC Association of Taxpayers says that not only do we need spending limits at the state level, we need them locally, as well. I couldn’t agree more.

In a perfect world where government was responsible with taxpayers’ dollars and egos weren’t more important than ideology, we wouldn’t even have to have this debate. Government would do its job, take what it needed to do that job, and either return the excess to the people, put it away for a rainy day, or reduce tax rates for the following year.

Unfortunately, that’s not reality.

The reality is that state government in South Carolina grew 41% during the past three years. The General Assembly spent $1.5 billion in reserve funds leaving the state’s coffers depleted in an upcoming budget year that shows us expecting significant shortfalls.

At the local level, according to a study out of the South Carolina Policy Council, without the imposition of local level spending limits:

• The entire 2008 reduction in property taxes will be negated by the introduction of new property taxes.
• Because the 1¢ increase in the state sales tax will be in effect, the state will still collect $594 million more in sales tax revenue.
• SC businesses will pay $409 million in additional taxes above what they would have paid had the swap not been imposed – a 12.51% increase.
• SC homeowners’ initial tax cut will decrease 45% (or $281 million) from $632 million to $351 million.
• The local tax burden will continue to rise, along with the increase in sales tax.
• The state will have 6,557 fewer jobs than it would had nothing been done.
• Investment will be $852 million lower.
• Personal Income will fall by $321 million and real disposable income per capita by $79.
• Sales tax will remain higher, while tax relief will become smaller or non-existent.

The Coalition Against Government Spending, a group of business community members and taxpayer advocacy supporters, notes that at the local level:

• From 1995 to 2006, local governments raised millage in 44 out of 46 counties.
• Total average statewide millage jumped 80 mills during that time — 277 in 1997 to 357 in 2005.
• From 2000 to 2005, making rate hikes even more dangerous, the value of one mill increased an average of $98,317.
• Despite increased property tax revenues, local reliance actually decreased because of escalating local option sales taxes, hospitality taxes, and user fees and permits.
• 21 schools districts across the state announced millage hikes by December 2006.
• By nearly 70%, voters in November 2006 approved the constitutional amendment limiting local property tax reassessment.

So with all that said, let’s remember that The State says there is “simply no need for a state spending cap.” Likewise, Mr. Weaver paraphrases Senate President Pro Tempore Glenn McConnell’s oft-quoted, “I’ve had about all the home rule I can afford.”

After looking at the facts, figures, and numbers as our state’s finances spin out of control, I have to agree with Weaver and can’t understand why The State or the General Assembly wouldn’t feel the same way — especially in an election year.

– Wilson Charles

As the state’s educrats continue complaining about not having enough money “for the kids,” I now understand why.

They need our tax dollars to buy these fancy briefcases to help them lobby the General Assembly for more cash that won’t get into a classroom.

Why didn’t they just say so? It makes perfect sense.

– Bo Burdette

Well, a new study soon to be published in the professional journal Psychological Science claims that conservatives are happier than liberals.

Um, yeah. And?

Haven’t you ever watched Fox News?

Researchers Jaime Napier and John Jost of New York University contend that their “research suggests that inequality takes a greater psychological toll on liberals than on conservatives.”

They say this is true “apparently because liberals lack ideological rationalizations that would help them frame inequality in a positive (or at least neutral) light.”

I think that translates in to the overriding fact that liberal philosophy in the United States is steeped in what’s wrong and how wrong things are.

There’s blame instead of solution, and the whole time you can hear Chicken Little tell us that the sky is falling.

Everything’s wrong, nothing’s ever right, and there’s no offered solution to fix the problem.

If I were a liberal, I’d be a little bummed out too.

Thankfully, I’m on the other end of the spectrum.

The results add explanation to a 2006 Pew Research Center survey where 47% of conservative Republicans were self-described as “very happy,” and 28% of liberal Democrats described themselves the same way.

One of the most basic truths of the human condition was completely missed, though.

Some people are just happier when they’re miserable, and there’s nothing you can do about it.

– Bo Burdette

NoHomeTax.org, a Charleston-based grassroots organization that worked with others for recent property tax reform measures, launched a new radio ad calling on the General Assembly to improve the state’s property tax structure.

With a fictional reporter questioning an equally fictional “Representative Seesaw” at a press conference, the subject revolves around NoHomeTax.org’s belief that South Carolina property taxes remain too high and that the legislature seems to be out of touch with taxpayers.

According to the ad which is running in each of the state’s major media markets, “A number of legislators are considering an improved property tax relief plan.”

The ad’s reporter claims that through an additional 1 cent sales tax the plan will:

• Completely eliminate homestead taxes
• Eliminate point-of-sale assessments
• Give new relief to all 4% and 6% properties.

The group promises to post the names of legislators who support and oppose H.4784 along with members’ home and Columbia contact information.

While the May 1 crossover deadline passed last week (meaning that after May 1, any bill passed in one chamber requires a two-thirds vote from the other chamber before it can be debated), NoHomeTax.org officials hope that pressure on legislators will help the bill move quickly and that its proponents can generate enough support to have the bill heard and voted on by both houses.

– Wilson Charles

Although Assistant US Attorney Walt Wilkins’ music career may not have been as long lasting as the Walt Wilkins pictured here, he is as accomplished in his own right.

On the advice of both of South Carolina’s senators, President Bush today nominated Greenville’s Walt Wilkins to be the next US Attorney for the District of South Carolina.

Upon confirmation by the US Senate, Wilkins will succeed recently inducted SLED chief Reggie Lloyd in the position.

Among his notable cases are successful prosecutions of a recent human trafficking/prostitution ring, a 2007 gambling operation forfeiting $9 million to the federal government, and a bank/mortgage fraud case involving two brothers who bilked banks out of more than $20 million.

PERSONAL NOTE/OPINION: That last one was especially satisfying. One of the brothers (James Byrd) caused a good friend of this site to lose a client because he had issue with the way Byrd conducted business. He objected to his client about doing work for Byrd and had his contract canceled after Byrd then claimed that the objections were racially motivated. As a result of illegal business practices, Byrd and his brother were sentenced to 63 months in federal prison and ordered to pay over $5.5 million in restitution.

Wilkins lives in Greenville with his wife and daughter.

He is the son of Judge Billy Wilkins (former Chief Judge of the US 4th Circuit Court of Appeals) and the nephew of former SC House Speaker and current US Ambassador David Wilkins but frankly has the skills and resume to deserve this position if his name were Booger McGee from Modoc, SC.

– Wilson Charles

It’s not even close to football season, but there’s already a lot of talk about potential recruits for the 2009 kickoff.

I was part of an e-mail volley earlier today in which the original sender was doing metaphorical back flips over Clemson receiving a verbal commitment last night from the nation’s top-ranked safety Craig Loston out of Houston, TX.

The exchange went like this.

• Original E-Mail: I received a phone call last night close to 10 from a “very excited” _______ _______.  He was astounded that I had not heard the news. This looks like a pretty big get.  Hopefully it can translate to some “W’s.”
• Response E-Mail 1: Big score for the Tigers; plus, he plans to enroll in January.
• Response E-Mail 2: That is good news. Safety is important in any sport — especially football. I hate seeing people get hurt.

If #2 wasn’t joking, I hope every South Carolina college’s offensive line takes turns hitting him.

– Matthew Wills

Here we are with our 100th post, and there’s not a celebratory cake to be found anywhere.

While the Charleston School of Law may have no problem with the huge dip in its most recent Bar exam pass rate as reported by the Post & Courier, illustrator Roger Harvell of The Greenville News apparently understands the situation pretty well.

Last spring’s Bar exam debacle has already been a topic of discussion on this site at least twice (see Here and Here), and other sites gave their opinions over the past few months. Harvell’s recent illustration really captures the essence of the events, though.

Why won’t the state’s judiciary wrap its collective mind around this, too?

– The OBB

The Alabama House of Representatives is now in session. At least it was on March 4, 2008 to debate HB196 — the “Gourmet Beer Bill” which would allow malt beverages (A.K.A. “Beer”) with higher alcohol content to be sold in the state of Alabama.

They debated and debated (highlights are available below), but the most passionate argument came from 33-year House veteran Representative Alvin Holmes who voiced his opposition to the measure (5:32 in the clip) saying,

“Yo, what’s wrong with the beer we got? I mean, the beer we got drank pretty good, don’t it? I ain’t never heard nobody complain about the, uh, beer we have. It drank pretty good. Budweiser. What’s the names of some of them other beers? Budweiser and what else? Miller. Coors. It drank pretty good, don’t it?”

Indeed they do, Representative Holmes. Indeed they do.

When the dust settled, by a vote of 48-42, HB196 moved to Alabama’s Senate.

I’m not sure what the folks at The Shot would think about this measure or Representative Holmes’ remarks, considering their love of Red Stripe, but I’m glad to see that legislatures across the country are continuing the people’s business like was done in Congress just a couple of weeks ago.

Hopefully, upon passage this will effectively end big-time smuggling operations like one I heard about involving a black Trans-Am and an 18-Wheeler who already had problems getting 400 cases of Coors from Texas to Georgia.

Representative Alvin Holmes is not only a true American, I’m sure he’s also appreciated by throngs of NASCAR fans who don’t want that sissy boutique beer.

– Bo Burdette

I’ve always found it sad that our schools are required to strive to achieve Adequate Yearly Progress or AYP. After all, “adequate” isn’t anything to brag about – unless it’s my golf game which still hasn’t gotten there.

At work, when it’s time for the annual review, the boss isn’t going to reward with a raise and/or promotion for adequate work.

In sports, as the coach makes lineup decisions, he or she isn’t going to put those with adequate skills as starters.

When it comes to hiring, as the pool of applicants grows, it’s pretty certain that those with adequate credentials/skills won’t get the job above those prepared to compete.

Why is it that “adequate” progress is what we strive for in our schools, then? What’s worse is having to ask why we can’t even seem to achieve that adequate progress we work so hard to attain.

For the record, this is not a post in support of vouchers. Frankly, I don’t support vouchers.

At the same time, I will say that something isn’t working. I’m not blaming the teachers. Their hands are often tied, and they’re doing the best with what they have. Unfortunately, what they have isn’t much.

I blame the system. I blame elected officials at several levels who are convinced that money is the ultimate answer and refuse to expand the debate further.

They haven’t wanted to talk about the outlandish levels of administration. They haven’t wanted to talk about squandered finances resulting from unnecessary redundancies and waste.

They’ve been convinced that if they throw enough money in this pit it will eventually fill up.

Excluding local bond revenues, South Carolina’s 2009 educational budget has plans for $11,480 ($4,867 in state funds, $1,097 in federal funds, and $5,516 in local funds) per pupil. That’s $200 more per pupil than Georgia and $2,000 more than North Carolina. For what are deemed our state’s “worst” schools, they will receive as much as $20,000 in per pupil funding.

That means that excluding local bond revenues, total K-12 appropriations for the upcoming school year in South Carolina will be more than $7.9 billion.

The numbers are deceiving, though. The unfortunate reality is that only 44 cents of each “education” dollar ever reaches the classroom. Out of each dollar, 44 cents pay for things like classroom materials (at least the ones that teachers aren’t forced to pay for out of their own pockets), books and teacher salaries. That means 56 cents of every dollar never reaches a classroom because that’s reserved for “non-instructional” expenditures like administration and bureaucracy.

It’s easy to see that the problem really isn’t that there isn’t enough money like some want us to believe. The problem is the system we created, fostered, and continue to support.

I know I wrote about this back in January, but the debate rages on, and these updated numbers illustrate even more than before how broken the system really is.

All of this explains why I was so encouraged to read the latest proposal (highlighted yesterday by The Palmetto Scoop and echoed by FITSNews) from Superintendent of Education Jim Rex and his friends.

Yea for us! A constitutional amendment adding the line “that will provide a high quality education, allowing each student to reach his highest potential” makes perfect sense.

Why didn’t we think of that before? It’s brilliant.

Revamping the educational system to foster real education for our children seems so silly now.

Putting money in the classrooms instead of breeding a bigger bureaucracy now seems downright ludicrous.

Of course. The answer is a constitutional amendment with no enabling legislation to spell out how this new public school system would operate to provide this high quality education and how we would pay for it.

A new line in South Carolina’s constitution will make us feel good, so the superintendent’s plan has to work. Right?

Thank you, Superintendent Rex. You’ve done it, old bean.

When you went on your name-calling tirade against someone who disagreed at the end of January, who knew it would only take you three months to single-handedly move South Carolina from 49th to 1st and prove all of your detractors wrong?

I have egg on my face now.

– Wilson Charles