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

Gordon said it in Wall Street. “Greed is good. Greed is right. Greed works.” That speech made the movie. I still want it as my ringtone.

Unfortunately, as much as I can’t imagine applying that to government — and I’m not in the minority – there are plenty of people who can, and they were all in Columbia tonight for Senator McConnell’s Spending Caps Study Committee public hearing.

They spoke as members of the Municipal Association of South Carolina, the South Carolina Association of Counties, and school boards. There were local elected officials and even bureaucrats weren’t going to stay silent.

Their argument? The sky is falling.

They spun it masterfully.

“We won’t be able to buy new ambulances or fire trucks,” one county administrator said threatening that spending caps would increase emergency response times and be responsible for property destruction and death.

“We won’t be able to fund the police department,” said a small town mayor hinting to a threat of a statewide crime spree that would make Death Wish look like SpongeBob.

Another tax trough sow asked, “What will our residents do when trash starts piling up along the roadside because we can’t pay for garbage collection?”

These people were there to fuel the politics of fear to get what they wanted, and they just might get their way.

Like state government who blew $3 billion in surpluses over the past three years, enough is not enough for local governments. They will do whatever they can to protect their piece of the pie.

That piece of the pie, ever increasing in its size, is the reason government has gotten obese. It’s outgrown its pants and needs to go on a diet.

The key to understanding the debate is that the legislative spending proposals aren’t spending stoppages. They are spending limits. They have different formulas, but they all aim to do the same thing – slow down government’s growth to a responsible and manageable level.

Right now, many of South Carolina’s local governments are growing at rates faster than the incomes of South Carolinians. We’re spending it faster than we can pay it, and there’s no end in sight unless House and Senate members take some reflection time this election year and stop local governments from gouging our wallets.

A recent study published by the South Carolina Policy Council and conducted by economists with the Beacon Hill Institute stated, “Without spending caps, government has continued to grow and tax policy measures designed to offer relief have failed to do so. Spending caps ensure that government remains lean, provides only those services that are critical and that any surplus is returned to the taxpayers. Such caps provide government with a necessary incentive to curb its spending, thus stimulating economic growth in the private sector. Private sector growth means income growth, job growth and purchasing power growth.”

So while spending limitations would encourage economic growth, the reverse is also true by 2010 as businesses become responsible for $409 million in additional taxes and homeowners see their property tax savings reduced by 45%.

One of the major supporters of the limitations is the Coalition Against Unlimited Spending which is the perfect illustration that politics makes strange bedfellows. I never thought the day would come when the folks at the state Chamber, the SC Manufacturers’ Alliance, and NFIB teamed up with grassroots taxpayer groups like the SC Association of Taxpayers and NoHometax.org, but they’re standing together, nonetheless.

Seeing that bunch together is like seeing Carolina and Clemson playing on the same side. Somebody better pay attention.

Among the hearing’s highlights:

• A representative from Clarendon County government noted that last year council members had a tough choice to make. They could either purchase a badly-needed new ambulance or provide employees with raises. They chose raises. Kinda puts a chink in the armor of the “we need to provide emergency services” argument, huh?
• A representative from the state employees association described his contemporaries as “the vehicles that provide the services and mandates.” He then said that state employees would lose their jobs under spending caps. Would that necessarily be a bad thing? Then they could get real jobs that reward them for their worth. OK, so some of them might have a problem.
• Hollie Bennett a self-described mother and taxpayer said that budgets in our private lives are based on our ability to pay from the income we have. She said that we should expect no less from government.
• Margaret Thompson, a Clemson City Council member said, “The sky isn’t gonna fall. These cities need to put themselves on a budget.” She added, “We have a great city manager, but I can already see him drooling over what he’s gonna do with that (extra money from spending increases) now.” That pretty well sums it up.

When the dust settled, the government types asked, “But what about home rule?” Well, as Senator McConnell frequently asks in response, “How much more home rule can we afford?”

We’re in state that passed millage caps (with 70% of the popular vote) as a part of a property tax reform measure, but according the business/taxpayer coalition, “21 schools districts across the state announced millage hikes by December 2006” to beat the deadline for property reassessment caps to be set in place.

Local government had the chance to police itself. It failed.

Now, as cities and counties blame “the folks in Columbia” for what they justify as necessary spending increases, let “the folks in Columbia” take control and say that enough is enough. The sky isn’t falling.

– Wilson Charles