On Leadership PACs

Why I filed H. 3077

Sometimes efforts to fix a problem actually make the problem worse.

Buried in a package of 15 rules changes that were quickly adopted by the House on a voice vote during the organizational session on December 2nd was an amendment to House Rule 4.16 which banned legislators from having a “Leadership PAC.” I do support the notion that House and Senate leadership should not be allowed to wield the power of a large PAC as a carrot or as a stick over the members of the body in which they preside the way former Speaker Bobby Harrell did.

Sadly, this new rule does not accomplish it’s stated purpose.

Notwithstanding Section 8-13-1340, a member of the House shall not, directly or indirectly, establish, finance, maintain, or control any entity including, but not limited to, a noncandidate committee that receives or makes contributions as defined in Section 8-13-1300. This rule does not apply to a candidate committee or a legislative caucus committee.

I filed H. 3077 to strike this new rule for the following reasons:

1. Nothing is said about “leadership.” This doesn’t ban leadership from having PACs, it bans all members from having PACs. Why shouldn’t House members be able to raise money to help their friends out, or to oppose their enemies? After all, that’s exactly what our own former Sen. Jim DeMint did with the Senate Conservatives Fund, which played a significant role in the elections of 2008 elections of Sen. Marco Rubio and Sen. Pat Toomey, and the 2010 elections of Sen. Mike Lee and Sen. Rand Paul. As DeMint famously said, “I would rather have 10 Marco Rubios than 30 Arlen Specters.” Would any conservative argue that replacing Charlie Crist, Arlen Specter, and others was a bad thing for DeMint to have done?

2. Nothing is said about “PACs.” The actual term this rule uses is a noncandidate committee, which could, conceivably, advocate for or against issues as much as for or against candidates. In fact, South Carolina has no legal definition at all for a “PAC.” This blurry line cannot be fixed in a House rule; it will have to be addressed statutorily.

3. This rule specifically exempts legislative caucus committees. Caucus committees are essentially “super” PACs with different rules and higher contribution limits. The current Republican Caucus chairman also happens to be House Majority Leader Bruce Bannister. The Speaker of the House, Jay Lucas, also has outsized influence on Republican Caucus decisions by virtue of his position. If we don’t want leadership getting involved in each others races, then why exempt caucuses? It's worth noting that the House Republican Caucus did contribute to several House incumbents who had challengers in the 2014 primary.

You may dislike the role money plays in politics. I understand that. However, if allowed to stand, this new House rule will not reduce the role money plays in SC politics, rather, it will put more of it into the hands of House leadership. To use a crude analogy, it is like disarming legal gun owners while allowing thugs and criminals to walk the streets with guns.

Sometimes you have to fight fire with fire. That’s what I’m doing with H. 3077.

Resolutions: "Follow The Law!"

You would think that passing resolutions which basically say "follow the law" would be pointless. Unfortunately, the South Carolina Legislature has not been following two specific laws pertaining to the State budget: funding the Local Government Fund, and holding joint, open budget hearings on the Governor's budget. I plan to introduce two resolutions addressing these issues (see below) at the upcoming Delegation meeting. You're welcome to attend:

Anderson County Legislative Delegation Meeting Friday, Dec. 5th at 6pm Ronald P. Townsend Government Building 2404 North Main Street Anderson, SC

The Local Government Fund

Act 171 of 1991 created the Local Government Fund which some counties rely on to provide services. The act requires the fund to consist of 4.5% of the previous year's tax revenues. Since 2007-2008 we've slashed the Local Government Fund by over $343 million, incentivizing local governments to double-tax their citizens to make up the shortfall.

In short, rather than pass on all of the tax dollars to which local governments were entitled by law, the state chose instead to keep part of those dollars.

The message sent to local governments was clear: the State is only willing to tighten its belt so far. Good luck tightening yours.

The Budget Process

Sections 11-11-90 and 11-11-100 of state law requires the House and Senate budget committees to convene jointly in public hearings to receive input on the budget. Not any budget, though: the Governor's budget.

Why does this matter? The South Carolina Policy Council explains:

When the budget becomes entirely a product of the legislature, as it is currently in South Carolina, it’s no longer a coherent spending plan based on the needs of the state as a whole; it’s rather a collection of spending items, many of them duplicative, meant to benefit local and regional constituencies, without regard for what benefits the entire state. The governor is the one public official in the budget process who is elected by the entire state; he or she is accountable to the Upstate, the Midlands, the Lowcountry, the Pee Dee, and everywhere in between. The law’s requirement that the executive budget be used as the first draft, therefore, makes sense.

When you think about it, the current practice of the House and Senate writing their own budgets separately without regard for each other or the Governor's budget may have much to do with why some parts of the state are better cared for than others in areas like road and education funding.

It's also inefficient. Why should state agencies, the media, and the public have to navigate multiple, sometimes simultaneous, subcommittee hearings--not once, but twice--to have input in the budget process, when state law has already outlined a clear and simple budget process which calls for the Governor, House, and Senate to work jointly?

What does the SC Legislature have to lose by adopting this streamlined process?

Don't Play God

Some lawmakers do not like these laws. They describe them as "antiquated," "unnecessary," or even "unconstitutional." Many of these arguments are in my view thinly-veiled arguments for the status quo and hold no weight.

One's personal feelings about the demerits of a state law does not give lawmakers the option to ignore said law. If a law is poorly thought out, inefficient, or no longer appropriate, it should be amended or repealed, but it may not be ignored. Lawmakers cannot play God.

Resolutions

In an effort to raise awareness and support among the SC Legislature for these issues, I plan to introduce two resolutions at the Friday, Dec. 5th meeting of the Anderson County Legislative Delegation. You can read the resolutions below.

This meeting will be held at 6pm at the Ronald P. Townsend Government Building on 2404 North Main Street, Anderson, SC. You are welcome to attend.

• Local Government Fund Resolution
• Budget Process Resolution

After Harrell: The Greatest Corruption of All

A Challenge for the Next Speaker of the House Note: a previous version of this post indicated the Governor plays a role in judicial selection, but this is factually incorrect. This post has been corrected.

Sometimes, I’m a pretty embarrassed South Carolinian. Though we could be described, at least here in the Upstate, as “the buckle on the Bible Belt,” we have a way of frequently making unpleasant political headlines.

It started with a former Governor, now Congressman, who said he “hiked the Appalachian trail” when he was actually visiting his “soul mate” who was not his wife (a saga that is still playing out like a soap opera), to a Lieutenant Governor forced to resign in disgrace after multiple campaign finance violations (in the private sector, this is known as “embezzlement”), to 8 Sheriffs in the last 4 years indicted or investigated for a variety of fraudulent behavior, including racketeering and bribe-taking, finally climaxing in the indictment of Speaker of the House Bobby Harrell just days ago for violations that dwarf those of former Lieutenant Governor Ken Ard.

But what you won’t hear in the media is the greatest corruption of all: our very system of government is compromised.

Oh, we make a show of the three-branch balance of power that our founders bequeathed to us. Yet, as Lawrence Lessig put it, “We inherited an extraordinary estate. On our watch, we have let it fall to ruin.”

Republic, Lost

The truth is that South Carolina more closely resembles an oligarchy than a republic.

As far back as the Civil War, the Palmetto State’s ruling class loathed the idea of a black governor, so they divested the governorship of most executive functions. Who were the recipients of this power? They were, of course--the legislators.

“Are you suggesting that the legislature does the work of two branches of government?” you ask. Of course not! That would be hard work. Instead, the legislature appoints a confusing and sometimes redundant array of hybrid, unelected board and commissions. Some of these are entities unto themselves; others perform executive oversight of entire state agencies, such as the Department of Transportation.

And one of these picks our judges.

The Judicial Merit Selection Commission

You’d think the Governor would appoint our judges. She does not. Instead, the Judicial Merit Selection Commission, which is itself comprised of a majority of legislators, screens candidates and submits a list of "approved" nominees to the joint House and Senate body for election.

By contrast, the President of the United States and many other state Governors appoint judges, who must then be confirmed by the respective Senate bodies. South Carolina is the only one out of fifty states with such an odd system.

As Rep. Kenny Bingham, a candidate running for Speaker of the House, put it to me: “We can’t give the Governor that much power.”

Thus is the mentality of many of our lawmakers. It’s their power, and no one else should have it. No matter that it’s a bastardization of the Republic that our founders gave us so many years ago.

Tracing the ties of power

Five of the ten members of this board are directly appointed by the Speaker of the House. The other five? Appointed by the Senate.

Now, imagine a scenario where the Chief Justice of the SC Supreme Court is up for re-election, and the Speaker of the House appoints House members to the Judicial Merit Selection Committee who are beholden to himself for their coveted House committee assignments, and also appoints his own brother. Let us further imagine that the Speaker is indicted for charges which could easily be appealed to the SC Supreme Court.

Do you think said Speaker will get a fair trial? Maybe a little too fair, if you get my drift?

Perhaps all 5 of Harrell’s appointees are good people. Corrupt systems often employ generally decent people. As Lessig writes in his book, “Republic, Lost:”

“[C]orruption does indeed wreck our democracy. Not a corruption caused by a gaggle of evil souls. On the contrary, a corruption practiced by decent people...people working extremely hard to do what they believe is right, yet...extraordinary bad gets done. This corruption has two elements...the first element is bad governance, which means simply that our government doesn’t track the expressed will of the people...on this account, [democracy] seems to a show or ruse; power rests elsewhere. The second element is lost trust: when democracy seems a charade, we lose faith in its process.”

Lost trust. Funny choice of words. (Look up “Operation Lost Trust” if you don’t know what I’m talking about.)

Oh, and did I mention that many South Carolina lawmakers are also attorneys, who, in their own law practices, will stand before the very judges they elect? Is it not enough that the lawmakers write the law? Must they also choose the judges?

Can we trust such a system?

After Harrell

“There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one who is striking at the root.” Henry David Thoreau

Literally moments after Speaker Harrell’s indictment was announced, Representatives of ambition began scrambling to line up votes for themselves. Amidst the melee, a call to change House procedures went out. Rep. Tommy Stringer wrote:

“At a minimum, the new Speaker should lead the reformation of House Rules to limit the number of terms a member can serve as Speaker, to limit the number of terms a member may serve as a committee chairman, and to expand the number of standing committees so that the State may benefit from the talents of the broadest number of Representatives as possible. I will not vote for any member running for Speaker who does not, at a minimum, strongly support and act to achieve these reforms.”

A few days later, Interim Speaker (and Speaker candidate) Rep. Jay Lucas appointed a “Special House Rules & Procedures Review Ad Hoc Committee” presumably to draft and propose potential rule changes.

This sudden move to reform House procedure was described by Rep. Nathan Ballentine as “a signal of a new day in the House...a breath of fresh air.”

I, for one, agree there is a need for things like term limits on the Speaker. However, I cannot help but be skeptical, and wonder if this could prove a diversion from a much greater problem: judicial dependence.

To the current Speaker candidates, Reps. Jay Lucas, Kenny Bingham, and Jim Merrill, hear me:

If you wish to rise above the previous speaker, to restore faith and trust in the SC House, and do more than whitewash a corrupt system, you MUST amend the SC Constitution to achieve judicial independence, which means, at a minimum, completely abolishing the Judicial Merit Selection Committee, divesting yourself of the inordinate power which you should never have had over this process and allowing the Governor the full power to appoint Judges with the advice and consent of the Senate, as our founding fathers (who were all much smarter than any of us) intended.

Only then will we begin to strike the root of the greatest corruption of all.

Legislative priorities: my top 3 for 2015

The Republican Caucus will meet in Myrtle Beach on Saturday, August 16th for the annual caucus retreat. I was asked to submit in advance my ideas on what we should work on in the upcoming legislative session, and here is my response.

1. Roads - our roads are on everyone's minds. They were in my district, it came up a lot. I'd like to see us earmark 100% of the gas tax and related fees (a total of about $650 Million) to fund road and bridge repair, to allocate DOT funding out of the general fund, to abolish the SC Transportation Commission and move DOT under Executive control, and abolish the State Transportation Infrastructure Bank. As far as I'm concerned, raising taxes or fees of any kind are off the table until we do these things because I am not confident any new funds would not be wasted in the same way that the old ones have been. There also seems to be a general public expectation that the gas tax pays for roads, but that isn't really true right now. A big part of it funds DOT operations. My positions in greater detail are outlined here.

2. Taxi Regulations - Uber came to town, and instead of celebrating hundreds of new jobs being created in SC's 4 large cities, the Taxi associations want the police to run them out of town. I'd like to repeal the regulations that give the state so much control over this industry and make SC a friendly place for new and innovative business models. It is not government's job to protect established industry players from competition. When the law becomes a tool to these ends, it's time to change the law.

3. Legit ethics reform - we need to repeal any law that sets politicians or candidates apart from everyone else. Dipping into campaign funds for personal use should be considered embezzlement, for instance, and should be treated as such. The law should also be enforced by an independent party, not the House Ethics Committee. We also need to get out of the business of electing judges (allow the voters of SC to pick them instead), and eliminate the FOIA exemption for legislators.

There's plenty more I could list, but I get the fact that we can't do it all, so these are my top 3 for 2015.

Issue Spotlight: Corruption

Everyone knows that government is corrupt, but you might be surprised to learn just how corrupt it is in South Carolina. There are systemic changes needed, but first, some background.

A Legislature-dominated government

As the saying goes, power corrupts. That’s why we have three branches of government. It’s like a three-legged stool: each leg helps keep the others on balance. Those branches are the Executive, the Legislative, and the Judiciary.

Corruption in South Carolina

Here in South Carolina, the legislature rides roughshod over everything, the Governor is little better than a figurehead, and the judiciary is beholden to the legislature.

This isn’t overheated political rhetoric. Here are some actual examples:

• The Governor vetoes a bill? No problem. We’ll just override the veto, over and over again.
• A legislative corruption case goes before the SC Supreme Court? Not to worry, those judges know that they’re elected by the Legislature (many of whom are lawyers who also practice before them).
• Want to know what is going on in a government agency? Send a FOIA request - but not to a state legislator. They don’t have to comply.

For this, we can thank South Carolina’s Jim Crow-era 1895 Constitution and over an hundred years of lawmakers who want the good-old-boy system to stay intact and keep “ragheads” out of power.

It doesn’t have to be like this. But, there’s more.

Unaccountable state boards and agencies

A maze of boards and commissions has been created over the years to perform functions that are sometimes legislative in nature and sometimes executive in nature. These boards, since they aren’t elected, aren’t directly accountable to the citizens of South Carolina. For instance:

• The Superintendent of Education vs. the State Board of Education vs. the State Education Oversight Committee vs. the local School District vs. the County School Board (is it any wonder our schools are failing?)
• The SC Department of Transportation (SCDOT) vs. the SC Transportation Commission vs. the SC Transportation Infrastructure Bank (STIB)
• The Department of Administration vs. the Bond Review Authority

This complexity both wastes money and allows our elected officials to shirk responsibility and avoid accountability. For a legislatively-run state, it’s amazing how little power they sometimes seem to have!

Now and then, the cry goes up for “restructuring,” but the result often looks more like a massive game of musical chairs.

It doesn’t have to be like this. Oh, but there’s still more.

The Judicial system

Currently, our judges are elected by the legislature, many of whom are lawyers who practice before those very judges.

Is this a problem? You bet.

House Speaker Bobby Harrell, under a grand jury investigation for serious campaign ethics violations, attempted to have Attorney General Wilson thrown off his case. The matter will be ultimately decided by the SC Supreme Court, whose Chief Justice Speaker Harrell actively campaigned for.

Solutions

Fixing this will likely take a generation or two, but here is a good starting place.

• Judges should either be elected (like Probate Judges) or appointed by the Governor with confirmation by the Senate (like the Federal government). I personally favor letting the voters choose - I trust the people of South Carolina much more than politicians to pick good judges. This is what Texas does, and it seems to work very well for them.
• Consolidate redundant boards, commissions and agencies.
• Eliminate hybrid boards that give undue legislative oversight to executive functions, such as the S.C. Transportation Commission.
• Remove legislators’ FOIA exemption. Lawmakers should have to respond to FOIA requests just as state agencies do.
• Establish term limits and eliminate pensions for state legislators. We should not be rewarding politicians who make a career out of spending your money.
• Shorten the legislative session. I favor the Texas model (a six-month session every other year). It seems to work great for them!
• Close the party primaries. Democrats should not have a say in who the Republican candidates are, and vice versa. This is like letting USC pick Clemson’s football coach! Why do we allow this? Crossover may be a factor in how some corrupt Republicans continue getting elected.

Am I really going to be any different?

It’s a fair question, and one I get a lot. You’ve heard it all before. How do you know I won’t turn out like everyone else does?

For one thing, a lot of candidates don't know what they believe going into office. I do, and have tried to be very open and detailed on all the major issues.

This is not about making money or about a career change for me personally. I have a great career as a computer programmer. Nor is it about belonging to an “elite” group. I hate pretentiousness. I’m not a party animal and you won’t find me hanging out in Columbia drinking with lobbyists.

So why would I run for office? Because I want South Carolina to be the freest and most prosperous state in the nation, and because I believe that I can make a difference, and because my conscience dictates that I try.

Issue Spotlight: Life

Life is the most fundamental of our God-given rights. It begins at conception and ends at natural death, and no person or government has the right to take it away without just cause and due process (hint: convenience doesn’t count as “just cause.”).

Abortion

How we treat unborn children and seniors tells what kind of society we are. While the Supreme Court decision Roe v. Wade officially allowed abortion, I believe that decision will be overturned eventually, hopefully in my lifetime.

Until then, we need to do all we can to reduce abortion as much as possible.

Here are some measures South Carolina should take to protect innocent life:

• Do not provide any taxpayer funding to abortion clinics, either directly or indirectly through health insurance coverage
• Hold clinics to ambulatory surgical center standards (as Texas has done)
• Resist Federal intrusion into healthcare
• Prohibit Planned Parenthood from providing sex education in public schools
• Provide faith-based abstinence education in schools

The SC House just passed a bill banning abortion after 20 weeks, the point at which unborn babies are able to feel pain (some believe the ability to feel pain begins earlier). The legislation is  currently before the Senate and will hopefully pass. I would definitely support this and similar measures.

What about rape and incest?

Rape and incest are tragic situations that do sometimes result in pregnancy. However, the child in the womb is an innocent third party and does not deserve to die. The baby isn’t just “a constant reminder” or “a tragic memento.” It’s a life, and deserves protection just as much as yours and mine.

Additionally, abortion often causes severe trauma and depression to the mother that often takes years to recover from. Abortion doesn’t provide healing to a girl struggling with the aftermath of rape; it only makes things worse.

Seniors

As the tragic case of Terri Schiavo showed, it’s not just unborn children who are endangered by a lack of respect for human life.

Seniors, the disabled, and unborn children are our most vulnerable members of society and can be very prone to abuse from neglect, manipulation, or - as in Ms. Schiavo’s situation - outright murder because she had no voice. The state’s job is to protect their right to life, not to allow others to take advantage of their disability.

Sometimes family members do have very difficult decisions to make regarding true life support. But denying the basic necessities of life does not count as “life support” regardless of what the Florida Legislature says, and no family member has the right to deny basic care to a loved one.

The intrusion of the Federal government into our healthcare system has very grave implications for our seniors. When the provisions and mandates in Obamacare fully take effect, seniors and the disabled are likely to be denied the care they need, in favor of more “useful” members of society. This is a travesty we must avoid at all cost.

Rep. Bill Chumley and Sen. Tom Davis led the fight to nullify Obamacare in South Carolina over the last year, but were thwarted at every turn by corrupt politicians. I supported Chumley’s bill and if elected, I will do everything I can to fight the implementation of Obamacare in our state.

Conclusion

In the Declaration of Independence, the founders stated that “...all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness…”

The right to life is foundational to all our other freedoms. When that right is trampled on, our freedom is gone. Government’s job is to protect every innocent life, no matter how small or insignificant.

Gov. Nikki Haley Endorses One of My Platform Items

My #1 priority will be to fix our roads. Yesterday at the First Monday Club in Anderson I had the opportunity to ask Governor Haley about the roads issue, and particularly my goal to have the DOT placed under the Governor’s office and eliminate two duplicate, unelected boards.

Gov. Haley wholeheartedly endorsed the idea and then went on to add:

“We don’t have to raise taxes to do it. The money is there.”

Click to hear her full answer

Governor Haley is right: we can do this without raising taxes. I am happy that she supports my solution to fixing our roads and I look forward to working with her in Columbia!

Issue Spotlight: Roads

South Carolina’s roads are a disgrace. Cross the border into Georgia or North Carolina, and the roads magically improve. This is one of the most basic and legitimate functions of our state government, and we can’t even get it right!

A Non-Solution

Some, including my opponent, suggest raising the gas tax would fix the problem. If only it were that easy… but did you know that the 2014 budget increases spending by about $600 million, and yet $0 of that extra spending is for roads?

Here’s a detailed list of $644 million we could have spent on roads this year. If we raise the gas tax, what makes you think we won’t blow that money too?

“‘Taxpayers understand that if they want better roads they have to pay for them.’ True enough. The problem is that South Carolina taxpayers are already paying for better roads – they’re just not getting what they’re paying for.”

Jamie Murguia, SC Policy Council

Our state budget looks like these gallon jugs that were used for target practice. Until we patch the holes in our budget and make road resurfacing a priority, raising taxes won’t fix a thing.

Roads in South Carolina

Never underestimate the State’s ability to waste your money.

The Magic Number: $600 million

How much will it cost to fix our roads? It depends on who you ask.

The SCDOT says we need about $2 billion a year for the next 20 years to fund roads, mass transit, and everybody’s wish lists. Excessive? Maybe a bit.

That’s why the South Carolina Alliance To Fix Our Roads set a more achievable proposed funding level of $600 million per year over 10 years to get our highways and bridges in good condition.

Road funding

I believe we can meet or exceed that goal by doing the following:

• Allocate 100% of gas tax and related fees to roads (currently about $640 million).
• Fund DOT overhead from the general fund at a reasonable level, and if necessary force DOT to streamline operations and cut costs.

In addition to state roads, we also have an obligation to our counties to fully fund the local government fund, according to the law, which will help counties allocate more funds to county roads.

It’s not just about how much we spend, though, it’s also about where and how we spend it.

Establish Proper Accountability

Who is responsible for maintaining and funding South Carolina’s roads?

If you said the DOT, you’d be partially correct, but while the DOT Secretary is appointed by the Governor, DOT is run by the SC Transportation Commission - a board appointed mostly by the state legislature.

This is a problem because it blurs the line between the legislative and executive functions of government and leads to less transparency and accountability. Besides, our District 3 seat on that board is vacant, so you aren’t being represented.

But there’s more…

Meet STIB

The SC Transportation Infrastructure Bank (STIB) was established in 1997. It isn’t really an agency, and isn’t subject to the debt limits that state agencies have.

STIB is responsible for doling out billions to Charleston and Horry counties, while most counties never got a dime for their roads. According to Sen. Harvey Peeler,

“[T]he bank is force-feeding asphalt to Charleston, while the rest of South Carolina is on a starvation diet.”

Road money

STIB is independent and unaccountable to the SCDOT or to the Governor - in fact, it is not even bound to follow DOT’s project list, which is disturbing since the legislature took $50 million of road funding away from DOT and gave it to STIB as a basis to borrow billions more without legislative debates or on-the-record votes.

It’s time to abolish the SC Transportation Infrastructure Bank and the SC Transportation Commission, and make DOT fully accountable to the Governor’s office.

Additionally, given DOT’s track record, the legislature should mandate that DOT maintain a fund balance at all times, so that DOT never goes broke again like they did in like they did in 2011.

Conclusion

Roads are not a Republican issue, nor are they a Democrat issue. It’s one of the most important issues our state faces right now, and every day we wait costs us millions more as our roads continue to deteriorate.

No more excuses. We have the money. We can do this.

How to pay for roads in 2014... without raising taxes

The SC Policy Council published this budget analysis last week.

One would think that if transportation funding were actually a priority, lawmakers would prioritize the taxes already collected for the purpose of repairing roads and bridges. Yet as much as lawmakers have taken the House and Senate floor to plead for more money for transportation, the budgets passed in both chambers don’t reflect this supposed concern.... The money is already there; only it’s being spent on corporate welfare and pork-laden earmarks.

We found at a bare minimum $644 million not currently in the Department of Transportation budget that could be transferred to the department.

• Department of Commerce: $65,277,555. Even when not including federal funds, over $65 million budgeted for the Department of Commerce could be transferred to DoT with no harmful effects. State government does more harm than good by redistributing wealth from taxpayers to state-selected companies, as much of the money allocated is budgeted to do.
• Rural Infrastructure Authority: $27,550,000. Essentially another arm of the Department of Commerce, this new agency doles out money for local projects that bureaucrats then appropriate.
• Capital Reserve Fund: $127,791,525. Often used as a slush fund for lawmakers to fund pet projects, this money could be spent on actual capital projects – like fixing roads and bridges. Instead, they decided to fund things like:
  • The Deal Closing Fund (plain ol’ corporate welfare): $24.9 million
  • Locate SC Site Inventory: $6 million
  • “Office of Innovation”: $1 million
  • Department of Commerce “Research Initiatives”: $4 million
  • Sesquicentennial State Park Splash Pad: $500,000
• Infrastructure Bank Board: $150,453,276. Although this money would be spent on “transportation,” it would be spent based on the skewed priorities of the board that has a history of funding very few counties, and road expansions, not repairs. Money is also put in this agency so it can be bonded at a much higher rate than it can in the DoT budget.
• Non-recurring Provisos (From FY14 Surplus): $187,275,934. Although it’s not prudent to rely on “one-time” money to fund major state functions, if lawmakers were serious about their concerns for transportation spending, they’d use these funds in conjunction with others to fund transportation needs. These are just a few examples-mostly from the Senate budget they decided to fund instead:
  • Partnerships for Innovation-TransformSC: $200,000
  • Deal Closing Fund (corporate welfare): $12.4 million
  • SC Council of Competitiveness: $750,000
  • Sports Development Fund: $2 million
  • Congressional Medal of Honor Bowl: $100,000
  • Historic Columbia-Woodrow Wilson Family Home: $600,000
  • Southeastern Wildlife Expo: $200,000
  • Marion County Workforce Development Training Facility: $500,000
  • U. of Charleston-Purchase of Surplus State Property: $2 million
  • Multi-Purpose Business/Entertainment/Sports Complex-City-County of Spartanburg: $380,000
• “The Money Tree”: $86,000,000. The Board of Economic Advisors recently added roughly $86 million to the state’s next fiscal year, thus giving lawmakers more money to “work with.” Although Governor Haley argued in the widely ignored executive budget that the money that falls from this “money tree” should be used for transportation, it’s unclear what lawmakers will use it for. However, it could be assumed that the House will use this extra money to help conform to the budget that the Senate desires (to avoid a conference committee).
• Legislator Pay Raises: $2,000,000. Although the additional $1,000/month for in-district expenses would be optional, the budget will need to cover the full amount since lawmakers can be counted on to take the full amount. (Remember, in-district expenses at the present level are “optional,” too.)

If lawmakers really valued funding transportation, they could easily use these items to accomplish that end. The money is there if they want to use it. They would just have to give up their raises, pork projects, the power to hand out corporate welfare. Don’t hold your breath.

Issue Spotlight: Education

Lee Stranahan, a columnist for Breitbart, once said that “Human beings have an innate, natural drive to learn things. One thing can kill this: it’s called an ‘education system.’” We need education more now than ever. The problem is, our educational system ironically fails to teach students the knowledge and skills they need. Rather than teaching key subjects, life skills, critical thinking, and creativity, we’re teaching the student how to ace a test that the teacher and the school will be evaluated on. Worse, we’ve burdened the taxpayer down to the point that some parents are financially trapped and have no other option.

How do we begin to fix this?

Funding

If there was ever a sacred cow, it’s education. It seems that any waste is excusable if it is “for the children.” You, the taxpayer, are footing the bill and you deserve to get more bang for your buck.

We spend roughly $12,000 per child in Anderson School District 4, yet the most basic supplies (like paper) have at times been rationed. Neither teachers nor parents should be forced to furnish classroom supplies out of pocket.

We can fix this if we:

• Fully fund teacher pay and classroom supplies in the education budget first. If cutbacks are made, they should be made in administration, not where teaching happens.
• Eliminate unnecessary boards such as the State Education Oversight Committee and the Anderson County Board of Education.
• Save money on school facilities by creating a set of efficient, pre-designed architectural plans that can grow with district needs. Abe Lincoln learned math with chalk on the back of a shovel - we don’t need Taj Mahals to teach students effectively. Simple strategies like building in a second unfinished story that can be expanded into, and using metal roofing, can save school districts millions of dollars in the long run.
• Allow school districts to pool their buying power to purchase supplies at a discount.
• Examine the SC Education Lottery to see if that money is being used as promised to improve education and lower costs.

Personal Responsibility

Grades Cartoon

What happened?

This country started going down the tubes when parents abdicated responsibility for raising their children to the public school system. Until parents realize that raising their children to be responsible members of society is their most important job, we will continue raising a generation with an entitlement mentality that expects everything to be handed to them on a silver platter.

That said, today we have a system that blames the teachers unfairly. We can fix this system and tilt responsibility back to the parents and students where it belongs.

We should:

• Restore effective, prompt means of discipline in the classroom and provide whatever legal protections are needed to allow this to happen.
• Reject merit pay and teacher evaluation schemes that operate according to student achievement, and instead create a work environment that attracts caring, self-motivated teachers and empowers them to do their job.
• Teach students that there is no such thing as a free lunch. If the parents cannot or will not pay for school lunch, provide ways for students to earn the money to pay for their meal.

Red Tape

Excessive red tape is driving our better teachers to an early retirement. Why collect 20 years of records that no one will look at, only to have them trashed in the end? That paper, and more importantly, that teacher’s time, could have been used better elsewhere.

To the extent that the state is responsible, we need to drastically reduce the amount of paperwork teachers have to spend time on. If we can’t do that, maybe we should eliminate some of administration’s assistants and use that money to hire teacher assistants to handle the paperwork.

Local Control

Decentralized control provides better results - our nation’s history is proof of that fact. So why would we think that letting Washington, or even Columbia, micromanage our schools is a good thing?

We’ve put ourselves on the hook for so many Federal regulations simply by applying for Federal funding. Given that Federal funds comprise a mere 10% or less of the overall funding stream, I think the return in flexibility that we would get by giving up that funding would be worthwhile.

Furthermore, each region is different and I would much rather have South Carolina deciding what is taught in South Carolina’s schools than have Washington, California, or New York decide.

We need to:

• Resist Federal experiments on our children like Common Core.
• Reject proposals that consolidate school districts.
• Support more community-based charter schools.
• Support an historically honest and academically effective curriculum, including civics, economics, American history, phonics-based reading, traditional math (not Common Core math), and practical life skills.
• Support the arts, logic, and speech and debate as key components in school curriculum.

Testing

Simply put, we test too much and we make too many important decisions on flawed test results.

Standardized tests are measuring tools designed to measure one specific thing: a student’s grasp of information relative to other students. To the extent that standardized tests reveal where a student’s needs are or where progress is being achieved, they are useful.

Attempting to measure educational quality through standardized tests is about as smart as trying to measure temperature with a spoon. When this becomes the axle which the school curriculum revolves around, standardized tests bring serious downsides to both teachers and students.

We have forced teachers to teach students how to pass a test or the teacher will pay a price. Both the Bush and the Obama administrations have been guilty of pushing us down this road, first through No Child Left Behind and more recently through Race To The Top, Common Core, and NCLB waiver requirements.

Standardized testing recently drove a Boston teacher to retire prematurely in protest:

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

We should:

• Encourage our Federal delegation to overhaul No Child Left Behind by passing the National Resolution on High-Stakes Testing.
• Reduce the number of standardized tests administered, as Texas did in 2013.

Choice

The only thing worse than a failing educational system is a failing educational system that traps parents and students and leaves them no other choice.

If you are a wealthy parent, you have other options such as private schools. But many parents cannot afford any other option besides the public school in their district, regardless of whether that school is right for their children or not. That’s not ok.

We need to:

• Allow public school choice. If you live in District 4 and want to send your child to a school in District 5, you should be able to do so without paying extra provided that there is room available.
• Allow parents to opt-out of the portion of their taxes that they would pay into the school system if they choose a different educational system such as charter, private, homeschool, or online virtual schools.

Higher Education

Barton Swaim at the SC Policy Council stated that “the exploding costs of sending your kid to a public college has nothing to do with state budgets. It has everything to do with the university budgets.” I agree.

A college degree is now yesterday’s high school diploma, since many employers put more weight on real-world experience. Overcharging for an under-valued diploma is adding insult to injury. Just as the State of South Carolina must live within its means, we should hold our state universities accountable to live within their means.

We need to:

• Accelerate college by CLEP testing high school students before they graduate. This can allow a student to skip the first two years of college and get to work on their major right away after they graduate high school.
• Hold our universities accountable for tuition price gouging and wasteful spending.
• Stop funding speculative, wasteful “research” projects such as Innovista - a set of empty buildings in Columbia that came with a $150 million price tag.
• Encourage our universities to develop and expand into low-cost online and distance learning programs similar to MIT and Stanford.

Conclusion

Fixing our education system is a complex, long-term endeavour, but at the end of the day it is a question of priorities. Do we care more about the system, or about the students the system exists for? If we are willing to start putting our students first, we can have the best education system in the nation.

All it takes is a little common sense and responsibility.