House approves deep cuts
Higher education, social services take biggest hits

By Yvonne Wenger
The Post and Courier
Wednesday, October 22, 2008

COLUMBIA — A plan to cut nearly $500 million in spending is on its way to the state Senate after the House on Tuesday voted down one proposal after another on everything from raising the cigarette tax to undoing property tax relief.

The Senate will return Thursday to debate what turned out to be an iron-clad, pre-determined agreement in the House.

How they voted
Find out how legislators voted on amendments considered Tuesday on proposals such as raising the state's cigarette tax or eliminating property tax relief. South Carolina General Assembly 117th Session, 2007-2008 Journal of the House of Representatives.

The House voted 109-3 to give the mid-year budget cuts key approval. Reps. James Smith, D-Columbia; Ken Kennedy, D-Greeleyville; and Mike Pitts, R-Laurens, voted in opposition.

The hardest blows were delivered to colleges, universities and social services, including health-care programs and agencies that serve mental health needs and disabled residents.

House Majority Leader Jim Merrill of Daniel Island warned his colleagues about what would be at risk if the House altered the agreement. If the House made too many changes, the whole agreement with the Senate could unravel and agencies then could face deep across-the-board cuts, he said.

Budget committees for the House and Senate last week drafted an agreement with input from Gov. Mark Sanford and the agencies' directors. The legislators are up against the Nov. 10 expirations of their terms, along with other constraints.

"Let's finish this budget," Merrill said. "Let's make the tough decisions."

His argument did not persuade Smith, who spent the most time at the podium.

Smith urged the House to raise the state's lowest-in-the-nation cigarette tax from 7 cents to 50 cents a pack to help the state recover revenue to help run services. His effort fizzled when it became clear the Republican leadership wouldn't budge.

Kennedy said the budget meltdown could be solved if the Legislature took back its property tax relief to home-owners. He said legislators should be spending more time debating the financial situation, considering the long-term effects it will have on the lives of South Carolinians.

"We cannot give tax relief after tax relief," Kennedy said. "There is no such thing as running a government on air."

Rep. Gilda Cobb-Hunter, D-Orangeburg, said she agreed with a lot of the issues Kennedy and Smith raised but that now wasn't the time to take them up. Those ideas can wait until January so that the agreement with the Senate wouldn't be jeopardized.

House Speaker Bobby Harrell, R-Charleston, said the agreement was carefully designed to keep government running the best it can. He noted that the House's and Senate's operating budgets took the largest percentage cuts.

"We couldn't ask other agencies to operate with less funding if the Legislature was not willing to also dramatically cut its budget," Harrell said in a statement.

If the Senate changes the cuts, the House could return as early as Friday to deal with any discrepancies in the plans. Otherwise, the House won't be back until Oct. 31, if Sanford vetoes parts of the plan.

Hit hard

University and technical colleges alone take $123 million in cuts that average just under 15 percent at each school, with much of that from payrolls and research. A program aimed at stimulating research at Clemson University, the Medical University of South Carolina and the University of South Carolina loses $10 million, while all three schools would lose cash for new high-speed data networks.

The state's adoption service program would lose a third of its payroll; a program supporting parents with autistic children loses 70 percent of operating expenses; nearly a third is cut from operating a program to help parents whose children suffer spinal cord injuries; and a program advocating for people with disabilities loses all of its state money.

The State Law Enforcement Division loses a third of its payroll for an arson and bomb unit, and a program for defending indigents loses all funds for death penalty trials. Meanwhile, a Mental Health Department program treating sexual predators loses more than 70 percent of its operating money, and a program monitoring sex offenders through the state's Probation and Parole Department loses half its operational money.

Harrell riding on 'Express'
Charleston Republican joins McCain on stump

By Yvonne Wenger
The Post and Courier
Thursday, October 9, 2008

House Speaker Bobby Harrell has the seat almost any Republican would dream about these days, on the "Straight Talk Express" with John McCain.

In a phone interview Wednesday from outside a rally near Cleveland, Harrell talked about the man he's come to know as friend, the nonstop pace of a presidential campaign and how McCain and his running mate Sarah Palin get along off-camera.

"His deep love for this country is even more obvious when you're around him personally than when you see him give speeches," Harrell, a Charleston Republican, said of McCain.

"You can feel his deep patriotism. And he is incredibly straightforward when you talk to him."

Harrell joined the presidential candidate at his invitation to sit in on the debate with Barack Obama Tuesday in Tennessee, then campaign with him Wednesday in Pennsylvania, Ohio and Wisconsin.

Harrell will fly home today from Milwaukee.

Harrell was an early McCain backer, and McCain leaned on Harrell for help winning the South Carolina primary in January, which is credited with propelling his presidential campaign out of the doldrums.

During the summer of 2007, Harrell remembers riding on a trip to Anderson with McCain on the "Straight Talk Express," then a 12-seat passenger van with room for more people.

"Oh, what a difference a few months and winning the South Carolina primary makes," Harrell said.

Now, 21 months after McCain launched his bid for the White House, Harrell said it's a different scene.

The energy at the rallies, which turned out thousands of supporters, was "incredible," and the pace of a presidential campaign "unreal," Harrell said.

McCain's addition of Palin to the Republican ticket in August gave an extra boost to his campaign, Harrell said, and added that the two get on "like they are longtime friends."

"From everything I have seen as I've been around these folks in the last couple of days, what you see is what you get," Harrell said.

Charleston Post and Courier: Reform S.C. school funding
August 3, 2008

Developing a politically palatable new way to pay for South Carolina’s public schools won’t be easy. Otherwise, that assignment would already have been completed. But unless our elected leaders accomplish that arduous task, our state’s education system will continue to be hamstrung by an outmoded funding format. This high-stakes job demands creativity, courage and compromise.
House Speaker Bobby Harrell, recognizing those needs, last year appointed a House committee to study school funding and to craft practical recommendations. That group, which last met on July 22, will convene again Tuesday.
Mr. Harrell, a Charleston Republican, aptly assessed his panel’s stern challenge Friday, telling us: “It’s critical that we deal with the formulas because they’re outdated. It’s going to create winners and losers, and that makes it politically difficult.”

Exacerbating that difficulty is the shift of public-school funding from property taxes to a state sales tax enacted by the Legislature two years ago. Speaker Harrell cites two areas of particular concern: “We need to take home values out of the formula. And we need to take poverty rates into account.”

The plight of poor districts that have long struggled to find sufficient resources for their schools highlights the vital issue of funding equity. Calls for a full takeover of school funding by the state, however, meet strong resistance from many South Carolinians, in and out of political office, who are opposed to the higher taxes that such a switch would almost certainly force.

The House panel examining this problem, and a Senate panel doing the same, cover a wide range of political and ideological affiliations.

Mr. Harrell hailed his House group as “a broad-based committee that represents all areas of the state.” He added that it includes “Republican and Democrat, black and white, male and female, rich and poor,” and argued that its diverse composition maximizes its chances of reaching a viable consensus.

While legislators are understandably wary about producing a new funding system that riles large parts of the taxpaying public, Mr. Harrell emphasizes that the overriding consequence of failing to produce one means “that we’ll continue to distribute school funding money on a formula that makes absolutely no sense.”

Certainly it will be more difficult for South Carolina to improve public schools while carrying the unnecessary burden of an anachronistic funding format.

The 2008 legislative session, conducted during an election year, didn’t address this pressing issue. The 2009 legislative session will do so only if lawmakers make the tough calls required to fulfill an overdue obligation.

Greenville News: Sanford-Legislature clash raises issue of diminished Governor's Office
By Dan Hoover • STAFF WRITER • August 2, 2008
 
He came into the Governor's Office pledged to vastly expand its power and to ignite the state's underperforming economy, but after six years of warring with an aroused and hostile Legislature run by his fellow Republicans, Mark Sanford may leave his successor with a mighty rebuilding task.

In his first inaugural address on a cold January day in 2003, Sanford said his administration "plans to formulate policies that will improve the economic well-being of our people and raise per capita income over time."

Sanford's bid to centralize power in the Governor's Office, at the expense of a Legislature that would have to relinquish the source of much of its clout, never came off. Instead, the state's bureaucracy remains split among the governor, agencies overseen by boards elected by the Legislature, and assorted independent fiefdoms.

And relations between the first and second floors of the Statehouse have perhaps never been worse.

Last week's House-Senate economic development proposal for a multipronged effort to attract knowledge-based jobs and raise the state's per capita income underscored what some view as Sanford's ideological rigidity that has ceded the initiative to the Legislature.

Sanford allies reject the notion of a weakened executive branch while placing the clash in terms not of personalities but of a small-government chief executive and big-government legislators.

'Chronically overspent'

Joel Sawyer, Sanford's spokesman, traced the roots of the conflict to a free enterprise-oriented governor who wants to limit government growth and a "supposedly Republican-dominated Legislature (that) has chronically overspent."

Last week's legislative initiative, built around government agencies, reflected that and was a "political maneuver to take the focus away from spending," he said.

"It says a lot about this supposed philosophy of Republicans who believe the economy is built upon government intervention versus government getting out of the way," Sawyer said. High praise for it from Senate Minority Leader John Land, D-Manning, "means one thing is hold on to your wallet," he said.

The press conference was marked by sharp criticism of the governor by House Speaker Bobby Harrell, R-Charleston; Senate President Pro Tem Glenn McConnell, R-Charleston; and Senate Finance Committee Chairman Hugh Leatherman, R-Florence, none of whom have opposition.

Sanford's spokesman, however, dismissed it as election-year politicking.

Some say that six years of increasingly bitter bickering between Sanford, the quintessential outsider who never served in the Legislature, and lawmakers accustomed to give-and-take negotiating mixed with a dose of political camaraderie, has taken its toll, mostly on the Governor's Office.

Although Sanford has won a modest small-business tax cut and reorganization of the Transportation Department and has closed the deal on Vought Aircraft Industries' Charleston facility, much of the program he campaigned on has died in the Legislature.

"The sleeping giant is awake," said Blease Graham, a University of South Carolina political scientist, referring to a Legislature aroused over threats to its dominance and the Sanford style.

Now, he said, "a lot depends on (Sanford's) successor."

Graham said the restructuring of state government that gave additional authority to the executive branch in 1995 was a desirable trend "in a contemporary state in a dynamic federal system that often demands speedy, unified action as an essential element of public policy."

"Many times legislatures require more coaxing to go along with major changes. This is where executive conduct is important and where the emphasis on informal powers of the executive is pivotal. And informal powers suggest the ability to persuade, to inform, to lead convincingly, even to compromise," he said.

No compromise?

The ongoing executive-legislative spat "seems to be a case of conviction over compromise," Graham said, "and that conviction may be perceived as meddling in electoral politics, as being insensitive to positions of key legislators, as being downright ornery on occasions. It doesn't take long for trust to break down; it may take a generation to rebuild it."

Sanford's support of conservative challengers to some legislators in the June primaries, backed by tens of thousands of dollars from a self-admitted New York admirer of the governor, may have further widened the breach.

"That's complete fiction," Sawyer said.

"A lot of our key accomplishments have been things we compromised on. We haven't gotten all we wanted in tax cuts and school choice," but compromise brought lower taxes for small business, more charter schools and a streamlined Department of Transportation with executive branch control, Sawyer said.

Sanford critics are "typically" adherents of big government, he said, "and that's something we absolutely won't compromise on."

But it may be nothing more than a clash of different styles, backgrounds and dynamics that will remain unique to this administration.

Clemson University professor David Woodard, a Republican consultant-pollster, predicted last week that because of two terms marked by slow growth and very public executive-legislative battling, those who run for the 2010 GOP nomination for governor will do so as "the un-Sanford," distancing themselves from him.

There has been a cost to the way government should work, Woodard said.

"The animosity between the Legislature and the governor means that the Legislature, vested with the power of the purse and the requirement to balance budget revenues, has been the scene of all the negotiating. The governor is just a veto voice. As a result you have legislators running the state, and virtually ignoring the governor because he refuses to talk with them about what they see as important," he said.

Former Democratic Gov. Jim Hodges observed that "one thing you learn as governor is some days you are the stick and some days you are the piñata."

'Healthy competition'

Hodges said that traditionally "there is always a healthy amount of competition" between the governor and legislative leaders, one in which private working relationships work better than going public.

"I'm not sure that's the case right now, and that's troubling.

"In our state, the veto power is a significant tool. I used to tell legislators, 'If my agenda doesn't pass, rest assured your agenda won't pass.' That threat was backed up by a reliable group of legislators who would back all reasonable veto messages. And it allowed us to co-exist in a productive way.

"If the governor can't put together the votes to sustain vetoes, then the Governor's Office has considerably less power to set any agenda. The danger is that the Legislature grows comfortable ignoring veto messages from the governor in future administrations, and that weakens the office," Hodges said.

Hollis "Chip" Felkel, a longtime Republican operative and Greenville business adviser, says Sanford's refusal to compromise "has created a chasm the next governor is going to have to spend a whole lot of political capital to repair."

By working the system, "he could have gotten so much more done. Restructuring? Carroll Campbell had a Democratic House and Senate and he still managed to get some restructuring done because he understood the value and power of reaching out to people, and, God forbid, actually compromising on a few things."

While the state has watched big-time development deals head to Alabama, Tennessee and North Carolina, Sanford has faced mostly unfavorable comparisons to many Republicans' iconic gold standard for leadership, the late Gov. Carroll Campbell, the guy who could win over reluctant legislators with closed-door bonhomie or knock their heads together, the guy who sealed the deal with BMW.

Harrell and Leatherman drew that distinction again last week to chide Sanford for failing to use what they said is the wider array of tools at his disposal and watching the state's once low unemployment rate become one of the worst and income levels lag behind those of neighboring states.

In July 2005, just after becoming speaker, Harrell said, "Since Mark's become governor, I don't think we picked (job growth) back up like it was when Carroll Campbell was governor."

Over the past 36 months, Harrell's opinion has only hardened.

Eclipsed Campbell's jobs

To critics of Sanford's jobs creation efforts, Sawyer says the governor has a sparkling record that exceeds his Republican predecessors.

Citing U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reports, he said Sanford generated 154,783 new jobs in this first 5 years in office, compared with 137,130 for the same period of Campbell's administration, and that his first four years topped Beasley's one term, 147,409-121,794.

Sen. David Thomas, R-Fountain Inn, says Sanford "has not been a Carroll Campbell in recruiting industry, but there aren't many like Carroll Campbell, who have that business savvy. I'm not sure I'd criticize him for that, exclusively."

"It seems like it was about the way it was, no difference one way or the other," Thomas said of executive-legislative balance.

Robert Royall, the retired banker who served as commerce secretary in the Beasley administration, defended Sanford's economic development record: "We don't need to jump on the governor. They're doing a good job."

But, he added, "If there's no teamwork, that's a severe problem. The whole idea is to work together as a team and nice things happen."

The State:  S.C. House pushing new immigration reform bill

BYLINE: NOELLE PHILLIPS, nophillips@thestate.com

The S.C. House of Representatives unveiled another immigration reform bill Monday, setting up a battle with the Senate over whose version should be enacted.

Leaders of both sides have said immigration will be a priority for the 2008 session, but each wants its version of immigration legislation to be the one that passes.

House Speaker Bobby Harrell, R-Charleston, said the House proposal is more wide-reaching than a package the Senate approved in 2007. That Senate bill is awaiting action in the House judiciary committee.

Harrell explained the House plan Monday at news conferences across the state.

He plans to file the bill, which he labeled The South Carolina Plan, this week.

About 15 members of the House Republican Caucus joined Harrell as he outlined the details, saying this would be the third year the chamber has tried to get immigration laws passed by the entire General Assembly.

"We've been at the forefront of looking at and studying this issue," said House Majority Leader Jim Merrill, R-Charleston. "Only now do we feel we have the momentum."

Lawmakers say they are responding to voters' concerns about the state's fast-growing immigrant population. South Carolina's Hispanic population grew 47 percent between 2000 and 2005, the Census Bureau reported.

Georgia passed immigration reform in 2006, and South Carolina must act before the state becomes a "safe haven," Harrell said.

Harrell's bill would be one of at least 35 bills addressing immigration, and many overlap.

Even with so many bills on the table, Harrell was optimistic his version would get through the House within three weeks.

Harrell's bill includes some of the same measures already addressed in the Senate's immigration package, such as a requirement for the State Law Enforcement Division to negotiate with the federal government so its agents can enforce federal immigration laws.

The bill does include new proposals, such as prohibiting illegal immigrants from attending state colleges and universities and penalties for towns and cities that ignore immigration laws.

While House leaders said they are determined to move quickly on creating immigration laws, Sen. Jim Ritchie, R-Spartanburg, said the fastest way for the House to pass a bill would be for it to act on last year's Senate proposal.

Representatives could add their ideas to the Senate bill and send it back for consideration, he said.

"The only reason for them to start on a whole new bill is political grandstanding," Ritchie said.

Reach Phillips at (803) 771-8307.

###

Spartanburg Herald-Journal: Op-Ed – Tax increase unnecessary

Some lawmakers want to raise the state's gasoline tax.

The tragic collapse of an interstate bridge in

Minnesota has given them a reason. The state has a $2.9 billion backlog in bridge repairs, and the state gasoline tax hasn't been raised in 20 years.

It sounds reasonable.

Until you remember that the state had $1.7 billion in new money this year that it could have spent on road and bridge projects and didn't.

Lawmakers faced an easy budget this year. With all that new money, they didn't have to cut and do without. They gave a token amount back to taxpayers by trimming the sales tax on groceries and making a microscopic cut in the state income tax. But they spent the rest, about 88 percent, on their own priorities.

Now, they want to come back and ask taxpayers for more.

The answer should be a resounding no.

The taxpayers have given lawmakers a big enough budget surplus for the state to take care of that $2.9 billion backlog completely in two years.

It is necessary to repair the state's bridges, but it can be done with current state revenues.
Bridge repairs could have been under way already. Lawmakers considered allocating more money to roads and bridges but didn't. For the past two years, the state has experienced budget surpluses of more than $1 billion each year, and still lawmakers didn't take care of the state's bridges. With that record, it takes a lot of hubris to come back and ask taxpayers for more.

But Senate Finance Committee Chairman Hugh Leatherman doesn't want the state's general fund to be used to fund bridge repairs. He'd rather raise gasoline taxes as a "user fee" charged to those who drive on the roads.

This is nothing more than an excuse to raise taxes. The entire state benefits from a maintained highway system. There is no good reason not to use an overflowing general fund to pay for bridge improvements rather than raising taxes.

Lawmakers would do better to follow the plan of House Speaker Bobby Harrell, who has identified some forms of revenue, such as automobile sales taxes, that could be diverted from the general fund to pay for roads and bridges.

Next year is an election year, and voters should tell campaigning lawmakers loudly and clearly: There is no need for increased taxes if you will simply restrain your spending and allocate existing revenue to roads and bridges.

To view this article online, go to:
http://www.goupstate.com/article/20070807/NEWS/708070301/-1/BUSINESS

The State: S.C. House speaker ‘thoroughly enjoying' job

Harrell upbeat despite contentious year

By John O'Connor, joconnor@thestate.com

The black cap toe oxfords were new in January, but House Speaker Bobby Harrell had worn holes in the soles by the time the Legislature finally adjourned Friday.

In his second year as speaker, Harrell, R-Charleston, put some miles on his shoes by placing himself at the middle of much of the debate: a war of words with the Senate over Transportation Department reform, workers' compensation and tax cuts; a divisive election to replace a state Supreme Court justice; and holding up the budget until the last minute when all other key legislation had passed.

While Harrell can claim the House met its agenda this year, State House leaders say those victories have come at a cost.

The House and Senate were often at each others throats, while Harrell had to fend off challenges from House Democrats and, at times, from a vocal, uncompromising band of House Republicans.

And some wonder if the past two years are prelude for a run for governor in 2010.

“I am thoroughly enjoying this job, even with all the difficulties,” Harrell said. “It was a little more contentious than the first year, but we got them (House agenda items) done.”

Harrell's two years in charge have been marked by an ability — building on his past writing House budgets — to head off battles ahead of time, a direct approach in dealing with the House, Senate and the governor and, above all, a focus on improving South Carolina's economy through education, research, tax credits and other incentives.

This year that commitment included additional money for science and technology scholars; perks to promote hydrogen research; as well as reducing the nuts-and-bolts business cost of insuring workers for on-the-job injuries.

Harrell, colleagues said, has also been willing to listen to House members and is honest about where he stands. Those qualities were put to test as lawmakers tried to wrap up work two weeks ago.

After Harrell refused to allow a final House vote on the budget first, Democrats pooled their members and prevented passage of the Transportation Department reform bill — a symbolic kick to the speaker's shin.

The following morning — with no state budget and a 5 p.m. deadline approaching — Harrell spoke to House Democrats, apologizing for his tone with the group the previous day. But, he reminded them, he was speaker for the entire House and had to do what he thought was right.

That meant passing Transportation Department changes, budget or not.

“There are deep divisions that we really haven't experienced before in the House,” Harrell said from the floor that day, exactly two years after becoming speaker. “It's been a tough anniversary day.”

In the end, Harrell took Democrats at their word and allowed a budget vote. Minutes later the Transportation Department bill was easily approved as well.

Earlier in the session, Harrell was on the losing end of a contentious election for a state Supreme Court seat. Democrats and a number of Republicans joined together, choosing Don Beatty over a candidate Harrell supported.

That election, Harrell said, taught him he needs to get involved earlier when its time to choose new judges.

Minority Leader Harry Ott, D-Calhoun, said Harrell has generally been fair, though not always accommodating, to Democrats. This year's budget, which took effect July 1, contains a number of concessions, including expanding health insurance for poor children and applying income tax cuts equally among all taxpayers.

“He's taken some hits from his caucus for working with us, and he's taken some hits from our caucus,” Ott said. “He has allowed us to be part of the decision-making process.”

But the hardest hits this year have come from the Senate, after Harrell and the House issued an ultimatum for tax cuts, Transportation Department reform and workers' compensation changes.

Senators blasted the House for running a public relations campaign, and noted the final version of workers' compensation and transportation law contained much of the Senate's plan.

As time ran out and the state budget remained in limbo, the tone got personal.

“You go downstairs and tell the little wizard to find you the money,” House Majority Leader Jim Merrill, R-Berkeley, said, referring to Senate Finance chairman Hugh Leatherman, R-Florence, during a debate about adding money to build new roads.

“You go talk to Napoleon, and then we'll see if he sets you free,” Sen. Tommy Moore, D-Aiken, shot back, referring to Harrell.

Senate President Pro Tempore Glenn McConnell, R-Charleston, said that despite the statements, the House and Senate have been able to work together.

Even while both sides were e-mailing a wave of press releases, Harrell and House leadership were meeting with McConnell and senators to work out a deal.

The ultimatums, McConnell said, helped unify the Senate. Likewise, McConnell said, the tactic may have had the same effect in the House. The goal, he said, remains the best policy for South Carolina, and both bodies will continue to work together.

“I think it was more for consolidating the home front in his own house where there have been rumors of unsettled waters,” McConnell said. “I just know Bobby and know he's been focused on moving the state forward.”

Though McConnell and others said they intended to pass DOT and workers' compensation bills, Harrell said he meant to make sure they got done this year to prevent any loss of support while the Legislature was adjourned.

“It's unfortunate when things get personal,” Harrell said. “At times they have to get confrontational.”

At the same time, Harrell is always willing to work. Last year, a rooftop dinner meeting with Leatherman paved the way for the property tax plan.

On Friday, senators were concerned the House might try to play games and renege in overturning some of Sanford's vetoes. Again, Harrell met with Leatherman to reassure him they would not, this time in the Legislative Library — halfway between the two chambers.

Harrell has been suggested as a possible candidate for governor in 2010, and the public showdowns, early support for U.S. Sen. John McCain's presidential campaign and commercials touting products made in South Carolina have all added to the speculation.

Francis Marion University political science professor Neal Thigpen was at a political fundraiser with Harrell recently. Thigpen does not think there is any doubt Harrell will run.

“He's been an exceedingly effective speaker,” Thigpen said. “He's just as charming as he could be. He's ambitious, but it just doesn't stand out on him. He hasn't gotten it written across his forehead.”

Harrell denies the speculation and said the things he pushed for this year are the same kinds of policies he has supported since first elected.

“A lot of people have been talking to me, asking me to do that,” Harrell said. “I want to get re-elected to the House and be speaker of the House of Representatives.

“You do what you think is right, and the chips fall where they fall.”

Reach O'Connor at (803) 771-8358.