Trash talkIs being the nation's dumpsite good for SC?By Bill Davis, senior editor MARCH 6, 2009 -- In two weeks, a Senate subcommittee will return to discuss a proposed statewide landfill moratorium that could have ramifications outlasting the current economic challenges facing the state.
 Sen. Tom Davis (R-Beaufort) has championed a bill intended to curtail the incursion of out-of-state companies from erecting massive “mega-dumps” throughout the state.
“The numbers are staggering,“ said Davis, who called calling it a “David versus Goliath” situation, where well-funded national companies are trying shoe-horn huge landfills into South Carolina.
According to Davis, nine states already use South Carolina as its dumping grounds -- New York, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Delaware, North Carolina, Tennessee, Georgia, Florida and Virginia.
“Almost 30 percent of the waste disposed of in South Carolina last year came from other states, and that amount increases steadily each year,” said Davis.
Davis’s rhetoric was redolent of the arguments surrounding the continued dumping of radioactive materials at the Savannah River Site.
Adjusting the process
 The state Department of Health and Environmental Control has acknowledged the permitting process was “broken.” It is looking to adjusting its “determination of need” procedure, according to Davis.
DHEC spokesperson Thom Berry said the agency was looking internally into changing the procedure. He also said that while the state produced 4.5 million tons of municipal trash for FY 2008, it disposed of 6.2 million tons that year.
Both numbers were down as much as a half-million tons from the previous fiscal year, according to DHEC.
“Some areas have excess capacity, and some areas are closer to their capacity, which is why landfills are used regionally,” said Berry.
Berry said there is currently only one “mega-dump” going through the permitting process, the one proposed for Marlboro County.
Already enough capacity
“The state already has twice the landfill capacity that it needs,” according to Heather Spires, a lobbyist from the S.C. Coastal Conservation League. It is working on the issue with more than two dozen environmentalist groups from around the state.
 Berry confirmed that there was currently close to 10 million tons of yearly capacity permitted across the state.
Spires said the environmental community came together on the issue after three “mega-dumps” were in the proposed across the state, one each in Marlboro, Williamsburg and Cherokee counties.
“No one wants the seventh-largest dump in the nation next to their house,” she said.
Industy's pitch
“First off, I reject the notion of referring to landfills as mega-dumps,” said Wes Muir, spokesperson for Waste Management, Inc., one of the companies looking to open a facility in the state. Muir defended his company’s facilities, stating that they were engineer-designed with liners and other apparatus to stop leaching of nasty substances,
Muir acknowledged that past industry mishaps have created “reasonable concerns” in the public mind that need to be assuaged.
“We see a well-managed plant as our social license to do business,” said Muir, who added that financial coverage is provided by his company to communities should an accident happen and the environment, or its residents, were harmed.
He said the landfill his company has proposed for South Carolina was better termed a “three-cycle plant,” which would be capable of a turning trash-produced methane into a renewable fuel source.
Muir listed other positives a larger facility brought with it, along with economic advantages to the company: “Clean and green” knowledge-based jobs, an increased tax base, and economic development to the community and state that welcomes it.
March 17 meeting scheduled
Sen. Danny Verdin (R-Laurens) will chair the Senate subcommittee looking into the proposed moratorium when it meets again on March 17. He declined to make comment until that time.
Rep. Jeff Duncan (R-Clinton) who chairs the Ag Committee in the House, said his body is taking a wait-and-see approach with what emerges from the Senate before acting.
Sen. Brad Hutto (D-Orangeburg), who serves on the subcommittee, wasn’t as cautious. Hutto, whose district does not include a proposed mega-dump, was and is unabashedly against the moratorium
 Hutto likened landfills to water resources -- rivers, lakes -- in the state: “We’ve got plenty, but not always where we need ’em.” He pointed to several counties whose proximity to fragile rivers and ecosystems mean they have to rely more on out-of-county and out-of-state landfills, like Davis‘s Beaufort County. “As do many of the counties located along our state’s borders,” he said.
Hutto said the solution was not to create a statewide moratorium, but to focus the debate on changing procedures and policies at DHEC, and promulgating law only as needed.
“What we need is a rifle approach,” said Hutto, where the state can manage its environmental concerns one at a time. “The moratorium is the shotgun approach.”
One thing both Hutto and Davis agreed on: any changes in state law or DHEC policies would come too late to affect the proposed Marlboro facility.
Crystal ball. It’s telling that Davis has pitched himself into the middle of the fight, and not just because of his district’s seaside location. As the former chief of staff to Mark Sanford, Davis was on hand, and apparently in lock-step, with the governor as the latter fought for and won series of land-use conservation measures. As a result, any moratorium that survives both the House and the Senate may be veto-proof. But an uglier issue may cloud the horizon, and that is, of course, the state’s economy. The question will arise, as it relates to the moratorium, is this the time to turn away any money -- even dirty, trashy money?
|
Budget debate on House floor
With the main part of the budget debate looming on the floor of the House, legislators have scheduled few, if any, substantive committee meetings next week, as Representatives focus on the budget fight and Senators await the outcome of next week’s affray.
In the Senate, an LCI subcommittee will meet Wednesday at 9 a.m. in 207 Gressette to discuss a host of bills, including one passed over from the House dealing with secret ballot voting for unions.
Immediately following that meeting, the full Education Committee will meet at 10 a.m. in 207 Gressette and welcome Chamber of Commerce president and chief executive officer Otis Rawl for a presentation.
Debate in the Senate is expected to continue on the subjects of payday lending and reforming the state Employment Security Commission, and several bills concerning the Department of Disabilities and Special Needs will likely surface on the floor.
In related agency agendas:
- DHEC. The Atlantic Compact Commission will meet March 23 at 12:30 p.m. in Jasmine and Carolina Wren rooms at the Hilton Hotel, 924 Senate Street, Columbia.
|
Budget fight ahead in House
Legislators in the House are gearing up for a big fight on the floor next week during debate on the FY 2009-10 state budget. Ways and Means chairman Dan Cooper (R-Piedmont) said this week that he expected the Democratic Caucus, led by Minority Leader Harry Ott (D-St. Matthews), to oppose much of the budget.
 Why? Because Ott rightly would be able to seize on a “discombobulated” House Republican Caucus that Cooper said couldn’t seem to get on the same page when it came to which parts of the proposed $5.6 billion budget to cut.
The biggest battle, according to Tyler Jones, the recently hired executive director of the S.C. Democratic House Caucus, will be the proposed $122 million cut to counties and municipalities, which he said amounted to the GOP attempting to pass on a de facto tax increase to local political subdivisions.
“Some of the counties will be forced to cut basic services, like fire and water,” said Jones, who complained that the majority party had made little to no attempt to include his colleagues in budget discussions. Jones also said that it was key for the state’s future that the state insurance for poorer kids program be expanded to families making 250 percent of the national poverty levels.
The House has until the end of the month to send its completed budget to the Senate.
Stimulus position
Gov. Mark Sanford announced this week he will unveil his final position on whether the state will take the federal stimulus money being proffered by the Obama administration.
Interestingly, the governor has already accepted some of the stimulus. Still, Sanford has been a staunch critic who has always massaged the point on whether he would block any more of the money coming to his state. Legislators are prepared for an end-run should Sanford try to block even big chunks of the $8 billion flowing into the state’s depleted coffers.
Bill watch
One of the bills we’ve been following would have allowed drivers to store their handguns under the front seat of their car as they drove. It has been voted down in a House subcommittee. The Senate has sent a crime bill to the House that would allow warrant-less searches of convicted criminals out on parole or probation.
|
… And they’re off
Making good on two years of rumors and speculation, U.S. Rep. Gresham Barrett (R-S.C.) announced officially this week he would be running for governor in 2012.
 Barrett, considered one of the GOP frontrunners in the state, along with Lt. Gov. Andre Bauer and Attorney General Henry McMaster, was joined this week by Furman University political scientist Brent Nelsen on the Republican ticket. There are no announced Democratic candidates.
In related news. Rep. Carl Gullick (R-Lake Wylie) has announced he will not be seeking reelection.
Cigarette tax redux
There’s growing concern in the House that the cigarette tax increase plan put forward by House Speaker Bobby Harrell (R-Charleston) may be in trouble. Harrell, who blocked last year’s increase because it wasn’t revenue neutral, authored a bill that would increase the state’s per-pack tax from 7 cents to 50 cents to pay for health care insurance premium assistance programs for businesses.
But, with the failing economy and little good tax revenue news on the horizon, some Republicans in the House are looking to put the money the increase would generate into the General Fund for two years, according to several legislators who asked not to be identified. After that two-year period, they say the money would be dedicated to state health care programs, which is what Democrats in the House have argued for the past two sessions.
|
Don't get caught up in handout blame gameBy Andy Brack, editor and publisher MARCH 6, 2009 - - With the economy in the tank and unemployment on the rise, people who need a little help are easy targets for finger-pointers.
 “They just need to go out and get a job,” one might say. Another might chime in, “They’re killing me because my tax dollars are paying them to be lazy and sit around on welfare.”
Let’s resist this kind of subtle racist rant. Instead, let’s hold state leaders accountable for creating a brighter jobs environment and working to help people weather the economic storm.
If they can’t do that, they should be shown the door.
Poverty in South Carolina is a fact of life. The state ranks 11th in the country with more than 642,000 living in poverty, according to 2007 numbers by KidsCount. In 2000, it was 13th with 557,000 people in poverty. Half those in poverty in South Carolina are black; about half are white, according to StateHealthFacts.org, a Web site run by the Kaiser Family Foundation.
So while poverty is increasing, interestingly, the number of people getting government assistance actually is going down. It’s the result of what happened in the 1990s when President Bill Clinton reformed “welfare as we know it.” If you’ll recall, people no longer can get “welfare handouts” for life. They’re limited to two years of lifetime assistance.
In 1997-98 in South Carolina, an average of 44,649 families a month received monetary financial aid, according to the state Department of Social Services. Ten years later, the monthly average dropped by almost 12,000 families to 32,985. The amount of money spent on traditional welfare 10 years ago was $38 million per month; last year, benefits from the Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF) program were $33 million per month.
So picking on people who receive direct monetary help to validate simmering prejudices just isn’t justified. There are fewer now “on welfare” than in years past.
Another indicator is Medicaid. It’s a myth that Medicaid, a health assistance program for the poor, is a “welfare program” for people who don’t work, according to the S.C. Hospital Association. Some numbers:
- 51 percent of people who receive Medicaid are white.
- On average, low-income families who get Medicaid stay on it for only two years; children average 2.5 years.
- Some 65 percent of people enrolled in Medicaid are in working families. The elderly and disabled account for about a quarter of the people who receive Medicaid, but use 62 percent of the resources.
 McKinley Washington, a former state senator from Charleston County who now chairs the state Employment Security Commission, says he sees increasing needs among all kinds of South Carolinians. At employment centers, he sees people looking for work who have doctorate degrees. At a Presbyterian Church where he pastors on Edisto Island, he sees hardship among rural residents.
“It’s the same thing all over,” Washington said. “You’ve got people all over really crying for jobs, looking for jobs.”
And more people are looking for food help than ever before, said Jermaine Husser, who runs the Lowcountry Food Bank. Demand on his organization this year is up 40 percent. Last year, the non-profit gave away 10.5 million pounds of food. This year, it will approach 15 million pounds.
“They’re coming in to supplement food stamps, or they’re coming in for the first time,” he said.
The number of people receiving food stamps has grown dramatically over 10 years. Last year, some 574,845 people per month on average received the benefit, up from 314,799 per month on average in 1997-98, according to DSS.
While some now might find it easy to target their blame to those receiving food help, our leaders really need to make job growth their first priority. But sadly, that doesn’t seem to be happening now at the Statehouse. Instead, they’re fiddling with bills on abortion, handguns under seats, smoking in cars and shuffling agencies from one place to another.
As my old boss Fritz Hollings often says, now is the time to keep your eyes on the doughnut (more jobs), not the hole.
|
SC Policy Council The public spiritedness of our underwriters allows us to bring SC Statehouse Report to you at no cost. This issue's underwriter is the South Carolina Policy Council. Since 1986, the Policy Council has brought together civic, community and business leaders from all over our state to discuss innovative policy ideas that advance the principles of limited government and free enterprise. No other think tank in South Carolina can match the Policy Council's success in assembling the top national and state experts on taxes, education, environmental policy, health care and numerous other issues. That ability to bring new ideas to the forefront, lead the policy debate and create a broad base of support for sensible reform is what makes our organization the leader in turning good ideas into good state policy. For more information, go to: www.scpolicycouncil.com.
|
Budget cut would be devastating to counties
By L. Gregory Pearce, Jr.
President, SC Association of Counties
MARCH 6, 2009 – On Feb. 19, the House Ways and Means Committee slashed funding to local governments by $122 million. This amounts to a 42 percent cut to what counties should receive under the statutory formula in the State Aid to Subdivisions Act. While many state agencies are seeing budget cuts that take them back to FY 2006 funding levels, the effect of this 42 percent cut takes local governments back 15 years – to FY 1995 levels. This will have a devastating effect on county government and the basic services we provide to our citizens every day.
 State aid to counties dates back to the time when legislative delegations, predominately the resident senator, set county budgets. Individual taxes were earmarked over the years on a piecemeal basis to share with counties. “Aid to Subdivisions” first appeared as a separate section of the State Appropriations Act in 1947. By the time “home rule” came to local governments, a patchwork of 11 different tax sources, each with their own formula, made up “Aid to Subdivisions.” Typically, counties did not know what their funding would be until the State Budget was passed, making county budget planning extremely difficult.
This all changed with the passage of the State Aid to Subdivisions Act in 1991. This act did away with the complicated funding formula and instead created a “Local Government Fund” that was tied to a stable formula: 4.5 percent of the state’s general fund revenues of the latest completed fiscal year. Further, the act provided that if mid-year cuts were necessary, the Local Government Fund could be cut no lower than the funding received in the immediate preceding year.
For counties, state aid is particularly significant. Counties not only provide local government services (law enforcement, roads, garbage, sewer, emergency services), but also a number of state services at the local level (courts, elections, emergency preparedness, libraries). Counties also provide support to state offices (DSS, Juvenile Justice, Health Department).
This funding source has not gone unscathed, however. Beginning in 1998, a number of funds were moved from the general fund to a “trust fund.” The net effect was to decrease the pot from which the formula is tied, amounting to a loss over the years in the hundreds of millions of dollars. We have had several mid-year budget cuts as well. This current fiscal year, we have had two cuts that amounted to a loss of more than $19 million in the Local Government Fund.
The hamstringing of local governments
Further acts by the General Assembly have hamstrung local government even more. We have seen tax exemptions grow, the assessment ratio on cars cut (this totals a loss of nearly $500 million to date), and counties’ revenue-raising mechanisms drastically curtailed by the Local Government Fiscal Authority Act. As part of Act 388 passed in 2006, property tax increases are subject to a millage cap which will not permit the loss of this state funding to be made up in property tax increases. Act 388 also imposed a 15% valuation cap on the assessed value of property, which has the effect of decreasing property tax revenues – revenues that are already decreasing because of the downturn in the economy.
The economic crisis has impacted county government just as it has affected all sectors. A number of counties already have had to initiate hiring freezes, impose unpaid furloughs, trigger layoffs, and even cut salaries across-the-board. Others have had to curtail services or postpone or scale back major projects and infrastructure repair. The loss of another $122 million will have disastrous consequences.
In my county – Richland County – we already estimate a $5 million shortfall in the current fiscal year, owing in part to a $1.2 million mid-year reduction in the Local Government Fund. We have absorbed this shortfall by reducing all operations by 1.5 percent. The impact of an additional $8.1 million loss in our share would mean a possible $2 million cut to the sheriff’s office, a $1.3 million cut to the detention center, and a $700,000 cut to EMS – which equates to the eliminating of 20 paramedics/EMTs and the closing of two EMS stations. In addition, we would have to cut judicial services by $600,000, public works by $400,000 and then find some way to cut $2.8 million from remaining departments.
If it affects my county that way, imagine what it does for our poorer counties in South Carolina. We find ourselves at a crossroads in our ability to provide the basic local government services that South Carolina citizens expect and demand. The frustration is that this situation is not of our own making.
Raising taxes and/or cutting services is at least palpable when you can point to the local circumstances that made these actions necessary. But it’s a hard pill to swallow when you have to take such actions to make up for state budget shortfalls. I hope that members of the House will not succumb to the pressures of the House leadership, but will save our taxpayers from the ruthless pillaging these actions represent. I urge all citizens to contact their House members and demand that they leave the funding formula intact and restore this $122 million cut. If they do not act, the results will be no less than devastating.
L. Gregory Pearce Jr., a member of Richland County Council, is president of the South Carolina Association of Counties.
RECENT MY TURN COMMENTARIES
|
3/1: Timely commentary on rural SCTo Statehouse Report:
I found your editorial, "Legislators need to stop forgetting our rural areas," very timely and appropriate. I happen to live in Williamsburg County where I relocated from Marlboro County. I find it sickening how the legislative delegations for rural counties, particularly, those in the Pee Dee Region, shortchange their constituents election after election after election.
But the problem isn't just at the state level. It also rest within these counties and municipal councils who refuse to do anything to create something that slightly resembles quality of life in these rural communities. Case in point, the federal prisons in Marlboro and Williamsburg counties bought in 300 plus jobs to each county. Less than 15 percent (my personal estimate) of the prison employees live in the counties.
Since there's an overage of available housing in these counties, the elected officials argue the schools are the problems. I beg to differ... many of the students who attend these very same schools receive an excellent education -- for those who want to learn. They go on to college and do very well for themselves. So "the schools" have served as a convenient political excuse to deprive these counties and their residents of economic development.
These elected officials can recite the list of projects and money they've bought in to help their constituents and communities, but the facts of consistent high unemployment and persistent poverty are the real indicator of their achievements as legislators and council members.
-- Roosevelt Henegan Jr., Kingstree, SC
|
Ups and downs of the week
 MUSC. The Hollings Cancer Center has earned the designation as a national cancer center for its good works, clearing the way for more trials and funding. More: The Post and Courier.
 Unemployment. Re-jiggered federal figures decreased the state’s December jobless rate by nearly 0.8 percent, or by 22,000 more workers; the downside was that South Carolina is still third highest in the country at 8.8 percent unemployment. More: Greenville News.
Prison spending. A new report says the state spends too much money and attention on imprisoning and not enough on parole and probation. The upside may be that Attorney General Henry McMaster’s “middle court” plan to divert non-violent drug offenders from state prisons may be gaining traction.
 Unemployment. The state may need to borrow another $300 million to cover unemployment benefits over the coming year, on top of the $171 million it’s already borrowed. More: Greenville News.
DDSN. Two weeks ago, the governor cleared house on its board, now the director of the state’s Department of Disabilities and Special Needs resigned in the face of calls for sweeping reform. More: The State.
Newspapers. After the latest round of layoffs, the state’s newspaper industry may soon rely on a roomful of monkeys on typewriters to cover beats, write Shakespeare’s complete works.
|
Inside the car ...
|