MAY 21, 2010 -- The end-of-session fight over next year’s state budget might center on whether the best way to offset lagging tax collections and an out-of-balance state tax structure is to increase fines and fees .  Or, as some Statehouse leaders now say, the battle may focus on abortion.

This week, the House sent the Senate its revised budget bill for the 2010-11 fiscal year. The pared-down version included $5 billion in the General Fund, which is fueled by state taxes.

Included in the memo were differences over major cuts to Department of Health and Human Services programs, including several hot-button topics like reducing funding for supplying medications to AIDS patients, along with several items highlighting House reticence to augment the General Fund with increased fines and fees.

Just a few years ago, the General Fund portion was projected to be $7.2 billion. Next July, the 2011-12 fiscal year budget will not include hundreds of millions federal stimulus dollars and the General Fund is projected to be $3.8 billion. If the projection comes true, the stage will be set for continuing funding shortfalls and threats to the “core services” state government provides.

In an attempt to offset those current and projected shortfalls, some legislators have championed increasing fines and fees until the state’s tax structure can be tackled in next year’s legislative session. Currently, the Taxation Realignment Commission is holding meetings to craft a report with tax overhaul suggestions. Its report is due in mid-November.

In the Senate-passed version of the budget, senators voted to divert court fines and fees directly to the court system. But that, based on Cooper’s memo and House floor rhetoric, didn’t go over well in the lower chamber – for a good, albeit political reason: It’s an election year for House members. Because members have to go home and campaign, they don’t want to spend time on the stump explaining passage of any increases in fines or fees, which many voters see as a disguise for a new tax.

The budget mess has put House Speaker Bobby Harrell (R-Charleston) in a tough spot, according to several leading House Republicans speaking on condition of anonymity. With dissension in the ranks regarding an embarrassing recent floor fight over abortion funding and other bills, some legislators told Statehouse report privately that the speaker should have quashed or massaged legislation better in private. As a result, they say Harrell is making moves to protect his job. And the last thing any speaker wants in an election year is to send the troops back home to angry voters with a tax/fee increase.

No. Abortion will, according to one senior House leader who asked not to be identified.

After the Senate reviews the House’s latest proposals, it will likely non-concur and send the matter into a conference committee to hash out a compromise. There, according to the same House leader, abortion language will become the focal point.

Abortion has been a hotly-debated issue in the General Assembly this year, with Sen. Lee Bright (R-Roebuck) and his seeming twin on the issue in the House, Rep. Greg Delleney (R-Chester), inserting the wedge topic at well-timed moments during the budget debate in both chambers.

The squabble expected to break out in the budget conference committee will likely center on an anti-abortion bill currently locked in another conference committee that would require women to wait 24 hours before having an abortion after seeing an ultrasound of the fetus, according to the House leader and several other sources in both chambers.

“If we can solve the 24-hour bill, we can solve the budget,” said the House leader.

At issue in the 24-hour bill is whether the state’s health care insurance plan should cover abortions for enrollees. Last year, six women covered by the state’s plan received the procedure. The Senate expanded House language as to who could be covered, opting to offer reimbursement when the mother’s life was threatened, among other criteria. Some in the House, like Delleney, oppose any payouts, even in instances of rape or incest.

So, in times of fiscal life and death for critical state services, debate over next year’s budget could hinge on matters of life and death.

5/14: The wait to fix school funding

5/7: Abortion fight for one senator
4/30: Will state's public colleges partially privatize?

With the final weeks of this two-year legislative session looming, almost all of the heavy lifting has been done. As a result, the agendas in the House and Senate are understandably light. The biggest item left is the budget, will likely be a bigger fight than expected.

Still there is some sweeping up to do. In the House:

• Payday lending. The full LCI committee will meet Wednesday at 9:15 a.m. in 403 Blatt to discuss a Senate bill that would close loopholes in the state’s payday lending industry legislation.  More.
  
  Residential fire sprinklers. The House is expected next week to concur with Senate amendments on a bill to require residential fire sprinklers starting in 2014. The measure then will go to the governor.

A last-minute amendment stalled what could be the session’s best bill -- reforming prison sentencing to make more beds available for more dangerous criminals by sending more non-violent, drug-related convicts to cheaper diversionary programs.

The amendment, which would shift who controlled the docket, was seen largely as a warning to solicitors, and will be quickly handled and the bill is expected to be passed in its final form next week. Gov. Mark Sanford is expected to support the bill, as it would save taxpayer money and lessen the load on one of his closest cabinet members, Department of Corrections director Jon Ozmint.

A poll released this week by Rasmussen Reports listed state Rep. Nikki Haley (R-Lexington) as the leading GOP primary candidate for governor, at 30 percent.

According to Rasmussen, it was big jump from March when she was polling at only 12 percent, good enough for fourth at the time. Since that time, Haley has picked up endorsements from former first lady Jenny Sanford and former Alaskan governor and GOP Veep candidate Sarah Palin.

Why the surge? While opponents say the poll was taken at just the right time because of Palin’s visit to the state, Haley’s support among the Tea Party set has always been strong, especially after Sen. Larry Grooms (R-Bonneau) dropped out of the race a few months ago. Additionally, with a slowed economic recovery, voter anger may be rising, and the other choices, like longtime GOP warhorse state Attorney General Henry McMaster and upstate Congressman Gresham Barrett, may not seem as refreshing as Haley, who has consistently tangled with staid leadership in the House.

What the latest poll could also mean is that Haley won’t have to strike out further right than expected. The conventional wisdom had been that McMaster and Barrett were the front-runners, with Lt. Gov. Andre Bauer counting on a triumvirate of conservative church folk, the elderly and headline-grabbing rhetoric (e.g. likening the poor with stray dogs), to get to a run-off.

Now with Haley swapping the fringes for the lead, she won’t have to take increasingly strident positions, leaving that to Bauer, and can now hone her Libertarian-tinged message, which worked well enough to get Gov. Mark Sanford elected twice and a spot, for a while at least, on the White House short-list.

Changing the rules

The House and Senate passed a rule changed this week that the lieutenant governor would assume many of the governor’s powers and duties if the governor is out of touch with staff for more than 12 hours.

The bill was result of Gov. Mark Sanford’s overseas disappearance last year when he visited his paramour in South America. One member of the House Judiciary Committee, grousing on condition of anonymity, said that he didn’t understand the mood of the legislature which has stalled a bill further censuring Gov. Mark Sanford for his tryst and disappearance. “It seems like if we don’t want to impeach Sanford, then we don’t want to bother censuring him; it’s as if we can’t put a guy in jail for murder, it’s like we don’t want to charge him with anything,” said the committee member.

Harrell under the microscope

While talk this week cooled about challenges to House Speaker Bobby Harrell (R-Charleston), there remain some pockets of the House GOP caucus who are less than pleased with the job he’s done.

The main complaint seems to be that Harrell is not former Speaker David Wilkins. Wilkins was known, according to several House GOP members, for ruling quietly, for making sure that bills that got reported out of committee were in a form that Wilkins would approve and control. Under Harrell, some fellow Republicans have complained, more bills get out of committee without a final massage.

A good example of this was the fight about covering abortions for those enrolled in the state insurance program that spilled out in a marathon battle on the floor during budget debates a few weeks ago. That bill, some have contended, would never have reached the floor under Wilkins, forcing Republican legislators to tackle such a thorny wedge issue. One GOP House member, disappointed in how abortion was handled and other issues, said there wasn’t enough discontent currently to coalesce into a real challenge for Harrell’s spot. But, the legislator warned, it could be a long summer following an expected budget fight with the Senate and governor, and leading up to a November election in the House.

MAY 21, 2010 – After almost eight years of a running battle between the governor’s office and General Assembly, what South Carolina needs for the next four years is stability and real leadership that focuses on outcomes that help people.

In other words, South Carolina needs experienced, open-minded leaders who will work hard to help all South Carolinians, not just people who are in one party or the other. Our leaders should work for the common good of the state, not partisan personal preferences on policy proposals.

That’s why Statehouse Report is offering endorsements for the first time in its nine years of publishing. South Carolina’s ox is in the proverbial ditch with 12 percent unemployment, crumbling infrastructure, money woes and education challenges.  If we don’t weigh in with why we think some Republican or Democratic candidates are better than others, we just won’t sleep at night. Furthermore, it is our responsibility to provide you with insights culled from frequent interactions with elected state leaders and candidates. 

Overall, we recommend candidates who best answer this question: “Which candidate in a contested primary will be best for South Carolina over the next four years?” With the state looking at a billion dollar budget shortfall next year, those elected in the fall may face the most challenging circumstances ever posed for state officials.

In the Republican primary for governor, we suggest you focus on Henry McMaster, a long-time state leader who has shown steadiness in his eight years as attorney general. Some of his primary opponents breathe populist fire about “cycles of dependency” (political code to instill fear about people on assistance) or arrogantly spew venom about other candidates while offering more of the same that has crippled the state in recent years.

Meanwhile, McMaster pushes forward with a common-sense approach to put the state on a “Path to Prosperity” to grow jobs and move forward. He rightly focuses on the best that is in South Carolinians and challenges residents to work together. His success and innovative proposals as attorney general and his camaraderie with both parties indicates he’ll work with our General Assembly to make real differences for the state.

On the Democratic side in the governor’s race, Vincent Sheheen provides a burst of enthusiasm mixed with a lifetime of experience of being schooled in working on behalf of South Carolina. His father was head of the state Commission on Higher Education; his uncle served as Speaker of the House. A member of the legislature since 2001, he has served as a state senator from the Midlands since 2004. 

Not only is Sheheen’s heart in the right place, but he’s got solid policy proposals to move South Carolina forward, or as his campaign says, “to get South Carolina moving again.” He rightly focuses on growing more jobs, including working harder for small businesses and attracting alternative energy jobs. 

When it comes to the lieutenant governor’s office, events of the last year have shown the real potential to South Carolinians for the state’s Number Two could become Number One. Unfortunately, most South Carolinians know little about any of the candidates for a mostly ceremonial position that would become very important if the governor departs office.

While newcomer Democrat Ashley Cooper of Charleston faces no primary opponent for lieutenant governor, Eleanor Kitzman is battling three opponents to get the GOP nod. We give her our nod because of her experience in business (she started an insurance company) and government (she ran a state agency, the Department of Insurance.) Taking nothing away from other candidates, Kitzman has the broadest experience in times that cry for leaders who have mastered multiple business and political tools needed now to help the state.

Like McMaster and Sheheen, Kitzman calls for comprehensive tax reform to allay problems with a property tax swap that continues to put the legislature in a revenue-draining pickle. While she shows more bias for working to help business than regular people, she offers a solid foundation for using the bully pulpit of the lieutenant governor’s office to help craft policies to create jobs desperately needed by South Carolinians.

5/14:  Advice for new college grads

5/7:   SC should pass on offshore drilling

4/30:   Two words that have caused problems

By Thomas A. Dicks
Chief, City of Barnwell Fire Department

MAY 21, 2010 -- This year, the General Assembly was lobbied by the Home Builders Association of SC to eliminate the requirement of residential fire sprinklers in new one- and two-family dwellings beginning January 2011 as indicated by the 2009 International Residential Building Code, which was approved by the South Carolina Building Code Council for adoption by the State of South Carolina. 

The issue should have been do we want to reduce the number of residential fire deaths in our state which ranks as one of the highest in the nation. But the home building industry, which we thought would want to build safe homes for South Carolinians, wanted to play the mandate card and told the General Assembly that this new requirement is another unwanted government mandate and that sprinklers should be at the option of the home owner. 

If fire protection sprinklers were to be optional, then perhaps there is need to consider some so-called mandates in the current Residential Building Code as optional.  Here are a few.

•  The residential code requires protection against subterranean termites.
  
• It requires a minimum of at least one habitable room to be no less than 120 square feet in size and all other habitable rooms not less than 70 square feet except the kitchen. A kitchen is required to have no dimension of less than 7 feet horizontal. 
  
• There’s also a required minimum ceiling height of 7 feet, a required minimum hallway width of 36 inches and a requirement of at least 6 feet 7 inches of headroom above stairs. 
  
• A water closet, lavatory and tub or shower and kitchen sink are required along with hot water so a water heater is required.  
  
• The code requires a street address be posted, and you insulate a house on all sides top and bottom to the R-values for South Carolina. 
  
• There is a required amount and size of nails and fasteners on all exterior walls in wood frame construction and requirements limit the span and spacing of floor and ceiling joists based on lumber dimensions. 
  
• Code requires at least two 20 amp electrical circuits on kitchen counter tops and they’re required to be GFCI protected as with the two required outdoor receptacles and required bathroom receptacle. 

Unemployment reform. A new bill making businesses that lay off employees the most frequently pay higher unemployment rates makes sense. Of course, figuring out who still has employees these days could be tough. More.

Dodging the oil spill. According to experts, there is less than 1 percent chance of the oil from the massive Gulf spill making it to our shores. Or will it hit here in a few weeks.  Huh?

Health care. An S.C. House plan to trim $50 million from state health care programs in next year’s budget will likely mean poor, sick citizens will probably get collectively sicker and poorer next year. More.

Immigration. Aping Arizona, immigration became a hot topic in the Statehouse again this week when the state’s top cop said he hadn’t signed onto a federal enforcement program because the legislature hadn’t supplied the money to enable him to do so. It gets worse:  read this.

Guns. The House approved a bill this week that would allow motorists to store handguns under their front seat. In related news, the House has lost its mind. More.

Maff. Elections for spots on the newly formed state Department of Employment and Workforce appellate board bogged down for hours because of math errors, resulting in several unneeded re-votes. Are these the kind of math errors that led recently to $120 million being mishandled in the state budget.

Also from Stegelin: 5/14 | 5/7 | 4/30 | 4/23 | 4/16