I wrote South Carolina Governor Mark Sanfraud, excuse me, Sanford about his illogical stance on the stimulus money. His response is long-winded, mind you, but I am going to share it here along with my rebuttals.
Thank you for contacting our office regarding the federal stimulus package. We appreciate your taking the time to let us know your thoughts.
Whether it's been attack ads launched from the Democratic National Committee or the so-called "Chaos Budget" produced by Hugh Leatherman (the head of the Senate Finance Committee), there's unfortunately been a lot of misrepresentation and misinformation about the stimulus and its implications. So in fairness, I'd be somewhat apprehensive too if much of what you've undoubtedly seen and read were true.
Fortunately what has been suggested is not the whole story, so I wanted to take a minute and lay out the facts and let you know why we've taken this position. So, even if we simply have to agree to disagree, in the end I hope you'll at least have a better idea of where we're coming from on our stimulus position.
I opposed the stimulus package in Washington because of what I believe to be the disastrous long-term consequences that will come to our nation by spending money we don't have - and issuing yet more debt to solve a problem that was created by too much debt. But that debate is passed, and now the question before us is, "How do we best custom fit the stimulus to South Carolina?"
Governor, I can already tell you we're going to have problems here. You act as if your a total victim here with the beginning paragraph about these ads being run against you for your stance. Wake up and smell the coffee, Mark. People around the country see how much of a jerk you are because of your posturing on national television and the snide comments made about South Carolinians. You paint the picture to the rest of America of a people who don't know any better, like children for example, and you're there to mind us. Pathetic.
And, as far as our state budget goes, I applaud the legislature in overriding your veto of it. Seriously, you'd have to be in a bunker to not realize what is happening. Then again, that Howard Rich money didn't come without ties, now did it? This is your last ditch effort to stamp out public education in this state. You could care less about school teachers losing their jobs, students having to join classes in which teacher/student ratios increase, schools becoming underfunded, less materials provided for students, and the school system in general.
First, it's important to realize that even without the debated portion of the stimulus, state government spent $19.7 billion last year and will spend over $21 billion next year. On education alone, we will spend over $100 million more as a state next year than we did this year. These numbers do not fit with the "chaos" many have tried to portray.
While you want to scare off people using those numbers, I'll provide the facts here. The budget being provided during 2008 was at
seven billion for the state, with $488 million being cut from education. That's right, cut. Here's a list of proposed cuts from the very same story:
House and Senate budget writers approved plans today to slice $488 million from the state's $7 billion budget, with colleges and universities taking the big hits. The full legislature returns Monday to consider the cuts.
— Education Department, 3.6 percent, $88.5 million
Cut includes: $67 million from aid to school districts; $6 million from innovation and support programs.
— Department of Health and Human Services, 8.1 percent, $76.7 million
Cut includes: $26.7 million from medical assistance payments.
— University of South Carolina-Columbia, 14.9 percent, $26.9 million
Cut includes: Reductions to education and general expenses.
— Technical college system, 14.4 percent, $24.8 million
Cut includes: $22 million spread among state's technical colleges
— Department of Mental Health, 10.8 percent, $23.6 million
Cut includes: $8.6 million from mental health centers; $8 million from inpatient services; $6.8 million from support services, administration and benefits.
— Department of Disabilities and Special Needs, 11.2 percent, $21.5 million
Cut includes: $18.6 million from family support, operations and other programs and services.
— Department of Health and Environmental Control, 13.7 percent, $19.6 million
Cut includes: $9 million from administration; $8.5 million from health care services.
— Clemson University, 14.9 percent, $16.5 million
Cut includes: $12.9 million from education and general expenses.
— Medical University of South Carolina, 14.9 percent, $14.2 million
Cut includes: $14 million from education and general expenses.
— Aid to local governments, 6.5 percent, $19.5 million
Source: House Ways and Means Committee
Now you tell me, Governor. Where's the "balloon" numbers you speak of? You even proposed something around the five billion range, nothing close to the "billions" you speak of.
Here, take a look:
South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford unveiled a $5.8 billion budget proposal Friday that would put money back into some subsidized health care programs that have seen severe cuts but also cut millions from education spending, furlough state workers for two days and require that retirees pay higher health insurance premiums.
The spending proposal for the next budget comes as $1 billion in cuts this fiscal year strip government aid for programs such as hospice care and meal delivery, and carve deeply into public schools and colleges. Slumping tax collections have shrunken South Carolina's state budget to $6.1 billion from more than $7 billion approved last year.
Face it, Governor. You simply could care less about state government and your libertarian ways are coming out. Before it was said and done, even more money was cut from education, including the Act 388 tax cuts.
Second, we need to keep this debate over a small portion of the stimulus in context and remember our grandparents' notion of moderation in all things being especially important when considering the financing of a state. More than $8 billion of total stimulus effort is projected to come to South Carolina. We proposed taking about ten percent of this and applying it to paying down state debt. I don't understand how that could be considered unreasonable or the kind of effort that would create disaster. If a family won a lottery, setting something aside to pay down the mortgage or the credit cards would be viewed as prudent.
Wow, you make sound so simple. Was it helpful to you to not mention what that "ten percent" was designed to be used for? I'll tell you... EDUCATION! If a family had a broken car or house falling apart, they'd use the money to fix those first, Mark. What you do not tell people outside your state is the simple
FACT that schools are falling apart and the state education system is broken down because of you and your radical GOP buddies. Not to mention your full assault,
financed by Howard Rich and friends, on the way the system operates. We already have a disaster. You just fail to do anything about it.
It shouldn't be any different for a state, particularly if, as in South Carolina's case, we are fourth in the entire nation in the percentage of our budget that goes not to teachers or health care, but to debt repayment. Eleven percent of every dollar in yearly revenue goes to paying down debt, and we have $20 billion on top of that in unfunded long-term political commitments. Paying these funds down would give us greater financial latitude, when the federal money runs out in twenty-four months, to offer more in the way of governmental services. It would pay dividends in the first twenty-four months alone of $162 million that would be saved in interest costs and could go instead to government service.
And why is that? Why do you constantly have to pay down debt? Because you do not take in the necessary revenue to support the programs to begin with. Duh... It's no secret you'd rather borrow and spend instead of taxing appropriately to fund the state programs you speak of. No matter whether or not you pay down debt, if you do not fix the tax rates, you'll still face debt every year because you do not properly fund the system.
Third, we believe in the common sense notion that when you're in a hole, it's vital you stop digging. Requiring our state to spend beyond its means for the next two years to be eligible for all the stimulus funds guarantees that South Carolina will dig itself a $740 million financial hole. Who helps us then? Do we raise taxes, and thereby weaken our competitiveness relative to other states and countries - or do we just summarily end programs for some of the neediest of our state? Or are we to plan on yet another round of stimulus windfall from Washington in two years - again, with money we don't have? I don't know the answer to these questions, but I do know the $740 million budget hole created would be the largest such hole in state financial history.
That hole you talk about was dug by you, former President Bush and your republican legislature. What competitiveness are you talking about? Are you competing to see how many jobs can be lost?
Looks like your moving up in the ranks, Mark. Are you striving to do better than 11.5 percent jobless? You raise taxes - the ones you cut extensively. The ones needed to support the programs you always threaten to cut and sometimes do. What needs to change is you... Mark, you need to leave office for this state to get better. The republican legislature needs to get a grip and tax so it can support the programs. You really do look pretty on television for not knowing the answers to the questions needing answers from a person they elected.
Finally, spending all this money relieves the political pressure to make reforms essential to South Carolina being more competitive in the global economy -and in turn offering more employment and "stimulus" to the national economy. Political forces rarely embrace hard changes, and they never embrace change when new money allows for the possibility of bypassing it. General Motors recently took billions with the promise of reform, but not surprisingly it didn't make the changes vital to its competitiveness over the long run. The debilitating thing about federal money is the change it forestalls. The same holds true when it comes to running a state and it is vital we not allow this opportunity to make change long overdue pass us by in South Carolina.
This last point is very important. The debate is not about money for education - it is about where the money will come from. Will the money come from lasting savings in other parts of government through reform, or the new checkbook in Washington which is destined to be turned off in twenty-four months? I believe strongly it should come from the first place as the money will be there for the long run. In the same vein, it is important people realize we certified the stimulus monies so that they cannot now go to New Jersey or California. This debate is, again, about paying down debt and making reforms or just spending it all and worrying about the shortfalls that come in two years.
The easiest of all things would be to take and simply spend all of Washington's well-intended stimulus efforts, but that would guarantee opportunities lost that I don't think our state can afford. I hope that this will give you a little better idea of why we've taken the stand we have. Thanks again for writing in, and take care.
Ah yes, here we go. The "reforms" needed by you - a person with no answers, you say - and efforts to be competitive in a "global market." Did your
Poland trip have anything to do with us or where you there to help their workers? How about the jobs being lost here and shipped overseas? Or the illegals coming here and taking our jobs (you were real supportive in fighting against illegals, weren't you).
I find it embarrassing you'd relate General Motors struggles to our children's need for high quality public education. Need I remind you that the CEOs of that company dug the hole with their oursourcing - as you intend to do with this state.
The CEO was fired by President Obama, wasn't he? Maybe the people in South Carolina ought to fire you.
We did ask for it, you know.
What's also shameful is the fact
South Carolina educators even denounce your stance - the very same people we entrust our children with and you deny them the funds to do their job.
I hope you sleep well at night knowing that teachers wept because they are being transferred or cut out completely, students are losing their friends and schools may not ever be the same. I hope you rest sound knowing that this could all have been prevented if you'd funded the system originally. Don't lose Howard's number, Mark. I am sure he'll help you in 2012.
The debate is about education, Mark. I am so sorry you do not find our parents, children and teachers alike attractive in a "global market" as you like to emphasize. I, on the other hand, and proud to have been a product of public education, proud of the teachers who care and work to better our children and proud of the parents who take an active role in their education system.
That's right. It's their system you are cutting from. We pay for it. And the money being alloted is money we will have to pay for again... Even if Georgia gets it to educate their children.
Good day, sir.
