Memos
-
news
cocklebur blog
Archives
- November 2008 (11)
- October 2008 (30)
- September 2008 (21)
- August 2008 (30)
- July 2008 (26)
- June 2008 (24)
- May 2008 (25)
- April 2008 (23)
- March 2008 (26)
- February 2008 (31)
- January 2008 (19)
- December 2007 (1)
- November 2007 (4)
- October 2007 (9)
- September 2007 (7)
- August 2007 (5)
- July 2007 (4)
- June 2007 (14)
- May 2007 (30)
- April 2007 (16)
- March 2007 (12)
- February 2007 (18)
- January 2007 (13)
- December 2006 (13)
- November 2006 (5)
- October 2006 (11)
- September 2006 (6)
- August 2006 (1)
- July 2006 (1)
- June 2006 (9)
- May 2006 (20)
- April 2006 (16)
- March 2006 (12)
- February 2006 (9)
- January 2006 (4)
- December 2005 (4)
- October 2005 (2)
- September 2005 (2)
- August 2005 (1)
- July 2005 (5)
- June 2005 (4)
- May 2005 (1)
- April 2005 (3)
- November 2004 (6)
- May 2003 (1)
- April 2003 (2)
- March 2003 (2)
- 0 (1)
-
Recent Comments
- Sullyman on standing by is not an option by Jose F. Garcia
- Sullyman on standing by is not an option by Jose F. Garcia
- Sullyman on Don’t blame me, I voted for Sarah bumper stickers!
- Sullyman on standing by is not an option by Jose F. Garcia
- The Dude on Don’t blame me, I voted for Sarah bumper stickers!
- Sullyman on Don’t blame me, I voted for Sarah bumper stickers!
- Sullyman on Don’t blame me, I voted for Sarah bumper stickers!
- Sullyman on Don’t blame me, I voted for Sarah bumper stickers!
- Art Kaldas on standing by is not an option by Jose F. Garcia
- The Dude on Don’t blame me, I voted for Sarah bumper stickers!
- The Dude on Don’t blame me, I voted for Sarah bumper stickers!
- Palmetto Conservative on Don’t blame me, I voted for Sarah bumper stickers!
- The Dude on Don’t blame me, I voted for Sarah bumper stickers!
- Palmetto Conservative on Don’t blame me, I voted for Sarah bumper stickers!
- The Dude on Don’t blame me, I voted for Sarah bumper stickers!
I hope some of you got to see the debate yesterday. Unfortunately, I believe it was overshadowed in today’s news coverage by the House debate on property tax. As it turned out, the debate moved away from the merits of using the 2005-2006 surplus to repay our debt to the trust and reserve funds and then improve secondary roads. Instead, we ended up talking about the process.
“The process” refers to the way things really work in the South Carolina Senate. Those opposed to the amendment designed to repay the trust funds argued that it hadn’t gone through the process of sub-committee and full committee. Indeed, it hadn’t, and that was, in my eyes, one of its merits.
If a large chunk of money, such as the estimated $275,000,000 plus we’re talking about here, goes through the process, the outcome is unknown. It may be spent as we proposed, or it may be divided up in to numerous local projects. Thus the debate yesterday was really about whether we were going to do the fiscally responsible thing and repay our debts or whether we were going to submit to the process and use the budget as a grab-bag. There are many legitimate needs, but I would prefer to pay off the debts, then channel the money to either our deteriorating roads and/or to the taxpayer.
This is where you folks need to weigh in. Let me know what you think of this debate and the way the SC Senate treats your money. I look forward to hearing from you.
$urplus update