The final bill passed the Senate late Wednesday night. I voted against this bill yet its passage sends it to the House which may improve the legislation. The Democrats filibustering the bill accepted this compromise. That alone tells me there’s a skunk in the woodshed. Here’s what stinks about the current bill: THIS ONLY APPLIES TO NEW HIRES!
Here’s the summary:
All employers (public & private) will be required to follow verification methods:
1-E-Verify
2-SC-Verify
-a new enforceable state verification system – enforceable by LLR
-a paper version of e-verify
-LLR must conduct random audits of employment records & audits upon the filing of a written complain
3-SC drivers license
Penalties
-felony and civil fines for “knowingly  and intentionally hiring an illegal”
-withholding penalties of 7% until valid verification
-denies business tax deductions on wages and benefits paid
-Federal penalties will be added on top of the state penalties
-additional state penalties from a technical violation starting at $100 to a third occurrence starting at $3,000 for each illegal hired

                               
                                 
On Wednesday, April 30, 2008, the spending caps bill (S. 718) has been amended by finance committee to:“When the balance in the Budget Stabilization Fund is greater than 15% of the prior year’s actual general fund revenue collection, 50% of the overage must be used for debt retirement and 50% must be used for capital improvement projects.”

In my opinion adding to capital improvement projects would be adding to a slush fund, which in turn, spending is not capped at all.

I agree with the Budget Stabilization Fund. It keeps us from the current roller coaster ride of up and down years. But with this committee amendment, the ride keeps going up at a sharp incline.

Greenville’s channel 4, covered this public meeting about government transparency!
                 
Comptroller General Richard Eckstrom called me this weekend with the unfortunate news of a death in his family. He will be attending a funeral Monday morning so he will be absent at our meeting on Monday at the Bagel Shop at noon. The Comptroller’s Chief of Staff, Nathan Kaminski, Jr., Esq. will be in Anderson at the Bagel Shop, however. As you may know already, the Comptroller’s office has offered to assist any local government with online reporting should my transparency proviso survive the SC House and the Budget Conference Committee.

          
Today, Sen. Jim Ritchie placed an objection on the whole calendar until another attempt is made at meaningful immigration reform. This means that the Senate will not take up any legislation until this matter is debated once again. We’ve found a new “vehicle” House bill H. 3032. Since this bill has passed the SC House already, we have the chance to beef up a piece of legislation, send it to the House. H. 3032 cannot amend this bill, only vote to “concur” or “non-concur”.
               
Sen. Ritchie has drafted a “strike-and-insert” amendment that inserts strict definitions of legal status of workers. I am also a sponsor of this amendment which will require all employers, whether State contract or not, to use either the e-verify or a SC drivers license to determine employees status. This is a great step in the direction of true immigration reform. A document called the “i9” is currently being used to verify status. This “i9” is virtually a joke (explained here), since the requirements to obtain an i9 are so lenient.

A pdf stands for portable document format. This format is commonly used when sending documents created in programs such as Word or Excel. If you send the original document, the recipient may not see the information as intended. Screen settings, printer settings, and other issues cause these differences. pdf’s can be created from any program, such as Quickbooks, Microsoft Money, or any professional book keeping software. It is very simple to create a pdf and post it on the web. primo pdf maker is a free download. pdf maker installs as if it were a printer. You simply click on “print” and select “primo” as your printer and boom you have a pdf.

If you have been following the recent debate, I’ve sponsored bills and provisos to require government agencies to post their expenditures online. Comptroller General Richard Eckstrom has verified this is being done already with over 70 agencies at not cost. I don’t know if the Comptroller’s office is using primo pdf maker or not, but I thought ya’ll would like the information.

House Walks Out On Immigration Bill

Ritchie vows to fight for strong illegal immigration reform

Columbia, SC – The House today walked out on illegal immigration reform. The Senate calls on the House to live up to its agreement. Less than 24 hours after agreeing to ask their members for a vote on private employer verification, the House failed to follow through on their agreement. After more than a week of political rhetoric, the House has failed again to take a decisive vote on legislation addressing private employer verification requirements.

“The people of South Carolina deserve better than what the House is doing,” says Senator Jim Ritchie (R-Spartanburg), Chairman of the Joint Legislative Conference Committee on illegal immigration reform. “The House has tried to kill this bill twice this year. They are hiding behind some strange interpretation of the rules to avoid delivering strong illegal immigration reform to the people of South Carolina”

The Senate has consistently led the effort on including private employer verification, while the House has offered little more than rhetoric and political maneuvering. The House had at least seven opportunities to vote on private employer verification and they have again failed to do anything to strengthen immigration reform.

Since 2006, the Senate has been working to deliver the strongest illegal immigration reform bill possible and remove the $186 million financial burden that illegal immigration places on the citizens of South Carolina.

After failing to secure the vote they had committed to yesterday, House conference committee members walked out on a conference committee meeting this afternoon.

###

We had our first meeting with Bryant for Senate volunteers on Monday night. I am excited to have the support of these good folks as well as many more that couldn’t make it. The positive message of reform as resonated very well in Anderson County, and we need to keep it up. Also, we had a visit with our good Congressman Gresham Barrett. They say in politics not to mix races, but in this case, we’ll be breaking the rules. We can’t permit Nancy Pelosi’s liberal Democrats gain traction in SC’s 3^rd Congressional district, so I don’t mind telling you I’ll be Barrett’s #1 foot soldier.

STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
THE SENATE

For Immediate Release
April 22, 2008

MEDIA ADVISORY
Senator Bryant Invites Comptroller to Discuss Online Registers
Public and local government officials invited to hear presentation

Columbia, SC - Senator Kevin Bryant (R-Anderson), has invited South Carolina Comptroller General Richard Eckstrom to the Corner Bagel Shop (715 E. Greenville St., Anderson) on Monday, April 28 at 12:00 P.M. to discuss how his office is providing online expense registers for 70 state agencies at no additional cost to South Carolina taxpayers.

WHO: Senator Kevin Bryant and South Carolina Comptroller General Richard Eckstrom,

WHAT: Online Check and Credit Card Registers

WHERE: Corner Bagel Shop, 715 E. Greenville Street, Anderson, SC  29621

WHEN: Monday, April 28, 12:00 PM

WHY:Senator Bryant will talk about the amendment to the state budget require counties to post check registers and credit card expenses on line to in order to receive reimbursement money from the state for general operating expenses.

South Carolina Comptroller General Richard Eckstrom will demonstrate how his office is providing online expense registers for 70 state agencies with no additional cost to South Carolina taxpayers.

“The proviso adopted last week during the Senate budget debate requires local governments to post expenses online in order to receive certain general operating funds back from the state,” says Senator Bryant. “The Comptroller General’s presentation is intended to help county officials in my district comply with that proviso. I would like to see standing room only for the Comptroller General’s presentation. I specifically encourage all local and county officials to attend, to see how easy it is to place expenses online.”

For more information, please contact Senator Kevin Bryant at 864-202-8394.

###

          My name is Joshua Phillips.  I am a 10^th grade student that recently had the privilege of shadowing Senator Bryant for a day.  While in Columbia, I read and analyzed a bill that was being brought before the finance committee that afternoon.  The bill calls for appropriating funds to pay for “at risk” students’ attendance in full day, four-year-old kindergarten.  The program would allow the funding to apply to private, as well as public schools.  A number of problems exist within this bill.

          First, there are presently fully funded public four-year-old kindergartens for “at risk” students.  The impetus behind the bill is obviously not to give at risk children a chance to participate in four-old-kindergarten, for a system is already in place that provides this service.  The bill actually creates a voucher program allowing four-year-olds to attend private schools at the state’s expense.  This could cause trouble for the private schools who accept the funding.  Under Section 59-35-390 of the bill, schools that accept the funding must relinquish control over the curriculum and follow the guidelines set by the First Steps state educational program.  In addition, all instructors must be state certified and selected.  The bill seems to promote educational choice, but in reality, it only allows the government to expand its influence further into private education.  Finally, funding the bill would cost the state a massive amount of money.  The finance committee estimated that the cost of implementing the bill could total as much as $185 million.

          If the bill is passed, private schools may be lured into accepting the funding, only to have increased government authority over their system.  Under the guise of educational choice,the bill would increase governmental authority and involvement in education.

update: anderson independent’s coverage saturday, april 19th
STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINATHE SENATE
For Immediate Release
April 16, 2008

Senator Bryant Gains Approval for Online Register
State would withhold general operating funding to noncompliant counties.

Columbia, SC - As part of the ongoing Senate budget debate Senator Kevin Bryant (R-Anderson) today proposed a proviso to the budget that would withhold general operating funding the state returns to county governments for one year unless the county maintains an online, searchable, register of expenses that includes all checks over $100 and county credit card statements. The Senate voted to adopt the proviso to the General Appropriations Bill.
                            
“Finally the taxpayer will have easy access to see how his or her hard earn taxpayer money is being spent,” says Senator Bryant.
                          
The amendment requires the register be updated once a month and include the amount of the expenditure, name of the payee, and an explanation on the purpose of the expenditure. The register will not include salaries or information that can identify individual employees. The monthly additions to the register must be maintained online for at least one-year.
                             
Today’s action is similar to the Truth in Spending Act (S.1144) Senator Bryant co-sponsored earlier this year, although the proviso would only be enacted for fiscal year 2008-2009. The State Comptroller General, Richard Eckstrom, is currently maintaining similar state agency registers for little or no additional cost. The comptroller’s office has offered its assistance to local governments to help them fulfill this requirement. Sen. Bryant may be reached on his cell phone for additional comments at 864.202.8394.
                           
###
                                
Douglas Ford
Majority Communications Director
South Carolina Senate
803.212.6295 - office

We’ve examined the appropriations bill for anything labeled special project. At this point, the tally is $249,925,878.00. Click here to see the list yourself . While some of these special projects are certainly justifiable, ya’ll may agree there are some questionable items in a “lean” budget year. I’m disappointed in this year’s process. Sure, it’s much easier to apply across the board cuts, but that’s not how it’s done at the kitchen table when families toil their budget. We scrutinize each expenditure and decide priorities. I disagree with those that will call this is a pork free budget, but I guess “pork is in the eye of the beholder.” Other essential items not getting attention are state employee pay raises and new school busses. Several amendments where offered Tuesday with little accomplishments. We’ll try to tackle some of the problems on Wednesday, so keep your fingers crossed.

Here’s to all citizens hurting today as you write your check(s) to federal and state treasuries. You are not alone.

When your day is long and the night, the night is yours alone,
When you’re sure you’ve had enough of this life, well hang on
Don’t let yourself go, ’cause everybody cries n everybody hurts sometimes

Sometimes everything is wrong. Now it’s time to sing along
When your day is night alone, (hold on, hold on)
If you feel like letting go, (hold on)
If you think you’ve had too much of this life, well hang on

‘Cause everybody hurts. Take comfort in your friends
Everybody hurts. Don’t throw your hand. Oh, no. Don’t throw your hand
If you feel like you’re alone, no, no, no, you are not alone

If you’re on your own in this life, the days and nights are long,
When you think you’ve had too much of this life so hang on

Well, everybody hurts sometimes,
Everybody cries. And everybody hurts sometimes
And everybody hurts sometimes. So, hold on, hold on
Hold on, hold on, hold on, hold on, hold on, hold on
Everybody hurts. You are not alone

After much resistance, I’ve finally removed the background music from “about me” website. I designed this flash movie a few years ago and I thought U2’s “Bad” loop sounded pretty cool, but ya’ll kept telling me it was annoying and demanded I take it off. So check out the link above called “about me”. This part of the site is mainly background information with general views on a variety of issues. Here’s a video of “Bad” for those of you that like one of the best songs in rock ‘n roll…

If you twist and turn away; If you tear yourself in two again
If I could, yes I would; If I could, I would; Let it go; Surrender
Dislocate; If I could throw this
Lifeless lifeline to the wind; Leave this heart of clay
See you walk, walk away; Into the night
And through the rain; Into the half-light
And through the flame; If I could through myself; Set your spirit free
I’d lead your heart away; See you break, break away
Into the light; And to the day; Oooh oooh, oooh oooh, oooh oooh oooh…
To let it go! And so to fade away; To let it go!
And so fade away; I’m wide awake
I’m wide awake; Wide awake
I’m not sleeping, oh no, no, noIf you should ask then maybe they’d; Tell you what I would say
True colors fly in blue and black; Bruised silken sky and burning flack
Colors crash, collide in blood shot eyes Oooh oooh, oooh oooh, oooh oooh oooh…If I could, you know I would; If I could, I would; Let it goThis desperation; Dislocation; Separation; Condemnation; Revelation; In temptation; Isolation; Desolation

Let it go; And so fade away; To let it go, oh yeah
And so fade away; To let it go, oh No; And so to fade away; I’m wide awake; I’m wide awake
Wide awake; I’m not sleeping oh no no

Cost of posting state agencies’ spending online overstated. by Richard Eckstrom, SC Comptroller General
     State government spending has grown tremendously over the last several years, and the public realizes that personal income levels have not grown anywhere near as fast as government spending. For example, spending by state government jumped twelve percent last year, yet the average South Carolina family’s income rose by just four percent. Clearly, government spending is out of touch with the economic realities faced by ordinary citizens.
     Taxpayers deserve to know where that money is going. The General Assembly is now considering legislation that would require state agencies and local governments to post their check registers and credit card statements online. This proposed legislation, if enacted, would make it easy for citizens to see for themselves exactly where their tax money goes.
     In turn, this could expose wasteful spending and remind state agencies and employees that they ultimately answer to the people they serve. This is exactly the kind of common-sense, good government proposal that no one should oppose. Many may not realize that the comptroller general’s office has already implemented a similar system — at no cost to state agencies — that makes expenditure information for most state agencies available via an easily accessible Web site.
     Agency compliance with any additional online data posting required by the proposed legislation could be implemented in most cases without costing the taxpayers a dime. Yet a recently released “fiscal impact statement” obtained by the General Assembly dramatically overstates the cost of implementing this proposal. Misinformed or biased “number crunching” only confuses lawmakers and gives governments an excuse not to make their spending available to the public.
     According to initial cost estimates for implementing this proposed legislation, the state would need as much as $5 million to fully implement an online check register and credit card database. These estimates, provided by a few assorted state agencies, are simply not credible to me. In fact, I already provide spending information on more than 70 state agencies via a Web site at absolutely no additional cost to taxpayers. The proposed legislation would simply require local governments and the remainder of state government to follow suit.
     I am told that some officials are already using the dramatically inflated cost estimates as political cover. They are arguing that it is a waste of taxpayer money to inform taxpayers how their money is spent.
     Most state agencies are already in compliance with the proposed law, whether or not they realize it. The majority of state agencies already report their finances to my office for me to process their check payments and in turn I summarize and electronically post their spending information on the state Web site. The entire program costs taxpayers nothing.
     State agencies exempted from reporting to my office now maintain their own similar financial databases that they could make available, if they wanted to, via the Internet at virtually no additional cost, simply by using the same type search engine that we are already using.
     Otherwise, school districts and county and municipal governments would be able to comply with the proposed law simply by scanning their check registers and credit card statements onto a computer and posting their scanned files to their agency’s Web site. Keep it simple. Require each governmental entity to decide the easiest and least expensive route to comply with the proposed legislation.
     But rather than taking this common-sense approach, some are lamenting that a vast network of new computers, databases and new employees will be necessary to manage an imaginary new bureaucracy. It is the usual ploy. If the costs to implement can be inflated, they think that maybe they can make go away these efforts at implementing more and better government transparency.
     But let’s be clear — their inflated cost estimates, which are awfully flimsy, are the only thing shielding lawmakers from the justifiable anger of the voters if this proposed legislation fails.
     This typical big-government mind-set, that an entirely new bureaucracy is required to reinvent the wheel, is bogus. The real facts are clear. The majority of government agencies essentially already comply with the proposed bill. Those that don’t comply have a no-cost, or very low-cost, example to follow. Complying is simply a matter of being willing to make it happen.
     The technology exists today. The infrastructure exists today. My office will assist any state agency with the transition to transparency. State lawmakers should welcome the chance to shine the sun on state spending and to invite the public into the vaults of government data. It should not cost them a thing to do so. And if they do not, the public would be justified in asking what it is their elected officials don’t want taxpayers to see.

In our special meeting on Tuesday, April 8, 2008 SC Senate Finance removed the 2% salary increase from the budget. This pay increase did not include legislators - not to be confused with the retirement 2% COLA in S. S. 1124. If this was the last option we had to balance the budget, I might consider the cut. I did not vote for this cut because there are other areas to look first. For example, the Legislative Slush fund (competitive grants) has $18 million remaining from last year, but I’m told the law doesn’t allow us to use that money to balance the budget. Last time I checked we write the law so I’d like to explore ways to get that money. Also, we’re sending $3.5 million to the Greenwood Genetics Center whatever that does. We’re sending $24 million in scholarships to Coastal Carolina. We could expand medicaids’ prior authorization on prescriptions to save us millions, but no, we pick on our dedicated state employees. Go figure…

We won round two! I have a few thousand constituents that have been jerked around by their water company for a few months now. They are already paying the next to highest rates in the County (2nd to the outside city limit customers of the city owned water company, don’t get me started on that one). And the USSC keeps coming up with ways to ask the Public Services Commission for an increase. I’ve received correspondence from the PSC that the Utilities Services of South Carolina has been denied again for a rate increase proposal. If you are interested in past posts on this topic, click  here and here. To read the PSC’s Directive . We initially thought this saga was over for residents of Acorn Drive, Altamont Court, Arcadia Drive, Bamboo Drive, Bayshore Lane, Brown Road, Bryson Road, Clearview Drive, Club Drive Drive, Crestwood Drive, Cretewood, Driftwood Drive, Edgewater Drive, June Way, Kings Court, Lakewood Drive, Marty Court, Meeting Street, Mountain View Place, Oakwood Estates, Old Shoals Drive, Olivarri Drive, Penniger Drive, Penniger Drive, Pine Top Circle, Red Oak Drive, Shannon Drive, Town Creek Trail, Twin Lakes Circle, Twin lakes Court, Twin Lakes Drive, Twin Lakes Drive, Wallwood Drive, Walnut Way, Wellwood Drive, Whisper Lane, Wilderness Lane, Wilson Road, Windwood Drive, Woodlake Road, Woodoak Drive, and Yates Circle. The USSC came back with another attempt to increase the rates on these constituents, but yet again, it was unanimously rejected.

 
                            
In what is supposed to be a lean budget year, the Senate Finance committee passed S. 1124 which calls for an automatic increase of State Employee retirement COLA (cost of living adjustment) of 2% every year. I was open to this notion at first. This is all well-and-good for our dedicated state employees, but here’s the big catch: it includes the retirement for members of the General Assembly. Upon further research, I have found how the retirement system for legislators is superior than that of our teachers and our D.O.T. crewmen. It would be good for us to reconsider the inclusion of the General Assembly’s system in this increase.
                       
Here’s the basic difference between the Legislator’s Retirement and the State Employees retirement.
State Employees: 1.42% x years of service x salary
General Assembly: 4.82% x years of service x salary
Since the 2% increase is across the board, the gap between the two will be even greater.

• Members of the Transportation & Finance Committees met with members of the SC Ports Authority on Wednesday, March 26^th. Below are highlights:

Harbor Deepening = $2.4 million Requested This Session for State Match-Corps Preparing to Close Out Project-$7.03 million in Carry Forward Funds-Approximately $7.9 million in Additional State Funding Needed Beyond Carry Forward FundsRequest for Proviso Change - Update Year in Ravenel Bridge Proviso

-To-date, SCSPA Has Paid $25 million of $45 million Commitment

-Twenty (20) $1 million Payments Remaining (FY08-27)

Charleston Port Development Update

-Status - Permits in Hand; 171-Acre Phase I is Underway; Demolition and Detention Pond Work Already Started

-Terminal Will Be Internally Financed Without Any Taxpayer Dollars or Taxpayer-Backed Debt

-Port Access Road - Permitted; State/Federal Funding Totals $182.5 million

-$167.5 million in Contingency Reserve Funds Appropriated Last Year to SCSPA - Held by Treasurer

Jasper Project - Intergovernmental Agreement

-Joint Project Office (JPO) Formed; Consists of a Six-member Board plus Four Ex-Officio

-Effectively Ends Condemnation; Land To Be Jointly Owned; Initiates Easement Work Along with Environmental and Market Analysis

-Eventually Result in Bi-state Compact; Will Require Approval of Legislatures/Congress

Port Royal Sale

-Properties Back on the Market Following Termination of Pending Contract

-NAI Avant will Continue to Market the Property

On Tuesday afternoon, the Senate Finance Committee met to debate H. 3567, or cigarette tax bill. The bill was amended to call for a 7¢ to 57¢ per pack cigarette tax increase. All of the revenue will go towards Medicaid. I could not in good conscience vote for this plan for several reasons. First, it increases the number of people dependent on government welfare rolls. It is funded by unreliable funds. It only exacerbates the problem of healthcare costs. It depends on matching funds from the Federal Government. What if these matching funds cease to exist or are decreased? We’d have to remove citizens from the benefits or increase taxes. Neither are pleasant.
           
There were several amendments introduced that I did support, but so far, these efforts have failed.
              
The subcommittee chaired by Sen. Thomas Alexander reported out a good starting point. The subcommittee worked with an organization called the Covering Carolina Collaborative, a committee made up of insurance companies, the SC Hospital Association, the SC Chamber of Commerce and others.
               
The subcommittee’s plan calls for an increase from 7¢ to 57¢ per pack cigarettes taxes. This increase would generate approximately $160 million. This money would go into a pool called the “Insure SC Trust Fund”. This fund will be allocated to individuals that purchase health insurance in the form of income tax credits.
              
The interest from this fund will be used in a special account called the “Smoking Prevention and Cessation Trust Fund”, which is obviously for smoking prevention education. The interest should accumulate about $5 million. I voted in favor of this amendment for the simple reason it is much better than the bill the House sent us.
                
There are shortfalls with the plan, however. One is that the tax credits only go to individuals not receiving healthcare currently. In other words, we’re punishing the employers that are currently providing health insurance.
                  
Also, I’m convinced that HSA’s (health saving accounts) are the only concept that will actually curb healthcare costs. The CCC plan isn’t clear as to if the tax credit can be placed in an HSA.
                 
Sen. John Courson will be introducing an amendment on the floor that will be my favorite plan, but getting the votes will be tough. His amendment will be short and simple. Raise cigarette taxes to 57¢ and give an income tax cut. Let the taxpayer decide how he or she will spend the money. Simple enough?