Seeing that re-election is just around the block, I’m going to close shop for a few weeks to remodel this site. Besides, didn’t you know that the Holiday season is the worst time of the year for politics? We’ll be in touch soon!

Heed warnings of 2006: Republicans must regain fiscal credibility
Rep. Michael D. Thompson
Thursday, November 8, 2007

In his 2003 book, “Breach of Trust,” U.S. Sen. Tom Coburn writes, “Power is like morphine. It dulls the senses, impairs judgment, and leads politicians to make choices that damage their own character and the machinery of Democracy.”
Sadly, when it comes to spending your tax dollars, our national leaders have been on a steady “morphine drip” in recent years.
In Washington, D.C., Republicans grew the national debt by $3 trillion from 2000-2006, losing any shred of fiscal conservative credibility in addition to their control of Congress. According to a poll taken shortly after the 2006 elections, 40 percent of Americans said they believed Republicans were the party of “big government.” I find that number surprising only because it wasn’t higher.
In South Carolina, we face similar issues.
At the heart of these troubling developments is a fundamentally flawed process. I believe changing this process is the first step in restoring Republican credibility both in Washington and Columbia.
To his credit, our own Sen. Jim DeMint is leading the way in Washington to change what he calls the “culture of how we spend America’s money.” Earlier this year Sen. DeMint offered a bill that would force legislators to put their names on spending requests that have been historically slipped into massive budget bills at the last minute. Sen. DeMint calls these million-dollar pork projects “earmarks.”
I call them budget busters, which is why this year I am pre-filing legislation in Columbia to bring this type of secret spending out in the open at the state level.
Not only will my bill require individual legislators to put their names on specific spending requests, it will require the sub-committee and committee chairmen who approve these requests to attach their names to the individual spending items as well.
Additionally, unlike our current system, no spending item would be approved without the opportunity for a full and open debate in both chambers. Simply put, if a state legislator wants money for a pet project, he or she would be required to stand up in front of the legislature and justify the expenditure on its merits.
My bill would also eliminate the so-called “competitive grants” program. Created with the intent of fostering economic development, this $46 million program has instead become a legislative slush fund for projects that have very little to do with economic development in our state. This is why I supported the governor when he vetoed the millions of dollars for this program.
Here is my concern: Given a projected half-billion-dollar shortfall next fiscal year, can we adequately support the core services of government if we are wasting millions of taxpayer dollars behind closed doors?
Republicans have a simple choice when we reconvene in January. We can either heed the warnings of the 2006 Congressional elections and insist on reforms to tighten up our spending practices, or face extinction as this state’s majority party.
Michael D. Thompson represents Anderson County’s District 9 in the South Carolina House of Representatives.

Heed warnings of 2006: Republicans must regain fiscal credibility
Rep. Michael D. Thompson
Thursday, November 8, 2007

In his 2003 book, “Breach of Trust,” U.S. Sen. Tom Coburn writes, “Power is like morphine. It dulls the senses, impairs judgment, and leads politicians to make choices that damage their own character and the machinery of Democracy.”
Sadly, when it comes to spending your tax dollars, our national leaders have been on a steady “morphine drip” in recent years.
In Washington, D.C., Republicans grew the national debt by $3 trillion from 2000-2006, losing any shred of fiscal conservative credibility in addition to their control of Congress. According to a poll taken shortly after the 2006 elections, 40 percent of Americans said they believed Republicans were the party of “big government.” I find that number surprising only because it wasn’t higher.
In South Carolina, we face similar issues.
At the heart of these troubling developments is a fundamentally flawed process. I believe changing this process is the first step in restoring Republican credibility both in Washington and Columbia.
To his credit, our own Sen. Jim DeMint is leading the way in Washington to change what he calls the “culture of how we spend America’s money.” Earlier this year Sen. DeMint offered a bill that would force legislators to put their names on spending requests that have been historically slipped into massive budget bills at the last minute. Sen. DeMint calls these million-dollar pork projects “earmarks.”
I call them budget busters, which is why this year I am pre-filing legislation in Columbia to bring this type of secret spending out in the open at the state level.
Not only will my bill require individual legislators to put their names on specific spending requests, it will require the sub-committee and committee chairmen who approve these requests to attach their names to the individual spending items as well.
Additionally, unlike our current system, no spending item would be approved without the opportunity for a full and open debate in both chambers. Simply put, if a state legislator wants money for a pet project, he or she would be required to stand up in front of the legislature and justify the expenditure on its merits.
My bill would also eliminate the so-called “competitive grants” program. Created with the intent of fostering economic development, this $46 million program has instead become a legislative slush fund for projects that have very little to do with economic development in our state. This is why I supported the governor when he vetoed the millions of dollars for this program.
Here is my concern: Given a projected half-billion-dollar shortfall next fiscal year, can we adequately support the core services of government if we are wasting millions of taxpayer dollars behind closed doors?
Republicans have a simple choice when we reconvene in January. We can either heed the warnings of the 2006 Congressional elections and insist on reforms to tighten up our spending practices, or face extinction as this state’s majority party.
Michael D. Thompson represents Anderson County’s District 9 in the South Carolina House of Representatives.

On Wednesday night, we had a public hearing for a water rate increase for a few hundred of my constituents. My remarks obviously irritated one of the high dollar attorneys for the utilities company. She insisted my statement contained unsubstantiated claims. I guess that’s what they pay these high-class lawyers to do. Here’s the letter I read to the PSC:
November 7, 2007

G. O’Neal Hamilton, Chairman
South Carolina of Public Service Commission
101 Executive Center Dr., Suite 100
Columbia, SC 29210

Re: Docket 2007-286-WS

Dear Public Service Commissioners:

Thank you very much for having a public hearing in Anderson concerning the rate increase proposal by the Utilities Services of South Carolina. I have a number of constituents with documents verifying less than average water pressure, low quality customer service and water quality issues.

There is also a comparison of neighboring water companies charging rates already less than those of the USSC. I am sure the USSC will give you several reasons to justify these rate increases. For whatever these reasons may be, I would think the neighboring water companies have similar circumstances yet the neighboring customers seem to get fairer treatment. Simply put, these customers should not be subject to funding the mismanagement practices of USSC. It is not their problem. I would like to encourage the members of the Public Services Commission to take great efforts to examine the issues raised by my constituents.

I am a retail pharmacist. In my profession, an unsatisfied customer can simply choose to shop at a different drug store in town. Utilities customers do not have an option, therefore we ask you, the Public Service Commission, to intervene and protect these working families. They simply cannot afford an unfair price increase for an essential need such as water.

With warmest personal regards, I remain

Respectfully,

Kevin L. Bryant
South Carolina Senate District 3

From the Aiken Standard: Senate race too close to call

By HALEY HUGHES Staff writer
It appears the fat lady has not yet sung for Senate District 25 — one candidate’s camp is declaring itself the outright winner and the other camp is not conceding and may request a recount with a 187-vote margin standing between them.
Republican candidate Shane Massey of Edgefield County has 50.7 percent of the votes while Democratic candidate Rep. Bill Clyburn of Aiken County has 49.3 percent. Clyburn carried Aiken and Saluda counties while Massey carried Edgefield and McCormick counties.
Under state law, a candidate must receive 50 percent plus one vote to win an election definitively.
In the entire district, Massey garnered 7,125 votes and Clyburn 6,938 votes.
“Based on the numbers, it appears I have won,” Massey said. “We knew from the beginning it was going to be a competitive race and it has been. The numbers demonstrate that people in District 25 want a change.”
Conflicting reports surfaced Tuesday night on who would fill the seat vacated by former Sen. Tommy Moore earlier this year. Even the South Carolina Republican Party released a statement congratulating Massey on his win though the results were clouded in uncertainty.
Aiken County Registration and Elections Commission Chairman Stuart Bedenbaugh could not be reached for comment.
Clyburn’s camp was not ready to accept either defeat or victory Tuesday.
“We are not going to concede,” said Phil Bailey, campaign spokesperson. “The numbers strongly suggest going to an automatic recount.”
State law requires automatic recounts when the difference between the number of votes is less than 1 percent. In the absence of an automatic recount, one may be generated if a petition is filed.
Massey stated his calculations clearly showed the margin was more than 1 percent of the total votes cast.
Clyburn said people were divided on whether Massey’s margin equaled 50 percent plus one vote.
“(The numbers are) so close we don’t know,” he said, adding his campaign would take a fresh look at the numbers this morning and decide on how to proceed after gaining input from the Clyburn family. “Our best appears not good enough, but we’ll see what the numbers bring.”
Massey, 32, is a partner at Nance, McCants & Massey law firm in Aiken and has had no previous political experience. Clyburn, 66, has had 27 years of political experience and is currently serving as state House Representative for District 82.