Dec 6 2010

Fire Marshal hearings Thursday 12/16 @ 1pm

You may be aware of a recent audit by the Legislative Audit Council of the State Fire Marshal.  The audit revealed instances, statewide, of local and state officials inaccurately interpreting the appropriate regulations and codes.  This has resulted in many businesses, churches, schools, and other organizations spending unnecessary amounts of money.  One school district was told to replace 626 working fire extinguishers at the expense of $37,000.  This is just one example.
I will be chairing a Subcommittee of the Senate Labor, Commerce & Industry Committee that will meet on Thursday, December 16, 2010, at 1:00 pm the Gressette Building in Columbia.  The sole purpose of this meeting is for public testimony as many have requested to share their horror stories with the Committee.  Others have asked to tell of their experiences anonymously from fear of retribution.  If you are aware of a positive or negative experience with a state or local fire marshal and would like to attend the meeting or forward information to me, please contact my office at 803-212-6024.

Here’s the full report. Here’s a summary.

By Kevin Bryant • Uncategorized •

Nov 26 2010

Senate Majority Leader Peeler: we must listen

Voters have spoken; we must listen By HARVEY PEELER For the Herald-Journal

The past year has been pretty eventful for South Carolina. We passed a number of conservative reforms in the Senate and made the hard choices when it came budget time. The primaries revealed some surprises, and when Nov. 2 rolled around conservatives took every statewide office. That means well for next year and the years to come.

However, not everything was coming up roses. There are lessons to be learned from what wasn’t working and what voters are telling elected officials.

Politically, you’d think a nasty virus swept through the electorate. People are sick of excuses. What we have to do is double down to find solutions to problems like the state budget woes, and not kick it down the road. People are sick of politicians putting faith in government. The way South Carolina moves forward is by empowering individuals to find their own way and allowing businesses to grow in a free market, not coming up with “fixes” from government.

People are sick of Republicans acting like Democrats. A voter goes to the polls to elect a Republican because he or she expects us to cut taxes, limit government and encourage economic growth. Elected Republicans who stray from that may soon find themselves out of office. The people know that we will fix our economy and create jobs when we put our faith back in people and not in government.

As majority leader, I take my responsibility seriously to help craft the priorities Senate Republicans will champion, work hard for and see passed into law. There are policies we’re fighting for that have stuck around for a while, whether it’s something that happens in committee, or disagreements with the House or the governor. Next session, though, with a nearly new slate of state officials and large GOP majorities in the General Assembly, we have an unprecedented opportunity to move forward.

One of my top priorities for next year is driving our caucus more to the right and demanding common sense conservative reforms like spending caps and government restructuring, including needed changes to state health care agencies and the Budget and Control Board. The crisis with the funding of Medicaid and other programs through the Department of Health and Human Services, in particular, cries out for changes to make sure needed services are provided without requiring running deficits, higher taxes, more spending or more government.

Also at the top of the list is tort reform. There’s no excuse. It’s past time for action.

We also need a good voter ID law. As much as our friends on the other side may act like it’s no big deal, voter fraud is not a laughing matter. The rest of the caucus and I are ready to push through the Democrats’ stalling tactics to make certain our elections are safe, secure and beyond doubt. Considering the amount of things on a daily basis when one needs to show a picture ID, doing it to vote is not that large an imposition.

And let’s not forget on-the-record voting. We’ve passed Senate rules to require on-the-record voting for a particular session, but that’s nothing permanent. At any given session, if enough senators agree, that session could be without what we’ve been doing recently and reassert the old order. We need to pass a law and make on-the-record voting real. Some people say that’s unconstitutional. If that’s proven, then we will put through a constitutional amendment to allow the voters to decide, correcting that issue.

The voters have told us they’re fed up. I’m listening, and I’m going to demand that my colleagues get down to business.

Sen. Harvey Peeler represents District 14, which includes portions of Cherokee, Spartanburg, Union and York counties.

By Kevin Bryant • Uncategorized •

Nov 24 2010

cool 911 truck

The trucker’s name is John Holmgren from Shafer , Minn. He has been ‘pulled over’ numerous times just so the troopers can get their picture taken with the truck.

By Kevin Bryant • Uncategorized •

Nov 17 2010

Cato: balancing the budget not that dificult

It’s Simple to Balance the Budget without Higher Taxes

Posted by Daniel J. Mitchell

John Podesta of the Center for American Progress had a column in Politico yesterday asserting that “closing the budget gap entirely on the spending side would require draconian programmatic cuts.” He went on to complain that there are some people who “refuse to look at the revenue side of the ledger – while insisting that we dig the hole $830 billion deeper over the next decade by extending the Bush tax cuts.”

Not surprisingly, Mr. Podesta is totally wrong. It’s actually not that challenging to balance the budget. And it doesn’t even require any spending cuts, though it would be a very good idea to dramatically downsize the federal government. Here’s a chart showing this year’s spending and revenue totals. It then shows the Congressional Budget Office’s estimate of how much revenues will grow, assuming all the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts are made permanent and assuming that the alternative minimum tax is adjusted for inflation. As you can see, balancing the budget is a simple matter of limiting the annual growth of federal spending.

So how is it that Mr. Podesta can spout sky-is-falling rhetoric about “draconian” cuts when all that’s needed is fiscal restraint? The answer is that politicians in Washington have concocted a self-serving budget process that automatically assumes that all previously-planned spending increases should occur. So if the politicians put us on a path to make government 8 percent bigger next year and there is a proposal to instead limit spending growth to 3 percent, that 3 percent increase gets portrayed as a 5 percent cut. read on

By Kevin Bryant • Uncategorized •

Nov 17 2010

my daughter Morgan

Please pray for our daughter Morgan. She’s been diagnosed with complex cystic masses on the right side of her thyroid. After several consultations, we’ve agreed to surgery to remove the right side of her thyroid next week.

Although cancer would be extremely rare, they will test the tissue and remove all of her thyroid if the tests show any possibility.

We’re told that the surgery requires an overnight stay in the hospital and recovery is tolerable.

By Kevin Bryant • Uncategorized •

Nov 16 2010

reform questions

Recently, I’ve received several e-mails with questions about reforming how the Legislature operates. Here’s my answers:

Senate:
1. South Carolina’s legislative session is the longest in the Southeast and the longest in the United States among part-time legislatures.
• Would you support shortening the legislative session to no more than 45 legislative days? yes

2. Because so much power is concentrated in the legislative branch, the leadership is therefore powerful through appointments to 250-plus executive branch boards and commissions. The Speaker of the House and the Senate President Pro Tempore, alone, make more than 120 appointments to executive branch functions.
• Do you believe there is an equal balance of power between the legislative, executive and judicial branches of SC state government? no
• If yes: Given that judges are appointed by the legislature, and many executive branch appointments are made by the legislature, how can you support that statement?
• If no: How would you propose changing the current system? Move more executive functions under the governor’s administration, have judges appointed by governor and confirmed by Senate, eliminate the Budget and Control Board

3. Given that we are one of only two states that determines committee chairman and committee assignments simply based on how long someone has been in the Senate;
• Would you support a rules change in the Senate to reform the seniority system? If it accompanied term limits. I support term limits on the full membership.

4. For the past two years the General Assembly has only recorded 25% of votes they took.
• Do you believe a statute requiring more recorded votes is unconstitutional? No, However, I support legislation (statute), constitutional amendment, rules change, or all of the above to increase roll call votes. Personally, I record all of my votes in the Senate Journal on 2nd or 3rd reading of all bills voluntarily if no role call vote is taken
• Would you support a Constitutional amendment requiring recorded votes? yes

By Kevin Bryant • Uncategorized •

Nov 15 2010

naked scanners: a picture of how gov’t really works

‘Naked scanners’: Lobbyists join the war on terror

By: Timothy P. Carney, Senior Columnist, Washington Examiner

The degradations of passing through full-body scanners that provide naked pictures of you to Transportation Security Administration agents may not mean that the terrorists have won — but they do mark victories for a few politically connected high-tech companies and their revolving-door lobbyists.

Many experts and critics suspect that the full-body “naked scanners” recently deployed at U.S. airports do little to make us more secure, and a lot to make us angry, embarrassed and late. For instance, the scanners can’t see through skin, and so weapons or explosives can be hidden safely in body cavities.

But this is government we’re talking about. A program or product doesn’t need to be effective, it only needs to have a good lobby. And the naked-scanner lobby is small but well-connected.

If you’ve seen one of these scanners at an airport, there’s a good chance it was made by L-3 Communications, a major contractor with the Department of Homeland Security. L-3 employs three different lobbying firms including Park Strategies, where former Sen. Al D’Amato, R-N.Y., plumps on the company’s behalf. Back in 1989, President George H.W. Bush appointed D’Amato to the President’s Commission on Aviation Security and Terrorism following the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103. Also on Park’s L-3 account is former Appropriations staffer Kraig Siracuse.

The scanner contract, issued four days after the Christmas Day bomb attempt last year, is worth $165 million to L-3.

Rapiscan got the other naked-scanner contract from the TSA, worth $173 million. Rapiscan’s lobbyists include Susan Carr, a former senior legislative aide to Rep. David Price, D-N.C., chairman of the Homeland Security Subcommittee. When Defense Daily reported on Price’s appropriations bill last winter, the publication noted “Price likes the budget for its emphasis on filling gaps in aviation security, in particular the whole body imaging systems.” full article

By Kevin Bryant • Uncategorized •

Nov 13 2010

modern idol worship

By Kevin Bryant • Uncategorized •

Nov 12 2010

Light Bulb: jMint’s finest hour

The State, Bright: Jim DeMint’s finest hour, By LEE BRIGHT – Guest Columnist

Sen. Jim DeMint has weathered incessant fire over the past few weeks for taking a stand entirely consistent with his stated principles: He refuses to engage in the political game of favor-trading just to look good at home. This is his finest hour.

The issue at hand is an earmark for a study on the efficacy of dredging the Port of Charleston. Sen. DeMint simply refuses to beg the Democrats in control of the appropriations process for the goody, and the Democrats therefore refuse to put it in the bag.

We learn three things from this sequence of events. First, we learn that Democrats play games with appropriations, but I assure you that such games are not a partisan affair. Second, we learn that Jim DeMint does not play games but stands on principle even when it hurts; actually that is the only measure of principle. Third, we learn that erstwhile “conservatives” right here at home suddenly contract amnesia when rhetoric bumps into desire.

We all know about earmarks. They direct agencies to spend money on specific items in specific places. They exist so that the politicians who get them into a spending bill can go home and crow about “getting things done” for their constituents. They usually do that in front of cameras and with an oversized check in their hands.

Consider some of the political payoffs from the stimulus bill: $554,000 to replace windows in a visitors center at Mount St. Helen’s, which has not been open for three years; $62 million for a train that runs to the two stadiums where the Pirates and Steelers play as well as a casino next to them; $1.9 million to send researchers abroad to photograph ants. And the list goes on.

Now, I readily agree that dredging the Charleston Port does not equate to photographing ants. I also agree that the Port of Charleston is a vital component in the economic engine of both South Carolina and America itself.

The question then becomes, if we all know that it is so important, why does it take a gift from politicians to get it funded? Well, let us look at what else lies in the appropriations bill that would include the Port of Charleston.

The bill that covers the Army Corps of Engineers that would do the dredging study came out of the House Energy and Commerce Committee and its Energy and Water Subcommittee. According to Citizens Against Government Waste, it included $1.2 million for carbon sequestration research at Brown University (with an endowment of $2.04 billion, Brown could surely afford its own research); $500,000 for LED streetlights in Los Angeles; $300,000 for an urban wind demonstration project in New York. With these funds, the city of New York will “place, test and note the barriers wind turbines face in urban areas.” Some of these barriers are called skyscrapers.

The problem, of course, is that in order for Sen. DeMint to win approval for an earmark for the Port of Charleston, he would have to vote for these insults to the taxpayers.

That is because the Corps of Engineers does not receive its money and then apply it to its priorities. The only way for the corps to spend money on projects like this is for Congress to earmark it. Engineers, in other words, have their priorities set by politicians. Why not? They think that they can “fix” health care too. We have an agency in South Carolina that used to operate in this manner: The Department of Transportation used to build roads and fix bridges and put up red lights largely based upon what politician asked for them.

Four years ago, a Legislative Audit Council review and subsequent hearings chaired by Sen. Larry Grooms uncovered the political influence at the Transportation Department and the fact that road-building decisions reflected influence and not engineering. Sen. Greg Ryberg led the effort to reform the agency, and the legislation passed in 2007 requires that engineers prioritize projects based upon objective criteria such as traffic counts and road conditions.

The Congress should take a page from our book and let the corps do its work based upon real priorities and not political pressure. Until it does, I applaud Jim DeMint for refusing to play in the sandbox of corruption.

Mr. Bright represents Spartanburg County in the state Senate.

By Kevin Bryant • Uncategorized •