The State: $292 million added to state budget An increase in jobs the past 12 months will bolster state income tax receipts By ADAM BEAM

State economists added an extra $292 million to the state budget Tuesday, the result of South Carolina adding 26,000 jobs over the last 12 months.

More people working means more people are paying state income taxes. In October, when state economists released their first revenue forecast, South Carolina had a 10.5 percent unemployment rate.

Six months later, the unemployment rate was 8.9 percent – the first time South Carolina has had fewer than 200,000 people on unemployment rolls in more than three years, according to Robert Martin, a state economist. “That’s a very positive sign.”

State income tax refunds also were down $93 million, which means more money for the state.

The state Board of Economic Advisors unanimously approved adding the money to the state budget Tuesday.

It is the second time in recent months that the board has added money to the state budget. In November, the board added more than $1 billion in new money to the budget, about half onetime money and the rest projected to recur annually.

Tuesday’s revised forecast calls for an additional $137 million in one-time money for the budget year that ends June 30. State lottery officials also added an extra $18 million in one-time revenue after that agency saw a surge in ticket sales preceding the Mega Millions record jackpot in March. Lawmakers most likely will spend the one-time money, meaning it won’t be available next year, on state construction projects.

But the big move was to add an extra $137 million in recurring money for the state’s budget year that begins July 1. That money should be available in future years to spend as well, meaning lawmakers can spend it on recurring obligations.

And fight over it.

Tuesday afternoon, after learning of the new state money, state Sen. Kevin Bryant, R-Anderson, proposed a budget amendment to use $93 million of the new recurring money to pay for two tax-cut proposals passed by the House of Representatives.

The first would cut state income taxes by about $84 a year for most taxpayers, reducing state revenue next year by $78 million. The second would cut taxes for small business owners, reducing state revenue next year by $15 million.

“Of the close to $1 billion in new money brought in this year, this is less than 10 percent,” Bryant said of the proposed tax cuts. “If 10 percent is good enough for the Lord, I think 10 percent might be good enough for the taxpayer.”

State Sen. Hugh Leatherman, R-Florence, the chairman of the Senate’s budget committee, told Bryant that he supported the tax cut for small businesses but asked Bryant to withdraw his amendment so lawmakers could have more time to study it.

If Bryant can get his amendment passed, he likely would find support in the House and the governor’s office.

Gov. Nikki Haley has long advocated for lawmakers to use any extra money either to pay down state debt or to return to taxpayers. Rob Godfrey, Haley’s spokesman, said Tuesday, “The governor believes it’s time to give the people and businesses this state tax relief.”

Rep. Brian White, R-Anderson, head of the House budget panel, said he supports using the extra money to pay for the House’s proposed tax cuts. He cautioned against rushing to spend the new money, especially when the state is only a few years removed from a budget crisis that caused massive cuts in state spending.

“The growth is there,” White said. “I was just shocked the growth was $137 million. On the one hand, that’s good that we are growing, but we need to manage that money wisely.”

Bryant, a Tea Party Republican, is not optimistic that will happen. “All this money is going to be spent,” he said. “I hope I’m wrong.”

Site Contact: Jeffery Crowley On Scene Coordinator crowley.jeffery@epa.gov

1625 Manse Jolly Road, Anderson, SC 29621, www.epaosc.org/ASR

On June 02, 2011, EPA’s removal program received from the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control a referral for the assessment of the facility located at 1625 Manse Jolly Road, Anderson, Anderson County, South Carolina. On November 2010 SCDHEC received information that the facility had stopped operations and declared bankruptcy. In May 2011 SCDHEC conducted an inspection of the facility and documented leaking holding tanks and overflowing sumps. SCDHEC also documented the presence of approximately 80 poly totes some of which were labeled hazardous waste, drums, as well as other containers such as pails, small plastic drums and cardboard containers. On June 02, 2011 Telephone Duty received from the removal program DHEC’s referral package and dispatched OSC Negron to conduct an assessment. On June 03, 2011 OSC Negron along with START personnel met with SCDHEC representatives and after obtaining access from the property owners and the bankruptcy trustee proceeded to enter the facility. Initial assessments from the facility revealed 44 poly totes exposed to the elements. Some totes exhibited cage corrosion and an advanced state of degradation. After entering the facility’s building the OSC observed overflowing sludge filled sumps, water ponds in multiple areas, totes labeled with hazardous waste stickers and pH 2 annotations, cardboard containers in advanced state of degradation some of which had spilled their contents, drums and multiple other containers.

S. 1512 is a bill I introduced to rectify the inequity of nearly 200 candidates being removed from the ballots on last week’s Supreme Court Ruling. Even though s.1512 was amendment and passed out of the Judiciary Committee it received a minority report by Sen. Jake Knotts of Lexington. A minority report in essence kills the bill unless the Senate puts the bill on special order. Senate rules dictate that a motion for special order cannot be made until the bill is on the calendar for 6 days. That means s.1512 could not be taken up until May 23, far too late for any effect.

However, there are more than one way to skin a cat. Today, the Senate put h.3392, which is a bill that deals with election law and can be amended with s.1512’s Judiciary Amendment. H. 3392 is on third reading, so it is possible to amend it and pass it out of the Senate Wednesday afternoon. If the House votes to concur, it would avoid a conference committee and go straight downstairs for the signature of the Governor.

I’m not a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, but the chairman (Sen. Larry Martin R-Pickens) was gracious enough to allow me to address the committee. Generally, testimony is not heard at the full committee level. Here’s what I said:

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee I want to thank you for this special meeting to consider s.1512. As I said on the floor last week, this bill was a quick reaction to the Supreme Court’s ruling, causing the disenfranchisement of nearly 200 candidates Democrats and Republicans alike. I wanted to drop a bill in the hopper, generate a debate, and get first reading since the time frame is so short. I am confident the process will produce a workable solution.

These districts belong to the people. On June 12, the Democrats and Republicans across this state will decide their respective nominees, and in November the voters will decide who they want to represent them.

The fallout of the Supreme Court’s ruling has eliminated nearly 200 candidates, all challengers. We have two sets of rules. Current legislators are required to file the statement of economic interest by April 15th each year. If we are late, we simply pay a fine, a slap on the wrist.

First time candidates, however, must file the same statement with a deadline 15 days earlier than ours. If they are a second late, they are disqualified. We get a slap on the wrist, they get the death penalty. That’s just wrong.

Some are accusing the General Assembly of purposefully setting up roadblocks to protect opponents and some say it wasn’t intentional. Personally, I was unaware of the disparity until last week. I think a blame game at this point is irrelevant and should wait until next session when a permanent fix can be constructed. Let’s put that discussion on hold and fix the problem before us as time is not on our side.

I ask that the Judiciary Committee take s.1512 and amend it as you see fit. This committee’s membership and staff consists of some of our State’s sharpest legal minds and I am confident y’all can find a way to thread is needle.

If we don’t act quickly, there are nearly 200 legislative districts in which their voters will not have a choice.

We’ve got a problem, a good problem. So good, we need your help.

We’ve had several hundred good conservatives ask for a sign for their yard so they can show their support. I’ve got everything sorted out by precinct, so if you have a few minutes of time to help deliver these signs, I’d really appreciate your help. Call or text me at 864-202-8394

Thanks!