Update, we’ve introduced S. 1144 and talked about it here and here . Below is the press release by Gov. Sanford on his recent executive order to provide spending information to the public. S. 1144 calls for the same transparency to all other forms of government in South Carolina. It’s your money, take a look!

    

Gov. Sanford Announces Completion of Spending Transparency Web Site

     

NEW SITE WILL MAKE SPENDING INFORMATION AVAILABLE TO CITIZENS VIA COMPTROLLER GENERAL’S OFFICE

      

Columbia, S.C. – March 3, 2008 – Gov. Mark Sanford today announced the completion of a new state Spending Transparency Web site, aimed at providing citizens with a greater degree of information about how their tax dollars are being used.

         

The site was created pursuant to a Spending Transparency Executive Order issued last year by the governor, and developed in concert with Comptroller General Richard Eckstrom’s office. The goal of the site, which can be found here, is to bring more accountability to where tax dollars are being spent. The site – which is freely accessible to the public – contains reports collected by the Comptroller General’s Office on all agencies’ funds expended and their source.

    

In addition, many agencies – including all Cabinet agencies – have provided even more information and details about their expenditures, including travel expenditures, expenditures for office supplies over $100, and contractual expenses over $100. Each Cabinet agency’s database is searchable, and will be updated monthly. Cabinet agencies are also each adding the database link to their own Web sites.

    

The governor said that these databases should serve as a starting point, and challenged all agencies to participate as well.

      

“We’ve long believed that transparency is key to voters’ ability to hold government accountable for the decisions it makes,” Gov. Sanford said. “This new site is all about providing another tool for our citizens to have the maximum amount of information in terms of how their government operates and how their tax dollars are being spent. I want to thank the Comptroller General and the folks over at sc.gov for their work on this front, and I’d urge every agency to do more in making more of this information available.”

      

“I’ve been working to open the curtains on government spending since I came into office,” General Eckstrom said. “Taxpayers have a right to know how their tax money is being spent. We’ll keep working to make this information even easier to access.  That’s one big reason why we need the new statewide computer system that we’re installing, so that we can provide better financial data than we’re able to provide with our thirty year old system.

  

On Tuesdays, Wednesdays, & Thursdays I get my coffee in the break-room in the statehouse courtesy of the SC taxpayers. On Sunday mornings our family normally eats breakfast at Panera Bread Company before church. As I was correctly lining up the seam opposite the spout on the lid, I asked myself this question.  Why haven’t I communicated this discovery to my fans in the blogsphere?
  
Here’s the warning. Put your lid on your cup with the seam in the back!  See how the spout of this lid is over the seam of the cup? It will surely leak if you put your lid on this way. I wouldn’t support legislation mandating this warning, but I’m surprised the “safety squad” hasn’t thought of this yet.

In my opinion anything that comes out of your pocket and goes into government’s coffers is a tax. The SC Policy Council’s take on taxes:

An Excise Tax is Not a User Fee

Excise taxes are fixed duties or charges on a specific type of good independent of the market value of the good. Examples include taxes on a liter of alcohol or a gallon of gas.

So-called “User Fees” are the costs that citizens pay to make use of specific public goods and services. These are voluntary services. Examples include charges to occupy a tent site at a state park or paying to tour a public monument.

  

South Carolina’s statues are clear:
  
A “service or user fee means a charge required to be paid in return for a particular government service or program made available to the payer that benefits the payer in some manner different from the members of the general public not paying the fee (6-1-300).
  
The key point is that user fees are attached to transactions the citizen makes directly and voluntarily with the government.
  
Some lawmakers have been arguing that excise taxes are a form of user fees. This mischaracterization is based on a failure to understand that user fees can only be collected when someone is directly purchasing a public good, not when tax revenue from a private sale is earmarked by lawmakers for public services. All taxes and fees help finance governmental operations in one manner or another, it is the nature of the taxed transaction that defines the type of levy.
  
Gasoline taxes are an example. Some of the money from state gasoline taxes is earmarked for highway construction but gasoline is purchased from private suppliers not from the government. Gasoline taxes are not the only source of revenue for highway construction and maintenance. What’s more, individuals who choose not to purchase gasoline may stand to benefit greatly from the existence of a state-subsidized network of roads. A more accurate example of a user fee for roads would be a toll paid to drive on a turnpike that was exclusively funded through toll revenues.
  
Just as gasoline taxes are often mischaracterized as user fees, so too are the state excise taxes levied on tobacco products. Some lawmakers claim that cigarette tax revenues will be spent on Medicaid, health insurance or placed in some type of medical trust fund. They argue that since the revenues are directed to health care, and smokers often need health care, that cigarette taxes are a type of user fee. This is nonsensical. Tobacco products are manufactured and sold by private companies, not the government. Cigarettes are not a public good. Those smokers who are taxed by the state are not enjoying a special benefit as the result of a targeted fee. Some may go on to seek government financed or subsidized health care, but many will not. Likewise, the vast majority of citizens who receive Medicaid, Medicare, or SCHIPS benefits are not smokers. These individuals are eligible for the same benefits that the smoker is but they have not been asked to pay an excise tax for it.
  
Policymakers looking to raise taxes on cigarettes and gasoline need to be honest. Increasing excise taxes means raising taxes, not levying a greater user fee. The concept of user fees – which often mean paying twice for a government service – is contentious enough. Mudding the water by further misusing the term is down right deceptive.
  
Nothing in the foregoing should be construed as an attempt to aid or hinder passage of any legislation. Copyright 2008. South Carolina Policy Council Education Foundation, 1323 Pendleton Street, Columbia, South Carolina 29201. Visit the Policy Council online at www.scpolicycouncil.com.
  
Neil Mellen
Research Director
South Carolina Policy Council

IDENTITY THEFT S. 453  

• The Financial Identity Fraud and Identity Theft Protection Act 

·        This legislation has been a priority for the Senate Banking and Insurance Committee for the past three years.  The Committee worked with the Department of Consumer Affairs, consumer groups, business leaders, industry specialists, SLED, and consumers who have been victimized in our efforts to draft a bill that will protect South Carolinians against identity thieves.

 ·        The bill includes protections that will shield our citizens from the devastating crime of identify theft.
 
 ·        Some of the provisions in the bill follow:
 
 Ø      Provides consumer the ability to place, remove or temporarily lift a security freeze on their credit report at no charge
 
Ø      Provides means for the removal of erroneous information on a credit report
 
Ø      Requires that consumer be notified by credit reporting agency if address given for credit is different than address on file
 
Ø      Provides consumer with the means to get a criminal charge dismissed if the crime was committed by a person who stole their identity
 
Ø      Establishes database of victims of identity theft at SLED
 
Ø      Provides mechanisms for protection of social security numbers
 
Ø      Regulates how a person’s social security number can be posted, displayed or communicated
 
Ø      Sets requirements for sanitization of public and business IT equipment before discarding and requirements for the disposal of printed data
 
Ø      Provides for notification to consumer of security breaches
 
Ø      Makes it unlawful for a person to rummage through or steal household garbageProvides for penalties, damages, attorney fees and costs for violations.

S. 333 sez as a condition of probation upon a 2^nd or subsequent conviction of DUI, a court may require that an offender wear a continuous remote alcohol monitoring device, to provide that a finding by the court that the offender’s blood alcohol concentration meets or exceeds .08 %. As in most legislation, funding sources are in question. What if the offender can’t afford the expense of the device? the bill was carried over to gather more information.
  
There is some interesting technology available these days. check this out