Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
>>> AND WELCOME BACK TO THIS WEEK AT THE STATEHOUSE.
THE SENATE HAS BEEN DEALING WITH THE AFFORDABLE CARE ACT,
OBAMACARE, NULLIFICATION. SOME HOT DEBATE.
OVER IN THE HOUSE THEY, OF COURSE, FINISHED THE BUDGET.
THE BUDGET IS NOW OVER IN THE SENATE AND IN THE SENATE
FINANCE COMMITTEE AS THIS SESSION MOVES ALONG.
WE'LL SEE WHERE THE SENATE WANTS TO GO IN WHAT IT
CONSIDERS TO BE PRESSING ISSUES AND THAT'S SOME OF WHAT
WE'LL BE TALKING ABOUT TODAY. WE HAVE A GREAT PROGRAM.
BEFORE I START, LET ME TAKE CARE OF SOME HOUSEKEEPING.
I WANT TO THANK TIME WARNER CABLE AND THE SOUTH CAROLINA
FARM BUREAU FOR THEIR SPONSORSHIP OF THIS PROGRAM.
ALSO THE SOUTH CAROLINA EDUCATIONAL TELEVISION FOR
THEIR PRODUCTION OF THIS PROGRAM AND THE ASSISTANCE OF
THE SOUTH CAROLINA PRESS ASSOCIATION INCLUDING PUTTING
THIS PROGRAM ON. AND I WOULD BE REMISS IF I
DIDN'T MENTION OUR FRIENDS AT 518 OF THE BLATT BUILDING.
REPRESENTATIVE STAVRINAKIS AND MERRILL AND OTHERS, THEY FIND
THIS PROGRAM VERY INTERESTING AND ENLIGHTENING AND I HOPE
THAT YOU FIND IT THE SAME WAY THEY DO.
WITH THAT WHAT IS OUR PROGRAM ABOUT TODAY?
I'VE GOT TWO SENATORS WHO HAVE BEEN HERE A LITTLE OVER A
YEAR. RIGHT NEXT TO MY IMMEDIATE
RIGHT SENATOR THOMAS McELVEEN WHO COMES FROM
SUMTER COUNTY. RIGHT NEXT TO HIM SENATOR PAUL
THURMOND COMES TO US FROM CHARLESTON COUNTY.
THEY HAVE BEEN IN THE SENATE A LITTLE OVER A YEAR AND HAVE
HAD A CHANCE TO SEE SOME OF THE FRUSTRATION, SOME OF THE
EXCITEMENT. I WANT TO TALK WITH THEM ABOUT
HOW THEY PERCEIVE IT AFTER A YEAR IN SERVICE.
SECONDLY, WHAT WOULD THEY LIKE TO BE SEEN IN THIS SESSION.
IT'S ALMOST HALFWAY THROUGH, A LITTLE BIT OF TIME LEFT.
WHAT DO THEY THINK SHOULD BE ADDRESSED AND SO WE'RE GOING
TO TAKE A LOOK WHERE WE'VE BEEN AND WHERE ARE WE GOING.
WITH THAT I'LL START WITH YOU, SENATOR.
YOU'VE BEEN HERE A LITTLE OVER A YEAR.
WHAT'S YOUR IMPRESSION, WHAT'S YOUR BIGGEST FRUSTRATION ABOUT
SERVING IN THE SENATE AND WHAT DO YOU THINK IS THE GREATEST
REWARD OUT OF THAT PUBLIC SERVICE?
>> WELL, GOVERNOR, FIRST OF ALL I WANT TO SAY THANK YOU
FOR HAVING ME TODAY ALONG WITH SENATOR THEY ARE MONDAY.
IT'S AN HONOR TO BE HERE AND I KNOW YOUR DAYS IN THE CHAMBER
ARE SOMEWHAT LIMITED AND I THINK THE STATE AND OUR BODY
IS REALLY GOING TO MISS YOU. YOU KNOW, FOR ME WASHINGTON
OUTSIDERS WHERE I WAS ELECTED, I SEE GUYS LIKE YOU AND NIKKI
SETZLER AND HARVEY PEELER, IT'S AN HONOR TO SERVE WITH
YOU AND I WATCH YOU UP THERE AND WATCH HOW YOU WORK WITH
PEOPLE. I THINK THIS COUNTRY WILL BE A
LOT -- [INAUDIBLE] BUT TALKING ABOUT THIS YEAR AND WHAT I'VE
SEEN SO FAR, I WANT TO HAVE THE CONVERSATION ABOUT ROADS
AND BRIDGES. I SEE THE CITIZENS IN
GEORGETOWN, SENATOR CLEARY WANTS TO TALK ABOUT IT, I WANT
TO TALK ABOUT IT TOO. KIND OF DANCED AROUND LAST
YEAR, BUT IT'S A PROBLEM NOT GOING AWAY AND SOMETHING
THAT'S GOT TO BE DONE FOR SO MANY REASONS AND IT BOTHERS ME
WE'RE ALMOST TWO MONTHS INTO THE SESSION, HAD A COUPLE ICE
WEEKS, BUT IT BOTHERS ME THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE'RE NOT
TAKING UP. WE HAVEN'T EVEN TALKED ABOUT
IT YET. THAT'S PART OF MY FRUSTRATION.
OF COURSE, THE GOOD THING ABOUT IT IS I DO HAVE A
DISTRICT THAT'S CUT IN AN ODD FASHION, I HAVE FOUR COUNTIES.
>> [INAUDIBLE]. >> YES, SIR.
MY PREDECESSOR HAD A -- NOW I GO FROM PINEWOOD SOUTH
CAROLINA DOWN IN SUMTER COUNTY ALL THE WAY UP TO NORTHEAST
RICHLAND COUNTY AND KERSHAWEN LEE COUNTY.
BUT IT'S A GREAT DISTRICT, GREAT PEOPLE AND IT'S A REWARD
FOR ME TO SERVE. >> I WOULD LIKE TO ECHO THE
STATEMENTS BY THE SENATOR FROM SUMTER REGARDING YOUR
PRESIDING OVER THE SENATE AND YOUR INVOLVEMENT THROUGH THE
MANY YEARS OF SERVICE TO THIS STATE.
I HAVE TWO SHOES TO FILL. I'M USED TO THAT AND GRATEFUL
FOR THE PEOPLE IN DISTRICT 41 THAT HAVE GIVEN ME THE
OPPORTUNITY TO COME UP HERE AND SERVE.
IT IS CERTAINLY CHALLENGE. THERE'S A LOT OF INFORMATION
TO TRY TO TAKE IN, TO TRY TO UNDERSTAND.
THERE ARE POLITICS AND POLITICS.
WHAT I'VE QUICKLY LEARNED IS TRYING TO -- YOU MAKE
RELATIONSHIPS TRYING TO GET THINGS DONE, MAKING SURE YOU
CAN BRING A PHILOSOPHY OF CONSISTENCY.
BUT AT THE SAME TIME UNDERSTANDING THAT THE OTHER
45 SENATORS ARE NOT NECESSARILY GOING TO AGREE
WITH YOU. AS TO THE ISSUES AT HAND WE'VE
GOT A BUNCH. WE SEEM TO HAVE CONSISTENTLY
NOT NECESSARILY LOOKED AT THE BIGGER ISSUES FOR THE STATE.
FORTUNATELY WE HAVE SOME THINGS COMING UP THAT I KNOW
WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO ADDRESS.
EDUCATION IS -- HAS SPECIAL ORDER RIGHT NOW, A BILL FOR
EDUCATION [INAUDIBLE]. I'VE INTRODUCED SOME THINGS
ABOUT EDUCATION TRYING TO ADDRESS WHAT I CONSIDER POOR
TEACHERS OR TEACHERS NOT PERFORMING AS THEY SHOULD, AT
THE SAME TIME SUPPORTING TEACHERS BY RAISING THE
AVERAGE SALARIES OF TEACHERS. SO IN OTHER WORDS, SUPPORTING
GOOD TEACHERS AND ADDRESSING UNDERPERFORMANCES.
BUT TO ME INFRASTRUCTURE IS OBVIOUSLY A BIG ISSUE.
I HAVE TO GIVE IT TO SENATOR CLEARY, HE HAS WORKED AND
WORKED TO MAKE SURE THAT BILL IS GOING TO HAVE A SHOT.
I THINK IT NEEDS TO BE DEBATED.
I MIGHT HAVE SOME DIFFERENCES OF OPINION ON HOW WE GET TO
THE FINISH LINE TO ADDRESS OUR ROADS AND BRIDGES, BUT THERE
IS NO DOUBT IT'S VERY OBVIOUS IT'S A CONCERN, QUALITY OF
LIFE, ECONOMIC DRIVERS THAT WE NEED TO ADDRESS IN THIS STATE
AND I'M READY TO GET TO BIGGER ISSUES THAT AFFECT PEOPLE'S
LIVES DAY IN AND DAY OUT AND I THINK WE'LL SEE THAT OVER THE
NEXT COUPLE OF MONTHS. >> WELL, I WANT TO GO TO THOSE
ISSUES AND WE'LL TAKE UP THOSE.
LET ME ASK YOU THIS. I LOOK AT YOUR BACKGROUND.
BOTH OF YOU ARE ATTORNEYS. THE YEARS I'VE BEEN UP HERE,
WE HAD LESS, LESS, LESS LAWYERS COMING.
SO WHAT I WOULD ASK YOU IN YOUR FIRST YEAR AND A HALF,
YOUR EXPERIENCE OF BEING IN THE LEGISLATURE, HAS A LEGAL
BACKGROUND HELPED YOU OR HINDERED YOU IN YOUR ABILITY
TO DEAL WITH LEGISLATION? WHAT'S BEEN YOUR EXPERIENCE IN
THAT AREA SO THE FOLKS OUT THERE -- EVERYBODY LIKES TO
SAY I DON'T WANT TO VOTE FOR A LAWYER.
WHEN YOU NEED ONE, EVERYBODY LOVES TO GET AHOLD OF ONE.
BUT LEGAL EDUCATION, YOU HAVE A CHANCE TO LOOK AT
CONSEQUENCES OF THINGS. DO YOU THINK IT HELPS OR HURTS
YOU? >> I THINK IT HELPS, GOVERNOR.
I MEAN [INAUDIBLE] ONE THING I'VE GOTTEN TIRED OF IS JUST
THE SHAMELESS ATTACKS ON LAWYERS.
IF A MAN HAS BEEN UNETHICAL I THINK IT'S FAIR GAME, BUT
LET'S NOT ATTACK LAWYERS BECAUSE LAWYERS HAVE BROUGHT
CONSIDERABLE CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE STATE AND THIS COUNTRY.
AND I THINK IT'S A BENEFIT FOR US.
IF NOTHING ELSE, WE'RE USED TO READING THE LAW.
WE KNOW THAT WORDS LIKE CAN, SHALL AND MAY CAN REALLY
CHANGE THE MEANING OF THE LAW. I THINK THAT OUR BACKGROUND IS
SOMETHING THAT CAN HELP US. MY PRACTICE HAS BEEN IN THE
GENERAL PRACTICE OF LAW. IT'S VARIED [INAUDIBLE] KIND
OF THE SAME WAY. I THINK IT'S SOMETHING THAT
BENEFITS US. YOU KNOW, I THINK THERE'S
NOTHING WRONG WITH LOOKING TO LAWYERS WHEN YOU HAVE LEGAL
ISSUES, JUST LIKE IF WE HAD A MEDICAL ISSUE, I PROBABLY
[INAUDIBLE]. I THINK IT'S A GOOD THING.
>> WELL, WE -- >> I GUESS WHEN YOU ARE
STANDING NEXT TO A VERY CAPABLE SENATOR YOU MIGHT
AGREE A LOT WITH WHAT YOU ARE SAYING SO I AGREE WITH THE
SENATOR FROM SUMTER'S POSITION IN REGARDS TO LAWYERS AND WE
ARE TRAINED TO REALLY LOOK THROUGH THE WORDING AND WHAT
THE MEANING IS AND HOW IT MIGHT HAVE COLLATERAL
CONSEQUENCES. I RELATE IT TO A CHESS MATCH
IN THAT YOU ALMOST HAVE TO LOOK AT THE MOVEMENTS OF THE
TERMS AND WHAT REALLY IS GOING ON AND WHAT COULD HAPPEN,
WHERE IS THE NEXT MOVE DOWN THE ROAD.
AS LAWYERS WE'RE TRAINED IN THAT REGARD BECAUSE YOU'VE GOT
TO ANTICIPATE THE OTHER SIDE AND YOU'VE GOT TO ANTICIPATE
PUSHBACK. BUT THAT'S NOT SAYING THAT
OTHER PROFESSIONS SHOULDN'T BE HERE TOO AND I THINK HE MAKES
A GOOD POINT IN REGARD TO DOCTORS.
ALL OF US BRING SOMETHING TO THE TABLE.
HAVING SERVED LOCALLY AND HAVING TO ADDRESS A DIFFERENCE
WITH THIS BODY AND THE DELIBERATIVE BODY VERSUS
LOCAL, YOU KNOW, PUBLIC SERVICE WHERE ALL YOU HAVE TO
DO IS COUNT TO FIVE. IF YOU CAN COUNT TO FIVE ALL
YOU HAVE TO DO IS RUN IT THROUGH.
HERE WE'LL HAVE A 37-4 VOTE AND THINK WE HAVE A SUPER
MAJORITY AND ALL OF A SUDDEN WE'LL GET AN OBJECTION OF SOME
SORT AND YOU'VE GOT TO FIGURE AND WORK IT OUT.
AND THAT'S BEEN A LITTLE CHALLENGING BUT ALL OF US ARE
BRINGING SOMETHING TO THE TABLE.
I THINK THERE IS A NEED FOR LAWYERS IN THE BODY, BUT
THERE'S A BENEFIT TO ALL THE BUSINESSES OUT THERE.
AND FRANKLY, ALONG THOSE LINES, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT
WAS EARLY ON SUGGESTED WAS REDUCING THE LEGISLATIVE
CALENDAR. AND ONE OF THE REASONS WHY I
[INAUDIBLE] IS BECAUSE I THINK IT WOULD OPEN IT UP TO MORE
PEOPLE WILLING TO SERVE, BEING INTERESTED TO BEING IN THE
BODY, BEING ABLE TO, YOU KNOW, DELINEATE THEIR TIME
APPROPRIATELY BY THEIR FULL-TIME JOB AND ALLOWING IT
TO BE A PART-TIME JOB. CERTAINLY THE COUPLE WEEKS
WITH THE ICE STORM WE REALIZED THAT IT HASN'T TOTALLY BEEN
DETRIMENTAL. SENATOR COURSON HAS TALKED
ABOUT WE'RE ON PACE, MOVING WELL.
BUT THOSE TYPES OF THINGS TO ALLOW FOR MORE PEOPLE TO BE
INVOLVED AND OFFER THEIR SERVICE IS REALLY IMPORTANT
AND HOPEFULLY THAT WILL BE SOMETHING WE TAKE UP AT SOME
POINT IN THE NEAR FUTURE AS WELL.
>> AND FOLLOWING UP ON THAT CALENDAR, WHEN I WAS IN THE
INCENTIVES AGAINST ARTIFICIALLY SHORTENING THE
CALENDAR FOR THIS REASON. THE SENATE IS STRUCTURED FOR
DEBATE AND [INAUDIBLE]. I NEVER GOT A COMPLAINT FROM
PEOPLE ABOUT HOW MUCH TIME I SPENT UP HERE.
I GOT A COMPLAINT ABOUT WHAT WE DID WHILE WE WERE UP HERE.
AND WHAT WE DID TO THEM. AND SOMETIMES COMPLAINTS WERE
UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES FOR FAILURE TO READ THE RULES OR
THE REGS. SO IF YOU COMPRESS THE TIME,
YOU HAVE TO COMPRESS THE DEBATE TIME, TIME SPENT ON
STUFF AND STUFF GOES FLYING THROUGH.
AND THEN IT'S VERY DIFFICULT TO UNDO THE MISTAKES.
AND THAT HAS ALWAYS BEEN MY CONCERN THAT THE FOUNDERS OF
THIS COUNTRY SET UP GOVERNMENT TO OPERATE SLOWLY,
DELIBERATELY AND MAKE IT VERY DIFFICULT FOR THE LEGISLATIVE
BRANCH TO GET A DICTATORSHIP OF AUTHORITY.
THEY SPLIT IT IN HALF, THEY GAVE THE GOVERNOR AND THE
EXECUTIVE BRANCH THE VETOES. AND LEGISLATIVE, YOU WANT TO
MAKE MORE PEOPLE UP HERE WHY THE LEGISLATURE DOES NO
INCREASE THE PAY. IT IS GROCERY TOO LOW TO
EXPECT YOU TO COME UP HERE AND READ THE VOLUME OF MATERIALS
AND STUFF. AND I JUST THINK THAT THE
LEGISLATURE CAN'T TAKE THE EASY WAY OUT AND SAY WE'RE OUT
OF TIME WHEN WE NEED TO RAISE THE PAY AND IT HASN'T BEEN
RAISED IN SO LONG. I'D ASK YOU WHAT DO YOU ALL
THINK? IT PUTS YOU IN A DIFFICULT
POSITION AND PEOPLE SHOULDN'T JUDGE YOU IF YOU ARE TRYING TO
[INAUDIBLE] YOU CANNOT RAISE YOUR PAY IN YOUR OWN TERM OF
OFFICE BY THE CONSTITUTION. >> IN THAT REGARD, I WOULD SAY
I'VE NEVER VOTED TO RAISE MY PAY, I WILL NEVER SIT IN A
BODY TO RAISE MY PAY BECAUSE PHILOSOPHICALLY [INAUDIBLE] I
RECOGNIZE THAT IT IS NOT SUFFICIENT, SO TO SPEAK, IN
REGARDS IF IT WAS A FULL-TIME JOB, BUT I THINK IF THE
FOUNDERS DECIDED TO MAKE THIS A PART-TIME JOB I THINK WE
NEED TO KEEP THAT. I ALSO SAY HOW DO WE MOVE THE
BALL AND MAYBE IF WE SHORTEN THE SESSION MAYBE WE LOOK AT
DOING A BIENNIAL BUDGET. WHEN THE BODY GETS DOWN TO
BUSINESS, WE GET THINGS DONE. SOMETIMES WE'VE GOT TO USE THE
RULES TO MOVE THAT BALL FORWARD, BUT MY CONCERN IS
THAT AS IT IS STRUCTURED, IT IS CHALLENGING.
WE'RE SO FORTUNATE IN REGARDS TO BEING A LAWYER AND WE GET
PROTECTION. IF WE DIDN'T HAVE PROTECTION,
AND I'M NOT SO SURE I WOULD BE ABLE TO SERVE.
IF I DIDN'T HAVE PARTNERS IN MY BUSINESS, I'M NOT SO SURE I
WOULD BE ABLE TO SERVE. AGAIN, HOW DO YOU BALANCE THAT
WITH THE CONCERNS THAT YOU HAVE, WITH IN ADDITION TO THE
DESIRE TO CREATE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR MORE PEOPLE TO
BE INVOLVED AND TO OFFER SERVICES.
BUT -- >> WHEN THE [INAUDIBLE] SAID
$10,000, $10,000 [INAUDIBLE] AND I GUESS THE TWO OF YOU ARE
YOUNG, YOU'VE GOT A FUTURE AHEAD OF YOU IN THE
LEGISLATURE. THE LEGISLATURE IS GOING TO
STARVE PEOPLE OUT OF COMING BECAUSE IT DOES NOT OFFER FOR
PART-TIME SERVICE AN ADEQUATE COMPENSATION SO WHILE THEY ARE
HERE THEY HAVE THE TIME TO LOOK AT BILLS RATHER THAN
HAVING TO GET ON THE TELEPHONE AND SCRAMBLE TO MAKE A LIVING
AT THE SAME TIME. >> I'LL ADD TO THAT TOO.
I'M CERTAINLY NOT GOING ON THE RECORD AND SAY WE NEED A PAY
INCREASE. I KNEW WHAT I WAS GETTING INTO
WHEN I RAN AND I THINK THOSE OF US HAVE HEARTS TO SERVE AND
[INAUDIBLE]. AND YOU KNOW, TO ME THE JOB
[INAUDIBLE] BECAUSE I DON'T WANT TO BE A FULL-TIME POLL
POLITICS. IT'S DIFFICULT.
AND I CAN HOME A LOT EASIER. I WATCH SENATOR THURMOND, I
HAVE ONE DAUGHTER, HE HAS FOUR CHILDREN.
HE'S VERY DEVOTED TO HIS FAMILY AND PROFESSION SO IT'S
*** HIM, IT'S *** BOTH OF US, BUT IT'S SERVICE.
AND SITTING THERE LAST YEAR I THINK BOTH OF US IN OUR FIRST
YEAR PROBABLY GOT FRUSTRATED AT TIMES, THE PROCESS GOT
BOGGED DOWN BUT THEN I THOUGHT ABOUT IT GOVERNOR AND WHAT YOU
SAID IS RIGHT, WE'RE SUPPOSED TO BE A DELIBERATIVE BODY.
[INAUDIBLE] AND I DON'T KNOW WHO SAID IT, YOU PROBABLY DO,
BUT I HEARD THE QUOTE THAT SOMEBODY SAID IF A BILL IS
GOOD ENOUGH TO PASS TODAY, IT'S GOOD ENOUGH TO PASS
TOMORROW. >> THAT WAS SENATOR GRESHAM.
>> WE DON'T NEED TO SET ANY RECORDS ON PASSING LAWS, JUST
MAKE SURE WE ARE PASSING GOOD LAWS.
>> AND I ASK YOU THAT BECAUSE AFTER I BECAME PRESIDENT OF
THE SENATE, ALL OF THE REGULATIONS COME TO MY DESK.
THESE AGENCIES ARE ATTEMPTING TO CIRCUMVENT THE LEGISLATIVE
PROCESS. THEY CAN'T GET IT THROUGH WITH
YOU ALL, THEY TRY TO WRITE A REGULAR.
IF SOMEBODY DOESN'T READ IT, SOMEBODY DOESN'T TAKE TIME TO
STAND UP ON THE FLOOR. THAT TAKES TIME AND EFFORT AND
IF YOU ARE UNDER TREMENDOUS PRESSURE TO MAKE A LIVING AT
HOME AND NOT HAVE SOME ROOM, THE PUBLIC IS GETTING CHEATED
AND THAT'S MY TWO CENTS. I KNOW THOSE WHERE YOU ARE,
YOU CAN'T. BUT AS SOMEBODY LEAVING I CAN
SAY TO THE PUBLIC YOU GET CHEATED WHEN YOU DON'T MAKE
SURE THAT THEY HAVE NOT COMPENSATION THAT THEY CAN
DEVOTE THE TIME NEEDED. BECAUSE THESE AGENCIES ARE
SPEWING THIS STUFF OUT. I SAW ONE LAST YEAR, A PAGE
AND A HALF BILL AND TURN IT INTO 27 PAGES OF REGULATIONS.
AND I HAD TO CALL THEIR HAND ON IT.
I HOPE THE NEXT ONE [INAUDIBLE].
LET ME TALK ABOUT ROADS. LET'S TAKE UP ROADS.
WE'RE GLIDING TO GRIDLOCK IN SOUTH CAROLINA.
THE ROADS ARE CRUMBLING, THE INTERSTATES ARE CRUMBLING,
WE'RE RIDING ON A PREVIOUS GENERATION'S LEGACY ON THE
INTERSTATES IN THIS STATE. WHAT DO YOU THINK THE REASON
THAT IT HASN'T BEEN ABLE TO GET UP AND GET DEBATED WITH
EVERYBODY SITTING OUT THERE AND KNOWING THE ROAD SYSTEM IS
COLLAPSING? WHAT'S THE REAL PROBLEM WITH
GETTING IT AT LEAST UP FOR DEBATE?
>> I THINK IT'S GOING TO BE UP FOR DEBATE.
I THINK WE'RE GOING TO SEE A TREND OF SETTING IT FOR
SPECIAL ORDER. OBVIOUSLY BECAUSE OF THE
POTENTIAL OF A GASOLINE TAX THERE ARE SIGNIFICANT AMOUNTS
OF MEMBERS IN THE BODY THAT ARE NOT INTERESTED IN
SUPPORTING, ALLOWING [INAUDIBLE].
I BRING A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT PHILOSOPHY TO THAT ISSUE.
I THINK THAT WE HAVE TO ADDRESS SOME OF THE MORE
CHALLENGING AREAS IN OUR STATE AND ROADS AND INFRASTRUCTURE
IS CERTAINLY ONE OF THOSE AREAS AND IT'S A CORE FUNCTION
OF GOVERNMENT. SO HOW DO WE GET THERE?
I WANT TO HAVE THE DEBATE. I'M IN NO WAY, SHAPE OR FORM
AGREEING TO A GASOLINE TAX. I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT FOR US
TO TALK ABOUT HOW IT IS [INAUDIBLE] THROUGHOUT THE
YEARS. LAST YEAR ALONE I THINK
TRANSPORTATION ACCOUNTED FOR MAYBE 12% OF OUR 6.7 BILLION
AMOUNT OF GENERAL FUND MONEY. AND SO WE'VE GOT TO FIGURE OUT
HOW WE CAN PRIORITIZE APPROPRIATELY.
BEFORE WE GET TO LET'S TAX EVERYBODY.
AND THAT'S A PHILOSOPHICAL ISSUE.
DO WE HAVE THE MONEY, HAVE WE APPROPRIATELY PRIORITIZED IT
AND AFTER THE DISCUSSION SHOULD WE LOOK AT ALTERNATIVE
OPTIONS? WHAT ARE THE ALTERNATIVE
OPTIONS. GASOLINE TAX IS ONE.
THERE MIGHT BE OTHER TAXES OR FEES AS THEY LIKE TO CALL IT.
BUT I BELIEVE THAT IT'S GOING TO BE DEBATED.
SEE IT SET FOR SPECIAL ORDER OR AT LEAST HAVE THE VOTES FOR
SPECIAL ORDER. FROM THERE AND THE OTHER PART
IS IN THE DISCUSSION WE HAVE TO ANTICIPATE THE GOVERNOR'S
VETO. IF WE'RE GOING TO SPEND A LOT
OF TIME ON IT, LET'S MAKE SURE THAT IT'S PRODUCTIVE
DISCUSSION AS OPPOSED TO SIMPLY PASSING SOMETHING WE
KNOW IS GOING TO GET VETOED, COME BACK TO OUR DESK IN WHICH
THE VETO WILL LIKELY BE SUSTAINED.
>> THE LOOMING POSSIBILITY OF THE VETO, SOME OF THE
PHILOSOPHICAL ARGUMENTS. >> I THINK THE GOVERNOR HAS
PUT US IN A BIND BY SAYING I WILL NOT ENDORSE A GAS TAX.
IN MY ESTIMATION THE HOUSE WILL OVERRIDE THAT.
WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT 30 BILLION NEEDED DOLLARS FOR 20 YEARS,
WE CAN'T DO THAT IN OUR GENERAL FUND.
IT JUST WON'T WORK. I DON'T KNOW OF ANY WAY TO DO
THIS OTHER THAN TO PASS A LONG OVERDUE GAS TAX.
I WILL SAY THIS. I WILL NOT SUPPORT A GAS TAX
UNTIL THE FORMULA CHANGES ON HOW WE DO THE FUNDING BECAUSE
I CAN TELL YOU RIGHT NOW, I'M SITTING BETWEEN TWO GENTLEMEN
FROM CHARLESTON, YOU GET YOURS, HORRY COUNTY, MY COUNTY
IS IN SHAMBLES. THE ONE THING THAT HURT US IS
THE WAY WE HAVE OUR HIGHWAY COMMISSION SET UP.
I THINK WE WERE THE OLD WAY OF JUDICIAL [INAUDIBLE] WE HAVE
ONE COMMISSIONER IN GAFFNEY, ONE IN COLUMBIA.
I LOOK AT THE INFRASTRUCTURE BANK.
IT'S FRUSTRATING TO ME THAT THEY'VE SENT MONEY, $4 BILLION
THIS THE LAST 17, 18 YEARS. MY COUNTIES HAVE GOTTEN PRETTY
MUCH NOTHING. I THINK IT'S UNREALISTIC TO
THINK WE COULD FUND THIS PROBLEM WITHOUT RAISING THE
GAS TAX, BUT OUT THE OTHER SIDE OF MY MOUTH I WANT TO
MAKE SURE MY DISTRICT GETS SOME OF THAT BECAUSE THAT'S
WHO I'M HERE TO REPRESENT. >> FOR WHAT IT'S WORTH, WHEN
THE INFRASTRUCTURE BANK WAS SET UP A GROUP OF US SAID YOU
SHOULD NEVER REQUIRE LOCAL [INAUDIBLE] RURAL COUNTIES AND
POOR COUNTIES OUT OF THE BANK AND IT WAS WRONG.
AND I AGREED WITH THAT. THAT WAS POLICY OF THE DAY.
SOME OF THEM WHO WERE OPPOSED TO IT IMMEDIATELY WENT AND GOT
THE MONEY. ALL THAT HAVING BEEN SAID IN
THE WORLD OF POLITICS, THAT'S WHAT HAPPENS.
SO IN A NUTSHELL, I WOULD ASK THE TWO OF YOU, THE GENERAL
FUND, I SEE THIS ATTEMPT TO SO-CALLED GET MONEY OUT OF THE
GENERAL FUND. GENERAL FUND, HIGHER
EDUCATION, TUITION IS OUT OF SIGHT, WE'RE CREATING A
GENERATION OF DEBTORS. WE HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO --
[INAUDIBLE] REALLY WHEN YOU THINK SOME OF THESE PEOPLE
ARE -- THE GENERAL FUND WHICH WAS NEVER SET UP TO HANDLE
ROADS SHOULD NOW GET INTO THE ROAD BUSINESS WHEN IT CAN'T
KEEP UP WHAT IT'S GOT? >> MY POINT IS LAST YEAR WE
SAW APPROXIMATELY $120 MILLION EARMARKED THAT WERE FROM THE
GENERAL FUND. STUFF LIKE FUNDING OF A
LIBRARY IN UNION, 1.25 MILLION, THAT REALLY IS
LOCAL GOVERNMENT, COMING FROM LOCAL GOVERNMENT, THAT SHOULD
BE LOCAL GOVERNMENT'S RESPONSIBILITY AND IT WASN'T.
IT WAS AN EARMARK. AND WE SAW A SIGNIFICANT
AMOUNT OF THOSE. SO AGAIN, THE ISSUE IS NOT --
IS IT AUTOMATICALLY GOING TO GET RESOLVED BY THE GENERAL
FUND. THE ISSUE IS WE NEED TO
PRIORITIZE THE GENERAL FUND TO START WITH AND FROM THERE IF
IT TURNS OUT THAT WE HAVE OTHER ALTERNATIVES, WHAT ARE
THOSE OTHER ALTERNATIVES. THE IRONY IS AND I THINK
THOMAS AND I UNDERSTAND THIS BEST IT'S A DECLINING REVENUE
SOURCE. ALL INDICATIONS ARE THAT THE
GASOLINE TAX IS GOING TO DECLINE BECAUSE CARS ARE
GETTING MORE EFFICIENT. THEY'VE GOT TO BE MORE
EFFICIENT. IS IT FAIR ALSO, I MEAN WE
TALK ABOUT A USER FEE, IS IT REALLY A USER FEE?
WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT ALL THE CARS THAT ARE NOW GETTING ON
THE ROADS IN REGARDS TO ELECTRICAL TYPE CARS, THEY
DON'T PAY THAT USER FEE. SO MY POINT IS THAT I'M ALL
FOR THE DISCUSSION AND I REALLY WANT TO START THE
DISCUSSION BY ADDRESSING WHAT I CONSIDER INAPPROPRIATE
[INAUDIBLE] TO START WITH AND LET'S GET TO THE MEAT OF THE
ISSUE. AND I THINK THE GOVERNOR
AGREES WITH. SHE REFERRED TO IT AS A MONEY
TREE WHICH I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S A GOOD ONE TO REFER TO
IT AS BUT IT GIVES PERSPECTIVE THERE'S A LOT OUT THERE NOT
BEING UTILIZED. THE LAST THING AND I DON'T
MEAN TO TAKE ALL THE TIME ASSOCIATED WITH THIS, BUT WHAT
WE HEARD OVER AND OVER AGAIN COMING INTO THIS BODY FOR THE
FIRST TIME WAS THE TERM RESTORE.
WE HAD THE DOWNTURN AND IT WAS VERY CHALLENGING BUT A
DOWNTURN REQUIRES GOVERNMENT TO BE RESPONSIBLE.
IT REQUIRED GOVERNMENT TO ACT APPROPRIATELY.
AND TO LOOK THROUGH WHERE WE'RE SPENDING MONEY AND
WHETHER OR NOT IT REALLY SHOULD BE SPENDING IT ON THAT.
AND THEN ALL OF A SUDDEN AS THINGS GET TURNED AROUND, YOU
HEAR THESE BUREAUCRATS SAYING WE'VE GOT TO RESTORE THIS
FUNDING. WE HAVE TO GET BACK -- NO, YOU
DON'T. THAT IS A TOTAL MISCONCEPTION.
THERE ARE FOUR ISSUES OF GOVERNMENT THAT WE NEED TO
MAKE SURE WE FUND. OBVIOUSLY EDUCATION, OBVIOUSLY
INFRASTRUCTURE, OBVIOUSLY LAW ENFORCEMENT, BUT WE DON'T
NECESSARILY NEED TO RESTORE THINGS THAT WERE WASTEFUL AND
THAT'S WHERE WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY AND THE LITTLE BIT
OF THE [INAUDIBLE] WE'RE GOING TO AUDIT AND REVIEW AND I
THINK WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO REALLY TRY TO MAKE SURE
THAT WE'RE SPENDING TAXPAYER MONEY WISELY.
>> WE'VE GOT LESS THAN TWO MINUTES LEFT.
I WANT YOU TO HAVE A CHANCE TO GET IN HERE TOO WHAT YOU SEE.
>> I THINK ONE THING WE NEED IN THIS STATE IS THE
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OVERHAUL.
WE CAN'T DISCUSS THAT IN TWO MINUTES, BUT WHEN WE HAVE THIS
DISCUSSION, HE'S RIGHT, THE GAS TAX WOULD BE A DECLINING
SOURCE OF REVENUE, BUT I THINK WHEN WE HAVE THIS DISCUSSION
WE NEED TO PUT IT ALL ON THE TABLE WHETHER IT'S INCREASED
GAS TAX AND A LOT OF THAT COMES FROM OUT OF STATE USERS.
LET'S LOOK AT TOLL ROADS, LET'S LOOK AT EVERYTHING AND
SEE WHAT THE BEST OPTIONS ARE. BUT OUR GENERAL FUND -- NO ONE
WANTS TO RAISE TAXES. I DON'T THINK ANYBODY IN THIS
BODY WANTS TO DO THAT, BUT OUR GENERAL FUND OVER THE LAST
DECADE HAS NOT GROWN WITH INFLATION.
WE CAN'T KEEP [INAUDIBLE] WHEN WE'RE NOT FUNDING PUBLIC
EDUCATION ADEQUATELY, NOT FUNDING HIGHER ED ADEQUATELY.
IT WON'T WORK. THE DOLLARS AREN'T THERE, THE
NORM LA IS NOT THERE. SO I THINK WE NEED TO HAVE
THIS DISCUSSION AND SPEND AS MUCH TIME AS WE CAN ON IT AND
FIND A SOLUTION. >> ONE OF THE THINGS THAT
BOTHERED ME HAS BEEN SOME OF THE WORK I'VE SEEN OUT THERE
ON THE HIGHWAYS, SOME OF THIS RESURFACING.
I DON'T HAVE TIME TO GO INTO IT, BUT I SAW A STRETCH OF
RESURFACING WHERE THEY ALREADY HAVE PATCHES ON IT AFTER ABOUT
120 DAYS. I DON'T KNOW.
VERY QUICKLY, WE'RE JUST ABOUT OUT OF TIME.
I WANT TO THANK BOTH OF YOU. YOU'VE GIVEN OUR VIEWERS AN
OPPORTUNITY TO SEE IT FROM SOMEBODY WHO IS FRESH IN HERE.
SOME OF MY QUESTIONS WERE AIMED AT SOMEBODY WHOSE BEEN
HERE FOR A WHILE. GOT A LOT OF VISIONS AHEAD AND
I HOPE WE HAVE A CHANCE -- WE NEVER GOT INTO THE EDUCATION
ISSUE THAT WE WANTED TO DISCUSS TODAY.
I WOULD JUST TELL YOU ANY PARTING REMARKS BECAUSE WE'VE
GOT TO GO, WE'RE OUT OF TIME. I WANT TO THANK BOTH OF YOU
FOR BEING WITH US AND WE'LL BE BACK NEXT WEEK AND DEAL WITH
OTHER TOPICS COMING UP IN THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY.