By now it's been written and
rewritten that South Carolina government is in tough
economic times. Lack of money put lawmakers' approval of
a budget in doubt to the bitter end of the session this
past week. The debate over money remains
contentious.
The GOP-dominated Legislature
resisted tax increases, notably a high-profile one on
cigarettes. Lawmakers used dollars coming the state's
way via the federal tax-cut package to boost education
spending to a level comparable to the current year.
Other state agencies were not so fortunate, seeing their
budgets cut again.
There will be controversy
aplenty about the decision to use $44 million from the
federal package for a one-time boost for education. The
money simply postpones by a year what to do about
funding education at prerecession levels, since
lawmakers put a quick fix on a high-profile problem with
use of non-recurring dollars.
Many hope the
dilemma won't be as bad next year if the state economy
rebounds and tax collections increase. Current trends,
however, indicate quite the opposite. Reserve funds or
more cuts may be required just to finish this fiscal
year at June's end.
The budget crisis has
politician and public playing the blame game. Notably,
there will be talk about the state Senate and its rules
that allow a lone member to hold up action through
filibusters and other delaying tactics. Even on the
session's final day, lawmakers nearly didn't pass a
budget because one senator was delaying action in a
protest over legislation that would deregulate state
colleges and universities.
While it may be argued that
Senate rules are antiquated and allow inefficiency in
government, there is benefit in the upper chamber's
slower pace. The House is a fast-acting body that
handles lots of legislation. The Senate, by nature, is
more deliberative. It is considered the check on
legislative exuberance, with rules to facilitate
such.
Those rules, however, at the session's end
may have led to what many Senate veterans consider the
ultimate no-no: transferring legislative power to the
governor.
Because the Senate, unlike the House,
did not approve a resolution allowing lawmakers to
return to Columbia, they cannot come back to consider
Gov. Mark Sanford's vetoes unless the governor calls a
special session.
On Monday, the Sanford made it
clear the ball is in his court. He will make his vetoes
and will not bring lawmakers back to Columbia for a
special session. Citing the expense of the process,
Sanford said lawmakers will have to wait until January
to consider his vetoes. That will be halfway through the
budget year, giving the governor six months of fiscal
control.
With the governor agreeing with the
funding boost for education and there being little other
flexibility in the spending plan, there probably won't
be major changes.
But with Sanford's history of
warfare on pork-barrel politics (including refusing to
allow the Legislature back at a cost of $75,000 a day),
look for him to make small cuts here and there that
won't sit well with some lawmakers. For a governor that
wants to further restructure to increase the chief
executive's power but has yet to get legislative OK,
there's a measure of irony in his ability to control the
flow with lawmakers on the sidelines.
