It dwarfs all previous proposals in size, largely because it includes a lot of verbiage to explain each cut, transfer or increase in state allocations.
Strengths of the $5.1 billion budget are that it does not raid trust funds, it begins the repayment of prior raids to the nuclear waste cleanup fund for Barnwell, and it calls for putting in motion the much-needed Land Conservation Bank. It reinforces the ailing prison system and funds Medicaid. It reduces the use of one-time dollars for ongoing programs.
Its most glaring weakness is that it funds public schools at a per-student rate of only $1,810. Even though that is $67 more per child than this year, and even though the Department of Education gets a $29.7 million increase, schools are left short. The state's own Board of Economic Advisers says the allocation should be $2,234 per child. Even that would be less than half of what neighboring Georgia and North Carolina spend. South Carolina has made too many advances in recent years for the schools to return to a funding level lower than 1997-98.
Sanford and his staff, however, should be complimented for the hustle reflected in this unusual budget document. It reflects a lot of research, thought and midnight oil. It is the result of a months-long process that included tedious meetings with the governor grilling state agency heads about what they spend and why. It included a commission charged with finding ways to make state government more efficient. Nevertheless, the resulting agenda for change no doubt caught some state agencies or workers by surprise.
State Rep. Bobby Harrell, R-Charleston, said in 10 years this is the first governor's budget proposal he's seen that could be used tomorrow to actually run the state. It is not contingent upon any of the proposals for new methods of taxation: Raising the sales tax, lowering income tax, raising the cigarette tax, etc.
Neither Harrell, who heads the House's budget-writing committee, nor any other member of the General Assembly will agree with all, or perhaps even most, of the governor's proposal. But Sanford wants the give and take to end up where his budget does: Making up a $350 million shortfall without raising taxes.
Sanford's budget does this by selling 6,000 state vehicles and "surplus" property, including the Port of Port Royal near Beaufort.
Government restructuring, with consolidation of 15 state agencies, would mean an 18 percent savings for each merged agency, he says. Even if that savings was not reached, he says, delivery of services still would be more efficient.
Sanford's budget calls for across-the-board 15 percent cuts in travel and telephone expenses and $37 million worth of program cuts.
His most dramatic program cut targets the Clemson Public Service Activities program, which includes extension, research and regulatory services. He says the service has wandered far from its core mission to promote farm productivity and profitability. Nine pages explain a proposed cut from $38.5 million to $22.8 million, though Sanford says that would be boosted to about $30 million by using $7.5 million from a land sale in suburban Columbia for next year's operations rather than a new building. Sanford cites the dramatic loss of farms and new means of information-sharing to argue that the service is fat. He leaves whole the regulatory function, but says most of the service's missions today are redundant. He cites a call-in radio program on insects and more than 1,000 free publications ranging from "Any Time is Time for Cheese" to "Electricity's Silent Partner -- Magnetism" to say the agency must narrow its focus.
Sanford uses his budget proposal as a bully pulpit for ideas that challenge the status quo. For example, higher education, where he recommends closing two two-year branches of the University of South Carolina, brings this salvo:
"Unfortunately, politics, not a coherent statewide strategy, has often been the driving force in decisions relating to higher education. As a result, we currently have 33 state-supported colleges and universities operating 79 different campus locations -- an unusually large number of state-supported colleges and universities given our state's small population.
"As for focus -- does South Carolina really need seven communications programs? Or two state-supported medical schools? Or six drama programs? Or 11 psychology programs?"
Give the governor credit for being willing to put ideas and reasoning -- in addition to numbers -- on the table.
The debate that follows should be good for South Carolina