Sanford: Lower tax
rate is top goal
By AARON GOULD
SHEININ Staff
Writer
Q&A WITH THE GOVERNOR
Lowering the S.C. income tax rate is his chief priority for the
legislative session that opens today, Gov. Mark Sanford told The
State.
This will be Sanford’s third legislative session as chief
executive, and he says changing the culture of government is, in
many ways, more important to him than advancing legislative
ideas.
In the interview, Sanford, a Republican, also refuses to rule out
a potential run for the White House in 2008, but he dismisses the
idea as not being “on my radar screen.”
Here are excerpts:
QUESTION: You’ve outlined five top priorities for the
legislative session, including income tax reduction, school choice
and changes to Senate rules. Which is your top priority?
ANSWER: The income tax.
QUESTION: Does this one speak more to your basic idea of
government?
ANSWER: The education thing does that. In various ways,
they all do that. With the income tax, it’s very specifically aimed
at, ‘How do you become more competitive?’
Very specifically, it’s tied to the fact that we’re really a
state of small businesses. If we want to have impact in our job
climate, we’ve got to do something for small business, the real
backbone of job creation.
We’ve seen that it’s helped in the job creation front and the
business creation front in the states that have given it a try.
QUESTION: How do you answer critics who argue the state’s
income tax rate might be higher than other states, but if you
consider the number of deductions and credits South Carolina offers,
our income tax is no more burdensome?
ANSWER: The biggest impact you can have in the aggregate
is lowering rates, is simply lowering marginal rates. (With the
current system), you’re still saying the politician should
ultimately pick the winner and loser, which is not something I
philosophically believe.
QUESTION: Do you worry that the income tax proposal is getting
overshadowed by focus on Put Parents in Charge?
ANSWER: That idea (income tax reduction) has been
introduced and well debated, and it passed the House, and it would
have passed the Senate had we been able to get it up for a vote. It
doesn’t worry me a great deal.
QUESTION: There’s been a lot of barroom talk, writings in
national publications, that you might be considered a candidate for
president in 2008. Will you say yes or no, if you’re re-elected
governor, whether you’ll seek higher office?
ANSWER: I’ve totally missed out on this conversation. You
don’t hear me talking about it. All this barroom talk, meanwhile,
I’m playing with the kids. As I’ve said before, this stuff is
flattering, but it (running for president) is the last thing in the
world on my mind. It’s not even on my radar screen.
QUESTION: You’ve struggled to get your legislative priorities
through a General Assembly that is controlled by fellow Republicans.
You’ve clashed openly with legislative leaders. If your goal is to
get policy initiatives passed, it seems you’re going about it in a
strange way. But you’re also smart enough to know the Legislature is
not going to change its ways just because you ask it to. So what is
your ultimate goal?
ANSWER: The big, big picture to me is limited government.
At the end of the day, I think the people know how to spend their
money better than somebody else.
We’re swinging the bat big time on each of these. Put Parents in
Charge would be the first statewide (school) choice program in the
nation. The income tax proposal would be a shift of money staying in
the private sector. To pull those off, you have to have people
thinking in that direction.
The biggest thing is trying to impact the debate that ultimately
leads to change, and I think we’re getting there. It’s not about
swinging the bat. It’s swinging the bat because of the difference it
would make in South Carolina and our ability to compete in the rest
of the world.
The actual outcomes, you know these different nuggets of
legislation, are ultimately in the hands of a legislative body. They
pass it or don’t pass it. All you can do is spell them out.
And that’s where some people get very confused. It ain’t Mark’s
legislative agenda. At the end of the day, people in the General
Assembly, Mark, (we) are going to be just fine. People in these
far-off corners of South Carolina who are struggling to make it,
they are not going to be just fine. It’s going to be more difficult
to compete.
People who say, ‘I don’t want to pass it because it’s Mark’s
agenda or someone else’s agenda’ miss the whole point of why we are
here. We’re here supposedly to try and make people’s lives just a
little bit better through the process of politics here in South
Carolina. And politics can make people’s lives a whole lot better or
a lot worse.
QUESTION: You seem to have made progress in changing the
culture of government, as you call it, by making people ask
different questions and look at things differently. But once you’re
out of office, that culture could slip right back to where it was
before you arrived. Passing legislative initiatives, changing state
law, would be around much longer, it would seem.
ANSWER: Whether legislative change lasts longer, I’d
respectfully disagree with you. Bobtailing, as a practice, is
basically prohibited in the (state) constitution, yet it’s become a
tradition and has been around for a long time. If we had said
nothing, that, ‘I have to be quiet on that,’ one can very
conceivably argue that the practice will not have been
curtailed.
In terms of having an impact over time, you’re talking about a
very significant change to the taxpayer over time because of the
relative inefficient way of doing business that bobtailing
incorporates. If you change that tradition, people say we don’t do
that, that’s not our practice.
(Some examples of culture change, Sanford says, are less obvious
but just as significant, such as his ending the practice of
accepting a BMW for his family’s use.)
You get here, and there’s a BMW parked out front, and I said,
‘No, I think the Highway Department or Commerce could use that
better than we could.’ I don’t see how the next governor can say, ‘I
want the BMW back.’ You guys (in the media) would have great
fun.
(Sanford says his decision last year to create an executive
budget proposal that is more detailed and specific than those of his
predecessors will have long-lasting impact as a change in
culture.)
The executive branch has been historically separated from the
budgeting process. The front-row seat in any legislative process is
what are you spending and where are you spending it this year.
To say, no, not just a boilerplate, 30-page, here’s my wish list,
but an operational budget that gets down into the nuts and bolts ...
that’s a real world change, that not only has a direct impact this
year, but a much bigger impact on future administrations that
impacts the way we set budgets in South Carolina.
In 200 years, the executive branch really wasn’t an evolving
process. Now it is.
Reach Gould Sheinin at (803) 771-8658 or asheinin@thestate.com. |