Carolina Politics Online

Makes sense to me

Share

Hundreds of Mecklenburg workers whose paychecks depend on federal stimulus money could be out of a job next month, county officials and employers say.

Local companies have hired 415 temporary employees this year through a government program that pays workers’ wages. But the program is set to expire Sept. 30 unless the U.S. Senate votes to extend it.

While some of the new workers have been offered permanent jobs, others will rejoin the ranks of the unemployed once funding runs out.

Charlotte Observer

I thought we needed to pass the porkulus bill last year so that we could get below 8% unemployment.  I thought this was going to be the summer of recovery.  You mean the trillions in borrowed Chinese money the Federal government  spent in order to save the economy didn’t work?  Gee, nobody saw that coming.

It seems the Republicans couldn’t manage an economy right.  The Democrats have demonstrated that they too are abject failures.  What’s a voter to do in November?  Oh that’s right, keep voting for the same two parties like always.  That will fix everything, while China meanwhile becomes the new world superpower.

Share

The last thing American businesses need in this economy is to get smacked with a tax increase so that the Federal government can dole out more welfare money, but that is exactly what the U.S. Senate did today and Kay Hagan voted for it.

WASHINGTON—The Senate voted Thursday to approve a package of $26 billion in aid for state and local governments, funded partly by an $11 billion tax increase on U.S. multinational corporations.

In what was one of the final moves by the Senate before lawmakers depart Washington for the summer recess, Democrats were able to score a significant victory for a core constituency of their party: labor unions and public-sector workers.

But at the same time, they handed a hefty tax bill to U.S. companies with units overseas that have been able to pay a lower corporate income tax rate on profits derived from their foreign businesses.

The Wall Street Journal

You would think that in a state with double digit unemployment numbers the last thing Hagan would want to do is hinder further job growth, but she isn’t too bright on the economic side, is she.  The House still needs to pass this before it becomes law, but I don’t see any reason why they won’t.

Share

In fiscal crises in a number of countries around the world, investors have lost confidence in governments’ abilities to manage their budgets, and those governments have lost their ability to borrow at affordable rates. With U.S. government debt already at a level that is high by historical standards, and the prospect that, under current policies, federal debt would continue to grow, it is possible that interest rates might rise gradually as investors’ confidence in the U.S. government’s finances declined, giving legislators sufficient time to make policy choices that could avert a crisis. It is also possible, however, that investors would lose confidence abruptly and interest rates on government debt would rise sharply, as evidenced by the experiences of other countries.

Unfortunately, there is no way to predict with any confidence whether and when such a crisis might occur in the United States. In a brief (“Federal Debt and the Risk of a Fiscal Crisis“) released today, CBO notes that there is no identifiable “tipping point” of debt relative to the nation’s output (gross domestic product, or GDP) that would indicate that such a crisis is likely or imminent. However, in the United States, the ratio of federal debt to GDP is climbing into unfamiliar territory—and all else being equal, the higher the debt, the greater the risk of such a crisis.

Over the past few years, U.S. government debt held by the public has grown rapidly. According to CBO’s projections, federal debt held by the public will stand at 62 percent of GDP at the end of fiscal year 2010, having risen from 36 percent at the end of fiscal year 2007, just before the recession began. In only one other period in U.S. history—during and shortly after World War II—has that figure exceeded 50 percent.

Further increases in federal debt relative to the nation’s output almost certainly lie ahead if current policies remain in place. The aging of the population and rising costs for health care will push federal spending, measured as a percentage of GDP, well above the levels experienced in recent decades. Unless policymakers restrain the growth of spending, increase revenues significantly as a share of GDP, or adopt some combination of those two approaches, growing budget deficits will cause debt to rise to unsupportable levels

CBO Director’s Blog

The CBO paints a very grim picture for the future of our nation if the government doesn’t restrain itself from continuing to flush our money down the toilet like we have an endless supply of it.  We are headed into Greece territory in which we will collapse under our debt, but who will come to the aid of the U.S. to  bail us out??

Remember, this was a bipartisan ass raping in the making.  George W Bush took 200 years worth of Federal debt and doubled it in eight.  Now Obama has taken over and kicked debt spending up into hyperdrive.  The men and women in Congress have shamefully written these budgets without the slightest regard for what they are bringing upon us in the future and this year they didn’t even write a budget for the next fiscal year because they don’t want the American people to know right before the elections that next year’s budget will have over a trillion dollars in debt spending like this year’s.  Remember all of this when you go to vote in November.

Share

A few days ago opponents of the climate change legislation affectionately known as Cap and Trade were rejoicing at the announcement from Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) that the job killing, economy destroying proposal had been shelved.  Good news, yes?  Overall, sure.  Stagnation is certainly better than inching forward, however, for those who think it won’t be resurrected, think again.

U.S. Senator John Kerry said Democrats may take up his comprehensive climate-change bill in a lame-duck session after the November elections, while calling on President Barack Obama to escalate his advocacy for the measure.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid yesterday introduced a more limited energy bill that doesn’t include a cap on greenhouse gas emissions, citing the lack of support for a broader bill.

The bigger measure “is not dead,” Kerry, a Massachusetts Democrat, said in an interview on Bloomberg Television’s “Political Capital With Al Hunt” airing this weekend. “If it is after the election, it may well be that some members are free and liberated and feeling that they can take a risk or do something.”

Bloomberg

Ta-dah!  This year’s lame duck session has long been a fear of mine and I’m afraid that Senator Kerry (D-MA) is correct.  They could very well pass the bill after the November elections if they manage to peel away one Republican in the Senate to join them and give them the 60 votes they need to break a filibuster.  Our own Lindsey Graham right here in South Carolina has had his nose planted firmly up the behinds of Senators Kerry and Lieberman (I-CT) over this proposal.  Multiple polling of the issue has shown that the American people are pretty firmly against Cap and Trade, but the majority also opposed ObamaCare and that didn’t stop them from ramming it down our throats.

A poll recently commissioned by the American Petroleum Institute shows that 67% of North Carolinians oppose new taxes on the oil and natural gas industry. Of that 67%, 46% strongly opposed the idea.  That’s a solid rejection of what is trying to be pushed on us by those in the Federal government all in the name of a theory compromised by lies and distortions.

“Voters know raising taxes on an industry that provides most of their energy and supports more than 9.2 million jobs would hurt them and damage the economy,” said API President and CEO Jack Gerard. “Raising taxes doesn’t address their major concern, which is putting people back to work.”

Energy Tomorrow

It’s a boneheaded time to be pushing this kind of proposal onto the American people when unemployment is in the teens around the country.  Even if unemployment were at historic lows, Cap and Trade is a bad idea because it would have negative economical effects on our nation in order to satiate the appetites of those who believe in man made global warming, which I firmly believe is nothing but junk science.

Americans want a robust economy and replenished jobs and this is part of the reason why this current Congress is taking such a beating right now.  Instead of addressing the needs of their constituents, they are too busy quenching their own ideological thirsts.

Share

South Carolina consumers would pay sales tax on music, book and movie downloads, higher taxes on car purchases and again pay sales tax on groceries in exchange for a lower overall sales tax rate, under a proposal given preliminary approval today.

The state’s Tax Realignment Commission, a Legislature-appointed group of financial experts, voted on a plan that will drop the base sales tax rate from 6 percent to 4.96 percent and add a 2.5 percent sales tax on groceries. The proposal is part of a comprehensive plan to reassess the way South Carolina taxes its residents and businesses, after the recession and ongoing economic slump have drained state coffers.

The proposal is made up of dozens and dozens of recommendations to repeal individual sales tax exemptions. Within the proposal are recommendations to:

• Charge 2.5 percent sales tax on prescription drugs (although purchases made by people on Medicaid and Medicare would continue to be exempt).
• Remove the $300 sales tax cap on motor vehicles, excluding boats and planes. Car, truck and SUV buyers would pay up to $1,200 in sales tax until 2014 when the cap is eliminated altogether and consumers would pay according to the value of the vehicle they purchase.
• Begin taxing music, books and movies, among other digital items, downloaded from the Internet.
• Charge sales tax on the purchase of newspapers.
• Tax at 2.5 percent water sold by public utilities and certain nonprofit corporations.
• Repeal the exemption on wrapping paper.
• Add sales tax to the purchase of supplies, machinery and electricity to television and radio stations.
• Remove the exemption on the sale of plants and animals sold to zoos and gardens.
• Tax vacation time shares.

Maybank said the goal is to have a broad, diversified tax base.

The Post and Courier

There is an exemption on wrapping paper??

Why not make it simple and just have a flat sales tax on everything.  Nobody or no thing gets an exemption.  Wouldn’t that just be the simplest way to do it?  Why do people on Medicare and Medicaid get to be exempt from paying taxes on their prescriptions, but the rest of us don’t?  When you start exempting this group and that group it only complicates things and leads to an unfair burden of taxation on certain members of the populace.

John Ruoff of the advocacy group South Carolina Fair Share warned the panel to consider the consequences of their recommendations.

“The more your system depends on sales taxes, the harder is going to be on low income folks,” he said.

And by “Fair Share” they mean other people should pay their bills for them.  The argument that sales taxes are regressive and hurt the poor doesn’t add up.  Tennessee has a 9.5% sales tax in lieu of an income tax and there isn’t a plague of poor, underprivileged people living in cardboard boxes, starving in the streets.

Share

GOP gubernatorial nominee Nikki Haley has spent the past two weeks in closed-door meetings with S.C. business leaders, seeking to mend fences and calm fears about her commitment to business in the state.

That is an unusual position for a Republican, whom political observers say is the favorite to be elected governor in November.

Haley’s opponent, state Sen. Vincent Sheheen, D-Kershaw, won the endorsement last month of the S.C. Chamber of Commerce. The chamber, which Haley has described in the past as pro-bailout and pro-big spending, has typically leaned Republican in this Republican-dominated state.

Haley is trying to head off Republican support for Sheheen, who has been courting the business community and positioning himself as the candidate more interested in working with business and the General Assembly on economic development.

At the heart of the business community’s discomfort with Haley is her rocky relationship with the GOP-controlled Legislature. Haley, a House member from Lexington, won the Republican nomination in runaway fashion over seasoned opponents in Attorney General Henry McMaster, U.S. Rep. Gresham Barrett and Lt. Gov. Andre Bauer, partly by running against the General Assembly.

The State

A candidate who truly believes in the idea of limited government can actually be an anathema to the business community, rather than a welcomed God sent.  The corporate welfare leaches sucking at the government tit have no interest in a politician who will not be keen on the idea of using taxpayer dollars to subsidize their bottom line.  This was something that Governor Sanford rarely would do and corporate beneficiaries of our money are concerned that Haley will play the same kind of hard ball.

As for our state legislators, they are worried first and foremost about protecting their fiefdoms.  They have had a rocky eight years with Sanford who wasn’t afraid to call them out on their bullshit and Haley is likely to follow suit.  How ironic to see a Republican legislature, the party of “limited government”, panicking over the prospects of another four to eight years of a true limited government state CEO.

Share

Naturally, the financial “reform” bill passed the Senate this afternoon.  There was no expectation for it not to once they had enough votes for cloture.  As I wrote earlier today, it’s a bad bill overall and contained many provisions that have absolutely nothing to do with protecting the financial markets, but promoting a leftist social agenda.

Kay Hagan (D) of North Carolina voted for the bill.  The three Republican Senators in the Carolinas:  Richard Burr, Lindsey Graham, and Jim DeMint voted against it.

Share

I think most people would agree that there should be some common sense regulation on Wall Street to prevent another crash like we saw in 2008, but this financial bill produced by the Congress is nothing but another special interest ass kissing.  This bill is chock-full of provisions that have absolutely nothing to do with the financial crisis whatsoever.

Principal among them is a measure to make it easier for unions, environmental groups and other activist organizations that hold shares to put their representatives on the boards of directors of every corporation in the United States.

The so-called “proxy access” provision, which activist groups say they will use to try to improve oversight of corporate financial practices, has provoked a backlash from the Business Roundtable, U.S. Chamber of Commerce and other major non-Wall Street business groups.

“This legislation includes provisions totally unrelated to the financial crisis which may disrupt Americas fragile economic recovery” and lead to increasing political battles in the boardrooms, said John J. Castellani, president of the roundtable.

So let me get this straight, we’re supposed to combat financial corruption by infiltrating it with union corruption? How are union and environmental activists sitting on boards of directors going to prevent another financial crash?  They don’t.  The Democrats are just throwing a bone to their base.

Other provisions of the financial legislation, which goes before the full Senate on Thursday for a vote and likely passage, favor Democratic constituencies directly by requiring banks and federal agencies to hire and do more business with them.

The bill would create more than 20 “offices of minority and women inclusion” at the Treasury, Federal Reserve and other government agencies, to ensure they employ more women and minorities and grant more federal contracts to more women- and minority-owned businesses.

The agencies also would apply “fair employment tests” to the banks and other financial institutions they regulate, though their hiring and contracting practices had little or nothing to do with the 2008 financial crisis.

Another load of crap.  Again, what does this have to do with the financial crisis?  Not a damn thing.  This is nothing more than institutionalized racism.  Why do we need 20 more affirmative action offices?  Are there not enough already?  Why is it so hard for these buffoons to understand that they are never going to eliminate discrimination in our society if the government openly partakes in it?

The powerful new consumer protection agency that is the centerpiece of the reform bill also would provide substantial employment opportunities and funding for Democratic and social-activist groups such as the Association of Community Organizers for Reform Now (ACORN), critics say.

The criminal organization ACORN was one of the players who had a hand in the crash from the very beginning.  They were one of the groups out there pressuring banks and mortgage brokers to lend to people who shouldn’t have qualified for mortgages in the first place, thus creating the crisis when they all started defaulting on their loans.

Like the corporate boardroom provisions, many of the activities within the reach of the new consumer agency had “absolutely nothing – zero – to do with the financial crisis,” Mr. Corker said. “But this has become a Christmas tree for those kinds of things, because people realize it’s something that’s going to pass.”

Need I say more?

Share

Green Party gubernatorial candidate Morgan Bruce Reeves says his solution to move South Carolina forward is to double state spending.  Yes, seriously.

“I’m a teamwork man. I’m not some kind of wild guy,” Reeves, 51 and owner of an Irmo land-clearing firm, says of his political philosophy. “I’m the only one with a $40 billion plan. The state budget is $20 billion. I’m going to double the state budget.”

The State

Ummm….. how about no?

Education is the cornerstone of Reeves’ platform, which he would use to switch to a year-round calendar to improve test scores and graduation rates. Reeves would promote new energy sources to allow more money on K-12 spending.

What will more education spending do??  What????  This entire country has thrown more and more money at public education for years and it’s not getting any better; it’s getting worse.  As I have pointed out a hundred times on this Web site, public education spending in the U.S. is already higher than any other country in the world!  What’s it going to take for people to understand that more money is not the solution to fix the pitiful public education system in this state or others?  It’s always their answer.  Throw more money at it, throw more money at it.  Well, when is it finally going to be enough?

Reeves’ plan has a number of holes, experts said. Reeves struggled to account for the $40 billion, jumping from the cost of changing the school calendar and hiring more teachers to using high school-aged students to build ethanol plants and a high-speed magnetic levitation rail system. His plan would rely heavily on state residents and businesses buying stocks or bonds in energy and infrastructure projects, which he said would guarantee 15 percent annual profits. Reeves thinks every citizen would invest at least $100, and the gains would mint many Palmetto State millionaires.

“You can get on this train and go anywhere in South Carolina,” Reeves said. “We’re going to connect all the cities.”

But Reeves’ vision is less clear when it comes to paying for the rail system. Reeves put the cost at $5 million for two miles of track, or roughly $500 million to connect downtown Greenville and Charleston.

The system would be built entirely with South Carolina-made steel, and the state would build its own mills and use existing private mills. Reeves would encourage those mills to hire the unemployed and train youths. The tax revenue from hiring unemployed workers, Reeves said, would pay for the project.

“Take young gang members and show them how to make steel,” he said.

OK, I’ll give the man some credit for attempting to be innovative and thinking outside the box, but let’s be realistic here.  High school students are going to build ethanol plants and a Maglev?  Oh yeah, the Department of Labor is going to have a field day with that one, not to mention that kids are graduating high school these days dumber than a bunch of rocks.  That’s just who I want developing a hazardous chemical plant.  And while a Maglev might be a neat thing to have, what benefit are we going to see from it by connecting the state’s cities together.  It’s not even close to being economically feasible.  It would cost far more than $40 billion to build that kind of infrastructure and the state would get almost no return on the investment.

He would push the federal government to raise the amount of ethanol blended with gasoline to at least 20 percent, if not more. Doing so would lower the cost of fuel to $1.50 per gallon in the state, Reeves claimed.

And the drive the price of food through the roof. Food prices have already risen due to corn crops being used for ethanol production.

Chad Hart, an assistant professor of economics at Iowa State University, said ethanol prices rise and fall with demand and it was unlikely Reeves could guarantee 15 percent annual profits on investments. Hart said there is no established market for sweet potato-based ethanol, though the crop “has good potential.”

“Those sweet potatoes tended to be worth more as fuel,” Hart said. Hart estimates construction costs of at least $2 a gallon of sweet potato ethanol production, or a total cost of $5.3 billion to fully replace the 2.64 billion gallons of fuel sold in South Carolina based on S.C. fuel tax collections. In addition, Hart said vehicle owners would pay at least $300 to $600 to retrofit vehicles to burn fuel that contains more than 10 percent ethanol.

But Reeves is undeterred and thinks South Carolinians will sacrifice for the greater good.

Hahaha.  Oh, Mr. Reeves doesn’t know South Carolina as well as he thinks he does.  I’m sure he could convince a bunch of aging hippie liberal douches in San Francisco that this is a fine idea, but not South Carolina.

While Mr. Reeves is certainly a creative individual, he does not have serious ideas.  Doubling state spending would cripple this state economically and actually investing in these schemes of his would bankrupt us before they even got off the ground.  We’d take California’s place as the nation’s financial laughing-stock.

Share

In lieu of an official budget, John Spratt last week introduced a budget enforcement resolution, eluding any details as to how exactly record deficits will be reduced. The reason for this is obvious. The Democratic Congress is attempting to pull one over on the American people. They caught hell for their $1.5 trillion deficit last year and in an election year they don’t want to be forced to vote on another budget with a similar deficit.

The enforcement resolution is being used because rank-and-file Democrats did not want to vote for a budget resolution that would show large deficits, particularly in an election year marked by worries about the nation’s fiscal solvency.

The measure, written by House Budget Committee Chairman John Spratt (D-S.C.), calls for a budget by 2015 that would be balanced except for debt interest payments. This mirrors a goal already set out by Obama.

Spratt’s measure doesn’t say what policies Congress should enact to reach that out-year goal, something past budget resolutions have done. Instead, it relies on the White House fiscal commission, a bipartisan panel looking at tax, spending and entitlement policies, to come up with a plan to halve the projected $1.5 trillion 2010 deficit by 2015.

The Hill

Spratt has failed in his duty as our elected representative here in the Fifth District and as the Congress’s Budget chairman. The NRCC has called Spratt out on his dishonesty and deception.

Share

More Bubba hypocrisy…

Speaking to a friendly crowd, Spratt, who is chairman of the House Budget Committee, explained the status of the U.S. House’s budget, something he said is in place despite not having a resolution.

“We need something to keep spending in line,” he said. “We need something that causes people to stop and say, ‘Can we afford it?’ We’ve got that in place…. Don’t worry about the fact we don’t have a budget.”

In late June, the budget vote stalled and was replaced by other measures, including an alternative budget resolution calling for a cap on discretionary spending at levels lower than those in President Barack Obama’s fiscal 2011 budget.

Spratt detailed the country’s deficit and unemployment numbers when Obama took office, talking about its positive turnaround and indicators for the future.

The Herald

Spratt tells you one thing, but does another.  He is the budget chairman.  He ushered through a budget last year with a deficit of a trillion and a half dollars and he’s going to usher another one with similar financial deficiencies.  Spratt helped pass the health care bill, creating yet another entitlement program that this country cannot afford.  Now he stands up before an audience of his sheep and lectures about responsible spending?  But here is the real kicker.  In 2006, it was John Spratt who said “If you can’t budget, you can’t govern.”

And what positive turnaround is Bubba referring to?  The real unemployment rate has remained in the mid teens and is worse than it was when Obama took office.  This Congress and administration have had more than enough time to start producing results.  It’s clear to me the only way to get the country back on track is to throw bums like Bubba out and stop the disastrous agenda coming from the White House.

Share

Normally when reading something like this, I would assume it’s a parody from The Onion, but sadly no.  This is Alvin Greene, our Democratic nominee for the United States Senate for South Carolina.

It is clear, too, in the course of the two hours I spend with Greene that he has some pretty wacky ideas that, were he to win in November, would put him among the more unpredictable members of the senate. At one point, he lurches off on his big idea for how to create jobs in South Carolina.

“Another thing we can do for jobs is make toys of me, especially for the holidays. Little dolls. Me. Like maybe little action dolls. Me in an army uniform, air force uniform, and me in my suit. They can make toys of me and my vehicle, especially for the holidays and Christmas for the kids. That’s something that would create jobs. So you see I think out of the box like that. It’s not something a typical person would bring up. That’s something that could happen, that makes sense. It’s not a joke.”

The Guardian

Stephen Colbert has got to get this guy on his show.

Share

I love when the establishment loses and that’s one of the benefits that came out of this past Tuesday’s run off election in North Carolina’s 21st State Senate District.  Democratic voters in the 21st told the party establishment to piss off when they overwhelmingly supported political newcomer Dr. Eric Mansfield over former Cumberland County Democratic Party Chairwoman Lula Crenshaw.

Dr. Eric Mansfield captured the Democratic Party’s nomination for the 21st District with a convincing win this week, surprising party officials and defeating a partisan heavyweight.

Mansfield, who is 45, acknowledged that he didn’t know what he was doing when he started knocking on doors in the snow in January. One man whom Mansfield met on Seabrook Road gave him a candid assessment.

“He said, ‘You don’t know the neighborhood, you don’t know politics and you don’t know what you’re doing,’ ” Mansfield said.

The man was right, Mansfield said. He said the Cumberland County Senior Democrats club told him the same thing in January.

He took the message as a personal challenge.

“We had a lot of work to do, and we set out to do it,” he said. “We learned a lot.”

In Tuesday’s primary runoff, he defeated Lula Crenshaw, a former county party chairwoman, 62 percent to 38 percent, according to unofficial results.

In the May primary, he led a five-candidate field that included a former five-term city councilman.

The Fayetteville Observer

Dr. Mansfield is an Ears, Nose, and Throat Specialist with a practice in Fayetteville.  He served honorably in the 82nd Airborne Division of the United State Army and he is an active member in his church and community.  As a doctor he supports greater free market competition in health care, tort reform, and Medicaid cost and fraud controls, in order to bring down medical costs so that heath care services will be more affordable to people in the state.  He also recognizes the need for improvement in the education system and the tax structure for small businesses.  He was endorsed by the North Carolina Chamber of Commerce.

While Mansfield will face a Republican opponent in the general election, the 21st is heavily Democratic and it’s highly unlikely Mansfield will be defeated.  I think he’ll make a great state senator for Cumberland County.

Standing up for what is right from kassaye kassaye on Vimeo.

Share

The debate over Gov. Mark Sanford’s vetoes last week was about far more than the ongoing political theater between the governor and the Legislature.

Residents across South Carolina are going to feel the loss of services from the most recent cuts made to a recession-hammered budget – already carved by $2 billion over the past three years.

Citizens will notice a difference, whether it’s a reduction or elimination of restaurant inspections, longer times to file complaints, the closing of health clinics or curtailing of educational programs, according to a review by The Greenville News.

“All of this would be funny if there were not real people behind these numbers,” said Rep. Gilda Cobb-Hunter, an Orangeburg Democrat. “What’s at stake is the future of South Carolina.”

The Greenville News

Well then, I guess “real” people will just have to get off of their duffs and start taking better care of themselves instead of relying on their next door neighbor to pay their way for them.  I have no problem with government money going to people who really are unable to take care of themselves, like people who are mentally and/or physically handicapped, but they are about the only ones who have an excuse.

Programs cut or reduced by the vetoes benefited everyone. They include a statewide effort to increase the number of black doctoral students; a 10-week course on how to start and grow businesses; a program to recruit and retain minority students; a study of pollution in the Congaree River; and an effort to increase the number of doctors serving rural areas.

“What’s intriguing is that all of these seem to be worthwhile,” said Dick Taylor, 67, of Greenville, who was at a table outside a downtown restaurant Saturday. “If we had the funds, I would be in favor of retaining all of these programs,” he said.

On the other hand, the budget must be balanced, he said, and while “these are good services to have in this state,” none are absolutely essential, except perhaps adding rural doctors, a program he said lawmakers should work hard to retain.

Precisely, none of these services are essential.  Let’s examine these, shall we?

1. “A statewide effort to increase the number of black doctoral students” – What the hell for?  Why are we spending our tax dollars on racially biased programs?  Furthermore, what about Hispanics?  What about Asians?  What about every other hyphenated American we can think of?  If black students want to become doctors, then they will.  Nothing is stopping that from happening.  Racial politics have no place in 21st century America.
2. “A 10-week course on how to start and grow businesses.” – A helpful course, I’m sure, but exactly why does the State of South Carolina need to be paying for this?  If someone wants to take a course on starting a business then let them pay for it themselves.  Why should I or anybody else be subsidizing somebody else’s career choice?
3. “A program to recruit and retain minority students” – Why does their need to be a special program to retain and recruit minority students?  Again, if minorities want to go to college, they will.  There is more financial help out there for them than was available to me when I wanted to go and had to pay my own way. As SCOTUS Chief Justice John Roberts said, “The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race, is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.”
4. “A study of pollution in the Congaree River” – That may have its merits, but I’m always skeptical of these so called studies and how necessary or efficient they are at what they are chartered for.  I have a buddy of mine who is doing a post doctoral fellowship so he is all too familiar with Federal research funding for universities and other organizations and he said it is rife with waste.
5. “An effort to increase the number of doctors serving rural areas.” – What does this “effort” entail and why do we need a bureaucratic government agency to do it?

Share

RALEIGH — The state Senate is expected to consider today a $450 million bond package that would pay for university and college projects, including a new engineering building at N.C. State University.

A key Senate committee approved the bond package Tuesday. Borrowing the money would not require the approval of voters. The state is facing an $800 million revenue shortfall in its operating budget because of the recession. That same recession means that construction costs could be as much as 30 percent cheaper than they would be during normal times.

The News & Observer

Sen. Phil Berger, an Eden Republican and the chamber’s minority leader, said the state may be facing a $3 billion deficit next year because of taxes and federal stimulus dollars that are set to expire. While the projects are worthwhile, another $18 million debt payment now doesn’t make any sense, he said.

“Would you do that in your personal life?” he asked.

Maybe the State of North Carolina just thinks down the road it can declare bankruptcy like people do when they get in over their head.  Bear in mind that the state legislature is also banking on the Feds providing another half a billion in Medicaid welfare handouts to the state as they present the next fiscal year’s budget.  That money isn’t even guaranteed so if the Feds don’t pony up, add another $500 million to the state deficit.

When the recession created a budget shortfall here in South Carolina our state legislature massively slashed the budget.  As a matter of fact, funding was cut to higher education throughout the state.  I’m a graduate student at Winthrop University.  Guess what.  My tuition went up.  We, the students receiving the educative services, had to pick up the financial slack for our own education and that’s exactly the way it should be.  I wasn’t bitching about it.  If UNC needs a new engineering building that bad then let them pay for it!

In a parting note, I can’t let the words of Republican State Senator Richard Stevens go without special fanfare.  I can always county on big government trough feeders like him to make my case for me when I repeatedly point out that the Republicans are no better at containing the size of government than the Democrats are.

“We can’t afford not to invest in our future,” said Sen. Richard Stevens, a Cary Republican.

Thanks again, Dick.

Share

The House voted 96-1 on Thursday to sign off on a bill that creates a new system that taxes employers according to the frequency that they lay off workers. The bill is the latest in a series of legislative fixes intended to correct problems at the state Department of Employment and Workforce, formerly known as the Employment Security Commission.

House Majority Leader Kenny Bingham, R-Cayce, said the new taxation system will reward employers who don’t layoff workers with no taxes and require those who layoff workers to pay their share.

“We have a system that is fair, competitive and puts South Carolina in a good light to businesses that are looking to locate here,” Bingham said.

The Post and Courier

I think this plan is completely asinine.  Employers don’t layoff workers because they want to build a gold bathtub in their bathroom and bathe in a bounty of $100 bills.  They layoff employees because they can no longer afford to keep them and maintain their bottom line.  So because for one reason or another their business isn’t doing as well we’re going to tax them more for it?  What kind of logic is that?

Share

At the afternoon rally, Dan Eichenbaum, a Murphy ophthalmologist running for the Republican nomination to face U.S. Rep. Heath Shuler in November’s congressional election, spoke in favor of a simpler tax policy.

Several speakers, including Eichenbaum, who the local tea party has endorsed, said they favor the “fair tax,” which would replace the federal income tax with a consumption tax on goods and services.

Asheville Citizen-Times

The Fair Tax is a legislation that has been around for nearing two decades now that would completely eliminate the Federal Income Tax and replace it with a national consumption tax on new goods and services.  It has its advantages, among them:  no more stressful income tax filing every year, no more intrusive and tyrannical IRS audits on the general public, more disposable income for almost every American, and more financial freedom.

I have stated in the past my skepticism that this will ever see a vote in Congress because the tax code is the primary vehicle for allowing politicians to wield their power in Washington.  Furthermore, while it will incredibly boost this country’s economic viability, no method of taxation will be a path to economic salvation until we get Federal spending under control  However, that said, unless the public supports candidates who support the idea of the Fair Tax then we only ensure my self-fulfilling prophecy, so I generally give two thumbs up to any candidate or representative who will get behind the idea.  Dan Eichenbaum supports the idea so hopefully that will weigh on your decision when you cast your vote in the North Carolina primary election, for which early voting has already begun.

Share

The Legislature socked it to retail customers, smokers, drinkers and big earners with higher taxes last year to help close a budget gap calculated by Democrats at more than $4 billion.

Could hospitals or doctors’ offices be next?

Legislative leaders are returning to Raleigh early to begin adjusting the second year of the state’s two-year budget and they’re intrigued by a hospital or provider tax or fee because it could draw down three times as much extra money in federal matching funds for Medicaid.

It’s one of several options they’ll examine to help close another budget gap starting July 1 that ranging from $700 million to $1.2 billion. Medicaid, the state-federal health care program for the poor, is on track to be $475 million over budget in North Carolina next fiscal year as more — and apparently sicker — patients enroll, legislative staff members told budget-writers last week.

“It’s worth considering,” said Senate Majority Leader Martin Nesbitt, D-Buncombe. “Medicaid is there to serve the people and we’ve gone past the point, in my opinion, of being able to serve people appropriately. We’ve cut to that point.”

Business Week

Dear God, these people are out of their flippin minds!  All we’ve heard from the socialists is how the government has to take over control of the health care industry because the cost of care is getting too expensive and what do the socialists in North Carolina come up with?  Tax people for visiting a hospital!  Really??  Can it get more insane?  Why is cutting services never an option to these people?  To hell with Medicaid.  Cut it!  We’re in a recession!  When a family gets hit with a financial set back they have to tighten their belts and deal with it.  The government shouldn’t be any different.  If revenue is falling then cut back on the freebies!

You always hear the left bitching about the shrinking middle class.  Well, this is exactly why it’s happening!  It’s the middle class that gets tapped to pay for all of this redistributionist garbage.  Your suburban families that are working hard trying to support a family and maybe put a kid or two through college are the ones having to pony up to pay for everyone else who either can’t or won’t support themselves.  When will enough be enough already?

Share

I must say it’s nice to see some Democrats publicly opposing Obama’s decree for once rather than walking ahead of him throwing rose pedals at his feet like they’ve all been doing for the past year.

RALEIGH, N.C. (AP) — President Barack Obama’s plan to allow oil drilling off North Carolina’s coast has no support among his party’s chief candidates for U.S. Senate in the state.

Chapel Hill attorney Ken Lewis positioned himself in an interview with The Associated Press as the most forceful opponent of offshore drilling, saying he wasn’t convinced that exploration would reduce gas prices and arguing that it would distract the country from focusing on low-carbon sources. Secretary of State Elaine Marshall said she would support exploration to see how much oil would be available but worries about the environmental and economic threat of drilling.

“I am not very keen about that at all,” she said.

Former state Sen. Cal Cunningham said he would currently vote against any drilling but might consider it as part of a broader energy plan.

Salisbury Post

So we have three candidates and three varying points of view:  an environmental extremist, an opportunist licking his finger and sticking it in the air, and a reasonable voice of common sense.

Ken Lewis apparently wants you to suffer from higher gas prices as we become more dependent on foreign oil with each passing year.  I thought the Democrat Party was the “party of the working man” but I’m sure the “working man” doesn’t want to pay $4.00 per gallon of gas again, especially those Teamsters driving semi-trucks.  I can assure Mr. Lewis that the country is not going to stop researching alternative energy sources.  It’s becoming quite a lucrative market actually.  There was a green stock I had considered purchasing  few months back and changed my mind and now the damn thing has gone up 60% since that time.

Cal Cunningham is trying to have it both ways.  He’s attempting to placate the environmental kook lobby while at the same time telling normal people like the rest of us that he could be open to drilling if it’s part of a broader plan, whatever that means.

Elaine Marshall is for the most part being quite sensible.  We absolutely should explore for oil and use our own resources rather than send billions and billions of dollars to terrorist nations and to the heads of enemy states like Venezuela.  Naturally, we want to take appropriate cautions to avoid mishaps that could pollute our oceans and coastlines.  Nobody wants to go surfing in an oil slick.  I’m not sure what economic concerns she has.  Everything I have read indicates that drilling off the Carolina coast would be an economic boom for both states.

Remember, however, that Obama is not giving the green light to drilling offshore.  He is allowing for exploration.  That doesn’t mean that if they find something they will be able to drill.  We already know there are oil deposits along our continental shelf, but they will still have to go through the long, involved never ending permitting process and fight lawsuit after lawsuit from environmental groups and injunction after injunction from sympathetic judges before a drill bit will ever touch the ocean floor.  Unless that is changed we’ll be into the next decade before any drilling begins and Obama knows that which is why I am skeptical of his whole support for this.  I think this is just a carrot he is dangling to get Republicans on board with Cap and Fraud because most of them are not as boneheaded as Lindsey Grahamnesty.

Share