SC Budget: Bigger Than We Thought
State government spends over $20 billion annually in South Carolina – more than three times the amount generally acknowledged by media sources – according to a comprehensive budget report issued today by the S.C. Policy Council.
Flanked by S.C. Gov. Mark Sanford and State Senator Tom Davis (R-Beaufort), Policy Council President Ashley Landess unveiled the report at a news conference in Columbia, calling the budget process in South Carolina “complicated” and “inaccessible.”
“Taxpayers think we spend about $6 billion a year on state government, but the budget is more
than three times that,” Landess said, adding that “we have no idea where most of our money is going, or why it is spent the way it is.”
Indeed, 34% of last year’s appropriations bill – or $7.1 billion – was in a category known simply as “other funds.”
A murky assortment of fees, fines and other revenue sources governed loosely by seldom-read budget provisos, these “other funds” go directly to individual agencies with little or no oversight as to how they are to be spent.
“This report shows very concretely that our state spending picture goes far beyond the $6 billion
that routinely gets reported,” said Gov. Sanford. “This again highlights the need for more
transparency in our budgeting process, so that citizens have a better handle on what is indeed
being spent in our state, rather than keeping more than a third of our state budget on autopilot
controlled by Washington.”
For his part, Davis announced the introduction of a bill designed to open up the budget process to the public.
“We need to follow the money,” Davis told FITS. “But the current budget process doesn’t allow us to do that.”
Specifically, Davis said that there should be a 72-hour “cooling off” period after House and Senate budget writers finish their work.
During that time, their proposed spending plans should be posted online so that lawmakers and their constituents can review them.
“Public input is critical to advancing democracy, and public scrutiny is critical to advancing taxpayer savings,” Davis said. “We currently have neither in South Carolina with respect to our state budget process.”
Incidentally, the so-called “comprehensive” Tax Realignment Commission proposed earlier this year by State Sen. Hugh Leatherman would only deal with general fund revenues – which according to the Policy Council report account for just 32% of state revenue.
Additionally, within that slice of the pie Leatherman’s commission would be specifically prohibited from addressing a recent property tax/ sales tax shift that accounts for a huge chunk of general fund revenues.
WEB EXTRA:
Comments
By me on February 10th, 2009 at 2:53 pm
WOW. we have a bunch of corrupt people in this state beyond what i ever imagined. Watch all the news ignore this now.
By Inside whispers on February 10th, 2009 at 3:38 pm
OK, I get Landess and Sanford together. I’ve seen that show before. But what’s up with Davis being in there? And where were Nikki and Nathan?
By Shine the Light on February 10th, 2009 at 4:28 pm
I would love to see all the numbers relating to this press conference.
You would think with this much money floating around, someone should be keeping track of it.
With what is happening now in Washington, does anyone else feel rather helpless and hopeless about our fiscal situation,both at the state and federal level?
By Chester Lee on February 10th, 2009 at 6:20 pm
Maybe Davis is the “chosen one”
By Catherine on February 10th, 2009 at 6:42 pm
I know how Sanford distorts these figures. In these “state spending” figures, for example, I know are the tuition and scholarship dollars for higher education students. The research grants won by faculty count as “state spending.” No matter what, Sanford refuses to consider general funds. You can see most of the figures if you lay out the general fund and total fund numbers by agency over time. Almost every agency (for better and for worse) has become less dependent on general fund appropriations. Like everything, there is good and bad to be had here.
Of course there’s waste and God knows we need more transparency. But until the Gov and his supporters acknowledges that agencies DO generate funds for projects, research, etc., how can we have an honest conversation on both sides? I’ll tell you that there’s waste in higher education if you admit we have the lowest general approps per student in the 16-state southeast.
By scguy123 on February 10th, 2009 at 8:20 pm
FITS future articles:
Davis is a leader within Senate…
Davis sets himself apart…
Davis endorsed by Sanford for 2010…
Davis is our man for 2010!
All paid for by Davis or Sanford.
Come one people, we all know Sanford wants Sanfordite in the West wing of the State House before he runs for president.
The nightmare is coming to me now…”All of my success is because of my predecessor, Republican Presidential candidate and Governor Mark Sanford” – Governor Tom Davis.
By BIN News Editorial Staff on February 10th, 2009 at 8:27 pm
Wow! It’s from THE sc policy council! They sound very impotent.
Ashley’s fake group is as impotent as scrg. As impotent as clubforgrowth. As impotent as the wacko at voiceforvoucherscams. As impotent as sic(k) willie.
Impotent clones. willie, your bogus front groups are exposed.
Your voucher worms “turn” in compost.
But a new day is dawning in SC.
Voter see through your scams.
BIN News Editorial Staff
Always, Flair and Balanced
By baker on February 10th, 2009 at 10:22 pm
Interesting commentary, Catherine.
I don’t doubt there’s waste in SC government. And if we’re spending money But it was the Policy Council and Mark Sanford who came up with the less-than-half-the-money-goes-to-the-classroom education “study”….it’s been exposed as misleading over and over. So, I don’t exactly trust the Policy Council’s so-called research.
I do think Ashley Landess has a point, though, about “inaccessible” and “complicated” or whatever. Not much room for disagreement to me in that regard.
By Mike Honcho on February 11th, 2009 at 2:26 am
Yes Catherine, interesting commentary. I read the whole report, including the title page and noticed it said South Carolina Policy Council, not Mark Sanford.
Your words speak to your agenda.
It appears that this report calls for exactly what you want. Read the state budget and dollars are broken into three categories, general fund, other fund, and federal funds. The ‘revenue’ you speak of in higher education typically comes in the form of federal dollars.
Other funds are typically fees and scholarships.
Your funding dilemma takes a whole new twist if you can accept that every street corner doesn’t need a ’satellite campus.’
By liz shepherd on February 11th, 2009 at 9:39 am
The state of South Carolina is paying for fraudulent Ghost Accounts established inside the SSA , inside Medicare Part D
It’d be nice to know what this fraud costs, wouldn’t it?
By BBeltBuckle on February 11th, 2009 at 9:54 am
baker,
go to the budget and control board web page, then their office of research and statistics, finally click on the local government finance report.
download and read the excel spreadsheet…
and wow, you can see for your self that public schools spend only 45 cents per dollar on instruction!
if you think even the B&CB bean counters are disredited, you are further out to left field that we imagined!
By KP on February 11th, 2009 at 10:37 am
The Budget and Control Board web page proves that what the Policy Council says about instructional spending is misleading. The 45 percent that goes for instruction according to their spreadsheet does not include anything except teachers — not guidance counselors or librarians or libraries or cafeteria workers or food or school bus drivers or transporation or coaches or athletic programs or computers. All necessary and completely legitimate expenditures.
But the only way the Budget and Control Board could get as low as 45 percent, even counting all those things as “non-instructional” expenses, is to include capital projects and debt service as operating expenses, which is not something you see on private sector spreadsheets.
By KP on February 11th, 2009 at 10:40 am
By the way, that’s not just me talking, it’s the Budget and Control Board’s spokesman.
By baker on February 11th, 2009 at 12:12 pm
BBeltBuckle — I recall the Policy Council “study” on school spending. And on the non-instructional side, they included such things as librarians and guidance counselors. So, sure, it may be that less than half the money literally goes into the classroom — or, instruction, depending on how you define that. However, to add up supposedly “non-instruction” costs, you’re still talking about people who work directly with students on academic and other issues….not just “educrats” sitting in a district office.
By KP on February 11th, 2009 at 5:07 pm
So, can we get a response from all of you who think you know that only 45 percent of education spending is “instructional”?