GOVERNOR’S VETO THREAT HAS TEETH …
“This is South Carolina, not D.C.,” Haley said, adding that “the House … used to be a conservative body.”
For the record, we don’t support this borrowing proposal. In fact we strongly oppose it. But once again Haley is assailing something she previously championed … yet another example of her chronic hypocrisy.
Haley didn’t just “talk smack” to House members, though, she accompanied her rhetoric with a vow to veto the borrowing provision from the budget.
Again … what gives? Not that we disagree with her, but this is a woman who vetoed less than one-tenth of one percent of last year’s budget.
Nonetheless, the governor’s threat has sent S.C. House budget writers scrambling – especially after Haley reportedly informed them she had the votes to sustain such a veto.
“I don’t know if that’s true … but I’m one of them,” a lawmaker not known for supporting the governor told FITS.
Other lawmakers told FITS the House has the votes to pass the borrowing provision, but is “nowhere near” to being able to override a gubernatorial veto – which would require a two-thirds majority.
This year’s borrowing provision – tucked into a section of the proposed FY 2015-16 state budget – would borrow an estimated $500 million for a variety of “infrastructure” projects. Among them? A $40 million “training center” aimed at improving the quality of the workforce at aircraft manufacturer Boeing’s North Charleston, S.C. facility.
Clearly Boeing’s South Carolina workers could use the help … but should taxpayers subsidize this proposed center? Especially after Boeing has already sucked up more than $1 billion in subsidies from Palmetto State taxpayers?
Hell no …
Hypocritical though it may be, we support Haley’s veto threat … and those lawmakers willing to support it.
As we’ve stated repeatedly, lawmakers don’t need to raise taxes or engage in deficit spending to meet the state’s infrastructure needs – they simply need to stop blowing money on unnecessary projects. The state budget has grown by leaps and bounds in recent years – meaning there has been and will continue to be more than enough money to handle repair and maintenance of our state’s roads and bridges.
Lawmakers just need to start prioritizing infrastructure based on need, not politics … and start slashing other unnecessary functions from the state budget.