Latest news with #HarveyPeeler
Yahoo
22-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
SC legislators advance $14.7B spending plan that includes pay raise for themselves
House Ways and Means Chairman Bruce Bannister, R-Greenville, and Senate Finance Chairman Harvey Peeler, R-Gaffney, talk to reporters following a vote to approve the state spending plan Wednesday, May 21, 2025. (Photo by Skylar Laird/SC Daily Gazette) COLUMBIA — A pay raise for legislators, lottery ticket payments using debit cards and a potential reduction in funding for the city of Columbia were all part of a spending plan a panel of legislators approved Wednesday. Much of the actual spending in the state's $14.7 billion budget, including a $1,500 bump in the state's minimum teacher pay and the completion of an income tax reduction already in law, was locked in when the six-person committee started negotiating Tuesday. A $1 billion hike in revenue projections Tuesday helped legislators quickly settle the remaining differences between the House and Senate spending plans. The newly recognized revenue allowed budget negotiators to choose whichever plan had the larger amount. That includes sending the state Department of Transportation $200 million to fix aging bridges and $35 million for Hurricane Helene cleanup (the House version), instead of the Senate's $100 million and $25 million. Negotiators also approved $45 million to pay private K-12 school tuition and other costs for up to 10,000 eligible K-12 students under a law Gov. Henry McMaster signed earlier this year. (The Senate version put $20 million toward the scholarships.) SC legislators get extra $1B to spend as budget negotiations begin They left roughly $500 million of the unexpected revenues unspent. That could become part of discussions next year in changing the state's income tax structure. It could also serve to fill holes amid economic uncertainties, said House Ways and Means Chairman Bruce Bannister, R-Greenville. 'That's left us a lot of flexibility, which I think is a good, responsible way to do it,' Bannister said. Not included in this year's budget were earmarks. Removing all one-time funding requested by legislators, usually for their districts, sped up the process, said Senate Finance Chairman Harvey Peeler, R-Gaffney. While some legislators have said the decision will disproportionately hurt poor, rural areas that lack the tax base to pay for projects themselves, Peeler and Bannister said a one-year moratorium was needed to rein in spending that swelled into the hundreds of millions of dollars the last several years. 'It's something that needed to happen this year,' said Peeler, who made the initial announcement refusing earmarks this year. 'It had gotten out of hand — too many earmarks, too large — and we had to have a full stop.' Legislators are expected to take a final vote on the spending package next week. It takes effect with the July 1 start of the fiscal year. Budget clauses that direct how to spend money made up most of the items of contention this year. That included a directive that effectively increases legislators' pay by $18,000 over the fiscal year. The clause inserted into the Senate plan during that chamber's floor debate was approved unanimously Wednesday by the panel's three representatives and three senators. It officially raises their allowance for 'in-district' expenses from $1,000 to $2,500 per month. But there are no limitations on how it can be spent, so it's really just a raise. That adds to their salaries of $10,400, which hasn't changed since 1990. They also receive stipends that are meant to cover meals and lodging as well as mileage while they're in session. Their $1,000 'in-district compensation' hasn't changed since 1995. The last time legislators attempted to increase it was in 2014, when then-Gov. Nikki Haley vetoed the effort. In that time, inflation has caused costs to rise drastically, legislators who proposed the change said. 'It's just time,' Bannister told reporters. Peeler, who voted against the raise on the floor, said he voted for it Wednesday in order to reflect the will of the full Senate, which voted 24-15 on the raise. But he said he still didn't fully support it personally. McMaster recently told reporters he'll decide whether to veto the clause after the final package reaches his desk. But he hinted he may let it go, unlike his predecessor. Being a legislator is officially a part-time job. But legislators work hard and often late into the night. It makes sense that inflation has hit them hard too, he said. 'They need to be able to work without a whole lot of distraction,' McMaster said. 'I'd like to see exactly what the details are, but everyone, if they're working at home, they have a home office, an office in their business, I think they're entitled to be reimbursed for all their expenses, and that's the nature of this.' Also adopted by negotiators was a clause that would revoke an estimated $3.7 million from the state's capital city unless it repeals a ban on so-called conversion therapy. The Columbia City Council deferred a vote Tuesday on the 2021 ordinance that threatens a $500 fine for anyone who tries to alter a juvenile's gender identity or sexual orientation through counseling. Officials wanted to wait and see whether the clause was included in the final version of the budget. Attorney General Alan Wilson sent the city a letter earlier this year asking council members to repeal the ban to 'avoid any future legal action.' Under a 2022 state law, only the state can license and regulate medical fields, including counselors, Wilson wrote. Columbia postpones vote on conversion therapy ban awaiting state budget decision The clause included in the state budget threatens to pull state aid from any city with an ordinance banning the practice, but Columbia is the only city in the state with such a ban. Bannister spoke with members of the Columbia City Council before the vote. He said the officials he spoke with — he declined to name them — supported including the threat in the budget, as they feared the city would lose any lawsuit challenging the ordinance. Adding the clause 'would encourage their members to think a little harder about it,' Bannister said. Another adopted budget directive would allow people to buy lottery tickets using debit cards, which Gov. Henry McMaster recommended as part of his executive budget. Opponents of gambling insisted on banning sales using credit and debit cards in 2001, when legislators created the lottery. But as fewer people regularly carry cash with them, allowing sales using debit cards could increase revenue by about $52 million, the state Lottery Commission estimated. The money pays for college scholarships, and it could potentially pay for K-12 students to attend private schools under the voucher law legislators passed.
Yahoo
22-04-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Budget without earmarks could harm poor, rural parts of SC the most, some legislators say
Senate Finance Chairman Harvey Peeler, R-Gaffney, who announced the Senate's spending plan would include no earmarks for the coming fiscal year, talks with Senate Judiciary Chairman Luke Rankin, R-Myrtle Beach, in Senate chambers on Thursday, Jan. 11, 2024. (File/Mary Ann Chastain/Special to the SC Daily Gazette) COLUMBIA — The state's poor and rural districts stand to lose the most from a budget with no earmarks, some legislators said, while others celebrated a pause on spending long criticized for its lack of transparency. When the Senate Finance Committee advanced its spending plan for the coming fiscal year, Chairman Harvey Peeler made a stunning announcement: The budget will not include any earmarks — in other words, no spending requested by legislators to fund projects in their districts. The decision comes two years after total earmarks — what legislators have consistently called 'community investments' — soared to $713 million. While last year's tally was smaller, at $435 million, critics said the process still allowed unvetted spending of taxpayer dollars. Churches, charities with little track record among nonprofits in line for $90M in SC budget Peeler, the Senate's chief budget writer since 2022, made clear the tally this year will be zero. 'No more pet projects equals more money in your pockets,' the Gaffney Republican said in a statement April 9. Two hours later, a joint statement went out from Peeler and House Ways and Means Chairman Bruce Bannister agreeing to focus this year on 'tax reform.' (Typically, the House adds earmarks after the Senate passes its budget plan.) Exactly what that means remains to be seen. The House Ways and Means Committee meets Tuesday to take 'expert testimony' on options for changing the tax structure. The meeting comes three weeks after a fiscal analysis showed a House GOP proposal would result in most tax filers paying more in state income taxes initially, resulting in Republicans putting the skids on their own bill. The agenda clearly states, in bold and underlined, the committee will take 'no vote' Tuesday. Meanwhile, the full Senate will open floor debate Tuesday on its spending package. It includes a revenue reduction of $290.5 million to complete the Legislature's 2022 tax-cutting law, which phased in a reduction in income tax rates, a year ahead of schedule. The budget passed by the House in March planned to do at least that. Peeler's announcement surprised even legislators, including many who had already submitted the paperwork laying out their earmark requests. Poor, rural communities in particular will have to forgo improvements and new equipment they can't afford without help, legislators representing those areas said. That includes projects already underway that local governments need funding to complete, said House Assistant Minority Leader Roger Kirby. 'It is not conservative to waste money on restarting projects, and that's what we're going to have to do,' the Lake City Democrat said. In Williamsburg County, one of the poorest in the state, Kirby had asked for money to expand the water system, with the hopes of attracting bigger businesses to the area. Williamsburg County doesn't have the tax revenue to afford finishing the project. But without the expansion, the county won't be able to attract more economic development, Kirby said. SC lawmakers set to spend over $430 million on local projects That project and similar ones 'are not going to happen on their own,' Kirby said. 'They're just not.' Rural water system improvements were also among requests made by freshman Sen. Russell Ott. Ott asked for new water meters in Swansea, as well as improvements to water and sewer systems in Calhoun County and the stormwater system in Cayce. Those systems are in dire need of upgrades that the cities and counties can't afford, he said. 'Folks from my district need help, real help,' said the St. Matthews Democrat, who was the House's assistant minority leader before Kirby. Without extra money, cities in Marlboro County will continue driving firetrucks from the 1980s, said Sen. JD Chaplin, a Darlington Republican. The sheriff's department in Lee County will remain unable to fix its broken air conditioning unit. And law enforcement officers across the five counties Chaplin represents will continue using unreliable radios, he said. Chaplin, a freshman legislator, said he was disappointed to learn he wouldn't get to fund those projects. When he was running for office, he promised to better fund law enforcement and infrastructure in his area, which those earmarks could have done, he said. 'It's going to continue another year with patches and Band-Aids and not actually fixing the problems we have in South Carolina,' Chaplin said. That's not to say Chaplin opposes a tax cut, which was another of his campaign platforms, he added. Chaplin and Ott, who also said he'd support a tax cut, questioned why legislators couldn't figure out a way to do both. Relying on state money that may or may not come through on a given year has always been a bad idea, said Sen. Greg Hembree. Each year, the Little River Republican suggests to representatives of the local governments and nonprofits that come to him for funding to think of whatever they get as a gift: nice to have but not necessary to keep running, he said. Depending on earmarks is 'a risky place to live,' he said. Last year, at Hembree's request, North Myrtle Beach received $1.5 million to dredge sediment and debris from Cherry Grove Beach, and Sea Haven Youth Crisis Center got $65,000 to screen youth for medical and dental issues, according to budget documents. While Hembree would have liked to continue funding those causes this year, they won't end without it, he said. 'Nobody's closing their doors because the money isn't coming in,' Hembree said. Although earmarks are one-time spending, legislators have long used repeated requests to fund expensive projects in their districts or give annual allocations to nonprofits, amounting in some cases to millions of dollars over the course of several years. Spending on earmarks ballooned after the COVID-19 pandemic, when the state's budget was flush with federal assistance and sales tax collections spiked as South Carolinians spent their own federal relief payments. The budget passed in 2022 contained about $390 million in earmarks, after the Legislature upheld Gov. Henry McMaster's vetoes that struck $33 million worth, before hitting a record high $713 million in 2023. After such high amounts, taking a year off could help legislators take a step back and consider how they're spending that money, Hembree said. 'It'll be kind of healthy,' Hembree said. If the budget continues without earmarks in coming years, Hembree said he feared a return to secretive spending slipped into the budget with little-to-no oversight. For years, earmark spending was rolled together in vaguely worded line items in agencies' budgets that gave no clue as to where the money was going. That practice ended in 2021, when legislators began listing earmarks and who sponsored them. In 2023, for the first time, legislators began giving the governor's office paperwork explaining their requests before sending him their final spending plan. But eliminating earmarks won't eliminate requests for money, and the pressure will be on for legislators to fulfill them somehow, Hembree said. 'I fear (the process) could revert back to what it was,' Hembree said. Legislators might consider creating a grant program, as McMaster has advocated for years. Under his proposal, local governments and nonprofits could apply for a chunk of money for agencies to dole out. Senate Majority Leader Shane Massey celebrated even a brief end to a process he has criticized for years over a lack of transparency. 'Hallelujah,' said the Edgefield Republican, who was part of a bipartisan duo that successfully pushed for the secrecy to end. Even after the changes in recent years, Massey has questioned the process and called for reviews on the back end, to be sure nonprofits were spending the money the way they said they would. 'Ultimately, I think we have to make a decision,' Massey said. 'Should we collect more money than we need and then dole it out in this process that really has little vetting? Or should we just not take any more money from taxpayers than we need?'
Yahoo
04-04-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
SC bill would legalize gambling on horse races. Don't bet on it.
Sen. Michael Johnson. R-Tega Cay, speaks Tuesday, April 1, 2025, at a subcommittee hearing on a bill that would permit betting on horse racing through online apps. (Screenshot via SCETV legislative livestream) COLUMBIA — Members of the state's struggling equestrian community say legislation allowing South Carolinians to bet on horse racing through an app on their phone could revive a once-thriving industry. Discussion opened this week in a Senate Judiciary subcommittee on a bipartisan proposal led by Sen. Michael Johnson, R-Tega Cay. No vote was taken. There could be several more meetings before that happens. It's one of several bills filed this year to allow gambling in some form. Advocates contend South Carolina misses out on millions in potential revenue from betting as it becomes more prominent — both legally and illegally. Of the proposals, the bill dubbed the Equine Advancement Act likely has the best odds of passing. However, even with the backing of one of the Legislature's most powerful players — Senate Finance Chairman Harvey Peeler of Gaffney — it's far from a sure bet in a Legislature that has historically avoided any change to the state's anti-gambling laws. Nonprofit raffles didn't become legal until 2015. The proposal would allow gambling on horse racing on approved apps while specifying that other forms of gambling, such as slot machines or video poker, remain illegal. That's an attempt to quell concerns about re-opening the door to an industry that went gangbusters on the authority of a little-noticed clause slipped into the state budget in 1986. 'This bill is very narrowly tailored,' Johnson said. 'The goal is to take the proceeds from this and pump that directly into our equine industry — horse training, horse farms, horse racing, all of those things — so that they have an opportunity to compete with the other states that already have this.' His legislation — which is going through Peeler's committee — will likely advance to the floor. That would follow the recent precedent of two similar bills sponsored by former GOP Sen. Katrina Shealy of Lexington. Those bills advanced through her committee to reach the floor in 2022 and 2024, but neither ever got a vote in the chamber. It's unclear whether the gambling foes in the Senate can still block debate, or whether there's been enough of a sea change in the chamber's mindset that it actually has a chance. Few senators are left who participated in the Legislature's fight to get rid of video poker and vowed not to allow a repeat. After all, it's been 25 years since a state Supreme Court ruling made video poker illegal. Notably, November brought 13 new senators, the largest freshman class in the 46-member Senate in at least a generation. They include former Rep. Russell Ott, who was the chief sponsor of the horse race betting bill that the House passed on a 55-46 vote in 2023. Should senators open floor debate on the latest proposal, Sen. Chip Campsen said he'll be providing the uninitiated a lengthy history lesson. 'We have a terrible history when it comes to gambling in South Carolina, and I don't want my children or my grandchildren raised in a place like South Florida,' said the Isle of Palms Republican, who was in the House when the multibillion-dollar video poker industry overplayed its hand with a lawsuit that backfired. 'You want to go gamble, gamble in Florida, but don't make us Florida. Don't make us Las Vegas,' Campsen said. Representatives of both the Palmetto Family Council and the South Carolina Baptist Convention, which have successfully lobbied against gambling bills in the past, told the SC Daily Gazette they will continue to fight the proposals. 'When you use something like a vice to promote income or revenue, you always have to have more of it,' said Tony Beam, a lobbyist for the Baptist Convention. 'It doesn't do anything to make a state better.' Even if a pro-gambling bill manages to make it to Gov. Henry McMaster's desk, it faces an almost guaranteed veto from the Republican who has opposed gambling over his entire career. 'Once you start letting gambling into the house, it will grow,' McMaster said Tuesday, making clear his position hasn't changed. 'Gambling is bad for our culture,' he continued. 'It's not part of our heritage and there are better ways to make money, to give jobs, to generate tax money, to generate a thriving economy.' The horse industry brings in $2 billion annually and is responsible for nearly 29,000 jobs, according to a 2019 state-commissioned study from the Department of Agriculture. Advocates told senators Tuesday the industry is being decimated as horses and trainers leave South Carolina — once a hot spot for horse owners due to its climate and abundance of rural land — for states like Virginia and New York that offer incentives for horses that are bred and certified in the state. Farms and horse barns that once served as community sanctuaries are disappearing and being replaced by office buildings or parking lots, said Frank Mullins, president of the Aiken Steeplechase, held in a city where many of the roads are purposefully left unpaved for equestrian traffic. SC equestrians call for Senate to pass bill legalizing horse race betting 'It's not good for the essence of our state, not good for the ambience of our small towns,' Mullins said. 'We have an opportunity to reverse this,' he continued. 'Allowing horse race betting in South Carolina will give us an opportunity to be competitive with other states.' Mullins said the facilities for the steeplechase get used only twice a year for competition. Should there be legalized betting, he'll likely add additional races. 'My singular goal is to try to find a way to use this place more than twice a year,' he said. South Carolina would join 41 states that permit online gambling on horse races, according to the Action Network, a sports media company focused on gambling. North Carolina legalized it in March 2024, but there are no entities licensed to offer or accept horse racing bets in the state, according to the North Carolina State Lottery Commission website. As for the details, Johnson's proposal would create a seven-member board to manage the program and license the apps that people could use for betting; 5% of all wagers would go to the industry. The commission would decide how to dole out that money, which could include vocational schooling, renovating training centers or supplementing prize money for horse races. The gambling industry is dangling lots of carrots. A 2022 analysis by Racing Resource Group, an analytics business specializing in horse racing, projected the state would see at least $40 million in horse racing wagers and as much as $70 million. The proposed 5% would translate to $2 million to $3.5 million annually for the industry under those estimates. However, advocates say they're optimistic wagers will surpass $70 million once the betting is legalized and gambling increases — which is precisely what gambling opponents worry about. Kip Elser, who was speaking on behalf of the South Carolina and Thoroughbred and Breeders Association and the state's Equine Council, said $2 million is the minimum the industry needs to start bouncing back. GOP Sen. Billy Garrett of Greenwood, an opponent of the bill, suggested the council simply ask for the money as an earmark in the state budget. The money could go through the state's Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism, as many millions of dollars do annually. But Elser said legalizing betting would be better for equestrians. 'We would rather get a leg up and be self-supported,' he said. There are other bills that would allow wide-open gambling, though none have gotten a hearing. Rep. Chris Murphy, a Dorchester County Republican, is the lead sponsor of a bipartisan bill that would allow the state's first casino to be built near the intersection of interstates 26 and 95 in Orangeburg County. The bill relegates permission to the state's poorest counties. It starts off with the declaration that 'casino gaming is not consistent with nor compatible with the economic, labor, or tourism industry profile for most communities in South Carolina.' However, it continues, for the 'rural and impoverished school districts' along I-95, 'casino gaming in these counties is consistent and compatible with their economic, labor, and tourism profiles' as a potential job creator and education opportunity enhancer for the children living there. Other proposals in the House and Senate would regulate sports gambling in the state. Still another proposes asking voters in a referendum whether the constitution should be amended to allow the Legislature to pass laws legalizing gambling, with the profits paying for roadwork wherever gambling is allowed. Putting that question on the ballot avoids McMaster's veto, since such resolutions don't go to the governor's desk. But the measure would still require supermajority votes in each chamber, which is highly unlikely. Proponents argue gambling is already happening; the state's just not making any money off the illegal, unregulated transactions. Sen. Brad Hutto, D-Orangeburg, said people gamble on horse races anyway, whether it's at the Aiken Steeplechase or the Carolina Cup in Camden. He's seen it often, he told his colleagues. Ott, who is a co-sponsor of Johnson's bill, said if the Legislature made gambling legal, the state would not only profit from it but could regulate it and put money into programs combatting gambling addiction. 'It's just time for us to quit burying our heads in the sand, acting like this is not happening right now in the state of South Carolina,' said the St. Matthews Democrat. 'It's time for us to get caught up with times and to use it in a way that can be a real benefit.' SC Daily Gazette Editor Seanna Adcox contributed to this report.
