Sanford’s Fuzzy Math
Today Gov. Sanford sent out a press release regarding the sprinkler bill. In the release, Sanford claimed that the House of Representatives altered the original bill causing the total cost to skyrocket from $36 million to $108 million over a five year period based on a new BEA estimate. The “supposed” cost increase was based on Sanford’s claim that new bill passed by the House now extended the tax subsidy to residential properties.
The problem with this claim is that the original bill provided subsidies to both residential and commercial properties. The original BEA estimate for $36 million included both property classifications.
So my question now is where the hell did the $108 million figure come from?
February 15th, 2008 at 10:44 pm
Mark Sanford and fuzzy math? Incorrect statements? No…you gotta be kidding me!
Sanford has very little regard for the truth…and the lazy SC press lets him get away with it, so please don’t expect any change.
I can only hope he gets the VP nod…that way the national press corps can investigate him…and rip his administration to shreads.
February 16th, 2008 at 7:09 pm
Fuzzy Math?…
…from the Mark Sanford, the ethically-conflicted governor?
Why that’s unheard of?
February 17th, 2008 at 2:26 am
“The state Supreme Court has decided to take a case that will decide whether the governor can trump the Legislature’s overhaul of the worker’s compensation system. Sanford also has asked the justices to take a case challenging his authority to oust a board member from the State Ports Authority”.
“While Sanford has been accused of trying to overstep his authority, They even include examples that have earned Sanford criticism: a call late last year to a judge hearing an annexation case in Jasper County and recent word of Sanford’s involvement in the sale of port facilities in Port Royal”.
“His views and direct inquiry into matters - from the workers’ comp case all the way to this phone call to the judge and to the inquiry about the bidder on the port”….
“The Supreme Court has yet to decide whether it will take up a case brought by Carroll Campbell III, whom Sanford ousted from the Ports Authority in January. Campbell sued in Lexington County, alleging in part that he was tossed because he questioned Sanford’s involvement in selling Port Royal’s port. That sale also was the subject of phone calls Sanford made last year to the-then chairman of the Ports Authority and to the agency’s lawyer disparaging the reputation of a developer seeking to buy the property”.
“Shortly after Campbell filed his lawsuit, Sanford asked the Supreme Court to decide it”.
…”Johnny Felder, Campbell’s lawyer, said Sanford’s authority is the issue. “What’s clear to me is that our governor in several different issues has indicated a willingness to exceed the scope of his authority. It doesn’t appear that he feels limited in his actions by the parameters contained in the spirit and the letter of the law,” Felder said.
“In the worker’s compensation case, Sanford wants the court to affirm his authority over the state Worker’s Compensation Commission. Last year, Sanford ordered the commissioners who decide payments to injured workers to use standards he set, even though the Legislature had rejected them. As he pushed that, workers sued in federal court”.
“Sanford wants that case decided by the Supreme Court, not in federal court, Sawyer said…
“Sanford’s critics hope the justices check his reach”.
“He doesn’t write the laws; he enforces the laws. He doesn’t change the law,” said Belinda Ellison, president of Injured Workers Advocates, a group of worker’s compensation lawyers. “It’s an abuse of power.”
“What some may term abuse…certainly raised the eyebrows of the federal judge hearing the workers’ compensation case when he heard of the governor’s telephone call to a state judge hearing an annexation case.
“That’s hard for me to believe that a governor would assume he had the authority to call a presiding judge,” U.S. District Judge Ross Anderson said in a Jan. 14 hearing, according to The (Columbia) State newspaper. “I’m just in shock, disbelief that that could happen.”
“In the case, the state and the Coastal Conservation League were challenging the town of Yemassee’s annexation of coastal plantation land”.
…”It still is unusual.”
February 19th, 2008 at 12:35 am
Why should the State subsidize sprinkler systems in private businesses and residences. I would think that the insurance premium savings, in addition to the social responsibility of the property owner, would make the addition of fire control practical. Doesn’t the taxpayer of South Carolina already have enough on his plate?