End of Education Part 5

The End of Education

Part 5:

Ten Things to Know Before You Don’t Vote

(or When You Do)

November 2, 2006

INTRODUCTION TO PART 5

On November 7, voters in South Carolina will elect several state officers, choose a new House of Representatives, and provide guidance to the General Assembly about the future of proposed amendments to the South Carolina Constitution. Every election, every issue is important. [1]

For this year’s election, there are some other folks who are trying to gain power in South Carolina – and their names are not even on the ballots. But – their fingerprints are all over the donor lists [2] of certain candidates, as they try to buy their power rather than letting the voters know who they are.

It is understood that those who vote will have an important voice in the future of our State. It is essential to understand that those who do not vote will have an equally important voice in that future – because, by their inaction, they will allow leaders to be elected and issues to be decided by the minority [3] – by the very small minority of South Carolinians who believe they are right and that they are right not only for themselves but for everybody else, as well.

Sometimes, there is just too much dirt and fertilizer being shoveled during an election. It’s hard to know who – and what – to believe. And that’s why some folks stay home on Election Day – letting somebody else’s leader get elected. So, instead of electing leaders who will serve all of us, folks who stay home elect leaders who serve only the special interests of those who radically and vehemently go to the polls.

So, here is what you need to know if you’re not going to vote – or if you are going to vote. For your convenience, all in one place, here’s everything that’s important to know before you don’t vote in Tuesday’s elections.

Ten Things to Know Before You Don’t Vote

As you prepare not to go to the polls on November 7, consider this list of ten things to know before you don’t vote. These are things that other folks will be deciding for you.

These are things you’re gonna wanna fuss about before the next four years are over. But you won’t have any right to fuss – if you don’t do anything Tuesday to keep these things from happening in the first place.

So vote. Tuesday. So you won’t have to be quiet for the next four years…

Number 1: Electing a Governor

Governor Sanford’s campaign ads show him as one of us – one of South Carolina’s own. Our boy. But the Governor is anything but “our boy.” [4] The Governor is Howard Rich’s boy. [5] The Governor is South Carolinian’s for Responsible Government’s boy. The Governor is the Club for Growth’s boy. The Governor is Conservatives in Action’s boy. [6] And the Governor has been running television spots since Labor Day because of the money he’s receiving from Howard Rich through these groups and others.

Governor Sanford is just a “SCINO” – you know, like South Carolinians for Responsible Government, he’s just a “South Carolinian in name only.” He’s really not one of us The Governor’s opponent, Tommy Moore, is a South Carolinian and will understand more about what we need than does Governor Sanford or Howard Rich (and Howard Rich doesn’t even pretend to be a “SCINO”).

South Carolina really needs a Governor who knows and wants to help South Carolina – rather than continuing with a Governor who is blinded – and made ineffective – by ideology.

Number 2: Republicans for Tommy Moore

Over the last several weeks, I’ve had the opportunity to travel to several parts of South Carolina. One of the biggest campaigns I’ve seen around the state is Republicans for Tommy Moore. [7] Their signs are everywhere. Their website lists Republican leaders who are disillusioned with Governor Sanford’s “leadership qualities” – or lack thereof. They list the critical issues – unemployment, education, economic development, healthcare – and the facts about those issues during the Governor’s first term. They also list the good Republicans that Governor Sanford tried to defeat in the primaries.

The following is a quote from their website: “Four years ago, Mark Sanford spent millions of dollars on commercials telling the voters of South Carolina about his leadership qualities. [Mr.] Sanford's record as Governor proves he is not a leader! [Governor] Sanford is not capable, or interested in the people of South Carolina.” [8]

If Republicans have finally figured out that the Governor is not a Republican, that he is not a South Carolinian, and that he is not a leader worthy of South Carolina – well, that’s why they are for Tommy Moore in this year’s election.

Number 3: House of Representatives

In the Republican primaries during the summer, the usual suspects (Howard Rich, SCRG, CIA, Club for Growth, etc.) tried to unseat Republicans who had not supported Governor Sanford’s voucher and tuition tax credit bills. [9] Before you vote for your House Member, be sure to ask if he or she supports the public schools or if he or she supports giving tax dollars to private schools so well-to-do families can reduce their costs for sending their children to those private schools.

Number 4: Proposed Constitutional Amendment #4: Property Tax Cap

Let’s leave the Governor alone for a few minutes – and let’s talk about the proposed amendment to the South Carolina Constitution that will place a cap on property taxes. [10] While capping your property tax – that is, limiting the amount your property tax can go up over a period of time – while that sounds like a great idea (and I really like that idea for my property), there is one serious flaw in this proposed amendment.

According to county officials and tax experts [11], “roughly two-thirds of the state’s homeowners would pay higher property taxes because of the [tax] cap.” In effect, the taxes on large homes in fast growing parts of the state (can anyone say “beach home” or “lake home”) will be reduced significantly – giving the owners of those homes more money in their pockets.

Those homes, if put up for sale, will sell for the “market value” and not the “assessed value” – meaning those homeowners will make even more money. They will pay less of their income in taxes and will get more from the sale of their homes – than will the rest of us. The rest of us will see a decrease in our take-home pay because we will have to make up the difference in taxes lost by giving those folks “on the water” big tax cuts.

This proposed amendment is bad for most South Carolinians – because it is really a “tax shift” instead of a tax cut. It will move the burden of taxes from the wealthy to the middle class and the poor. And, those people who rent their homes get gouged again.

But watch what happens. It’ll be like the “Education Lottery” – where no money goes to education – but everybody thought it would – until it was passed into law. If this amendment becomes part of the state constitution, there will be a reality check right before the rest of us send in our next property tax check.

This is a bad proposal [12] – for more reasons than those listed above. It’s just bad for most people. Vote “No” for Amendment #4 – especially if you think you will be in that two-thirds of South Carolinians who don’t live on water and whose tax costs will go up.

Number 5: Proposed Constitutional Amendment #3: Investing in Foreign Companies

Currently, the South Carolina Constitution prohibits the investment of state money in “foreign companies” – that is, in companies with headquarters in other countries. But, in this day of globalization, most American companies have their headquarters in other countries.

Never mind that investment should not be a constitutional issue; it is part of the state constitution. [13] If the state is to invest wisely and is to invest in stable companies [14], the constitution must change in order to allow such investment. It seems reasonable.

This amendment [15] will help the state, especially the South Carolina Retirement Systems, in stabilizing financial growth for the future. A “Yes” vote on amendment #3 will be helpful.

Number 6: Proposed Constitutional Amendment #5: Eminent Domain

This proposed amendment [16] came about because of a U.S. Supreme Court ruling [17] in a Connecticut case. The city of New London condemned privately owned property so it could be used as part of a commercial redevelopment plan. The Court’s ruling affirmed that the city could take the property even if the property was to be turned over to private developers who want to turn the property into private residences and shopping areas.

Passage of this amendment will make it more difficult for government to take personal real property for private use. It seems reasonable to vote “Yes” on amendment #5 – assuming, of course, that it’s constitutional.

Number 7: The Budget and Control Board

The State Budget and Control Board runs state government. [18] The members of that Board manage all the money – every cent that comes and goes through state government. The members of the Budget and Control Board are the Governor, the State Treasurer, the Comptroller General, the Chair of the Senate Finance Committee, and the Chair of the House Ways and Means Committee.

Four of those gentlemen are up for re-election on Tuesday. Governor Sanford is being opposed by Tommy Moore; Treasurer Grady Patterson is being opposed by Thomas Ravenel; Comptroller General Richard Eckstrom is being opposed by Drew Theodore; and Representative Daniel Cooper is running without opposition in his district. Senator Hugh Leatherman is not up for election this year.

In previous matters concerning human assets, Governor Sanford and Mr. Eckstrom have voted together to cut healthcare resources, cost-of-living adjustments for retired state employees, and other areas that affect state services to citizens. Both Governor Sanford and Mr. Eckstrom have received considerable financial support from out-of-state supporters like Howard Rich and groups funded by out-of-state sources (such as South Carolinians for Responsible Government, the Club for Growth, and Conservatives in Action – all of whom have paper trails back to Howard Rich and others. [19]

It would be safe to say that Thomas Ravenel, if elected instead of Grady Patterson, would join Governor Sanford and Mr. Eckstrom – creating a change in the 3-2 voting on some very important issues. [20]

It would seem reasonable to elect someone who has an interest in South Carolina – rather than Mr. Eckstrom, who is being financed heavily by out-of-state millionaires who want to control South Carolina’s elections.

Number 8: Electing the Lieutenant Governor

There’s not much to say about the race between current Lt. Governor Andre Bauer and challenger Robert Barber. One word might sum up the whole race: Maturity. Judgment. Responsibility. Pick one from the list. In the last four years, the Lt. Governor has had major difficulties in dealing with all three.

Recently, I read the following statement (and realized how true it is in today’s political arena): “In the past, community leaders often served on the school board as a civic duty. Today, more and more board members seek election to the board in order to become community leaders.” [21] The emphasis is the author’s, not mine.

Community leaders should be leaders first and elected second. It’s much harder – for everybody – the other way around.

A change – any change – in this election would help in moving our state forward. [22]

Number 9: Electing the State Superintendent of Education

Back in the June Republican primaries, Karen Floyd received 50.5% of the votes to be her party’s candidate for Superintendent of Education. [23] That was about 1195 votes more than the 50%-plus-1 needed for that nomination – out of almost 239,000 votes cast in that primary. In her own party, if fewer than 560 persons had voted for somebody else, Ms. Floyd would have been forced into a two-way runoff from which she might not have become the party’s nominee.

Now, I know that didn’t happen and I know Ms. Floyd is the Republican nominee. I point out those numbers for one reason only – her support of vouchers and tuition tax credits is not nearly universal in her own party – and much less in the rest of the state. And, yet, she will view her election (if she is elected) as a mandate to force those education vouchers and tuition tax credits on everyone in the state.

At the same time, Ms. Floyd has received more money from Howard Rich and Mr. Rich’s shell companies than any other candidate in South Carolina. She has received more than $73,500 from Mr. Rich and his enterprises. [24]

Ms. Floyd’s main opponent in the election for Superintendent of Education is Jim Rex.

There are three major differences between Mr. Rex and Ms. Floyd:

Mr. Rex has been a life-long educator and understands the issues of improving South Carolina’s schools; Ms. Floyd is an attorney who has no experience in education. [25]
Ms. Floyd supports Governor Sanford’s vouchers and tuition tax credits to private schools for well-to-do families; Mr. Rex has plans for improving South Carolina’s schools without abandoning those schools. [26]
Mr. Rex is not financing his campaign with Howard Rich’s money; Ms. Floyd has accepted more than $73,500 from Mr. Rich (who will expect some return on his investment).

In her support of vouchers and tuition tax credits to private schools, Ms. Floyd does not support holding the private schools accountable for the state funding they receive. Those schools will not be required to test students to see if and what they are learning. Without that accountability component, we will never be able to compare public and private schools to show that private schools actually perform better. [27]

Because Ms. Floyd’s platform is based on the abandonment of South Carolina’s public schools, she does not seem to be a good choice as the State Superintendent of Education.

Mr. Rex’s background in education – and the resulting understanding of the state’s educational needs – makes him the better choice.

Number 10: Our Public Schools

As you’ve read this article, you will have noted that I have a keen interest in what happens with the education of our children in South Carolina. I’ve been an educator all my life. I went to an all-white school system in Southern Pines, North Carolina, attended college during the years of integration, and began my teaching career in 1969-1970 – the same year that integration in South Carolina was mandated by the courts.

My first couple of years teaching were spent dealing as much with the social issues of the time as with the academic content of my math and Algebra classes. When I came to South Carolina in 1973 (and because I was white – and still am, to a large degree), I taught at a private school in Georgetown County (because I was looking for something near the beach). That private school was a segregationist academy – something I had no idea about before starting to work there.

After two years in Georgetown County, I took a teaching job in Allendale County. During my first day on that job, the librarian (that was before there were media specialists) took me aside and told me that the students attending Allendale-Fairfax High School were not teachable and would never learn anything. (She was about 60 years old then, lily-white, and disgruntled because she had to help black students in “her” library. That year was her last.) I taught at A-F high school for four years – and never taught a student who didn’t want to learn. She had been absolutely wrong.

I’ve seen the impact of segregation based on race and ethnicity. It was never good.

It is the intent of the folks who are buying our leaders to segregate us again – this time based on economics.

Ladies and gentlemen; if Mark Sanford and Karen Floyd have their way, we will return to the days before South Carolina actually began taking care of all its children. We will move – immediately – back to two unequal public school systems, with one system (the private schools getting rich from vouchers and increased tuition) for the well-to-do and another system (the public schools getting poorer from losing public resources) for the rest of our children. [28]

Mr. Sanford and Ms. Floyd want to abandon the public schools because of their beliefs in economic principles – not because there is any direct proof or research that shows those principles will do anything for education. They make bold statements about expected results – based purely on ideology – based purely on a belief in a set of principles that have nothing to do with the education of children.

Carl Sagan [29] said, years ago, “Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.” Neither Mr. Sanford nor Ms. Floyd offers any proof – extraordinary or ordinary. In fact, their private public schools would not be required to test the students who attend – thus, there could never be any proof to support their extraordinary claims.

At the end of the day, on Election Day, I hope you will be able to say that you supported our public schools by opposing the ideology of Mr. Sanford and Ms. Floyd. That you opposed those unproven and unprovable principles – by voting for Tommy Moore and Jim Rex.

Conclusion

It’s time to help our state. It’s time to take control of what happens in our state. It’s time to elect leaders who believe in South Carolina – and in “real” South Carolina values. Those values do not include letting outsiders – carpetbaggers – get control of our political system just because they have more money than they have sense. Just because they think they can buy our political leaders. It’s time to elect leaders that have not already been bought – and that will not let themselves be bought.

If you don’t vote on Tuesday, you will still be electing the state’s leaders. Because – if you don’t vote – that will be one less vote those out-of-state folks have to get in order to get control of our state government – in order to abandon the children in our public schools – in order to force their values on us.

Please vote Tuesday. And please consider the issues, the amendments, and the candidate’s positions as you make your decisions. No matter what you believed yesterday, there may be real and important issues yet to consider.

Don’t leave our government in the hands of the rich carpetbaggers and their rich little groups around the state. Vote for real folks – folks who are not just SCINO’s. Folks who know folks are important – regardless of what they believe.

Endnotes

[1] See the candidate lists and read the proposed amendments to the state constitution at http://www.scVotes.org.

[2] The State; “Rich in S.C.”; http://www.thestate.com/mld/thestate/15905399.htm; The Post and Courier; “Outside money pours in”; 10/25/06; not currently available online; South Carolinians for Responsible Government, Club for Growth, Conservatives in Action, Clergy for Educational Opportunity, and others; “Ditch Howard Rich, SC”; Ross Shealy; http://www.stophowardrichsc.blogspot.com/; the financial links for these groups go back to Howard Rich.

[3] Election results from 2002; 54.6% of registered voters actually voted; in a close election, that would mean that less than 30% of registered voters actually voted for the winner; http://www.scvotes.org/statistics/voter_history; by not voting, you let a small minority decide for you what will happen for the next four years.

[4] The State; “Sanford’s not ‘our boy’”; Brad Warthen; 10/22/06; http://blogs.thestate.com/bradwarthensblog/2006/10/we_endorse_tomm.html.

[5] The State; “New York man pours cash into S.C. races”; Aaron Gould Sheinin; 11/2/06; http://www.thestate.com/mld/thestate/15905402.htm; The State; “Rich in S.C.”; http://www.thestate.com/mld/thestate/15905399.htm; The Post and Courier; “Outside money pours in”; 10/25/06; not currently available online.

[6] “Ditch Howard Rich, SC”; Ross Shealy; http://www.stophowardrichsc.blogspot.com/; the financial links for these groups go back to Howard Rich.

[7] Republicans for Tommy Moore; http://www.republicansfortommymoore.com/; check all the links in the menu to the left of the homepage.

[8] Republicans for Tommy Moore; http://www.republicansfortommymoore.com/.

[9] “A Primary Strategy”; http://home.earthlink.net/~garywwest3/id25.html; this site contains article after article about the supposedly Republican campaign strategies to defeat good Republicans in the 2006 primaries; see also the following links for other related articles: http://www.thestate.com/mld/state/news/opinion/14766455.htm (pink pigs and all); http://home.earthlink.net/~garywwest3/id29.html (comments and commentary from around the state).

[10] South Carolina State Election Commission; http://www.scvotes.org/elections/2006/08/14/2006_statewide_constitutional_amendments; scroll down to number 4.

[11] The State; “Proposed tax-law change criticized: Plan to amend state constitution would benefit a few and hurt many others, foes say”; John O’Connor; 10/28/06; http://www.thestate.com/mld/thestate/news/15874712.htm.

[12] A referendum like this proposed amendment (and the marriage amendment) shows a lack of guts and leadership in the General Assembly. We elect our Representatives and Senators to make these kinds of decisions for us. When they let a referendum like this get back out for a majority vote, they are failing in doing their job to represent all of us. Their job as our representatives is to moderate in their decision-making so that laws don’t have victims. This kind of thing is put out there to “let the people decide.” But the tyranny of the majority is not the law of the Republic. This kind of thing is dereliction of duty and we should let our elected officials know that.

[13] You know, this proposed amendment should be unnecessary – because investment should not be a constitutional issue at all. The only reason we’re voting on this amendment in 2006 is because of some nationalistic hysteria (probably begun in the McCarthy era) about American dollars going overseas in the past. Now that American companies (those that became successful because of American workers) have moved overseas, I guess it’s OK that American dollars follow now – and it’s patriotic to let those dollars go. “The winds of time, they blow over my head…,” to quote Buffett (that would be Jimmy, not Warren).

[14] “Why We Need a Yes Vote on Amendment #3”; Charley C. McDonald; http://home.earthlink.net/~garywwest3/id39.html.

[15] South Carolina State Election Commission; http://www.scvotes.org/elections/2006/08/14/2006_statewide_constitutional_amendments; scroll down to number 3.

[16] South Carolina State Election Commission; http://www.scvotes.org/elections/2006/08/14/2006_statewide_constitutional_amendments; scroll down to number 5. Of the five proposed amendments on this year’s ballot, this is the only one that is a real constitutional issue. The other four should be a matter of law (if necessary, at all) and not a matter of the state’s constitution.

[17] Kelo vs. City of New London; U.S. Supreme Court ruling in 2005; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelo_v._New_London.

[18] The Budget and Control Board (http://www.bcb.sc.gov/BCB/BCB-about.phtm). The Governor (http://www.scgovernor.com/) is Mark Sanford, who is up for re-election in 2006. The State Treasurer (http://www.state.sc.us/treas/) is Grady Patterson, who is up for re-election in 2006. The Comptroller General (http://www.cg.state.sc.us/) is Richard Eckstrom, who is up for re-election in 2006. The Chair of the Senate Finance Committee is Hugh Leatherman. The Chair of the House Ways and Means Committee (http://www.scstatehouse.net/members/bios/0390909044.html) is Daniel Cooper, who is up for re-election in 2006.

[19] The Post and Courier; “Candidates take out-of-state money”; Adam Parker; 10/27/06; (http://www.charleston.net/assets/webPages/departmental/news/default_pf.aspx?NEWSID=115463); The State; “Rich in S.C.”; 11/2/06; http://www.thestate.com/mld/thestate/15905399.htm; The State; “New York man pours cash into S.C. races”; Aaron gould Sheinin; 11/2/06; http://www.thestate.com/mld/thestate/15905402.htm.

[20] For an example of the impact for retired state employees, see the open letter by Sam Griswold, president of the State Retirees Association; http://home.earthlink.net/~garywwest3/id36.html; Mr. Griswold points out the importance of maintaining the current 3-2 voting edge on the Budget and Control Board.

[21] Inventing Better Schools; Phillip C. Schlechty;Jossey-Bass, Inc.; 1997; p. 225.

[22] And Mr. Bauer’s name shows up on Howard Rich’s list of supported politicians; http://www.thestate.com/mld/thestate/15905399.htm.

[23] South Carolina State Election Commission; official primary results from June 13, 2006; http://www.scvotes.org/files/06primaryOfficial/RepublicanStatewide.pdf.

[24] The State; “Rich in S.C.”; 11/2/06; http://www.thestate.com/mld/thestate/15905399.htm; this page lists candidates receiving money from Howard Rich; this page also lists the companies and acquaintances controlled by Howard Rich that also gave money to Ms. Floyd; the companies and acquaintances are used to circumvent South Carolina’s campaign finance laws that restrict the size of donations to political candidates; also visit http://www.stophowardrichsc.blogspot.com/ for more information about these types of donations.

[25] One of the emails I received after one of my other articles asked the question if I would want a mechanic performing brain surgery if I had the need for such surgery – or would I want a surgeon fixing my car if it were my car that needed repair. This election is much the same.

[26] You can see how Ms. Floyd’s ideology and plans will result in the abandonment of the public schools at http://home.earthlink.net/~garywwest3/id38.html.

[27] You can read more about the accountability issues at http://home.earthlink.net/~garywwest/id57.html.

[28] You can see how Governor Sanford’s and Ms. Floyd’s ideology and plans will result in the abandonment of the public schools at http://home.earthlink.net/~garywwest3/id38.html.

[29] Carl Sagan; created and hosted Cosmos on educational television; visit his website at http://www.carlsagan.com/; click on his name in the menu line; then choose “The Baloney Detection Kit”; try it on some of the stuff you hear the candidates talk about.

About the Author

Gary West has lived in South Carolina for more than thirty years. He is amazed that a few folks from out-of-state still believe they should be running our state for us – running it as though it were an antebellum plantation where they know what is best for us and will tell us what we should be doing, saying, and thinking. He’s in favor of buying them new carpetbags and sending them on their way – back to where their values come from.

You can reach Mr. West at garywwest@earthlink.net.

This article and others can be found online at http://home.earthlink.net/~garywwest/. Permission is granted to share this article in electronic or printed format as long as you don’t change it or charge for it.