State budget surplus

[krazeeboi]

The State reports that the state has a budget surplus of around $118 million. State Comptroller General Richard Eckstrom has suggested that it be used to reduce a long-standing state deficit. Senate Finance Committee chairman Hugh Leatherman, R-Florence says that the decision should be left to lawmakers. Eckstrom says that the state must address the deficit issue (and the state constitution actually forbids the state from having a deficit in its operation budget [Article X, section 7(a)]). The deficit was cited by credit agencies before Standard & Poor

[Charleston native]

Give it back to the taxpayers of this state. It is a surplus, in other words, it is excess money that the state did not need to take. It's not the state's money, period. I'm very anal when it comes to the state's finances, and if they did not have a budget to account for $118 millon extra, that money should not be in their possession.

[GvilleSC]

I would guess that the extra money is thanks to Sanford's frugal nature. I think it should be used to fix some wrongs that exists in the state. Improve roads, education, etc. Surely with that we could begin to opperate more of our weigh stations along the interstates to prevent abuse to our highways. More police officers and funding for them is a big one too.

Just as a thing that irritates me, I would like to see all the entrances into our state be redone and improved along all of the interstates. Most of our welcome centers are embarassing-- like the little OLD signs that are faded that say "South Carolina Welcomes You". I absolutely love that entrance into the state via interstate 95 (?). There is that nice wall sort of thing, with flags, and nice signage.

[Chickenwing]

I would prefer it be applied to the deficit.

[krazeeboi]

I agree with Chickenwing. We're already in opposition to the state constitution.

As far as state welcome signs, I think the one on I-77 from NC into SC is a pretty nice one.

[Spartan]

SC recently lost is AAA credit rating because of the morons in our Legislature. If they had listend to Gov Sanford and payed off the debt last year, we would not have been downgraded to an AA rating. This reflects poorly on our state. We should pay off the deficit, so that future surpluses can be put towards mproving our state without question.

Returning it to the tax payers is not the best idea becuase it would be a miniscule amount. Why not return it in the form of better roads or for money for NEW school busses, rather than Kentucky' rejects.

[vicupstate]

SC recently lost is AAA credit rating because of the morons in our Legislature. If they had listend to Gov Sanford and payed off the debt last year, we would not have been downgraded to an AA rating. This reflects poorly on our state. We should pay off the deficit, so that future surpluses can be put towards mproving our state without question.

Returning it to the tax payers is not the best idea becuase it would be a miniscule amount. Why not return it in the form of better roads or for money for NEW school busses, rather than Kentucky' rejects.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Well said Spartan, there is NO surplus when there is an illegal budget deficit. I wouldn't trust those guys with a kid's piggy bank. Returning it would indeed be a miniscule amount.

[sonofaque86]

I love the I-95 welcome sign...It's like coming into a Gated Community

[jfl25]

I also agree Spartan The money should be used to pay off the States debt. What is the total state deficit.

[Charleston native]

Well said Spartan, there is NO surplus when there is an illegal budget deficit.  I wouldn't trust those guys with a kid's piggy bank.  Returning it would indeed be a miniscule amount.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

So let me get this straight...the budget the state initially provided has not been completely paid for with revenue?!?! I guess if that's the case, whatever needs to be paid off in the budget should be done with the surplus. In essence, it is not a surplus if the budget has not been paid off. If the budget was completely paid for, I would then again say give the surplus to the taxpayers. Even if it is a miniscule amount, the money is not the state's.

[MAJIKMAN]

So let me get this straight...the budget the state initially provided has not been completely paid for with revenue?!?! I guess if that's the case, whatever needs to be paid off in the budget should be done with the surplus.    In essence, it is not a surplus if the budget has not been paid off. If the budget was completely paid for, I would then again say give the surplus to the taxpayers. Even if it is a miniscule amount, the money is not the state's.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It's like this. And most will understand it like this. If you have to pay your credit card bill and you know you have the money to pay it all. you have option A: which is to pay the minimum or option B: pay it all off. And we know what happens most

often.

[MAJIKMAN]

To me deficit is a big word for debt to me.

[GMoxley]

To me deficit is a big word for debt to me.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Actually a deficit is only a insufficient amount of funds for a GIVEN time period...in most cases a fiscial year. A debt is the accumulation of years of deficits. Thus, all this talk about paying the "deficit" down with the surplus is nonsense. If there is a surplus, by definition, there cannot be a deficit. What everyone really means to say is "Should we pay down the debt?"

[MikesLogic]

lol I was a bit perplexed trying to figure out how we could have a deficit to pay off if we have a surplus. =p

but yeah I think we should use any surpluses we have to pay toward the states debt.

[Spartan]

So let me get this straight...the budget the state initially provided has not been completely paid for with revenue?!?! I guess if that's the case, whatever needs to be paid off in the budget should be done with the surplus.    In essence, it is not a surplus if the budget has not been paid off.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yeah. Thats why Sanford took them to court earlier this year.

[vicupstate]

Comptroller General and Legislature spur over "surplus'

This article explains the true situation. The "surplus" simply means that the state took in more money than it had planned to spend. However, the "deficit" was basically money borrowed in order to balance the budget in previous years. The interest was paid of those funds, but not the principal, it was simply "carried forward".

This practice is not only unwise and fiscally irresponsible, it is illegal. The state's constitution requires a balanced budget. Borrowing to pay budget items (as opposed to legitimate borrowing for capital projects) is deficit spending.

In other words, our gutless legislature spared itself the pain of truly balancing the budget by borrowing money.

The one thing that the legislature could be counted on (years ago) was fiscal responsiblity and a good credit rating. Now, that isn't even the case anymore. The SC Pension fund also use to be on very solid ground, but those #%#(*@ legislators have endangered that too.

[MAJIKMAN]

Comptroller General and Legislature spur over "surplus'

This article explains the true situation.  The "surplus" simply means that the state took in more money than it had planned to spend.  However, the "deficit" was basically money borrowed in order to balance the budget in previous years. The interest was paid of those funds, but not the principal, it was simply "carried forward". 

This practice is not only unwise and fiscally irresponsible, it is illegal.  The state's constitution requires a balanced budget.  Borrowing to pay budget items (as opposed to legitimate borrowing for capital projects) is deficit spending.

In other words, our  gutless legislature spared itself the pain of truly balancing the budget by borrowing money.

The one thing that the legislature could be counted on (years ago) was fiscal responsiblity and a good credit rating.  Now, that isn't even the case anymore.  The SC Pension fund also use to be on very solid ground, but those #%#(*@ legislators have endangered that too.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Is that not what I said.

[vicupstate]

Is that not what I said.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

My post was in response to Gmoxley's post which came after yours.

[goodbye]

I agree with all of you. The money should not be considered expendable in any other way than to meet the State's budget.

If we had a true surplus, I'd say it should go into actually helping fix our statewide education system, which is still not where it should be. We've got far too many people learning to read in Tech schools and not Grade schools. I know it isn't as bad in every part of the State, but there is just not enough enforcement (or whatever the word is) to ensure EVERYONE is literate upon completion of Grade school. Believe me, I've seen it first hand.

[Jerseyman4]

Pay off most or all of the debt that the state is currently under the red. As Spartan mentioned, this would bring back the credit rating back to AAA. For the leftvover money, a statewide public referrendum instead of refunding the money to the taxpayers would be a better idea on where the money should be focused on the most. Its the taxpayers money so why not let them decide on where the money should go. There is always room for improvement for all public services.

[Spartan]

SC was the only state to loose its AAA credit rating and get it back. I sure hopw we can do it again. I think it took 5 years to get it back last time.

[MAJIKMAN]

I agree with all of you.  The money should not be considered expendable in any other way than to meet the State's budget.

If we had a true surplus, I'd say it should go into actually helping fix our statewide education system, which is still not where it should be.  We've got far too many people learning to read in Tech schools and not Grade schools.  I know it isn't as bad in every part of the State, but there is just not enough enforcement (or whatever the word is) to ensure EVERYONE is literate upon completion of Grade school.  Believe me, I've seen it first hand.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

And I do agree. I have seen so many people come into my place of employment and have to have help filling out an application. Now that is ridiculous. And it is a disgrace to our educational system.

[mcashlv]

SC recently lost is AAA credit rating because of the morons in our Legislature. If they had listend to Gov Sanford and payed off the debt last year, we would not have been downgraded to an AA rating. This reflects poorly on our state. We should pay off the deficit, so that future surpluses can be put towards mproving our state without question.

Returning it to the tax payers is not the best idea becuase it would be a miniscule amount. Why not return it in the form of better roads or for money for NEW school busses, rather than Kentucky' rejects.

If you want socialism, someone has to pay for it.

[upstate29650]

So let me get this straight...the budget the state initially provided has not been completely paid for with revenue?!?! I guess if that's the case, whatever needs to be paid off in the budget should be done with the surplus. In essence, it is not a surplus if the budget has not been paid off. If the budget was completely paid for, I would then again say give the surplus to the taxpayers. Even if it is a miniscule amount, the money is not the state's.

But...but...but...we need to use it for signage along our interstates!!!

Incredible.

[Spartan]

I guess the loss of our perfect credit rating was a swift kick in the face of our all-knowing legislature. This article from the Herald-Journal says that the state will use this years budget surplus to pay off all of the debt accumulated since 1991.

Article

The question now is, what should be done with this year's remaining surplus?