Walk-On Legislator

As Fitting for Today as it was in 1964

2009-08-04T11:15:00.000-05:00

I think that Ronald Reagan’s speech in 1964 at the Republican National Convention is as relevant today as then. We could use a dose of that medicine right now and I think the following paragraph from that speech sums it up:

“Not too long ago two friends of mine were talking to a Cuban refugee, a businessman who had escaped from Castro, and in the midst of his story one of my friends turned to the other and said, "We don't know how lucky we are." And the Cuban stopped and said, "How lucky you are! I had someplace to escape to." In that sentence he told us the entire story. If we lose freedom here, there is no place to escape to. This is the last stand on Earth. And this idea that government is beholden to the people, that it has no other source of power except to sovereign people, is still the newest and most unique idea in all the long history of man's relation to man. This is the issue of this election. Whether we believe in our capacity for self-government or whether we abandon the American Revolution and confess that a little intellectual elite in a far-distant capital can plan our lives for us better than we can plan them ourselves.”

We would be wise to quickly look at how far we have come in so short a time.

Duncan gets "FITS NEWS" shout out

2009-06-18T12:51:00.004-05:00

Will Folks over at FITS News picked up on my support of the "Government Ownership Exit Plan Act of 2009" introduced by Senator John Thune, South Dakota.

Read the article here: FITS NEWS

Duncan Supports "Government Ownership Exit Plan Act of 2009"

2009-06-18T12:48:00.001-05:00

Congressional candidate, Rep. Jeff Duncan calls on the
SC Congressional Delegation to support the
Government Ownership Exit Plan Act of 2009

Legislation would stop the purchase of private entities, set a timetable to sell assets, re-privatize Fannie & Freddie, and create penalties for elected officials attempting to influence the management of private businesses

Clinton, S.C. – June 18, 2009 – Laurens County legislator and third congressional district candidate Jeff Duncan sent an open letter to the SC Congressional delegation today, urging them to support the Government Ownership Exit Plan Act of 2009. The legislation which originated from Senator John Thune R-SD, sets clear restrictions on the use of federal TARP funds. The legislation immediately blocks the federal government from purchasing of any additional shares of private businesses and sets a deadline of July 1, 2009 for the government to sell any remaining corporate holdings.

The Troubled Asset Relief Program or TARP was originally established to purchase “toxic assets” from banks and other corporate organizations. However, most of the near $800 billion in TARP funds have instead been used to purchase ownership stakes in automotive companies and financial institutions. Another controversy has arisen over the “recycling” of TARP funds. Under the status quo, when corporations pay back the TARP funds to the federal government, instead of the revenue being used to pay down the deficit, the money is returned to the TARP fund for the purchasing of more corporate assets.

“The government’s intrusion into the management of private businesses is disgraceful, and un-American. The GOEP Act is the first step towards returning some fiscal sanity to Washington. President Obama has said that he wants to end the government ownership of businesses as soon as possible. Therefore I see no reason why he, his colleagues, and all Republican members of Congress would not support this legislation in its entirety,” said Rep. Jeff Duncan.

Rep. Duncan states that he felt it was important to bring this legislation to the attention of the voters in the 3rd Congressional District. “Everywhere I’ve traveled in the district, voters have been furious with the irresponsibility they have seen lately in Washington. When I learned of Senator Thune’s legislation, I wanted to act and show the voters of South Carolina that there is a clear and reasonable solution to this particular problem. We can’t afford to wait another day without taking action on this issue, and that is why I’m urging South Carolina’s Congressional delegation to act immediately to address the problem.”

Rep. Jeff Duncan is running for the 3rd Congressional District seat being vacated by Congressman Gresham Barrett.

Now - The Clyburn Amendment

2009-06-08T20:47:00.002-05:00

The "Clyburn Amendment" can be viewed here: Clyburn Amendment

Stabilization or "Stimulus" Fund - The Bill

2009-06-08T20:23:00.004-05:00

With all of the hoopla over the "Stimulus" money - I decided to look the actual bill up and read it for myself.....I am going to try to highlight in RED who has responsibility to spend the money.....I haven't seen the "Clyburn" Amendment - but it is clear that the Legislative intent of Congress is to give the Governor the spending authority.......maybe the SC Supreme Court sees something I don't in here or has more information than is on the U. S. Dept. of Education web site at:

http://www.ed.gov/programs/statestabilization/legislation.html

This is posted here for you to decide for yourself.....if you so choose to be informed.....

American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009

Public Law 111-5 (H.R. 1), February 17, 2009; 123 Stat. 115

As amended by Public Law 111-8 (H.R. 1105), the Omnibus Appropriations Act, 2009; Division A, Section 523; March 11, 2009; 123 Stat. 524

Below are excerpts from Public Law 111-5, as amended by Public Law 111-8, that relate to the State Fiscal Stabilization Fund administered by the U.S. Department of Education. The U.S. Department of Education has posted this information as a courtesy to readers. The official (and controlling) texts of this material will be printed in those two Public Laws.

DIVISION A, TITLE XIV – STATE FISCAL STABILIZATION FUND

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

STATE FISCAL STABILIZATION FUND

For necessary expenses for a State Fiscal Stabilization Fund, $53,600,000,000, which shall be administered by the Department of Education.

GENERAL PROVISIONS – THIS TITLE

SEC. 14001.  ALLOCATIONS.

(a) Outlying Areas.  From the amount appropriated to carry out this title, the Secretary of Education shall first allocate up to one-half of 1 percent to the outlying areas on the basis of their respective needs, as determined by the Secretary, in consultation with the Secretary of the Interior, for activities consistent with this title under such terms and conditions as the Secretary may determine.

(b) Administration and Oversight.  The Secretary may, in addition, reserve up to $14,000,000 for administration and oversight of this title, including for program evaluation.

(c) Reservation for Additional Programs.  After reserving funds under subsections (a) and (b), the Secretary shall reserve $5,000,000,000 for grants under sections 14006 and      14007.

(d) State Allocations.  After carrying out subsections (a), (b), and (c), the Secretary shall allocate the remaining funds made available to carry out this title to the States as follows:

(1) 61 percent on the basis of their relative population of individuals aged 5 through 24.

(2) 39 percent on the basis of their relative total population.

(e) State Grants.  From funds allocated under subsection (d), the Secretary shall make grants to the Governor of each State.

(f) Reallocation.  The Governor shall return to the Secretary any funds received under subsection (e) that the Governor does not award as subgrants or otherwise commit within two years of receiving such funds, and the Secretary shall reallocate such funds to the remaining States in accordance with subsection (d).

SEC. 14002.  STATE USES OF FUNDS.

(a) Education Fund.

(1) In general.  For each fiscal year, the Governor shall use 81.8 percent of the State's allocation under section 14001(d) for the support of elementary, secondary, and postsecondary education and, as applicable, early childhood education programs and services.

(2) Restoring state support for education.

(A) In general.  The Governor shall first use the funds described in paragraph (1)—

(i) to provide the amount of funds, through the State's primary elementary and secondary education funding formulae, that is needed—

(I) to restore, in each of fiscal years 2009, 2010, and 2011, the level of State support provided through such formulae to the greater of the fiscal year 2008 or fiscal year 2009 level; and

(II) where applicable, to allow existing State formulae increases to support elementary and secondary education for fiscal years 2010 and 2011 to be implemented and allow funding for phasing in State equity and adequacy adjustments, if such increases were enacted pursuant to State law prior to      October 1, 2008.

(ii) to provide, in each of fiscal years 2009, 2010, and 2011, the amount of funds to public institutions of higher education in the State that is needed to restore State support for such institutions (excluding tuition and fees paid by students) to the greater of the fiscal year 2008 or fiscal year 2009 level.

(B) Shortfall.  If the Governor determines that the amount of funds available under paragraph (1) is insufficient to support, in each of fiscal years 2009, 2010, and 2011, public elementary, secondary, and higher education at the levels described in clauses (i) and (ii) of subparagraph (A), the Governor shall allocate those funds between those clauses in proportion to the relative shortfall in State support for the education sectors described in those clauses.

(C) Fiscal year.  For purposes of this paragraph, the term "fiscal year'' shall have the meaning given such term under State law.

(3) Subgrants to improve basic programs operated by local educational agencies.--After carrying out paragraph (2), the Governor shall use any funds remaining under paragraph (1) to provide local educational agencies in the State with subgrants based on their relative shares of funding under part A of title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6311 et seq.) for the most recent year for which data are available.

(b) Other Government Services.

(1) In general.  The Governor shall use 18.2 percent of the State's allocation under section 14001(d) for public safety and other government services, which may include assistance for elementary and secondary education and public institutions of higher education, and for modernization, renovation, or repair of public school facilities and institutions of higher education facilities, including modernization, renovation, and repairs that are consistent with a recognized green building rating system.

(2) Availability to all institutions of higher education.  A Governor shall not consider the type or mission of an institution of higher education, and shall consider any institution for funding for modernization, renovation, and repairs within the State that—

(A) qualifies as an institution of higher education, as defined in subsection 14013(3); and

(B) continues to be eligible to participate in the programs under title IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965.

(c) Rule of Construction.  Nothing in this section shall allow a local educational agency to engage in school modernization, renovation, or repair that is inconsistent with State law.

SEC. 14003.  USES OF FUNDS BY LOCAL EDUCATIONAL AGENCIES.

(a) In General.  local educational agency that receives funds under this title may use he funds for any activity authorized by the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6301 et seq.) ("SEA''), the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (20 U.S.C. 1400 et seq.) ("IDEA''), the Adult Education and Family Literacy Act (20 U.S.C. 9201 et seq.), or the Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education Act of 2006 (20 U.S.C. 2301 et seq.) ("the Perkins Act'') or for modernization, renovation, or repair of public school facilities, including modernization, renovation, and repairs that are consistent with a recognized green building rating system.

(b) Prohibition.  A local educational agency may not use funds received under this title for—

(1) payment of maintenance costs;

(2) stadiums or other facilities primarily used for athletic contests or exhibitions or other events for which admission is charged to the general public;

(3) purchase or upgrade of vehicles; or

(4) improvement of stand-alone facilities whose purpose is not the education of children, including central office administration or operations or logistical support facilities.

(c) Rule of Construction.  Nothing in this section shall allow a local educational agency to engage in school modernization, renovation, or repair that is inconsistent with State law.

SEC. 14004.  USES OF FUNDS BY INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER EDUCATION.

(a) In General.  A public institution of higher education that receives funds under this title shall use the funds for education and general expenditures, and in such a way as to mitigate the need to raise tuition and fees for in-State students, or for modernization, renovation, or repair of institution of higher education facilities that are primarily used for instruction, research, or student housing, including modernization, renovation, and repairs that are consistent with a recognized green building rating system.

(b) Prohibition.  An institution of higher education may not use funds received under this title to increase its endowment.

(c) Additional Prohibition.  No funds awarded under this title may be used for—

(1) the maintenance of systems, equipment, or facilities;

(2) modernization, renovation, or repair of stadiums or other facilities primarily used for athletic contests or exhibitions or other events for which admission is charged to the general public; or

(3) modernization, renovation, or repair of facilities—

(A) used for sectarian instruction or religious worship; or

(B) in which a substantial portion of the functions of the facilities are subsumed in a religious mission.

SEC. 14005.  STATE APPLICATIONS.

(a) In General.  The Governor of a State desiring to receive an allocation under section 14001(d) shall submit an application at such time, in such manner, and containing such information as the Secretary may reasonably require.

(b) Application.  In such application, the Governor shall—

(1) include the assurances described in subsection (d);

(2) provide baseline data that demonstrates the State's current status in each of the areas described in such assurances; and

(3) describe how the State intends to use its allocation, including whether the State will use such allocation to meet maintenance of effort requirements under the ESEA and IDEA and, in such cases, what amount will be used to meet such requirements.

(c) Incentive Grant Application.  The Governor of a State seeking a grant under section 14006 shall—

(1) submit an application for consideration;

(2) describe the status of the State's progress in each of the areas described in subsection (d), and the strategies the State is employing to help ensure that students in the subgroups described in section 1111(b)(2)(C)(v)(II) of the ESEA (20 U.S.C. 6311(b)(2)(C)(v)(II)) who have not met the State's proficiency targets continue making progress toward meeting the State's student academic achievement standards;

(3) describe the achievement and graduation rates (as described in section 1111(b)(2)(C)(vi) of the ESEA (20 U.S.C. 6311(b)(2)(C)(vi)) and as clarified in section 200.19(b)(1) of title 34, Code of Federal Regulations) of public elementary and secondary school students in the State, and the strategies the State is employing to help ensure that all subgroups of students identified in section 1111(b)(2) of the ESEA (20 U.S.C. 6311(b)(2)) in the State continue making progress toward meeting the State's student academic achievement standards;

(4) describe how the State would use its grant funding to improve student academic achievement in the State, including how it will allocate the funds to give priority to high-need local educational agencies; and

(5) include a plan for evaluating the State's progress in closing achievement gaps.

(d) Assurances.  An application under subsection (b) shall include the following assurances:

(1) Maintenance of effort.

(A) Elementary and secondary education.  The State will, in each of fiscal years 2009, 2010, and 2011, maintain State support for elementary and secondary education at least at the level of such support in fiscal year 2006.

(B) Higher education.  The State will, in each of fiscal years 2009, 2010, and 2011, maintain State support for public institutions of higher education (not including support for capital projects or for research and development or tuition and fees paid by students) at least at the level of such support in fiscal year 2006.

(2) Achieving equity in teacher distribution.  The State will take actions to improve teacher effectiveness and comply with section 1111(b)(8)(C) of the ESEA (20 U.S.C. 6311(b)(8)(C)) in order to address inequities in the distribution of highly qualified teachers between high- and low-poverty schools, and to ensure that low-income and minority children are not taught at higher rates than other children by inexperienced, unqualified, or out-of-field teachers.

(3) Improving collection and use of data.  The State will establish a longitudinal data system that includes the elements described in section 6401(e)(2)(D) of the America COMPETES Act (20 U.S.C. 9871).

(4) Standards and assessments.  The State—

(A) will enhance the quality of the academic assessments it administers pursuant to section 1111(b)(3) of the ESEA (20 U.S.C. 6311(b)(3)) through activities such as those described in section 6112(a) of such Act (20 U.S.C. 7301a(a));

(B) will comply with the requirements of paragraphs (3)(C)(ix) and (6) of section 1111(b) of the ESEA (20 U.S.C. 6311(b)) and section 612(a)(16) of the IDEA (20 U.S.C. 1412(a)(16)) related to the inclusion of children with disabilities and limited English proficient students in State assessments, the development of valid and reliable assessments for those students, and the provision of accommodations that enable their participation in State assessments; and

(C) will take steps to improve State academic content standards and student academic achievement standards consistent with section 6401(e)(1)(A)(ii) of the America COMPETES Act.

(5) Supporting struggling schools.  The State will ensure compliance with the requirements of section 1116(b)(7)(C)(iv) and section 1116(b)(8)(B) of the ESEA with respect to schools identified under such sections.

SEC. 14006.  STATE INCENTIVE GRANTS.

(a) In General.

(1) Reservation.  From the total amount reserved under section 14001(c) that is not used for section 14007, the Secretary may reserve up to 1 percent for technical assistance to States to assist them in meeting the objectives of paragraphs (2), (3), (4), and (5) of section 14005(d).

(2) Remainder.  Of the remaining funds, the Secretary shall, in fiscal year 2010, make grants to States that have made significant progress in meeting the objectives of paragraphs (2), (3), (4), and (5) of section 14005(d).

(b) Basis for Grants.  The Secretary shall determine which States receive grants under this section, and the amount of those grants, on the basis of information provided in State applications under section 14005 and such other criteria as the Secretary determines appropriate, which may include a State's need for assistance to help meet the objective of paragraphs (2), (3), (4), and (5) of section 14005(d).

(c) Subgrants to Local Educational Agencies.  Each State receiving a grant under this section shall use at least 50 percent of the grant to provide local educational agencies in the State with subgrants based on their relative shares of funding under part A of title I of the ESEA (20 U.S.C. 6311 et seq.) for the most recent year.

SEC. 14007.  INNOVATION FUND.

(a) In General.

(1) Eligible entities.  For the purposes of this section, the term "eligible entity'' means—

(A) a local educational agency; or

(B) a partnership between a nonprofit organization and—

(i) one or more local educational agencies; or

(ii) a consortium of schools.

(2) Program established.  From the total amount reserved under section 14001(c), the Secretary may reserve up to $650,000,000 to establish an Innovation Fund, which shall consist of academic achievement awards that recognize eligible entities that meet the requirements described in subsection (b).

(3) Basis for awards.  The Secretary shall make awards to eligible entities that have made significant gains in closing the achievement gap as described in subsection (b)(1)—

(A) to allow such eligible entities to expand their work and serve as models for best practices;

(B) to allow such eligible entities to work in partnership with the private sector and the philanthropic community; and

(C) to identify and document best practices that can be shared, and taken to scale based on demonstrated success.

(b) Eligibility.  To be eligible for such an award, an eligible entity shall—

(1) have significantly closed the achievement gaps between groups of students described in section 1111(b)(2) of the ESEA (20 U.S.C. 6311(b)(2));

(2) have exceeded the State's annual measurable objectives consistent with such section 1111(b)(2) for 2 or more consecutive years or have demonstrated success in significantly increasing student academic achievement for all groups of students described in such section through another measure, such as measures described in section 1111(c)(2) of the ESEA;

(3) have made significant improvement in other areas, such as graduation rates or increased recruitment and placement of high-quality teachers and school leaders, as demonstrated with meaningful data; and

(4) demonstrate that they have established partnerships with the private sector, which may include philanthropic organizations, and that the private sector will provide matching funds in order to help bring results to scale.

(c) Special Rule.  In the case of an eligible entity that includes a nonprofit organization, the eligible entity shall be considered to have met the eligibility requirements of paragraphs (1), (2), (3) of subsection (b) if such nonprofit organization has a record of meeting such requirements.

SEC. 14008.  STATE REPORTS.

For each year of the program under this title, a State receiving funds under this title shall submit a report to the Secretary, at such time and in such manner as the Secretary may require, that describes—

(1) the uses of funds provided under this title within the State;

(2) how the State distributed the funds it received under this title;

(3) the number of jobs that the Governor estimates were saved or created with funds the State received under this title;

(4) tax increases that the Governor estimates were averted because of the availability of funds from this title;

(5) the State's progress in reducing inequities in the distribution of highly qualified teachers, in implementing a State longitudinal data system, and in developing and implementing valid and reliable assessments for limited English proficient students and children with disabilities;

(6) the tuition and fee increases for in-State students imposed by public institutions of higher education in the State during the period of availability of funds under this title, and a description of any actions taken by the State to limit those increases;

(7) the extent to which public institutions of higher education maintained, increased, or decreased enrollment of in-State students, including students eligible for Pell Grants or other need-based financial assistance; and

(8) a description of each modernization, renovation and repair project funded, which shall include the amounts awarded and project costs.

SEC. 14009.  EVALUATION.

The Comptroller General of the United States shall conduct evaluations of the programs under sections 14006 and 14007 which shall include, but not be limited to, the criteria used for the awards made, the States selected for awards, award amounts, how each State used the award received, and the impact of this funding on the progress made toward closing achievement gaps.

SEC. 14010.  SECRETARY'S REPORT TO CONGRESS.

The Secretary shall submit a report to the Committee on Education and Labor of the House of Representatives, the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions of the Senate, and the Committees on Appropriations of the House of Representatives and of the Senate, not less than 6 months following the submission of State reports, that evaluates the information provided in the State reports under section 14008 and the information required by section 14005(b)(3) including State-by-State information.

SEC. 14011.  PROHIBITION ON PROVISION OF CERTAIN ASSISTANCE.

No recipient of funds under this title shall use such funds to provide financial assistance to students to attend private elementary or secondary schools, unless such funds are used to provide special education and related services to children with disabilities, as authorized by the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (20 U.S.C. 1400 et seq.).

SEC. 14012.  FISCAL RELIEF.

(a) In General.  For the purpose of relieving fiscal burdens on States and local educational agencies that have experienced a precipitous decline in financial resources, the Secretary of Education may waive or modify any requirement of this title relating to maintaining fiscal effort.

(b) Duration.  A waiver or modification under this section shall be for any of fiscal year 2009, fiscal year 2010, or fiscal year 2011, as determined by the Secretary.

(c) Criteria.  The Secretary shall not grant a waiver or modification under this section unless the Secretary determines that the State receiving such waiver or modification will not provide for elementary, secondary, and public higher education, for the fiscal year under consideration, a smaller percentage of the total revenues available to the State than the percentage provided for such purpose in the preceding fiscal year.

(d) Maintenance of Effort.  Upon prior approval from the Secretary, a State or local educational agency that receives funds under this title may treat any portion of such funds that is used for elementary, secondary, or postsecondary education as non-Federal funds for the purpose of any requirement to maintain fiscal effort under any other program, including part C of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (20 U.S.C. 1431 et seq.), administered by the Secretary.

(e) Subsequent Level of Effort.  Notwithstanding (d), the level of effort required by a State or local educational agency for the following fiscal year shall not be reduced.

SEC. 14013.  DEFINITIONS.

Except as otherwise provided in this title, as used in this title—

(1) the terms "elementary education'' and "secondary education'' have the meaning given such terms under State law;

(2) the term "high-need local educational agency'' means a local educational agency—

(A) that serves not fewer than 10,000 children from families with incomes below the poverty line; or

(B) for which not less than 20 percent of the children served by the agency are from families with incomes below the poverty line;

(3) the term "institution of higher education'' has the meaning given such term in section 101 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1001);

(4) the term "Secretary'' means the Secretary of Education;

(5) the term "State'' means each of the 50 States, the District of Columbia, and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico; and

(6) any other term used that is defined in section 9101 of the ESEA (20 U.S.C. 7801) shall have the meaning given the term in such section.

[END]

President Obama: "We're out of money..."

2009-05-24T08:01:00.001-05:00

'WE'RE OUT OF MONEY' Sat May 23 2009 10:32:18 ET In a sobering holiday interview with C-SPAN, President Obama boldly told Americans: "We are out of money." C-SPAN host Steve Scully broke from a meek Washington press corps with probing questions for the new president. SCULLY: You know the numbers, $1.7 trillion debt, a national deficit of $11 trillion. At what point do we run out of money? OBAMA: Well, we are out of money now. We are operating in deep deficits, not caused by any decisions we've made on health care so far. This is a consequence of the crisis that we've seen and in fact our failure to make some good decisions on health care over the last several decades. So we've got a short-term problem, which is we had to spend a lot of money to salvage our financial system, we had to deal with the auto companies, a huge recession which drains tax revenue at the same time it's putting more pressure on governments to provide unemployment insurance or make sure that food stamps are available for people who have been laid off. So we have a short-term problem and we also have a long-term problem. The short-term problem is dwarfed by the long-term problem. And the long-term problem is Medicaid and Medicare. If we don't reduce long-term health care inflation substantially, we can't get control of the deficit. So, one option is just to do nothing. We say, well, it's too expensive for us to make some short-term investments in health care. We can't afford it. We've got this big deficit. Let's just keep the health care system that we've got now. Along that trajectory, we will see health care cost as an overall share of our federal spending grow and grow and grow and grow until essentially it consumes everything... SCULLY: When you see GM though as “Government Motors,” you're reaction? OBAMA: Well, you know – look we are trying to help an auto industry that is going through a combination of bad decision making over many years and an unprecedented crisis or at least a crisis we haven't seen since the 1930's. And you know the economy is going to bounce back and we want to get out of the business of helping auto companies as quickly as we can. I have got more enough to do without that. In the same way that I want to get out of the business of helping banks, but we have to make some strategic decisions about strategic industries... SCULLY: States like California in desperate financial situation, will you be forced to bail out the states? OBAMA: No. I think that what you're seeing in states is that anytime you got a severe recession like this, as I said before, their demands on services are higher. So, they are sending more money out. At the same time, they're bringing less tax revenue in. And that's a painful adjustment, what we're going end up seeing is lot of states making very difficult choices there... SCULLY: William Howard Taft served on the court after his presidency, would you have any interest in being on the Supreme Court? OBAMA: You know, I am not sure that I could get through Senate confirmation...

Tell Me - Not in America!!

2009-05-22T18:33:00.003-05:00

FAITH UNDER FIRE
Home: No place for Bible study
County demands pastor obtain $10,000 permit to host friends

Posted: May 22, 2009
5:13 pm Eastern

By Drew Zahn
© 2009 WorldNetDaily

A San Diego pastor and his wife claim they were interrogated by a county official and warned they will face escalating fines if they continue to hold Bible studies in their home.

The couple, whose names are being withheld until a demand letter can be filed on their behalf, told their attorney a county government employee knocked on their door on Good Friday, asking a litany of questions about their Tuesday night Bible studies, which are attended by approximately 15 people.

"Do you have a regular weekly meeting in your home? Do you sing? Do you say 'amen'?" the official reportedly asked. "Do you say, 'Praise the Lord'?"

The pastor's wife answered yes.

She says she was then told, however, that she must stop holding "religious assemblies" until she and her husband obtain a Major Use Permit from the county, a permit that often involves traffic and environmental studies, compliance with parking and sidewalk regulations and costs that top tens of thousands of dollars.

And if they fail to pay for the MUP, the county official reportedly warned, the couple will be charged escalating fines beginning at $100, then $200, $500, $1000, "and then it will get ugly."

Dean Broyles of the Western Center for Law & Policy, which has been retained to represent the couple, told WND the county's action not only violates religious land-use laws but also assaults both the First Amendment's freedom of assembly and freedom of religion.

"The First Amendment, in part, reads, 'Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,'" Broyles said. "And that's the key part: 'prohibiting the free exercise.' We believe this is a substantial government burden on the free exercise of religion."

He continued, "If one's home is one's castle, certainly you would the think the free exercise of religion, of all places, could occur in the home."

Broyles confirmed the county official followed through on his threat. The pastor and his wife received a written warning ordering the couple to "cease/stop religious assembly on parcel or obtain a major use permit."

"The Western Center for Law and Policy is troubled by this draconian move to suppress home Bible studies," said the law center in a statement. "If the current trends in our nation continue, churches may be forced underground. If that happens, believers will once again be forced to meet in homes. If homes are already closed by the government to assembly and worship, where then will Christians meet?"

On a personal note, Broyles added, "I've been leading Bible studies in my home for 13 years in San Diego County, and I personally believe that home fellowship Bible studies are the past and future of the church. … If you look at China, the church grew from home Bible studies. I'm deeply concerned that if in the U.S. we are not able to meet in our homes and freely practice our religion, then we may be worse off than China."

Broyles also explained to WND that oppressive governments, such as communist China or Nazi Germany, worked to repress home fellowships, labeling them the "underground church" or "subversive groups," legally compelling Christians to meet only in sanctioned, government-controlled "official" churches.

"Therein lies my concern," Broyles said. "If people can't practice their religious beliefs in the privacy of their own homes with a few of their friends, that's an egregious First Amendment violation."

WND contacted a spokeswoman for San Diego County, who acknowledged the description of the incident seemed "bizarre," but who was unable to locate the details of the account. She simply could not provide comment yet, she said, until she could become familiar with the case.

Broyles said the WCLP is nearly ready to file a demand letter with the county to release the pastor and his wife from the requirement to obtain the expensive permit. If the county refuses, Broyles said, the WCLP will consider a lawsuit in federal court.

Broyles also told WND the pastor and his wife are continuing to hold the Bible study in their home.

Weighted Pupil Funding (Backpacking)

2009-05-18T20:54:00.001-05:00

This article is from Lisa Snell's Blog:

Out of Control Policy Blog

Reason Foundation's New Weighted Student Formula Yearbook

Lisa Snell
April 30, 2009, 3:00pm

Much of our education funding is wasted on bureaucracy. The money never actually makes it into the classroom in the form of books, computers, supplies, or even salaries for better teachers. Weighted student formula changes that. Using weighted student formula’s decentralized system, education funds are attached to each student and the students can take that money directly to the public school of their choice.

At least 15 major school districts have moved to this system of backpack funding. Reason Foundation's new Weighted Student Formula Yearbook examines how the budgeting system is being implemented in each of these places and, based on the real-world data, offers a series of “best practices” that other districts and states can follow to improve the quality of their schools.

In places where parents have school choice and districts empower their principals and teachers we are seeing increased learning and better test scores. The results from districts using student-based funding are very promising. Prior to 2008, less than half of Hartford, Connecticut’s education money made it to the classroom. Now, over 70 percent makes it there. As a result, the district’s schools posted the largest gains, over three times the average increase, on the state’s Mastery Tests in 2007-08.

San Francisco Unified School District has outperformed the comparable large school districts on the California Standards Tests for seven straight years. A greater percentage of San Francisco Unified students graduate from high school than almost any other large urban public school system in the country.

Oakland has produced the largest four-year gain among large urban districts on California’s Academic Performance Index since implementing results-based budgeting in 2004.

In 2008, Baltimore City Schools faced a $76.9 million budget shortfall. But Superintendent Andres Alonso instituted weighted student formula. He identified $165 million in budget cuts at the central office to eliminate the deficit and redistributed approximately $88 million in central office funds to the schools. By the 2010 school year, Alonso will have cut 489 non-essential teaching jobs from the central office, redirecting 80 percent of the district’s operating budget to schools.

The experience with weighted student formula also shows that one of the most important factors in the success of schools is decentralized decision-making. Principals should have autonomy over their budgets and control the hiring of teachers for their schools. This flexibility allows principals to tailor their schools to best fit the needs of their students. Eliminating the top-down bureaucracy lets principals and teachers focus on teaching.

Weighted Student Formula Yearbook 2009 (Full Study .pdf)
Weighted Student Formula Overview (.pdf)
Weighted Student Formula Best Practices (.pdf)

A Cartoon from the Past.....Wake Up America!

2009-05-17T09:04:00.003-05:00

Cartoon from 1934� Chicago�Tribune

Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.
George Santayana,�The Life of Reason, Volume 1, 1905

Congressional Run

2009-04-05T12:42:00.003-05:00

Announcement day was Thursday, April 2nd....in Laurens. Have spent three days in the District listening to the voters.

Here is a link to the opening day announcement:

Duncan Announces for 3rd Congressional District

Even Germany Gets It......no more spending

2009-03-29T12:34:00.002-05:00

Way to go Angela Merkel, German Chancellor, who said last night when discussing a new global/European stimulus package: “I will not let anyone tell me that we must spend more money,” she said.

That was followed up by more reason when Spanish finance minister, Pedro Solbes, also dismissed new cash being pledged at Thursday’s London summit.

“In these conditions I and the rest of my colleagues from the eurozone believe there is no room for new fiscal stimulus plans,” he said.

It is shameful when what is considered "socialist Europe" spouts more fiscal commonsense than the United States.

Way to go Anderson!

2009-03-29T07:24:00.001-05:00

From an article on GOUPSTATE.COM:

Informing constituents

South Carolina's local governments should report their spending online

Other local governments in the Upstate should follow the example of Anderson County, which put its checkbook register online this month.

Taxpayers who wonder how Anderson County is spending their money can go to andersoncountysc.org and see. They can look at all the checks the county writes from its accounts payable account. They can see the amounts and the payees.

Voters who wonder about the performance of their elected officials in that county can examine where the money goes. When they hear a rumor that a county councilman has arranged for the county to hire his nephew's lawn maintenance business at overpriced rates, they can check the register to see whether it's true.

Anderson County officials said it wasn't particularly difficult for them to put their checkbook on their Web site. Once they decided to do it, it took a couple of days to upload the files, and their constituents had the enhanced ability to be informed.

It's an extra level of government transparency that would be welcome across the state.

S.C. Comptroller General Richard Eckstrom has been urging local governments to put their check registers on the Web. He has had good response since he put state agency checkbooks on his Web site, and he has offered assistance to local governments that need it.

Because local government spending isn't done through the same computer systems as state spending, the online information isn't as easily searched and surfed as the state checkbooks are, but the information is still useful.

Some local officials may wonder about the repercussions of revealing this much public information to the public. They may wonder whether they'll have to answer too many questions from constituents or whether people will misunderstand the information.

These are not valid concerns. Questions from an informed public can only make government better, push officials and administrators to question spending traditions and force innovation.

And putting this level of information at the fingertips of all voters and taxpayers will build confidence in any local government. By making this information available, Anderson County has told its citizens that it has nothing to hide and is willing to let any and all of them examine the books at their leisure.

Even if citizens find something they don't like, any anger will be muted by the fact that the government was so open with them. Intense voter anger is generated when elected officials try to hide controversial spending items from the public.

Putting check registers online will lead to greater efficiency, accountability and public confidence in government. Anderson's example should be followed by every county, municipality and school district in the state.

By the Seat of Your Pants.....

2009-03-20T12:35:00.005-05:00

From the Urban Dictionary on-line:

fly by the seat of your pants

1. to pilot a plane by feel and instinct rather than by instruments

2. to proceed or work by feel or instinct without formal guidelines or experience
It's during a time like that that you must fly by the seat of your pants.

Act according to one's own desires or beliefs without regard for standards for social behavior, logical sensibility, or the approval of others.

Generally regarded as negative, irresponsible

Example: "Don't fly by the seat of your pants; make real plans for your future"

I point out the second definition above that says: Act according to one's own desires or beliefs without regard for standards for social behavior, logical sensibility, or the approval of others.

With no real experience to draw upon, this seems exactly how our new President is executing the duties of his office.

The Congress, too, seems to have lost its way, with the House passing an unconstitutional 90% punitive tax on AIG bonus recipients. Now, don't get me wrong....AIG paying those bonuses was wrong and should have never been allowed since they were receiving taxpayer funds. But look at who pushed for the bailout of AIG and allowed the bonuses - even basically nationalizing the company.....Senator Dodd and his cronies.

For President Obama, House Speaker Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Reid - who seem to have lost their way - please know that there is a map available - The US Constitution. Stop obligating my children and grand-children to pay the debts for your stupidity and over-zealous governing! You cannot borrow and spend your way out of this crisis - just like you cannot borrow your way out of debt. It just doesn't work.

We Americans need to remember that "Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely."

There's Oil in them there hills!

2009-03-20T07:51:00.000-05:00

3 to 4.3 Billion Barrels of Technically Recoverable Oil Assessed in North Dakota and Montana’s Bakken Formation—25 Times More Than 1995 Estimate—

Reston, VA - North Dakota and Montana have an estimated 3.0 to 4.3 billion barrels of undiscovered, technically recoverable oil in an area known as the Bakken Formation.

A U.S. Geological Survey assessment, released April 10, shows a 25-fold increase in the amount of oil that can be recovered compared to the agency's 1995 estimate of 151 million barrels of oil.

Related Podcasts

3 to 4.3 Billion Barrels of Oil in North Dakota and Montana

download Download directly | Details

podcast icon itunes icon
or subscribe by e-mail.
Technically recoverable oil resources are those producible using currently available technology and industry practices. USGS is the only provider of publicly available estimates of undiscovered technically recoverable oil and gas resources.

New geologic models applied to the Bakken Formation, advances in drilling and production technologies, and recent oil discoveries have resulted in these substantially larger technically recoverable oil volumes. About 105 million barrels of oil were produced from the Bakken Formation by the end of 2007.

The USGS Bakken study was undertaken as part of a nationwide project assessing domestic petroleum basins using standardized methodology and protocol as required by the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 2000.

The Bakken Formation estimate is larger than all other current USGS oil assessments of the lower 48 states and is the largest "continuous" oil accumulation ever assessed by the USGS. A "continuous" oil accumulation means that the oil resource is dispersed throughout a geologic formation rather than existing as discrete, localized occurrences. The next largest "continuous" oil accumulation in the U.S. is in the Austin Chalk of Texas and Louisiana, with an undiscovered estimate of 1.0 billions of barrels of technically recoverable oil.

"It is clear that the Bakken formation contains a significant amount of oil - the question is how much of that oil is recoverable using today's technology?" said Senator Byron Dorgan, of North Dakota. "To get an answer to this important question, I requested that the U.S. Geological Survey complete this study, which will provide an up-to-date estimate on the amount of technically recoverable oil resources in the Bakken Shale formation."

The USGS estimate of 3.0 to 4.3 billion barrels of technically recoverable oil has a mean value of 3.65 billion barrels. Scientists conducted detailed studies in stratigraphy and structural geology and the modeling of petroleum geochemistry. They also combined their findings with historical exploration and production analyses to determine the undiscovered, technically recoverable oil estimates.

USGS worked with the North Dakota Geological Survey, a number of petroleum industry companies and independents, universities and other experts to develop a geological understanding of the Bakken Formation. These groups provided critical information and feedback on geological and engineering concepts important to building the geologic and production models used in the assessment.

Five continuous assessment units (AU) were identified and assessed in the Bakken Formation of North Dakota and Montana - the Elm Coulee-Billings Nose AU, the Central Basin-Poplar Dome AU, the Nesson-Little Knife Structural AU, the Eastern Expulsion Threshold AU, and the Northwest Expulsion Threshold AU.

At the time of the assessment, a limited number of wells have produced oil from three of the assessments units in Central Basin-Poplar Dome, Eastern Expulsion Threshold, and Northwest Expulsion Threshold.
The Elm Coulee oil field in Montana, discovered in 2000, has produced about 65 million barrels of the 105 million barrels of oil recovered from the Bakken Formation.

Results of the assessment can be found at http://energy.usgs.gov.

Not afraid to profess your faith.....even as an elected official!

2009-03-15T18:50:00.002-05:00

On Saturday, March 14th I had the privilege of sharing the stage with Congressman Gresham Barrett and Senator Kevin Bryant in Anderson, SC at New Covenant Church. New Covenant held a breakfast fundraiser for their private school, New Covenant School and invited the three of us to speak.

It was refreshing to see three elected officials not afraid to profess their personal relationship with Jesus Christ.

Thank you Tim Bowers and the elders at New Covenant for allowing me to share the morning with you and the opportunity to speak to the students and parents at New Covenant! God Bless you, always.

Jeff

Religious Freedom

2009-03-10T20:07:00.000-05:00

From the SC House Republican Caucus:

One of the most sacred rights that countless South Carolinians have fought and died for is religious freedom. The great leaders in our country's history have been guided by faith that was nurtured over the years in homes, communities and schools. Today, elected officials continue to be buoyed by their strong faith as they make tough decisions during difficult times.

But religious freedom on college campuses has come under attack by Democrats. The massive Democrat spending bill, or so-called stimulus package, recently signed into law by President Barack Obama prohibits funds to renovate buildings on college campuses from being used for buildings with any type of religious connection. Our own U.S. Senator Jim DeMint has called the bill "a direct attack on students of faith."

The South Carolina House Republican Caucus believes strongly in protecting religious freedom and will not allow students to come under attack. That's why House Republicans voted today to safeguard religious freedom on college campuses in South Carolina. According to an amendment passed with overwhelming support from House Republicans, state supported colleges receiving federal stimulus stabilization funds must continue to support and maintain existing student programs and facilities used for religious activities.

What they are saying now......

2009-03-08T16:55:00.003-05:00

General Motors. On September 24, Congress approved a $25 billion bailout for General Motors (GM), Ford (F), and Chrysler. In November, they were back.....asking Congress for more of our tax dollars.

Dallas Executive Mr. Jody Grant stated well in the Dallas Morning News stated "I think Washington is inclined to do a bailout. But if it's not done properly, we'll be back in the same old boat: GM's no more competitive than they were before, nor is Ford, nor is Chrysler." GM received $13.4 Billion in round one.

Most people in September and throughout the fall were saying that they should file Chapter 11 Bankruptcy, reorganize the business free from the immediate creditor pressure and, most importantly, renegotiate the union contracts they have. Most people being the American public, not the politicians in DC.

Just this morning (March 8th) Senator John McCain is saying just that - like it is his idea and he just came to this conclusion. How much in taxpayer dollars needs to be thrown down the hole before those in Washington listen to the things that the American people are saying?

Why not bring back the RTC?

2009-03-08T16:47:00.003-05:00

When the Savings and Loan Industry failed in the late 1980's, the federal government instituted the Resolution Trust Corporation to deal with the liquidation of what are now called "Toxic Assets" held by the S&L's. From Wikipedia:

"The Resolution Trust Corporation (RTC) was a United States Government-owned asset management company charged with liquidating assets (primarily real estate-related assets, including mortgage loans) that had been assets of savings and loan associations (S&Ls) declared insolvent by the Office of Thrift Supervision, as a consequence of the savings and loan crisis of the 1980s. It also took over the insurance functions of the former Federal Home Loan Bank Board. It was created by the Financial Institutions Reform Recovery and Enforcement Act (FIRREA), adopted in 1989. In 1995, its duties were transferred to the Savings Association Insurance Fund of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.

Between 1989 and mid-1995, the Resolution Trust Corporation closed or otherwise resolved 747 thrifts with total assets of $394 billion."

This seems like a viable option for the Federal Government now instead of pouring more and more of our future taxes into a bottomless pit.

Outraged!!

2009-01-22T09:21:00.008-05:00

If you have ever encountered a leak in your home, maybe behind a wall or under the house where it wasn't noticed for some time, you know the tremendous amount of damage that can be done over time. Incrementally. Gradually. When you finally do realize what has happened, it is too late to save a lot of damaged area that needs to be ripped out and rebuilt.

I am afraid that this is exactly what is happening to our government. Slowly, over a period of time, we are having our Republic eroded and in its place we are seeing a stronger centralization of power in Washington. It is happening in the name of propping up the economy. What really is happening is the nationalization of our banking industry. In addition, just look at what Representative Barney Frank has done: From the WSJ:

"Mr. Frank, by his own account, wrote into the TARP bill a provision specifically aimed at helping this particular home-state bank. And later, he acknowledges, he spoke to regulators urging that OneUnited be considered for a cash injection." To the tune of $12 million.

Our Governor, Mark Sanford is quoted in the article: ""It's totally arbitrary," says South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford. "If you've got the right lobbyist and the right representative connected to Washington or the right ties to Washington, you get the golden tap on the shoulder," says Gov. Sanford

He is correct: it is totally arbitrary now which companies get Federal assistance and which do not, based on political favors and payback! Remember - these are your tax dollars being given out here.....

This has everything to do with the perpetuation of power by guys like Rep. Barney Frank and Sen. Chris Dodd - both chairing powerful Congressional Finance Committees.

It is time to be outraged, Americans, over this! Maybe Madam Speaker Pelosi or Senate Majority Leader Reid don't care. But I do! South Carolina does!

We are going to wake up one day and the world is going to have no faith in the US Dollar. Then what?

It is time for the Federal Government to stop dangling stimulus carrots and get out of the way....this is a scary trend of Nationalization of private businesses - incrementally leading us down the road of Socialism or worse. As bad as it may seem, we must allow some businesses to fail and some to succeed in a natural business climate without being propped up by a government which has greatly overstepped its Constitutional authority. Our Founding Fathers envisioned a weak & limited central government - stronger state governments and most of the power in the hands of the free people.

Thomas Jefferson on the Bailouts.....

2009-01-18T10:11:00.001-05:00

"A wise and frugal government, which shall leave men free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned - this is the sum of good government."
Thomas Jefferson

Merry Christmas from the Duncans!

2008-12-25T08:28:00.001-05:00

While wishing everyone a Merry Christmas, I stop and think about what Christmas means...what I truly believe:

We are celebrating the birth of our Savior....the only perfect man to ever walk the earth....the Son that God sent to tell man about His love.....to show His love by allowing His own Son to be sacrificed so that we shall not have to spend eternity separated from Him - that separation is the true Hell.....Thank You God for loving me, a sinner who is unworthy of the tremendous Grace you show me.....

A celebration of this birth......WOW....and that is why we give gifts, because God gave us the gift of His Son, but also the gift of his Grace!

Merry Christmas!

What is UnConstitutional about it?

2008-12-12T07:00:00.003-05:00

I Believe!

I also believe in the Constitution. After our Forefathers wrote the second greatest document of all time governing our lives (of course the Bible is No. 1), they decided to address some things that were left out - they did this through the Amendment process - which had to also be ratified by the member States. The First Ten Amendments became known as the Bill of Rights.

As I have stated before, I could poll the nation, asking what people thought of when they heard "First Amendment Rights." The answers, based on the smaller polls I have done in person, would be "Freedom of Speech." But the first thing our Forefathers addressed was Freedom of Religion. The First Amendment reads at it's beginning:

"Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof......" then it goes on to mention freedom of speech, of the press, of the right of the people to peacefully assemble and to petition the government for grievances which they may have with government.

It doesn't say anything about the member states not being able to post the Ten Commandments in their Statehouses or creating a license plate stating "I Believe" or even "I Don't Believe" should they choose to do so. In fact, the Constitution goes on to state that any power not specifically spelled out in that document as a power of the Federal Government is reserved for the States or the people.

I use the term "member states" because what we have in America is a Republic - a union of states who freely joined the union for a lot of common good. The states themselves voted on the Constitution and the Amendments.

So I return to the basic question in this post: What is UnConstitutional about the State of South Carolina producing a license plate which its citizens can freely purchase or not purchase? You could argue, I guess, that the highways are built and maintained with Federal Highway Funds. But those funds stem from gasoline tax, collected here in the State, sent to Washington where a portion is siphoned off, and returned to our State. It was our money to begin with, eh?

The right of South Carolina to offer to it's citizens an "I Believe" tag is no different than the state of Washington allowing a non-religious symbol to be placed next to a Christian symbol inside the capital building. Is that UnConstitutional as well? We are off kilter in this country and we need to make some changes. I am providing the article about the Judge's ruling on the "I Believe" tag for your information.

Judge Keeps SC "I Believe" Plates Off The Roads
Catherine M. Welch

WILMINGTON, NC (2008-12-11) A federal judge in South Carolina has put the brakes on production of a Christian license plate featuring the words "I Believe" next a cross and stained glass window.

The judge issued a temporary injunction halting producing of the "I Believe" license plate after a lawsuit filed this summer claimed the plates were unconstitutional.

South Carolina's Lt. Governor Andre Bauer says drivers requesting the Christian plate should be able to share the road with those already displaying the state's secular plate displaying "In Reason We Trust."

"You know, it's amazing to me that atheists and non-believers can purchase a secular license plate that they requested, but that same first amendment right given to them they now deny to others who want to purchase a different type of license plate."

Americans United for Separation of Church and State sued the state claiming the plate favors Christianity. Its Director Barry Lind says the judge's order will keep religion off the roads.

"I think it makes it clear that the "I Believe" license plates are very unlikely to ever see the light of day in South Carolina."

2008 Presidential Election Map - by County

2008-12-10T20:37:00.001-05:00

Duncan Elected Chairman of House Ag Committee

2008-12-05T07:56:00.001-05:00

On Wednesday, December 3rd, I was elected Chairman of the House Agriculture, Natural Resources & Environmental Affairs Committee - one of six standing Committees in the South Carolina House of Representatives.

This is quite an honor for me to serve my State in this capacity. There are some mighty big shoes to fill following my friend Chairman Billy Witherspoon who retired in June. I hope I can show similar leadership that Billy had during his tenure.

I believe that there will be a lot of critical issues facing our State this Session. I have been assigned a great team of Committee members from all across the state, all with diverse backgrounds. I will post the members on this blog in a late post.

I am currently tasked with assigning these members to the appropriate sub-committees of: Agriculture Sub-Committee; Wildlife Sub-committee; Environmental I and Environmental II Sub-Committees. In addition, I am mulling over the Sub-Committee Chairmen - not an easy task since I want to make sure I have the right Leaders on each.

Thanks to everyone on the Committee for this opportunity and I look forward to serving with you. - Jeff

In Case You Missed It.....More on Energy

2008-11-27T20:45:00.001-05:00

Breaking imported oil addiction must be top priority

By Rep. Jeff Duncan • November 24, 2008

Here in the Southeast, we recently saw severe gas shortages because of Hurricane Ike. All along the I-85 corridor, you couldn't find stations with gas, and when you did, you paid a steep premium for it. It was reminiscent of the 1970s oil crisis. The problem is despite the falling gas prices today, we are still going to be in a modern day oil crisis.
Advertisement

During this election, you undoubtedly saw the ads featuring Texas wildcat oilman Boone Pickens talking about our nation's addiction to foreign oil. He does a very good job in laying out the problem. And unlike most elected officials in Washington, he has a plan to solve the problem: Use America's abundance of wind and natural gas to break us of our addition to foreign oil.

Today we import some 70 percent of the oil we consume and we pay approximately $700 billion per year for it. As a country, we spend as much as the Wall Street bailout is projected to cost every year on imported oil. And forecasts show that we will continue to import more going forward unless we do something to change it.

In Washington, the solution of the day is "drill here, drill now." While that may make a good bumper sticker slogan, I think it's shortsighted and misses the mark. Drilling is good, but we need a lot more than that.

We need to take advantage of every resource we have here at home to provide energy. This does include more drilling, but also needs to include using clean coal, increased use of natural gas for transportation, looking at nuclear and investing in renewable resources.

The Pickens Plan uses power generated with wind to replace power generated from natural gas. The natural gas that wouldn't be needed for power generation could then be used to fuel large truck and fleet vehicles like city buses, municipal trash trucks and even some big city taxi fleets. This will cut down on the amount of oil consumed and lower the amount we spend on importing oil.

What I like most about the Pickens Plan is that instead of continuing to send $700 billion per year overseas for oil, we can start to invest some of the savings the United States. By investing in wind, natural gas, solar, cellulosic ethanol and a whole host of other renewable technologies here in the United States, we are investing in our economy, our jobs and our future.

Here in South Carolina, we could reap the benefits of those new technologies and new jobs.

That's one reason I have signed the Pickens Energy Independence Pledge and urge my fellow elected officials at all levels of government to do the same at www.pickensplan.com. As elected officials we have to show true leadership on this issue if we are going to break our addiction to imported oil.

Pickens has been asked several times why someone at his age -- he's 80 years old, by the way -- would be spending as much time and money as he is on this. His answer is simple. It's not for him, it's for our children and grandchildren. If we don't do something to tackle this problem now, their standard of living is at risk.

I have children of my own, and completely understand his answer.

Op-Ed on Conservatism with Senator Kevin Bryant

2008-11-27T19:45:00.000-05:00

Bryant/Duncan: Republicans must return to conservative roots

By KEVIN BRYANT and JEFF DUNCAN - Guest Columnists

Two years ago, following the first Republican bloodletting, our colleague Sen. Danny Verdin wrote that the election “turned not on the voters’ embrace of ideas offered by Democrats but the voters’ rejection of Republicans who abandoned them.” Today, following further losses in Congress and the loss of the White House, Sen. Verdin’s diagnosis stands out in bold. Republicans can blame no one but themselves for their exile.

Two years ago federal spending had increased 69 percent since 1994, and 49 percent since 2001 alone. It never stopped growing, and now the Heritage Foundation reports that it is 57 percent higher than 2001.

Republicans hoped two years ago that Randy Cunningham, Jack Abramoff and Mark Foley would be exceptions that prove the rule. However, corruption continues unabated. Alaska Republican Sen. Ted Stevens is a convicted felon, and of course there’s Idaho Republican Sen. Larry Craig.

The primary reason Republicans fell like a stone this year is that they have the sense of a box of rocks. A good friend of ours likes to say there’s no education in the second kick of the mule. The only hope therefore is that the second kick just received will rid of us of the folks who don’t seem to get the fact that the American public is tired of broken promises, hypocrisy and outright lies.

What the public does want is conservative leadership. Sen. Verdin pointed out two years ago that “The evidence clearly proves that conservative issues and candidates win.” Voters affirmed that fact again this year as they approved conservative measures and candidates from coast to coast.

Arizona approved a marriage amendment by 12 percentage points and increases in penalties on illegal hiring by 18 points. Arkansas passed a ban on adoptions by same-sex couples by 13 points. California voted for Obama by a 24 point margin, but it also preserved traditional marriage by 4 points. Florida went for Obama by 3 points and also preserved traditional marriage by 24.

San Francisco, the pit of despair for most conservatives, actually rejected the legalization of prostitution, a ban of Junior ROTC from high school campuses and the renaming of the sewer treatment plant for President Bush. Talk about hope for change.

Conservative candidates also won in Obama states. Obama carried Indiana, but so did the conservative governor, Mitch Daniels, by 18 points.

The 2008 election indicates that when voters in most places are given a chance to vote for conservatives or conservative positions, they do.

The majority of voters chose not, of course, to vote for John McCain. Sen. McCain would have earned more votes if he had presented more voters with a conservative choice.

We wish Sen. McCain had explained that the difference between a tax credit and “spreading the wealth” is that the former is when you keep your own money and the latter is when government takes your money and gives it to someone else.

We wish Senator McCain had not said that, “you don’t raise taxes in a bad economy” and instead said: “We have enough revenue in Washington. We don’t need to raise taxes at all.”

We really, really wish Sen. McCain had said in answer to Jim Lehrer’s question on whether he would support the bailout that not only would he not support it but also that he would lie down in the Senate floor before politicians stuck taxpayers with a $700 billion bill for a problem that politicians created in the first place. We really wish he had said that instead of, “oh of course I’ll vote for it.”

He did not, however, and therefore conservatives were left wondering whether Sen. McCain really believed in the same things they do. The majority of the Republican Party currently suffers from the same disease as Democrats before them and, for that matter, the same disease as Wall Street bankers. They simply believe that government is a good thing and more government must, by definition, be an even better thing.

Meanwhile, a recent survey indicates that while only 9 percent of voters believe that the Republican Party is too conservative, more than 60 percent believe it has either “lost its way” or become “incompetent.”

The voters get it. If Republicans ever want to regain the mandate of the voters, they need to take the hint: Do what you promise you’ll do, not what Democrats do.

Republicans do not need to search their souls. They need simply to revisit their principles. And this time, they need to stick to them.

Mr. Bryant represents Anderson County in the S.C. Senate. Mr. Duncan represents Laurens and Newberry counties in the S.C. House.

Op-

2008-11-17T20:04:00.000-05:00

Real Economic Stimulus...Cheap Gas!

2008-11-12T21:34:00.001-05:00

From UPI.com

Crude oil prices down as demand falters

Published: Nov. 12, 2008 at 5:48 PM

Order reprints | Feedback

Today's Price of Crude Oil

Nymex Crude Oil

55.75 - (0.00% )

Quotes delayed at least 20 mins.

NEW YORK, Nov. 12 (UPI) -- Lower gas consumption and a gloomy economy conspired to lower crude oil prices Wednesday.

Crude oil prices fell $3.23 to $55.65 per barrel Wednesday on reports that China's imports had declined in October and U.S. gasoline consumption was behind last year's consumption level for the 29th consecutive week.

"With the global macro situation looking pretty lousy, we probably shouldn't be looking for a material rebound in oil prices until some time in 2009," Bart Melek, a global commodity strategist at BMO Capital Markets told The Wall Street Journal.

Heating oil prices also fell Wednesday, down 0.0991 cents to $1.825 per gallon. Reformulated blendstock gasoline fell 0.06 cents to $1.24 per gallon. Natural gas prices also fell, down 0.358 cents to $6.349 per million British thermal units.

At the pump, the average price for a gallon of regular unleaded gasoline was $2.202 Wednesday, down 0.018 cents from Tuesday's $2.22 a gallon, AAA said.

Obama on Firearms

2008-10-27T20:40:00.003-05:00

This letter came to me from a friend in Illinois:

October 10, 2008

Fellow Sportsman,

Hello, my name is Rich Pearson and I have been active in the firearm rights movement for over 40 years. For the past 15 years, I have served in the Illinois state capitol as the chief lobbyist for the Illinois State Rifle Association.

I lobbied Barack Obama extensively while he was an Illinois State Senator. As a result of that experience, I know Obama’s attitudes toward guns and gun owners better than anyone. The truth be told, in all my years in the Capitol I have never met a legislator who harbors more contempt for the law-abiding firearm owner than Barack Obama.

Although Obama claims to be an advocate for the 2nd Amendment, his voting record in the Illinois Senate paints a very different picture. While a state senator, Obama voted for a bill that would ban nearly every hunting rifle, shotgun and target rifle owned by Illinois citizens. That same bill would authorize the state police to raid homes of gun owners and forcibly confiscate banned guns. Obama supported a bill that would shut down law-abiding firearm manufacturers including Springfield Armory, Armalite, Rock River Arms and Les Baer.

Obama also voted for a bill that would prohibit law-abiding citizens from purchasing more than one gun per month. Without a doubt, Barack Obama has proven himself to be an enemy of the law abiding firearm owner. At the same time, Obama has proven himself to be a friend to the hardened criminal. While a state senator, Obama voted 4 times against legislation that would allow a homeowner to use a firearm in defense of home and family.

Does Barack Obama still sound to you like a “friend” of the law-abiding gun owner?

And speaking of friends, you can always tell a person by the company they keep. Obama counts among his friends the Rev. Michael Pfleger - a renegade Chicago priest who has openly called for the murder of gun shop owners and pro-gun legislators. Then there is his buddy Richard Daley, the mayor of Chicago who has declared that if it were up to him, nobody would be allowed to own a gun. And let’s not forget Obama’s pal George Soros - the guy who has pumped millions of dollars into the UN’s international effort to disarm law-abiding citizens.

Obama has shown that he is more than willing to use other people’s money to fund his campaign to take your guns away from you. While a board member of the leftist Joyce Foundation, Barack Obama wrote checks for tens of millions of dollars to extremist gun control organizations such as the Illinois Council Against Handgun Violence and the Violence Policy Center.

Does Barack Obama still sound to you like a “friend” of the law-abiding gun owner?

By now, I’m sure that many of you have received mailings from an organization called “American Hunters and Shooters Association(AHSA)” talking about what a swell fellow Obama is and how he honors the 2nd Amendment and how you will never have to worry about Obama coming to take your guns. Let me make it perfectly clear - everything the AHSA says about Obama is pure hogwash. The AHSA is headed by a group of left-wing elitists who subscribe to the British view of hunting and shooting. That is, a state of affairs where hunting and shooting are reserved for the wealthy upper-crust who can afford guided hunts on exclusive private reserves. The AHSA is not your friend, never will be.

In closing, I’d like to remind you that I’m a guy who has actually gone nose to nose with Obama on gun rights issues. The Obama I know cannot even begin to identify with this nation’s outdoor traditions. The Obama I know sees you, the law abiding gun owner, as nothing but a low-class lummox who is easily swayed by the flash of a smile and a ration of rosy rhetoric. The Obama I know is a stony-faced liar who has honed his skill at getting what he wants - so long as people are willing to give it to him.

That’s the Barack Obama I know.

Sincerely,
(original signed)
Richard A. Pearson
Executive Director
Illinois State Rifle Association

Illinois State Rifle Association
420 E. Locust, P.O. Box 637, Chatsworth, IL 60921
Phone: (815) 635-3198 or (815) 635-3166 Fax: (815) 635-3723 Website: www.isra.org

Dedicated to education, safety training and support
of Illinois firearm owners

Agriculture is BIG in South Carolina!

2008-10-25T17:51:00.002-05:00

Study: Agribusiness is a $34 billion economic engine in state

Agriculture, forestry eclipse manufacturing and toursim as S.C.'s cash cow

By Rick Spruill (Contact)
Friday, September 19, 2008

Agribusiness is South Carolina's No. 1 industry, ahead of manufacturing and tourism. Anderson County farmer Brian Clinkscales' Triple C Farms in Starr raises swine and cattle.

A study conducted by the South Carolina Agribusiness Council and the South Carolina Forestry Association shows agriculture and forestry have eclipsed manufacturing and tourism as the state’s largest economic segment.

Harry Miley of Miley Gallo and Associates, a Greenville-based economic consulting firm, estimated that South Carolina’s agribusiness, which includes all aspects of farming and forestry, annually contributes $33.9 billion to the South Carolina economy and employs an estimated 200,000 residents.

“The bottom line is that South Carolina’s oldest industry has entered the 21st century with great promise in the emerging economy,” Miley said in a statement.

And, while technology and manufacturing remain at the forefront of many state and county economic initiatives, the role of agribusiness and the need to encourage local agricultural production and consumer awareness should not be underestimated, he said.

“South Carolina’s agribusiness is so much larger than most people realize,” said Evin Evans, co-owner of Split Creek Dairy Farm in Anderson. “Producing, packaging and transporting food is an enormous industry and contributes a great deal to the state economy in terms of tax revenue and job creation.”

Evans said that “agribusiness, which is everything from growing food to raising cattle to insuring farm equipment or selling supplies, is the jewel in South Carolina’s own backyard.”

Edgar Woods of the Palmetto Agribusiness Council echoed Evans’ sentiment.

“The industry that provides consumers with food is one of the dominant economic forces in our state and the challenge remains for our leaders to continue encouraging the development of new technologies and methods in support of that industry,” Woods said.

Besides the economic impact, another less obvious benefit is derived from the consumption of locally grown food — economic independence and security.

“Just like foreign oil, we can ill afford to become dependent on foreign food,” Evans said. “It is harder to inspect products for contamination when they are grown in foreign soil. It also costs a great deal more in terms of logistics, and the only ones who gain are the multinational food distribution companies.”

Jim Smith, founding director of South Carolina’s Upstate School of Sustainable Agriculture, said consumers are becoming increasingly aware of the origins of their food, from where it is grown to how it is fertilized and stored.

“The demand from restaurant owners and consumers for locally grown, organic food is outstripping supply,” Smith said.

He cited a variety of factors are contributing to the increased demand, including a desire many consumers have to buy local, organic produce rather than what is shipped in from outside sources.

Forestry officials said emerging technologies for alternative fuels will help the agribusiness sector grow even faster.

“This is just the beginning compared to what we are likely to see in the coming decades,” said Bob Scott, president of the S.C. Forestry Association, in a statement. “Whether its carbon credits or biofuels, South Carolina will be on the cutting edge.”

State Rep. Jeff Duncan, a member of the House Agriculture Committee, called on members of the state legislature to look closely at the results of the Miley study.

“Agriculture should not be seen as what our state used to be,” Duncan said in a statement. “It’s the backbone of our economy.

“As elected officials, we have a responsibility to do all we can to support growth in the agribusiness sector,” he said. “Our future depends on it.”

To learn more about “agribusiness” in South Carolina, go to www.carolinafarmsteward.org.

Justice Clarence Thomas is Right on the Money

2008-10-20T19:51:00.002-05:00

From the Wall Street Journal - Monday, October 20, 2008
How to Read the Constitution

The following is an excerpt from Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas's Wriston Lecture to the Manhattan Institute last Thursday:

When John F. Kennedy said in his inaugural address, "Ask not what your country can do for you -- ask what you can do for your country," we heard his words with ears that had been conditioned to receive this message and hearts that did not resist it. We heard it surrounded by fellow citizens who had known lives of sacrifice and hardships from war, the Great Depression and segregation. All around us seemed to ingest and echo his sentiment and his words. Our country and our principles were more important than our individual wants, and by discharging our responsibilities as citizens, neighbors, and students we would make our country better. It all made sense.

Today, we live in a far different environment. My generation, the self-indulgent "me" generation, has had a profound effect on much around us. Rarely do we hear a message of sacrifice -- unless it is a justification for more taxation and transfers of wealth to others. Nor do we hear from leaders or politicians the message that there is something larger and more important than the government providing for all of our needs and wants -- large and small. The message today seems more like: Ask not what you can do for yourselves or your country, but what your country must do for you.

This brings to mind the question that seems more explicit in informed discussions about political theory and implicit in shallow political speeches. What is the role of government? Or more to the point, what is the role of our government? Interestingly, this is the question that our framers answered more than 200 years ago when they declared our independence and adopted our written Constitution. They established the form of government that they trusted would be best to preserve liberty and allow a free people to prosper. And that it has done for over two centuries. Of course, there were major flaws such as the issue of slavery, which would eventually lead to a civil war and casualties of fellow citizens that dwarf those of any of the wars that our country has since been involved in.

Though we have amended the Constitution, we have not changed its structure or the core of the document itself. So what has changed? That is the question that I have asked myself and my law clerks countless times during my 17 years on the court.

As I have traveled across the country, I have been astounded just how many of our fellow citizens feel strongly about their constitutional rights but have no idea what they are, or for that matter, what the Constitution says. I am not suggesting that they become Constitutional scholars -- whatever that means. I am suggesting, however, that if one feels strongly about his or her rights, it does make sense to know generally what the Constitution says about them. It is at least as easy to understand as a cell phone contract -- and vastly more important.

The Declaration of Independence sets out the basic underlying principle of our Constitution. "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness. -- That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed . . . ."

The framers structured the Constitution to assure that our national government be by the consent of the people. To do this, they limited its powers. The national government was to be strong enough to protect us from each other and from foreign enemies, but not so strong as to tyrannize us. So, the framers structured the Constitution to limit the powers of the national government. Its powers were specifically enumerated; it was divided into three co-equal branches; and the powers not given to the national government remained with the states and the people. The relationship between the two political branches (the executive and the legislative) was to be somewhat contentious providing checks and balances, while frequent elections would assure some measure of accountability. And, the often divergent interests of the states and the national government provided further protection of liberty behind the shield of federalism. The third branch, and least dangerous branch, was not similarly constrained or hobbled.

Since Marbury v. Madison the federal judiciary has assumed the role of the interpreter and, now, final arbiter of our Constitution. But, what rules must judges follow in doing so? What informs, guides and limits our interpretation of the admittedly broad provisions of the Constitution? And, more directly, what restrains us from imposing our personal views and policy preferences on our fellow citizens under the guise of Constitutional interpretation?

To assure the independence of federal judges, the framers provided us with life tenure and an irreducible salary -- though inflation has found a way around the latter. This independence, in turn, was to assure our neutrality and impartiality, which are at the very core of judging -- and being a judge. Yet, this independence can also insulate a judge from accountability for venturing beyond the proper role of a judge. But, what exactly is the proper role of a judge? We must understand that before we can praise or criticize a judge. In every endeavor from economics to games there is some way to measure performance.

As important as our Constitution is, there is no one accepted way of interpreting it. Indeed, for some commentators, it seems that if they like or prefer a particular policy or conduct, then it must be constitutional; while the policies that they do not prefer or like are unconstitutional. Obviously, this approach cannot be right. But, it certainly is at the center of the process of selecting judges. It goes something like this. If a judge does not think that abortion is best as a matter of policy or personal opinion, then the thought is that he or she will find it unconstitutional; while the judge who thinks it is good policy will find it constitutional. Those who think this way often seem to believe that since this is the way they themselves think, everyone must be doing the same thing. In this sense, legal realism morphs into legal cynicism. Certainly this is no way to run a railroad, not to mention interpret the Constitution. . . .

Let me put it this way; there are really only two ways to interpret the Constitution -- try to discern as best we can what the framers intended or make it up. No matter how ingenious, imaginative or artfully put, unless interpretive methodologies are tied to the original intent of the framers, they have no more basis in the Constitution than the latest football scores. To be sure, even the most conscientious effort to adhere to the original intent of the framers of our Constitution is flawed, as all methodologies and human institutions are; but at least originalism has the advantage of being legitimate and, I might add, impartial.

Right-on, Justice Thomas, Right-on!!!

Southern States Energy Board

2008-10-15T10:01:00.002-05:00

I was honored to receive from the Speaker of the House Bobby Harrell an appointment, effective November 10th, to the Southern States Energy Board.

According to the Code Section 13-7-420, this Board is charged with the power to, among other things:

a) Ascertain and analyze on a continuing basis the position of the South with respect to energy, energy-related industries and environmental concerns.

b) Encourage the development, conservation and responsible use of energy and energy-related facilities, installations and products as part of a balanced economy and healthy environment.

I am excited about this appointment and look forward to serving the State of South Carolina in this capacity as we continue to meet our energy needs for today and the future.

Thoughts on "Going Back"

2008-10-15T07:42:00.003-05:00

With the General Assembly being called back into an "Emergency Session" to take up the State's shrinking budget, I start to think about what sort of shenanigans we might be faced with. Here are some thoughts that I have:

1. Well, here is an opportunity to put Nikki Haley's transparency bill to the test by requesting roll-call voting on all of this.

2. Don't propose any tax increase. Not even a repeal of the grocery tax. At times like these, we need to cinch up our belt, every agency pitch-in and we will get through this down-turn. We are not unique in this situation - every state is facing similar circumstances. I know Rex Rice will probably propose a cigarette tax increase to give the government more funding. I just don't think that you raise taxes in a situation like this - you cut expenses. That is what most South Carolina families do.

3. Don't raid the Trust Funds and Reserve Funds. We may not be at the "bottom" in this economy and we may need those funds later. Let's attempt to make targeted cuts first.

SC Club for Growth Scorecard - A+!

2008-10-14T20:23:00.003-05:00

The South Carolina Club for Growth released its 2007/2008 Legislative Scorecard today. I am proud that I received an A+ rating by this Conservative group.

You can view the House Scorecard here: SC Club for Growth

Congratulations to Eric Bedingfield and Mick Mulvaney for their Stellar A+ ratings, too!

Why It Is Important

2008-10-09T06:43:00.005-05:00

There is a lot of talk concerning the importance of the Bill Ayers connection with Presidential hopeful Barack Obama, whose campaign consistently brushes off and changes the subject.

The reason it is so important - and where the McCain campaign is falling short - is that, when this connection is considered along with other questionable connections for Obama, it clearly points to a disturbing lack of judgement on his part.

Barack Obama has not been truthful in his disclosure of his relationship with Bill Ayers. His campaign's statements of:

"Bill Ayers lives in his neighborhood. Their kids attend the same school. They're certainly friendly, they know each other, as anyone whose kids go to school together."

- just don't hold water.

Obama launched his campaign for the Illinois Legislature in Ayers home, in addition to Obama serving on the Board of Directors for a non-profit organization that Ayers started and ran. Furthermore, Ayers' children are in their late 20's or early 30's and Obama's kids are in gradeschool.

But the Obama campaign wants to dismiss the Ayers connection.....OK......let's do that and focus on his other questional judgements. The Obama campaign wants to focus on the economy. Ok, let's look at the players.

The economy is at this point in history due to the under-regulation of the Federal Government sponsored entities Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. During the growth of these quasai-agencies, when they were guaranteeing billions in low documentation/no documentation mortgages, as well as dealing in securities that are backed by these low doc/no doc mortgages and which were traded on Wall Street and around the world, purchased by the likes of Lehman Brothers and Bear Stearns, the guys at the helm were none other than Franklin Raines, Chairman of the Board & CEO; Tim Howard, Chief Financial Officer at Fannie Mae; Jim Johnson, a former executive at Lehman Brothers who was later forced from his position as CEO at Fannie Mae.

Obama's judgement, and his campaign's ties to the recent economic problems, lie with these three men. And this is where the McCain camp needs to get busy:

Franklin Raines: Chief Economic Adviser to the Obama Campaign.
Tim Howard: Also a Chief Economic Adviser to the Obama Campaign.
Jim Johnson: Hired as a Senior Economic Adviser to the Obama Campaign and selected to head the Vice Presidential search committee.

McCain also needs to look to the numbers: Obama, in a very short, less than one-term US Senate career, has amassed campaign contributions from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to rank his only second in the most donations received to long-time Senator Chris Dodd, Chairman of the Senate Finance Committee which oversees the likes of Fannie and Freddie.

If we dislike nothing else about Obama, and there is more to question, let's at least call him out on his judgement and his ties to individuals who were at the root of the economic meltdown. That is why it is so important.

A Historic Perspective on the "Bailout"

2008-10-05T19:22:00.010-05:00

Whether it is called a "Bailout" or a "Economic Rescue," I have some fundamental problems with Congress passing this bill. Was it necessary? Maybe. Will it work? The jury is still out - we'll see how the market responds.

The question that I have is: Was it Constitutional? Under what Constitutional authority does Congress have to raise taxes on citizens of the United States, giving the money to the U. S. Treasury to buy private mortgages (good or bad) or securities or even to hold these types of real estate assets in the event of a foreclosure? Maybe they do under a broad interpretation of the Interstate Commerce provision - coincidentally used by the Roosevelt Administration to implement the social agenda called the New Deal in the 1930's or under the General Welfare clause of Article I.

So, in thinking about the bailout - let me share some quotes from the Founding Fathers and historical figures about the role of government as well as cautions from them:

George Washington once said: "The Constitution is the guide which I never will abandon."

"The first and governing maxim in the interpretation of a statute is to discover the meaning of those who made it." James Wilson, Of the Study of Law in the United States, c. 1790

"On every question of construction carry ourselves back to the time when the Constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit manifested in the debates and instead of trying what meaning may be squeezed out of the text, or invented against it, conform to the probable one in which it was passed." Thomas Jefferson, June 12, 1823

".....Certainly no such universal power was meant to be given to them. {The Constitution} was intended to lace them up straightly within the enumerated powers, and those without which, as means, these powers could not be carried into effect." Thomas Jefferson, Opinion on the Constitutionality of a National Bank, Feb. 15, 1791

"The legislative department is everywhere extending the sphere of its activity and drawing all power into its impetuous vortex." James Madison, Federalist No. 48, Feb. 1, 1788

"It would reduce the whole instrument to a single phrase, that of instituting a Congress with power to do whatever would be for the good of the United States; and, as they would be the sole judges of the good or evil, it would be also a power to do whatever evil they please." Thomas Jefferson, Opinion on the Constitutionality of a National Bank, Feb. 15, 1791

"If Congress can do whatever in their discretion can be done by money, and will promote the General Welfare, the Government is no longer a limited one, possessing enumerated powers, but an indefinite one, subject to particular exceptions." James Madison, letter Jan. 21, 1792

"No nation was ever ruined by trade, even seemingly the most disadvantageous." Benjamin Franklin, Principles of Trade, 1774

"I think all the world would gain by setting commerce at perfect liberty." Thomas Jefferson, letter to John Adams, July 7, 1785

"I think we have more machinery of government than is necessary, too many parasites living on the labor of the industrious." Thomas Jefferson, letter Sept. 6, 1788

"The principle of spending money to be paid by posterity, under the name of funding, is but swindling futurity on a large scale." Thomas Jefferson, letter May 28, 1816.

"The same prudence which in private life would forbid our paying our own money for unexplained projects, forbids it in the dispensation of the public moneys." Thomas Jefferson, letter June 19, 1808

"Excessive taxation.....will carry reason & reflection to every man's door, and particularly in the hour of election." Thomas Jefferson, letter Nov. 26, 1798

"To take from one, because it is thought his own industry and that of his fathers has acquired too much, in order to spare to others, who, or whose fathers, have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to violate arbitrarily the first principle of association, the guarantee to everyone the free exercise of his industry and their fruits acquired by it." Thomas Jefferson, letter April 6, 1816

"The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined." James Madison, Federalist No. 45

"One hundred and seventy-three(the number of Congressmen at the time) despots would surely be as oppressive as one." James Madison, Federalist No. 48, Feb. 1, 1788

"A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury." Alexander Tyler, 1787

I am fearful that this expansion of the power of the Federal Government will further erode our Republic. It, too, is obvious that the failures of past Congresses to regulate the mortgage industry, especially relating to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac despite warnings in the Spring of 2001 (Bush Administration) and later in 2004(Bush Administration and Congressional Hearings) and 2005 (Congressional Hearings and McCain speech/Legislation Introduced), played a huge part in this economic meltdown. Both Republicans and Democrats are to blame and there are numerous YouTube videos of the hearings to satisfy your appetite as to these facts.

Remember ENRON? It seems that the guys from Freddie and Fannie (Franklin Raines and James Johnson) should be investigated and brought up on charges (for "cooking the books" that led to huge bonuses for them) the same as the ENRON officers. Maybe they will. But allowing this Congress, with the likes of Chris Dodd and Barney Franks, to investigate is like sending the burglar to investigate the burglary.

Selling in the Capital

2008-09-21T17:24:00.005-05:00

This past Tuesday evening, I conducted a fundraiser auction for the Congressional Sportsmens' Foundation on Capital Hill. A crowd of around 1,000 people participated in this event geared toward raising the funds necessary for CSF to continue to fight for the sportsmen and women in this country.

Lyman Bostock

2008-09-21T08:35:00.006-05:00

I just watched a story on ESPN "Outside the Lines" about a baseball player who was killed in 1978. His name was Lyman Bostock and he finished his career through an untimely death. He wasn't your ordinary ballplayer. Let me explain:

When Bostock traded from the Twins (where he was making $20,000/year) to the California Angels - he was awarded one of the highest sports contracts in history - $2.25 million. He hit .336 in 1977 but was obscured by well known teammate Rod Carew.

Moving to the Angels, Bostock - with one of the best batting averages in major league baseball - fell into a slump - batting just .147.

Here is where it gets interesting: Bostock did not want his salary until he starting performing again. He wanted to feel that he earned his paycheck. When the club refused to stop his paycheck, Bostock gave almost all of the $36,000 to charity. From the story: "Though Bostock certainly craved the financial security that came with a high-priced deal, he knew what it was to live poor, knew he could be equally happy with peanut butter and jelly sandwiches as he was with filet mignon. As Twins teammates overspent on fancy homes and luxury boats and snazzy automobiles, Lyman and Youvene lived in a simple one-bedroom apartment" Bostock's agent said.

Wow.

His sports agent said "He wasn't after the most lucrative contract -- just the happiest lifestyle."

If you can, I recommend the ESPN article (or you can watch the video) at this website:

ESPN - "Fifth & Jackson"

I have added a new name to my list of heroes. Thanks ESPN for sharing this with me.

Continuing the Rememberance.......

2008-09-18T13:49:00.005-05:00

Let me first say that I was appalled by the terrorist threat that someone put on the 9/11 blog post of mine below. I hope the authorities tract that down.

As part of my travels over the past week or so, beginning on 9/11, I paid a visit to the new 9/11 Pentagon Memorial. It opened to the public last Thursday (9/11/08) and it is very moving.

The tragic terrorist act at the Pentagon took the lives (184) of not just those on board the airplane, but a significant number of people serving our great country inside the Pentagon.

The memorial is made up of benches, inscribed on the edge with the victims name. Benches with the end facing the Pentagon signifies a victim on the airplane. Ends facing away from the Pentagon signify those lost inside.

The monument is new - but I believe it will mature into something truly wonderful in the Nation's Capital......

Remembering

2008-09-11T04:23:00.005-05:00

It is September 11, 2008.
It is 5:25 AM.
I am sitting in an airport, watching people as they get ready to board airplanes traveling to different destinations.
I am nervous to be traveling today.
I am thinking about those people who did this very same thing in 2001.
I pray for their families, the families of the victims in the towers in NYC, the families of those lost in the Pentagon........the heroes through it all.......the heroes fighting the war on terror today in far corners of the earth.
May you be blessed.
Thank you for protecting me and my family.

May God Bless America......Jeff

Global Effects!

2008-09-06T09:33:00.002-05:00

I am taking this from Mike's America blog - because it is so necessary for as many people to read this and try to understand this! Thanks to Mike for his work!

From Mike's America:

No Sun Spots Means Bigger Problem: Global Cooling, NOT Global Warming

Another nail in the globaloney coffin!

What could be worse than Al Gore's apocalyptic scaremongering on global warming? A new ice age brought on not by man's emission of CO2 but the Sun taking a holiday.

It's a definite possibility especially with this latest news:

No spots means no warming and might mean rapid cooling.

Sun Makes History: First Spotless Month in a Century
By Michael Asher
Daily Tech
September 1, 2008

Drop in solar activity has potential effect for climate on earth.

The sun has reached a milestone not seen for nearly 100 years: an entire month has passed without a single visible sunspot being noted.

The event is significant as many climatologists now believe solar magnetic activity – which determines the number of sunspots -- is an influencing factor for climate on earth.

According to data from Mount Wilson Observatory, UCLA, more than an entire month has passed without a spot. The last time such an event occurred was June of 1913. Sunspot data has been collected since 1749.

When the sun is active, it's not uncommon to see sunspot numbers of 100 or more in a single month. Every 11 years, activity slows, and numbers briefly drop to near-zero. Normally sunspots return very quickly, as a new cycle begins.

But this year -- which corresponds to the start of Solar Cycle 24 -- has been extraordinarily long and quiet, with the first seven months averaging a sunspot number of only 3. August followed with none at all. The astonishing rapid drop of the past year has defied predictions, and caught nearly all astronomers by surprise.
...
In the past 1000 years, three previous such events -- the Dalton, Maunder, and Spörer Minimums, have all led to rapid cooling. One was large enough to be called a "mini ice age". For a society dependent on agriculture, cold is more damaging than heat. The growing season shortens, yields drop, and the occurrence of crop-destroying frosts increases.

Sunspot activity of the past decade. Over the past year, SIDC has continually revised its predictions downward (Source: Solar Influences Data Center)

A chart of sunspot activity showing two prior solar minima, along with heightened activity during the 20th century (Source: Wikimedia Commons)

And lest you think a new ice age would be better than global warming, think again. Famine, disease, death and political chaos worldwide would likely be the result.

Played on the Peninsula

2008-09-05T18:44:00.003-05:00

We were played.

In February and April 2007, North Korea agreed to "abandoning all nuclear weapons and existing nuclear programs and returning, at an early date, to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons and to IAEA [International Atomic Energy Agency] safeguards."

Supposedly, "this significant achievement commits all six parties to a denuclearized Korean Peninsula and will lead to a more stable and secure Northeast Asia."

For doing this, North Korea received as it "complies with its commitment to declare all its nuclear programs and to disable all existing nuclear facilities (including reactors and processing plants), further shipments of economic, energy and humanitarian assistance equivalent to 950,000 tons of heavy fuel oil will be delivered in line with the principle of "action for action."" (Source: US Dept. of State Website)

Well, they're baaaaaccccckkkkk! The picture above is the Yongbyon facility. IAEA seals are broken and it more than appears that North Korea is re-starting its nuclear programs. Sources say that it could produce plutonium within two months!

They agreed to the deal long enough to get their hands on the fuel oil and other incentives. Furthermore, I believe that China influenced North Korea to go along with the deal until after the Olympics in order to placate the rest of the world, and then crank up their weapons program once the Games were over. Well, it seems the Games have just begun!

What are we going to give them to stop for a little while this time??

Let's do the math: I found that there are 7 barrels of petroleum per metric ton. 950,000 tons X 7 barrels = 6,650,000 multiplied by the going rate for crude oil (I know, they sent fuel oil, but for calculations sake - let's just use this, OK?) $105/barrel today (9/5/2008) = $698,250,000.

Go figure.........

I am a FAN!

2008-09-03T22:20:00.003-05:00

My favorite lines from Gov. Palin's speech:

"In politics, there are some candidates who use change to promote their careers. And then there are those, like John McCain, who use their careers to promote change," she said.

"What exactly is our opponent's plan? What does he actually seek to accomplish after he's done turning back the waters and healing the planet? The answer is to make the government bigger and take more of your money."

"This is a man who can give an entire speech about the wars America is fighting and never use the word 'victory' except when he's talking about his own campaign.

WOW! What a great "Hockey Mom!"

What is Wrong with This Picture

2008-09-02T19:59:00.004-05:00

I was in line dropping the boys off at school last week and saw this bumper sticker. Now - I am going to leave the question open, waiting to see what you see as wrong with the bumper sticker:

Left out of the debate.......

2008-08-29T17:50:00.002-05:00

We tend to forget the side-benefit of our involvement in Iraq - and that is the drastic reduction of terrorist activity in Israel.

Since the fall of Iraq and the removal of Saddam Hussein, the terrorist activity in Israel has almost ceased. Maybe this is due to the end of payments to the families of the suicide bombers by the Hussein regime, the presence of the US military in Iraq or the terrorists' focus being redirected toward the US troops in Iraq, the beneficiaries would seem to be, in some measure, the state of Israel.

Think about the last time you saw or heard a news report about a terrorist act - marketplace or bus suicide bombing - since the fall of Saddam Hussein. Before the US went into Iraq, it seemed like a weekly, if not a daily, occurrence.

If you have not read Victor David Hanson's article, I recommend it: What happened to Iraq?

McCain Housing Crisis? Please......

2008-08-25T20:06:00.003-05:00

Recently Senator John McCain was asked by a reporter how many houses he owned. This was definitely a loaded question designed to put McCain in a box and paint him as an elitist. As it turns out, he has seven houses worth approximately $14 million (based on what I have read).

So what?

Now, McCain is being painted in the light that he "doesn't know how many houses he owns...." - which is not what he said. He never said "I don't know how many houses I own......" He clearly was uncomfortable in discussing the subject and did not want to answer the question.

Probably because some of their houses are investment properties and some may be in the name of his wife, or in partnerships or holding companies.....I think he wanted his staff to accurately and completely answer the question.

As I thought about his answer, I began to add up the houses that I own.

I am a real estate investor and I own several rental properties. I own them in my name; my wife and I own some together; I have partners and I have some property in a corporate name. Let's see: my primary residence (1); three rentals in my name (3); one in Mel's name (1); two with partners (2); one in a corporation (1) - that totals eight (8). If you count a duplex that I own with a partner, then add another one to the total.

I deal with these properties every week. I am in the business. But think about answering a question like that on the spot - (heck I had to give it some thought).

John McCain has been on the campaign trail running for President for over two years! What if Cindy McCain had sold some of their properties or purchased others (given the real estate market - it could have been either).

If you are in the real estate business, think about it: How many houses do you own? Quickly, now. The world is watching........

If there can be an upside.....

2008-08-14T08:23:00.004-05:00

The BEAR is back. The Russian BEAR that is.

I have always been interested in geography. One of my college professors instructed that geography is more than just knowing where countries and geological features are in the world, but also is the study of those region's natural resources, climates and even political make-up to some degree.

Russia (during my college years it was the Soviet Union) has tremendous natural resources - primarily oil, natural gas, gold and timber. There are bountiful others but these are the biggies for this debate.

The Soviet Union was inefficient at tapping these resources primarily due to their inept government structure. After the fall of the Soviet Union and the rise of market driven capitalism, there was incentive for, not only the new government but also private businesses, to invest in exploring and utilizing these resources. Russia isn't reliant on foreign sources of energy.

During the time since the fall of the Soviet empire, the United States has seen a reversal of sorts take place that, when juxtaposed against the NEW Russia, is daunting. Let me explain:

While Russia was experiencing capitalism, low taxes (they have a flat rate income tax of 13%) and a positive business climate, the US has seen a tremendous growth in government. We have created a huge entitlement state and have proceeded to limit free-market driven investments in energy resources. From the moratorium on oil and natural gas exploration to the moratorium on new nuclear reactors to the moratorium against recycling nuclear fuel to the increased regulations on business and industry that is growing everyday due to the global warming alarmism - we are like the inept Soviet state.

Neutered, if you will, by "Political Correctness" and by a small but vocal minority in America that is calling for carbon tax & trade, no nuclear expansion and don't even think about drilling in ANWR or off our coasts!

This latest Russian move is a power-play. The Russian leaders and the proud Russian people desire to once again be a major global force as they were under the old Marxist empire. This time, however, they are building their might, not through fear as during the Cold War era, but through cagey capitalistic approaches to wealth creation and energy independence.

If there can be an upside for the U. S. in the unforgivable Russian aggression towards Georgia it would be in how Americans begin looking at our own country again. With the Russian Bear gaining in global power once more, maybe - just maybe - the vocal liberal minority and environmentalists who have stymied progressive approaches to energy independence will gain some American pride again.

If we are to solve this energy crisis, deal with a weak economy and the dramatic reduction in American manufacturing, we need an increasing sense in American pride. This applies, too, to our struggles against Islamic terrorists and pride in our military.

If we don't wake up quickly here in America to what is happening, we may soon find ourselves a good ways down the list in world power and influence rankings.

The Clock is Ticking for Energy Independence

2008-08-13T14:52:00.001-05:00

ENERGY!

2008-08-13T06:45:00.005-05:00

I posted this back in May but wanted to re-post it, as it is probably more important today in light of the world events surrounding Russia's power play in Georgia. Russia gets it - we get it but are impotent to act: We must begin securing our energy future by tapping our American natural resources, reducing our reliance on foreign sources of energy! Will we be able to "drill our way out of this crisis?" - No. But it is a big part of the Solution - utilize American natural resources, more nuclear energy for electricity production (which, by the way frees up a ton of natural gas and reduces reliance on coal for electricity), continued support for research into alternative fuels for transportation, continued investment in renewable sources such as wind & solar, energy conservation and conservation education.

Here is a re-post:

Energy

In the 1967 movie "The Graduate," Dustin Hoffman's character, Ben, is given the following career advice:

Mr. McGuire: I just want to say one word to you - just one word.
Ben: Yes sir.
Mr. McGuire: Are you listening?
Ben: Yes I am.
Mr. McGuire: 'Plastics.'
Ben: Exactly how do you mean?
Mr. McGuire: There's a great future in plastics. Think about it. Will you think about it?
Ben: Yes I will.
Mr. McGuire: Shh! Enough said. That's a deal.

If the movie were filmed today - or if the book were written today, the "WORD" would not be plastics - it would be "ENERGY." The demand for energy in the future, this issues surrounding how we will acquire sources of energy and how we balance our impact on the environment will be crucial. Energy.............Energy.........

FAQ's About OCS 5-year Plan

2008-08-12T20:48:00.002-05:00

FAQ: (MMS is the Sub-Agency under the Dept. of Interior - Mineral and Mining Servicces)

Q: Why is MMS doing another 5-year program now?

A: In light of the current energy situation and President Bush’s lifting of the Presidential Withdrawal, the Secretary of the Interior directed MMS to begin the initial steps for developing a new five-year program. We are, in effect, getting a two-year jumpstart on that process. It is still a multi-step, and multi-year process to develop a five-year program.

The current five-year program took effect on July 1, 2007 at a time when oil was only $64 a barrel and does not contain many of the areas that were under Withdrawal and remain under Congressional ban. Should the Congressional ban be lifted, a new program would have to be developed to make those areas available.

Q: With this new program, will you be able to lease new areas that were under Presidential Withdrawal?

A: This action begins a process that will open discussions about expanding our domestic energy production. If Congress acts by removing their ban, then new areas could become available, but only after a lengthy process involving active public input and strong safety and environmental protections.

Q: Did Congress lift their ban?

A: They have not. Current moratoria for the Atlantic, Pacific coasts and a small portion of the Eastern Gulf of Mexico are established through the annual appropriations process. However, most of the Eastern Gulf of Mexico was placed under a different statutory ban that is set to remain until 2022. Congress would have to either delete or modify language in upcoming appropriations bills or enact specific legislation to make those areas available.

Q: What happens if the new administration doesn’t want the new 5-year program? Will they have an opportunity to change it?

A: The next administration will have every opportunity to take advantage of today's action. Decisions to continue or stop this process will be theirs.

Q1: Are you going to open up the entire OCS or just certain sections?

A: This action is designed to encourage discussions about the OCS areas of greatest interest, with the greatest potential. New areas will not be available for leasing until the Five Year Program is complete, having incorporated multiple rounds of public comment and Congressional approval.

Q: How much oil do you really think is out there?

A: The Minerals Management Service estimates about 17.84 billion barrels of oil and 76.47 trillion cubic feet of natural gas to be technically recoverable in the areas currently off limits. Those numbers are very conservative as little exploration has been conducted in most of those areas during the past 20-30 years. Our estimates are based on the available data. We have seen, though, that the numbers tend to increase dramatically as technology improves and exploration activities occur.

Q: Which areas are considered to be under the congressional ban?

A: The congressional ban currently encompasses all of the Outer Continental Shelf located along the west coast, east coast, most of the Eastern Gulf of Mexico Planning Area, and a portion of the Central Gulf of Mexico Planning Area.

Q: How much energy does the Outer Continental Shelf provide our nation?

A: The Outer Continental Shelf currently provides about 27% of domestic oil production and about 15% of domestic natural gas production.

Q: What is MMS doing to make companies produce on the leases they already have?

A: MMS encourages due diligence by establishing primary terms of leases that allow only the minimum length of time a company should need to explore a lease. At the end of the primary term, the lease must produce in paying quantities or the operator must conduct continuous operations in order to keep the lease in effect unless MMS grants an extension. If an extension is granted, the MMS monitors activity closely and ensures that approved milestones are met in a timely fashion.

Helping to Solve America's Energy Crisis

2008-08-12T20:17:00.003-05:00

This is a map of areas currently off limits to oil and natural gas exploration.

In March, 2008, I was appointed to a US Department of the Interior sub-committee which deals with oil and natural gas leases on America's outer continental shelf (see earlier posts).

I am excited about playing a small role in helping the Nation solve it's energy crisis by utilizing our own natural resources. Our first action will be a conference call of the committee on August 26th.

Here is a copy of the Dept. of Interior Press Release about this initiative:

Interior Department Initiates New Five Year

Oil and Gas Leasing Program for Outer Continental Shelf

Seeks Public Comment to Address Changed Energy Situation

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Saying the nation’s energy situation has dramatically changed in the past year, Secretary of the Interior Dirk Kempthorne today jumpstarted the development of a new oil and natural gas leasing program for the U.S. Outer Continental Shelf. The action could give the next administration a two-year head start in expanding energy production from federal offshore jurisdictions, including some areas where a congressional ban had prevented oil and gas development.

“When our current five-year program for Outer Continental Shelf oil and gas leasing was launched in July 2007, oil was selling for $64 a barrel,” Kempthorne said. “Today a barrel of oil costs more than $120, almost double the price a year ago. Clearly, today’s escalating energy prices and the widening gap between U.S. energy consumption and supply have changed the fundamental assumptions on which many of our decisions were based.”

“Areas that were considered too expensive to develop a year ago are no longer necessarily out of reach based on improvements to technology and safety,” Kempthorne noted. “The American people and the President want action and this initiative can accelerate an offshore exploration and development program that can increase production from additional domestic energy resources.”

President Bush lifted the Executive Withdrawal on oil and gas leasing operations on the Outer Continental Shelf on July 14, calling on Congress to lift its ban that has been in place since 1982. He also urged Congress to enact legislation that would allow states to have a say regarding operations off their shores and to share in the resulting revenues.

“The President believes coastal states should have a voice in how Outer Continental Shelf resources are developed off their shores while ensuring those environments are protected and that Congress should provide a way for the federal government and states to share new leasing revenues,” Kempthorne said.

Because of the current energy situation and the President’s action, Secretary Kempthorne has directed the Minerals Management Service to begin the initial steps for developing a new five-year program that accurately reflects the nation’s needs. The multi-year process starts with a call for information from all parties on what a new five-year program should consider. MMS is also requesting comment to ensure that all interests and concerns are considered regarding oil and gas leasing and exploration and development resulting from a new five-year program. The governors of all 50 states will be specifically asked for their comments, particularly on issues unique to each state.

“This initiative could provide a significant advantage for the incoming administration, offering options it would not otherwise have had until at least 2010,” Kempthorne said. “Today’s action would provide a 2-year head start for the next administration on developing a new five-year program.”

The current program runs from 2007-2012 and includes 21 lease sales in eight of the 26 Outer Continental Shelf planning areas in the Gulf of Mexico, Alaska and the Atlantic. It does not include areas under a congressional ban, with the exception of Virginia. The new program, depending on public comment, can consider any area although any leasing in a banned area would need congressional action.

The Outer Continental Shelf currently provides 27 percent of U.S. domestic oil production and 15 percent of domestic natural gas production -- most of that from the Gulf of Mexico. The areas under a congressional ban contain an additional 18 billion barrels of oil and 76 trillion cubic feet of natural gas in yet-to-be-discovered fields.

Those numbers are considered conservative estimates because little exploration has been conducted in most of those areas during the past 20-30 years because of the congressional ban. Interior’s estimates are based on available data. Estimates tend to increase dramatically as technology improves and exploration activities occur.

This initiative uses the process mandated by the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act Amendments of 1978, which give the Secretary of the Interior authority to develop “out-of-cycle” leasing programs and requires various procedural steps, including several rounds of public comment and multiple environmental reviews.

Funding Education

2008-08-05T21:12:00.002-05:00

Alright - I know it has been a while since I posted anything. I wanted to post about the Education Funding Study Committee meetings.

First off, I want to thank those committee members who have participated and are trying to help us "Untangle the Knot of Education Funding Mechanisms." This is an almost daunting task.

But I am encouraged by today's meeting and what I see as similar solutions from two unlikely sources: The Dept. of Education Task Force and The South Carolina Policy Council. It looks as if more and more people are embracing the idea of funding students versus funding programs.

Rep. Clemmons provided the beginnings of a bill for us to chew on. I compare it to a jar of clay that we can now begin molding and shaping. Thanks, Alan!

I like the Policy Council's study on Weighted Pupil Funding or "Backpacking." In the next meeting we will take a comprehensive look at Dr. Rex's Task Force's report. The meeting after that we will talk with Dr. Brian Hassell, the author of the Policy Council's study.

Democracy in Our Time

2008-06-06T06:03:00.002-05:00

The stuff below comes from an email that has been circulating the internet. I have been saying since 2000 that the Democrats (Al Gore) won the population centers where more people are reliant on big government and it's supportive programs, while the Republicans (George W. Bush) won the other states where there are hardworking Americans paying taxes. (There was simiar patterns in the 2004 Presidential Election) I have to say THANK GOD for the WISDOM of our FOUNDING FATHERS in the design of the ELECTORAL COLLEGE.

From the Email:

About the time our original thirteen states adopted their new constitution in 1787, Alexander Tyler, a Scottish history professor at the University of Edinburgh , had this to say about the fall of the Athenian Republic some 2,000 years earlier:

"A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government."

"A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury."

"From that moment on, the majority always vote for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship."

"The average age of the world's greatest civilizations from the beginning of history, has been about 200 years"

"During those 200 years, those nations always progressed through the following sequence:

1. from bondage to spiritual faith;
2. from spiritual faith to great courage;
3. from courage to liberty;
4. from liberty to abundance;
5. from abundance to complacency;
6. from complacency to apathy;
7. from apathy to dependence;
8. from dependence back into bondage"

Professor Joseph Olson of Hemline University School of Law, St. Paul, Minnesota, points out some interesting facts concerning the 2000 Presidential election:

Number of States won by: Democrats: 19 Republicans: 29
Square miles of land won by: Democrats: 580,000 Republicans: 2,427,000
Population of counties won by: Democrats: 127 million Republicans: 143 million
Murder rate per 100,000 residents in counties won by: Democrats: 13.2 Republicans: 2.1

Professor Olson adds: "In aggregate, the map of the territory Republican won was mostly the land owned by the taxpaying citizens of this great country. Democrat territory mostly encompassed those citizens living in government-owned tenements and living off various forms of government welfare..."

Olson believes the United States is now somewhere between the "complacency and apathy" phase of Professor Tyler's definition of democracy, with some forty percent of the nation's population already having reached the "governmental dependency" phase.

If Congress grants amnesty and citizenship to twenty million criminal invaders called illegal's and they vote, then we can say goodbye to the USA in fewer than five years.

No Apologies for Being Conservative

2008-05-27T12:02:00.004-05:00

We stand at a crossroads in South Carolina as we debate the Governor's Veto of the Cigarette Tax. There are some things that the proponents of a cigarette tax are not telling you. While I firmly agree that reducing smoking is a good idea for the citizens of this state, I think a government using its power of taxation to change behaviors is a slippery slope to it using taxation to punish unpopular activities.

The argument that it will be a deterrence to underage smoking is a ruse used to gain support. If we want to be serious about underage smoking, then let us adopt policies in this state that really penalize youthful offenders.

In addition, the Bill as written is not revenue neutral. We are expanding a program that we cannot afford and we are at risk of (in subsequent years due to historical revenue reductions from this tax) 1) not being able to provide the services to those who are currently receiving them; 2) cutting programs at other agencies to pay for them; or 3) further raising taxes to pay the cost of the expanded Medicaid rolls and new welfare voucher programs.

We should be empowering the individual healthcare consumer by way of health savings accounts or, better yet, simply providing a tax refund so that citizens might make their own decisions with their own money.

This bill sets up a trap for future taxpayers. The legislation adds people to the Medicaid rolls which means, of course, that the cost of Medicaid will rise. The proposed increased cigarette tax promises, hopefully, to decrease the purchase of cigarettes in South Carolina. This means that the revenue from this new tax will decrease over time. Over a short time the revenue from the cigarette tax will fall behind the cost of the new Medicaid recipients. The only place to make up the difference will be the General Fund of the State. That reality means that this legislation actually represents a tax increase on everyone in future years and I cannot support that.

Rep. Doug Jennings stated it well: this vote is about raising the cigarette tax from our 7 cents per pack to 57 cents. Ok, I am fine with that. But let's be smarter about spending the money. Period.

If Sweden can do it..........?

2008-05-27T11:47:00.002-05:00

Sweden's parliament has approved a government proposal to deny subsidized public healthcare services to illegal immigrants. From an article from YAHOO news:

STOCKHOLM (AFP) - Sweden's parliament on Wednesday approved a centre-right government proposal to deny subsidised public healthcare services to illegal immigrants as of July 1.

The law, which is largely a formalisation of the current practice, stipulates that clandestine immigrants and rejected asylum seekers can only receive emergency medical care if they pay for it themselves.

The parliament voted 265-33 in favour of the proposal, with the left-wing Green Party and Left Party voting against it on humanitarian grounds.

The vote was postponed by a day to allow for an extended debate.

The government plans to create a commission later this year to examine whether some groups within the categories of people who will not receive subsidised health care should be entitled to it.

All parties in parliament are, for instance, in favour of giving clandestine immigrant children the right to subsidised medical care.

Government's Growth is "Smokin'"

2008-05-08T21:21:00.003-05:00

The South Carolina Senate passed this week a 50 cent per pack cigarette tax increase - expected to generate $159 million annually. Where will the money go? The majority of it will go for heath care for low income residents - 50% for Medicaid and 50% to a new voucher system for the state's lowest-income residents to get private health insurance. There are a few concerns for me here:

I personally have never had a philosophical problem with a cigarette tax increase. The problems I have had, though, have been: 1. What is the state was going to use the excess revenue for? and 2. Would we be creating programs that would need recurring revenues? - knowing that the new revenues from this tax would dramatically decrease over time due to, hopefully, less people smoking as well as cross-border or internet cigarette sales.

The Senate plan, as I understand it, grows government - well - it grows welfare, too. So the state is going to chase the 3 to 1 Medicaid match with 50% of the revenues (keep in mind that historical data shows that revenues from a cigarette tax decrease after the initial surge, leveling off somewhere significantly below the revenues realized in the first couple of years). When we grow the Medicaid rolls, what will we do in future years when the cigarette tax revenue declines? That would mean taking dollars from elsewhere to fund Medicaid or, heaven forbid, cut Medicaid spending - which we will never do........

Then, the Senate plan will grow welfare by creating a voucher system for the state's poorest to purchase health insurance........hmmmmm..........So there is nothing to help small businesses provide affordable health care insurance for those employees that are gainfully employed, trying to contribute to the success of a business and are paying taxes? Or how about the guy in the middle, who is struggling to have health insurance, will probably never be eligible for Medicaid and needs a helping had if we are going to increase taxes?

Yes I am a Conservative. No apologies here for that. I am not about growing government and not about growing welfare. I may not have a problem with the cigarette tax increase - but new revenues would have to be used sensibly to help the majority of the state citizens. Give me a sensible plan and I'll vote for it. Give me the Senate plan, and I will vote against it.

Energy

2008-05-08T21:11:00.003-05:00

South Carolina Trade Mission

2008-05-02T11:51:00.003-05:00

With the strength of the Euro versus the US Dollar, it is a good time for South Carolina to be courting German (and other European) businesses to our state. While on a a recent trade mission to Germany and France, Representative Mike Pitts and myself had the opportunity to meet one on one with German companies. A meeting and plant tour with Koerber in Berlin (Koerber recently announced locating a manufacturing business in Laurens, SC), we were glad to hear of a planned expansion of operations in Laurens - even though the operation is just getting underway!

I want to take the opportunity to say what a great job that South Carolina's Department of Commerce European Office is doing. From what I have seen, the Director - Ian Forbes-Jones and the Assistant Director - John Stillwell - are well respected and are doing a first class job for the state.

We attended the Hannover Trade Fair in Hannover, Germany - WOW! It is the largest in Europe and is truly hard to explain how large it is. The University of South Carolina's Hydrogen Fuel Cell research was featured and was a big part of the fuel-cell exposition portion of the energy section. Although it was USC, I was still proud to see South Carolina so well represented.

More about the energy issues I witnessed in later posts.

Jeff

Legislators Meet with German Parlimentarian

2008-04-22T16:03:00.003-05:00

Representatives Jeff Duncan and Mike Pitts met today with Thomas Silberhorn, Member of German Bundestag.

Topics ranged from Mr. Silberhorn's life outside of politics (he is an attorney) to European Union Trade, Energy and the possibility of Turkey entering the EU. It was a tremendous experience and I was surprised at the amount of time Mr. Silberhorn spent talking with the Trade Mission group from South Carolina. He has previously been to the US and to Greenville with BMW. His District is the Bamburg area of Bavaria and is close to the BMW operation.

In addition to meeting with the Member, the group was able to tour the Budestag and discuss the differences of Parlimentary procedures in the US vs. Germany. For instance - on a recorded vote, the members must exit the chamber and then return via doors marked "Ja" for yes or "Nien" for no. Each member is counted as they enter the room by the appropriate door. There is also a door for abstaining from the vote. A physical act to record the vote was most interesting.

We will attend the Hannover Trade Fair on Wednesday/Thursday (Europe's largest Trade Fair) where we will meet with industry of different sorts to discuss South Carolina's business climate.

Trade Mission to Germany

2008-04-21T00:14:00.004-05:00

Representatives Duncan & Pitts in Germany to recruit business and industry:

In an effort to assist the South Carolina Department of Commerce with industry recruitment, Representative Jeff Duncan (R - Laurens/Newberry Cos.) and Representative Mike Pitts (R - Laurens/Greenwood Cos.) made a commitment to travel to Germany on the 2008 Trade Mission.

Monday's agenda includes meeting with Koeber, a German company which recently announced a strong investment in Laurens County. Following that meeting, the group, which includes Dr. Jay West from Greenwood County and Edward B. O'Donnell, former US Ambassador and current Director for International Operations for the American Business Development Group, will meet with prospective German Companies in Berlin.

After two days in Berlin, the Trade Mission will move to Hannover, Germany for the Hannover Trade Fair, the largest trade fair in Europe.

Jeff's Notes: I want to specifically mention the work that SC Commerce has done to put this trip together and the outstanding work that Ian Forbes-Jones, Managing Director of the SC European Office, along with the Asst. Director - John Stilwell, are doing in Europe. In just a short time, it was apparent to the Trade Mission delegates that these two are doing a fantastic job for the state of South Carolina!

With the strength of the EURO against the DOLLAR, now is the time for South Carolina to really be recruiting European industry. I wish more were in attendance with us here in Germany, but aside from that - I look forward to making a positive impact on SC economic development efforts here.

For the Pundits out there: No State dollars were involved in our travels to Europe.

Obama on Guns

2008-04-19T11:07:00.001-05:00

This is just a quick post on Obama's anti-gun stance - contrary to what some groups are saying about this aspiring Presidential candidate - his record is pretty clear as "Anti-gun"

Hunters and shooters group says Obama 'gets' 2nd amendment
By: Mark On Memmott and Jill Lawrence
USAT Politics Blog
http://blogs.usatoday.com/onpolitics/2008/04/hunters-and-sho.html

USA TODAY's David Jackson listened in on a conference call sponsored by Barack Obama's campaign to tout the endorsement of the American Hunters and Shooters Association.

Leaders of the group said Obama is a strong supporter of the Second Amendment right to bear arms, David reports. He says they brushed aside his statement last week that many Americans "cling" to guns because they are "bitter" over economic problems.

Some opponents have said the statement shows Obama is elitist and out of touch. "We know Sen. Obama 'gets it,' " said Ray Schoenke, president of the group. "To say that he is an 'elitist' is patently ridiculous."

The American Hunters and Shooter Association was formed two years ago to counter the more conservative Second Amendment groups, particularly the National Rifle Association and Gun Owners of America.

Hillary Clinton's campaign was ready with a list and links to Obama's earlier positions in favor of various gun control measures. "It will be interesting to learn how the American Hunters & Shooters Association feels about Senator Obama’s previous position to ban the manufacture, sale, and possession of all handguns," Clinton Montana state director Matt McKenna said. "It’s awfully hard to shoot a gun if you’re not allowed to have one."

Update at 2:25 p.m. ET: Danny Diaz, spokesman for the Republican National Committee, weighs in: “Should Barack Obama be the Democrats’ nominee, he will probably be the most anti-gun general election candidate in political history. The AHSA’s endorsement of Obama will not provide him any credibility on the Second Amendment.”

OBAMA HAS A LONG ANTI-GUN RECORD

OBAMA WANTS TO BAN MANY TYPES OF FIREARMS

Obama Has Come Out In Support Of Banning Handguns, Hunting Firearms And So-Called “Assault Weapons”:

In Response To A 1996 Independent Voters Of Illinois Questionnaire, Obama Indicated That He Supported Banning The “Manufacture, Sale And Possession Of Handguns.” Question: “Do you support state legislation to … ban the manufacture, sale and possession of handguns?” Obama’s Response: “Yes.” (Independent Voters Of Illinois Independent Precinct Organization 1996 General Candidate Questionnaire, Barack Obama Responses, 9/9/96)

During 4/16 Dem. Debate, Obama Falsely Claimed His Handwriting Did Not Appear On Questionnaire. “Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., maintained at Wednesday’s ABC News debate in Philadelphia that his handwriting does not appear on a 1996 questionnaire stating support for a ban on the manufacture, sale, and possession of handguns. The Democratic presidential frontrunner made this claim even though a copy of the original document suggests otherwise. … When asked about the gun questionnaire with the handwriting on it, Obama adviser Robert Gibbs did not dispute that the writing was Obama’s.” (Teddy Davis and Talal Al-Khatib, “Obama Forgets Writing On Gun Questionnaire,” ABC News’ “Political Radar” Blog, www.abcnews.com, 4/16/08)

Scholar John Lott Recalls Obama Stating: “I Don’t Believe That People Should Be Able To Own Guns.” John Lott: “In fact, I knew Obama during the mid-1990s, and his answers to IVI’s question on guns fit well with the Obama that I knew. Indeed, the first time I introduced myself to him he said ‘Oh, you are the gun guy.’ I responded ‘Yes, I guess so.’ He simply responded that ‘I don’t believe that people should be able to own guns.’” (John R. Lott, Jr., “Obama And Guns: Two Different Views,” Fox News, www.foxnews.com, 4/7/08)

Obama Supported Banning “The Sale Or Transfer Of All Forms Of Semi-Automatic Weapons.” According to his responses to an Illinois State Legislative Election 1998 National Political Awareness Test, Obama pledged to “Ban the sale or transfer of all forms of semi-automatic weapons.” (Project Vote Smart Website, www.votesmart.org, Accessed 3/5/08)

In 2003, Obama Voted In Support Of Legislation That “Would Have Banned Most Of The Privately Held Hunting Shotguns, Target Rifles, And Black Powder Rifles” In Illinois. “[I]n 2003, Obama voted in support of SB1195, which, if passed, would have banned most of the privately held hunting shotguns, target rifles, and black powder rifles in the state. If the ban was enacted, law enforcement officials would have been authorized to forcibly enter private homes to confiscate newly banned firearms.” (Illinois State Rifle Association, “ISRA Blasts Candidate Obama On His Record Of Hostility Toward Law-Abiding Firearm Owners,” Press Release, 8/24/04)

In A 2004 Candidate Questionnaire, Obama Supported Banning So-Called “Assault Weapons.” Question: “Do you support legislation to ban the manufacture, sale and possession of … assault weapons?” Obama’s Response: “Yes.” (Lynn Sweet, “Obama’s 2003 IVI-IPO Questionnaire May Be Getting Closer Scrutiny,” Chicago Sun-Times’ “The Scoop From Washington” Blog, http://blogs.suntimes.com, 12/11/07)

OBAMA HAS TAKEN A NUMBER OF ANTI-GUN POSITIONS

Obama Has A Long Anti-Gun Record:

Obama Was Director Of Anti-Gun Joyce Foundation, Which Spent Millions On Gun-Control Causes. “Adding even further skepticism to Obama’s claim of support for the 2nd Amendment is his previous service as a director of the Joyce Foundation. Since 2000, the Joyce Foundation has provided over $15 Million in funding to radical gun control organizations such as the Violence Policy Center and the Illinois Council Against Handgun Violence. The Joyce Foundation is tightly linked to the Soros Open Society Institute -- an extremist group that advocates a worldwide ban on civilian firearm ownership.” (Illinois State Rifle Association, “ISRA Blasts Candidate Obama On His Record Of Hostility Toward Law-Abiding Firearm Owners,” Press Release, 8/24/04)

Running For The U.S. Senate In 2004, Obama Advocated National Gun-Control Legislation. “On the issue of prohibiting citizens from carrying concealed weapons, Obama said he believes national legislation should be passed to ‘prevent other states’ laws [allowing citizens to conceal their guns] from threatening the safety of Illinois residents.’” (John Chase, “Keyes, Obama Are Far Apart On Guns,” Chicago Tribune, 9/15/04)

Obama Has Expressed His Opposition To Concealed Carry. Obama: “I mean, I am consistently on record and will continue to be on record as opposing concealed carry.” (David Mendell, “Obama Has Center In His Sights,” Chicago Tribune, 4/27/04)

In 2001, Obama Voted Against A Bill To Allow Individuals To Carry A Concealed Weapon When They Have A Valid Order Of Protection Out Against Another Person. (S.B. 604, Senate Floor Third Reading, Failed, 29-27-0, 4/4/01, Obama Voted Nay)

Obama Believes The DC Gun Ban Is Constitutional. “Obama believes the D.C. handgun law is constitutional.” (James Oliphant and Michael J. Higgins, “Court To Hear Gun Case,” Chicago Tribune, 11/20/07)

In 2004, Obama Voted Against Self-Defense Rights. “[Obama] opposed letting people use a self-defense argument if charged with violating local handgun bans by using weapons in their homes. The bill was a reaction to a Chicago-area man who, after shooting an intruder, was charged with a handgun violation.” (“Obama Record May Be Gold Mine For Critics,” The Associated Press, 1/17/07)

Obama Wants To Turn Law-Abiding Gun Owners Who Are Victims Of Theft Into Felons. “Obama is proposing to make it a felony for a gun owner whose firearm was stolen from his residence which causes harm to another person if that weapon was not securely stored in that home.” (Chinta Strausberg, “Obama Unveils Federal Gun Bill,” Chicago Defender, 12/13/99)

In 2005, Obama Voted Twice To Hold Manufacturers, Distributors, Dealers And Importers Of Firearms And Ammunition Liable For The Acts Of Criminals. (S. 397, CQ Vote #206: Motion Agreed To 66-32: R 53-1; D 13-30; I 0-1, 7/26/05, Obama Voted Nay; S. 397, CQ Vote #219: Passed 65-31: R 50-2; D 14-29; I 1-0, 7/29/05, Obama Voted Nay)

Obama Pressed To Require Gun Owners To Supply Photos And Fingerprints To State Officials. “Sen. Barack Obama of Chicago called the Democrats’ proposed crackdown ‘not only constitutional, but eminently reasonable.’ … The proposals would: … Make gun owners apply in person for Firearm Owner Identification cards and supply their photos and fingerprints.” (Sean Noble, “Senate Democrats’ Proposals Take Aim At Weapons Control,” The [Springfield, IL] State Journal-Register, 2/15/01)

In 1999, Obama Came Out In Support Of “Smart Gun” Technology. “[Obama is] also asking that gun manufacturers be required to develop safety measures that permit only the original owner of the firearm to operate the weapon purchased.” (Chinta Strausberg, “Obama Unveils Federal Gun Bill,” Chicago Defender, 12/13/99)

Obama Has Expressed His Continued Support For Registration and Licensing. Obama: “I’ll continue to be in favor of handgun law registration requirements and licensing requirements for training …” (Chinta Strausberg, “Obama And Trotter Takes Aim At IRA For Waging Unjust Campaign,” Chicago Defender, 7/5/01)

Obama Has Received “F” Ratings From The National Rifle Association:

In 2004, 2002 And 1998, Obama Received “F” Ratings From The National Rifle Association Political Victory Fund. The NRA has given Obama 3 “F’s.” (National Rifle Association Political Victory Fund Website, www.nrapvf.org, Accessed 1/8/08; National Rifle Association Political Victory Fund Website, www.nrapvf.org, Accessed 1/8/08; 1998 Illinois National Rifle Association Political Victory Fund Political Preference Chart, p.2)

OBAMA: NO GUN SHOPS NEAR SCHOOLS, BUT PORN SHOPS ARE OK

Obama Wanted To Ban Gun Businesses From Being Within Five Miles Of A School Or Park, But Balked At Placing Similar Restrictions On Porn Shops:

At An Anti-Gun Rally, Obama Proposed Federal Gun Control Legislation That Included Restrictions On The Placement Of Gun Stores. “[Obama is] proposing that all federally licensed gun dealers sell firearms in a storefront and not from their homes while banning their business from being within five miles of a school or a park.” (Chinta Strausberg, “Obama Unveils Federal Gun Bill,” Chicago Defender, 12/13/99)

But In 2001, Obama Voted “Present” On A Bill To Place Similar Restrictions On Adult Establishments. In 2001, Obama refused to support a bill restricting “adult use” establishments by prohibiting locations of such establishments within 1000 feet of schools, parks, places of worship, preschools, day cares and other residential areas. (S.B. 609: Senate Floor Third Reading, Failed, 33-15-05, 3/29/01, Obama Voted Present)

Marriage

2008-04-05T12:15:00.006-05:00

As a follow-up to my comments last week during the Marriage Tax Credit Debate: I would love to see South Carolina, and the nation for that matter, create more incentives for both parents to remain in the home, as I feel that one of the societal issues in America (and England according to this article) have to do with the erosion of our family structure, most importantly having both Mom and Dad at home. This is an article by Stephen Flurry from "theTrumpet.com"

Stephen FlurryColumnist

Britain’s Broken Society

March 28, 2008 | From theTrumpet.com

Now, even marriage is being called into question.

Stephen Flurry

The marriage rate in Britain has collapsed to its lowest point since its government began keeping statistics in 1862. Even when discounting population growth, the numbers are embarrassingly low. According to Britain’s Office for National Statistics (bons), in 2006, the UK recorded a little over 228,000 marriages—its lowest number since 1895, when its population was barely half what it is today.

In response to the study, the Daily Mail quoted British researcher Patricia Morgan as saying that the government had succeeded in “eradicating” marriage. “This is what they have tried to achieve and they should be congratulating themselves,” Morgan said. “But it is a disaster for children, families and society.” The British government has indeed played a significant role in accelerating family breakdown. As the Sunday Telegraph pointed out last year (July 15, 2007),

Over the past decade, Labor has presided over the almost total destruction of any official recognition that marriage is something to be encouraged, to the point where most official forms no longer require, indeed no longer allow, people filling them in to state whether they are married. It has become government policy to accept that co-habitation should be recognized as “just as good” and “equally as valid a choice” as marriage, and that all trace of stigma attached to having children out of wedlock should be removed.

Thus, in legislating policies and entitlements tailor-made for society’s exceptions, the exceptions have now become the rule.

That’s not to say that Labor is the root cause of Britain’s family breakdown. As the bons study notes, the institution of marriage has been steadily eroding since the early 1970s. Consider these recent statistics:

For Brits who choose to marry, 45 percent of new marriages will end in divorce. Added to that, the average age for women entering first-time marriages is nearly 30—for men, it’s 32.

Of the marriages that stay together, based on a recent column in the Sunday Times, an incredible 59 percent of married women said they would leave their husbands tomorrow if they could be assured of economic stability. Half of the husbands questioned defined their marriage as “loveless.”

According to the annual British Social Attitudes Survey, 70 percent of Brits see nothing wrong with premarital sex. Less than a third believe homosexuality is wrong. These attitudes have become increasingly more liberal over the past 20 years.

Forty percent of British babies are now born out of wedlock. The teen pregnancy rate in England and Wales is six times higher than in Holland—three times that of France. As Jenny McCartney recently wrote for the Telegraph, Britain’s teen pregnancy plague is “the talk of Europe.”

Violent crime among teenagers in the UK has increased 37 percent in just three years, according to the Sunday Telegraph: “Total offenses climbed steadily from 184,474 in 2003 to 222,750 in 2006, the last year for which figures are available—a rise of 21 percent. But the increase in violent offending was steeper, while robberies rose even more dramatically, up 43 percent over the three years. By contrast, adult convictions and cautions increased by less than 1 percent.”

The breakdown of family life is Britain’s most urgent crisis today. Every week, it seems, newspapers in the UK shed additional light on how wrecked the British family actually is. The once United Kingdom has not only lost its empire, what’s left at home is rotten to the core.

Earlier this year, the Royal United Services Institute (rusi) published a sobering report about Britain’s national security risks. (You can view a pdf of the report here). The report’s authors argue that British weakness at home is exposing the country to dangerous threats from abroad and within its borders. “The ‘war on terror’ is with us now in all its ugliness,” the report asserts. It then raised a number of important questions it said the British government needed to answer, as well as choices to be made. “In making our choices, however, we need to know who we are ourselves and what we stand for,” it said. “Once we know these things and admit them, we can restore our divided house to harmony and thence to security” (emphasis mine throughout). Yet, in addressing Britain’s divided house, notice what the report concentrates on:

The United Kingdom presents itself as a target, as a fragmenting, post-Christian society, increasingly divided about interpretations of its history, about its national aims, its values and in its political identity. That fragmentation is worsened by the firm self-image of those elements within it who refuse to integrate. This is a problem worsened by the lack of leadership from the majority which in misplaced deference to “multiculturalism” failed to lay down the line to immigrant communities, thus undercutting those within them trying to fight extremism.

But unless Britain is willing to fight extremism within the basic building block of society—the nuclear family—how will it find strength to confront its enemies abroad? Britain’s interpretations of history, its national aims, values and political identity all begin at home—within individual families of British society.

In her book Londonistan, Melanie Phillips points to the importance of America’s alliance with Britain in its war against terrorism. Great Britain, she said, is America’s most important ally. “The United States may provide the muscle to defend the free world against Islamic fascism, but Britain—the originator of the values that America defends—provides the backbone.”

And the solid family structure is what has traditionally held that backbone together. But over the past two generations, family life in Britain has undergone a radical transformation. The Judeo-Christian system of ethics has collapsed. Government programs are laden with all sorts of incentives that encourage deviant behavior. Forty percent of British citizens receive some kind of government subsidy. It has become a culture of dependency where divorce, out-of-wedlock births and juvenile crime are sky high.

Even marriage is being called into question.

Why Marriage?

Well ahead of his time, Herbert Armstrong wrote this 40 years ago: “Some psychologists, taking a new look at the institution of marriage, are voicing shocking predictions for the near future. Indeed, in their professional eyes, the trend toward obsolescence of the marriage custom has already started, and is gaining momentum!”

Marriages are not only breaking down, he went on to write in 1968, even their usefulness and desirability are being seriously questioned!

Imagine British citizens questioning the usefulness of marriage 50 or 60 years ago. Yet today, we have drifted so far from our Maker that now we question the very institutions He ordained! According to the bons study, only 34 percent of British marriages even occur within a religious setting, which is half what it was in 1991—just 17 years ago. Look how far and how fast we have drifted away from anything having to do with the Bible.

We take marriage for granted! If, as many assume, man evolved from apes and monkeys over the course of millions of years, then, as Mr. Armstrong asked, where along the evolutionary line did marriage begin? Animals have never married. Why and when did it begin with mankind?

Or, if you believe that God created man, why does the largest Christian denomination on Earth teach that the highest spiritual state is that of an unmarried celibate?

These questions are answered in our free booklet Why Marriage! Soon Obsolete? •

HOPE

2008-03-30T21:11:00.003-05:00

I had the good fortune of meeting with a young student from Presbyterian College on Friday to discuss soil and water conservation in South Carolina. She was interviewing me for her internship at the Joe Adair Center, a wonderful nature and conservation learning center located in the heart of Laurens and run by a great lady named Laura Blind.

The interview involved a discussion about the surface water withdrawal bill currently being debated in the Senate and evolved into more detailed discussions on the environment, global warming, the economy and current events.

I left the meeting energized and very optimistic about the generation of college students currently enrolled. Knowing how, generally, liberal-leaning most college campuses are, Mandy convinced me that there are self-thinking students who are digesting the information given to them, investigating all sides of the issues and coming up with their own conclusions about things. Thanks, Mandy, for giving me hope for our future and good luck! You have a very bright future, I believe!

Campaign Season 2008

2008-03-30T21:08:00.002-05:00

I want to take this opportunity to say THANK YOU to the voters of House District 15 who continue to support my efforts in Columbia. As of the close of filing today, Sunday, March 30th - I sam without opposition for the 2008 Primary and General elections. I look forward to serving the District for another two-year term!

Why Iraq?

2008-03-24T20:49:00.003-05:00

I hear a lot of folks question why we are in Iraq and Afghanistan - well, not as many people question Afghanistan because they can easily make a direct connection between Al Qaeda and Bin Laden with Afghanistan. But the reasons are really the same - we are at war against terrorism in this world - not against a nation state as in previous wars. There is no enemy to oust from a certain territory or nation - no borders to reclaim and reestablish; no spoils of war to return to the rightful owners or heirs.

But why did we go to Iraq, the pundits ask? There were no "direct" ties to Al Qaeda in Iraq or with Saddam Hussein, they say.

Did there have to be?

Saddam Hussein was a terrorist himself and definitely supported terrorist acts. Do we forget that he paid families up to $30,000 per family member that committed a suicide terrorist act in Israel?

One windfall that the media seems to fail to address is in Israel. Think about it......when was the last time you turned on the news and heard of a suicide bombing in an Israeli marketplace or on a bus in Israel? I can't remember the last one and would wager that it has been years. Not counting the recent shooting that happened at a school in Israel nor the brief war/skirmish with Hezbollah in southern Lebanon, I can't think of a suicide bombing there in the past few years - THANK GOD!

But also thanks to the US military and our President for taking it to the terrorists in their home countries or the nations which harbor them.

I went back and re-read President Bush's speech following September 11. Here it is in its entirety - I have put in bold the paragraph about nations harboring terrorists: Let us never forget, please......

September 11, 2001 - President George W. Bush - Speech to the Nation

THE PRESIDENT: Good evening. Today, our fellow citizens, our way of life, our very freedom came under attack in a series of deliberate and deadly terrorist acts. The victims were in airplanes, or in their offices; secretaries, businessmen and women, military and federal workers; moms and dads, friends and neighbors. Thousands of lives were suddenly ended by evil, despicable acts of terror.

The pictures of airplanes flying into buildings, fires burning, huge structures collapsing, have filled us with disbelief, terrible sadness, and a quiet, unyielding anger. These acts of mass murder were intended to frighten our nation into chaos and retreat. But they have failed; our country is strong.

A great people has been moved to defend a great nation. Terrorist attacks can shake the foundations of our biggest buildings, but they cannot touch the foundation of America. These acts shattered steel, but they cannot dent the steel of American resolve.

America was targeted for attack because we're the brightest beacon for freedom and opportunity in the world. And no one will keep that light from shining.

Today, our nation saw evil, the very worst of human nature. And we responded with the best of America -- with the daring of our rescue workers, with the caring for strangers and neighbors who came to give blood and help in any way they could.

Immediately following the first attack, I implemented our government's emergency response plans. Our military is powerful, and it's prepared. Our emergency teams are working in New York City and Washington, D.C. to help with local rescue efforts.

Our first priority is to get help to those who have been injured, and to take every precaution to protect our citizens at home and around the world from further attacks.

The functions of our government continue without interruption. Federal agencies in Washington which had to be evacuated today are reopening for essential personnel tonight, and will be open for business tomorrow. Our financial institutions remain strong, and the American economy will be open for business, as well.

The search is underway for those who are behind these evil acts. I've directed the full resources of our intelligence and law enforcement communities to find those responsible and to bring them to justice. We will make no distinction between the terrorists who committed these acts and those who harbor them.

I appreciate so very much the members of Congress who have joined me in strongly condemning these attacks. And on behalf of the American people, I thank the many world leaders who have called to offer their condolences and assistance.

America and our friends and allies join with all those who want peace and security in the world, and we stand together to win the war against terrorism. Tonight, I ask for your prayers for all those who grieve, for the children whose worlds have been shattered, for all whose sense of safety and security has been threatened. And I pray they will be comforted by a power greater than any of us, spoken through the ages in Psalm 23: "Even though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I fear no evil, for You are with me."

This is a day when all Americans from every walk of life unite in our resolve for justice and peace. America has stood down enemies before, and we will do so this time. None of us will ever forget this day. Yet, we go forward to defend freedom and all that is good and just in our world.

Thank you. Good night, and God bless America.

GOD BLESS AMERICA INDEED! Jeff Duncan

Re-Election Press Release

2008-03-17T18:29:00.002-05:00

Rep. Jeff Duncan to Seek Re-Election

(CLINTON, S.C.) – Representative Jeff Duncan announced today that he will seek a fourth term representing the people of District 15 in the South Carolina House of Representatives.

“It is a tremendous honor to serve the people of District 15 in the State House,” said Rep. Duncan. “I’m honored and humbled that the people of Laurens and Newberry counties have elected me three times and my hope is that I have earned their trust for another term.”

Duncan currently serves in several leadership roles in the South Carolina House, including Chief Majority Party Whip, Chairman of the Environmental I sub-committee and Chairman of the South Carolina Legislative Sportsman’s Caucus. Previously, he has served as Vice Chairman of the Agriculture, Natural Resources and Environmental Affairs Committee and Vice Chairman of the Freshman Caucus.

With the recent retirement announcement of Representative William Witherspoon, Rep. Jeff Duncan is positioned well to be the top contender for the Chairmanship of the Agriculture, Natural Resources and Environmental Affairs Committee, one of only six major standing committees in the House.

During his tenure at the Capital in Columbia, Duncan has regularly been singled out for his leadership on important issues. He has been selected as “Legislator of the Year” by the South Carolina Recreation & Parks Association and recently by the South Carolina Wildlife Federation. In 2006, Duncan was named “Guardian of Small Business” by the National Federation of Independent Business for his work on tort reform and worker’s compensation reform.

This winter, Speaker of the House Bobby Harrell picked Duncan to Chair the important Education Funding Study Committee which began its’ work in December. “Jeff’s commitment to the State and to the people of District 15 is obvious every day in the House of Representatives,” said Speaker Harrell. “We regularly seek his input and his leadership on important issues because we see success from his efforts.”

Rep. Jeff Duncan is a real estate broker and auctioneer with offices located in Clinton. An Upstate native, Jeff is a graduate of Clemson University. He and his wife of 19 years, Melody, have three sons: Graham, John Philip and Parker.

In addition to his service in the House, Jeff Duncan serves as a Deacon at the First Baptist Church in Clinton and as a Board member of the Laurens County Chamber of Commerce, South Carolina Auctioneers Association and the Advisory Board at Palmetto Bank.

District 15 covers portions of both Laurens and Newberry counties, including the communities of Clinton, Joanna and Whitmire.

Outer Continental Shelf Policy Committee

2008-03-17T11:14:00.011-05:00

Rep. Jeff Duncan chosen to serve on Federal OCS Policy Committee
Department of the Interior - Minerals Management Service
5-Year OCS Oil and Gas Leasing Program Subcommittee

The Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) Policy Committee provides advice to the Secretary of the Interior on implementing the OCS Lands Act. It currently has three subcommittees: the 5-Year OCS Oil and Gas Leasing Program Subcommittee; the OCS Alternative Energy Subcommittee; and the Hard Minerals Subcommittee.

Rep. Jeff Duncan has just been appointed to serve on the 5-Year OCS Oil and Gas Leasing Program Subcommittee of the OCS Policy Committee. This Subcommittee's primary purpose is to assist and provide recommendations to the Minerals Management Service (MMS) and the Department of the Interior, through the full OCS Policy Committee, on the 5-Year leasing process that the OCS Lands Act, as amended, requires the Department of the Interior to undertake in developing a 5-Year OCS Oil and Gas Leasing Program.

This assessment by the Subcommittee will help guide the Secretary of the Interior and the MMS in determining if the current 5-Year process is the best method for assuring that the OCS meets the energy needs of the United States within the framework of a national energy policy and in the development of the next 5-year process.

“I am excited about the opportunity to serve our nation in this capacity as we seek to meet our energy demands for the future,” Representative Duncan said. “I believe that there are ways in which we can reduce our reliance on foreign sources of energy while remaining good stewards of the environment.”

Burning Our Food

2008-03-16T18:43:00.008-05:00

The Global Warming "debate" continues with little air-time or space given to the opposing view: the view that disputes Al Gore's INCONVENIENT TRUTH. As I study the issue - I hope to post my thoughts as I develop them. This little post concerns the push for alternative fuels - specifically corn-based ethanol.

If you haven't noticed yet, you will soon - the price of foodstuffs is going up. The reason is the increasing demand for corn to be used in the production of ethanol. Folks - it doesn't make sense for several reasons: 1. corn is not a good source of fuel, as it takes more energy to produce corn-ethanol than is gained in the output. That is not disputed; 2. even if we took all the available farm acreage in the US and started growing corn and soybeans, we still could not produce enough ethanol to meet our energy needs.

This is driving the price of corn out the roof (prices have gone from $1.86 bushel in late 2005 to $5 bushel on Chicago futures market in February 2008) and the price of things that eat / use corn along with it. (Wheat prices, too, have soared from $3.40 bushel in late 2005 to $18 at Chicago in February 2008). Just think about it - dairy farmers feed corn / silage to the cows. The price of corn makes this cost-prohibitive. Beef cattle farmers also feed some corn and this, coupled with the price of fuel & the low sale prices of recent years, has resulted in many cattle farmers dumping their cattle on the market. Right now, beef prices - ie. hamburger/steak, etc. are very low due to this flood of US beef on the market. But what do you think will be the case when supply doesn't meet demand for US beef - that's right - higher beef prices, too!

Next - think about our taking certain farmland out of normal production and putting it into corn/soy crops. That means, in order for us here in America to meet the food demands, we will be importing more and more food. It is a scary thought for the US to be reliant on other countries to provide our food. You think our thirst for foreign oil is causing tough economic times - just wait until there is an OPEC-like cartel dictating the price of say - wheat? The Feds have mandated that 36 Billion gallons of renewable fuel be used by year 2022. On what land, I ask?

I want to quote some stuff from a presentation by Dennis T. Avery of the Hudson Institute here and I want to make sure he gets credit. His presentation was titled "Food, Fuel or Wild Species: The Eco-Dangers of Growing More Biofuels."

The world is farming all of its prime land already. Agriculture is humanity's biggest intrusion on nature. To increase production for biofuels (or the replacement land to grow food crops) would take millions of acres and displace a lot of wild species, both flora and fauna. Think about the millions of acres of forests cleared and wetlands drained for agriculture.

World food/feed demand is expected to double in the next 40 years. Humans are expected to increase from 6.3 Billion to 8 - 10 Billion by 2050. A push for more high-protein diets are ardently sought but take three times the farming resources to grow.

Biofuels Violate Farm Rule #1: Save the Poorer Land for Nature

Corn ethanol nets 50 gals of gas equivalent per acre. If corn yields double (it would take better fertilizers for this and that is a use of energy to create) it still takes too much land.
Sugar cane yields 3.6 times more energy per acre but this is on tropical land with big biodiversity questions
Palm oil plantations attract thousand of great apes (orangutans) which are captured/killed so that the European Union can have biodiesel. It also threatens elephants and Sumatran tigers.

So, are we going to go backwards on protection of certain areas set aside for "green space" in our quest for alternative fuels?

Higher Crop Yields (more crop per acre): it will take more and better fertilizer to increase crop yields. Huge amounts of natural gas energy is necessary to create fertilizer and then you have the whole run-off issues, etc.

I am still studying switch-grass / pine harvest residue and other sources proposed for ethanol production. I could go on about that and I am sure someone will comment that there are or will be other sources for ethanol than food crops. The jury is still out on that.

In summary: fewer US crops for food; fewer cattle raised here in US; crops that are grown here are subject to the WTO (see Brazil vs. US cotton in World Court); rising fossil fuel prices affect food production costs for farmers; transportation costs due to increased fuel prices affect the price of food; slower economy; rising prices; more land cleared to meet fuel & food demands worldwide; loss of natural habitat increases the risk of losing species - and more land will be necessary unless we use more fertilizers to increase crop yield; the whole water issue that is bubbling to the surface (pun intended) and competition for water between farming and metropolitan/human needs - it goes on and on and on and on. An old Chinese proverb says: "He who burns his food goes hungry."

I think we should be afraid - very afraid - of the direction this is heading.

Energy Frustrations

2008-03-16T18:29:00.004-05:00

I picked a crappy time to buy a diesel vehicle. I bought one because I was wearing out gasoline motors driving as many miles a year as I do. Just the other day I went to fill up and paid $3.97/gallon! Yeah - it was a bio-diesel 80/20 blend, but still -

they didn't give me any of this petroleum by-product to go with it!

Why is diesel fuel so much higher than gasoline? It is a by-product of gasoline production anyway, right?

I am writing this as I watch a documentary on the DOC channel entitled "Oil is Blood," about the US' effort to get oil for the WWII war effort. The question I have at this time is: Could the US do something like fight a world war again? Would Americans rally around any war effort the way they did before.

SC Club For Growth Endorsement

2008-03-02T07:12:00.002-05:00

The South Carolina Club for Growth recently sent out it's endorsements for the 2008 election cycle. This is my second endorsement from this conservative group and is very much appreciated!
I proudly stand with the other members whom have been endorsed!

February 21, 2008
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: Matt Moore
803-454-1134
matt@SCClubForGrowth.com

SC Club for Growth State Action PAC Endorses Seventeen Legislators for June Primaries

Columbia, SC – Today, the South Carolina Club for Growth State Action PAC endorsed seventeen current South Carolina legislators that are seeking election in the upcoming June 10th primary.

Each of these legislators has shown a continued commitment to limited government and responsible spending, while leading efforts to change South Carolina's antiquated system of government. All earned a combined grade of "B" or better in the Club's legislative scorecards and cumulatively represent approximately the top 10% of grades for the entire General Assembly.

South Carolina Club for Growth Executive Director Matt Moore released the following statement on the endorsements:

"On behalf of our membership across the state, I'm proud to announce these endorsements. We believe leadership matters. South Carolina's future generations will benefit from these legislators leading the charge to reform our state government.

Through the support of hundreds of members around the state, we are hopeful that many more change-oriented legislators will join these reformers at the Statehouse next January. We will be carefully monitoring their re-election efforts. Should credible challengers run against any of them, we will urge our members to contribute generously to these endorsed incumbents."

SC State Senate:

Legislator – District #, Area, Party
Kevin Bryant – 3rd District, Anderson, Republican
Danny Verdin – 9th District, Laurens, Republican
Mick Mulvaney – 16th District, Lancaster, Republican
Greg Ryberg – 24th District, Aiken, Republican
Larry Grooms – 37th District, Berkeley, Republican
Chip Campsen – 43rd District, Charleston, Republican

SC State House of Representatives:

Legislator – District #, Area, Party
Don Bowen – 8th District, Anderson, Republican
Michael Thompson – 9th District, Anderson, Republican
Jeff Duncan – 15th District, Laurens , Republican
Dwight Loftis – 19th District, Greenville, Republican
Eric Bedingfield – 28th District, Greenville, Republican
Herb Kirsh – 47th District, York, Democrat
Thad Viers – 68th District, Horry, Republican
Nathan Ballentine – 71st District, Lexington, Republican
Nikki Haley – 87th District, Lexington, Republican
Jim Merrill – 99th District, Berkeley, Republican
Chip Limehouse – 110th District, Charleston, Republican

Climate Change

2008-03-02T07:00:00.002-05:00

Duncan attends INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON CLIMATE CHANGE

Well, I am off to attend a climate change conference in New York City. I really don't know what to expect, but as that I am interested in the topic of climate change (global warming, etc.) I am excited about hearing what others from around the globe have to say.

I recently read a book which I recommend to anyone who is interested in the subject. It is titled "Unstoppable Global Warming: every 1500 years" and provides some very sound evidence that warming and cooling of the globe is naturally occurring on a 1500 year +/- cycle, tied to the sun's activities.

I am currently reading Tom Mulliken's book on global warming. Tom lives in Camden, SC and is a friend of Rep. Mike Pitts. Tom has traveled the globe studying the issue and I am enjoying the book so far......I just started.

I look forward to posting about the conference and picking up some additional information that I can share with my House colleagues.

Serious or Not?

2008-02-13T21:30:00.002-05:00

I am perplexed as to why we, as legislators in South Carolina, can't seem to really get serious about tough issues - primarily in addressing illegal immigration issues, but while I'm at it, I'll add education finance reform, DUI laws, medicaid reform and the rising cost of higher education. I mean, man......we all talk tough, but when it comes down to passing legislation, well it seems we don't have the fortitude to pass anything with real teeth - instead of legislation that, technically meets the goals, but in reality amounts to little more than political posturing.

I am going to limit this post to illegal immigration - like I haven't written about this before, right!? South Carolinians want, no expect, the Legislature to tackle the problem of the growing population of illegal immigrants in our state. I know that it is a tough issue to solve - heck, I know there isn't a silver bullet. I don't like what I am hearing out of the Senate as they water down the issue surrounding employer verification of legal residence. Here are some of my thoughts:

In the State: South Carolina needs to decide which services we will provide with taxpayer dollars to those people in our state illegally. We need to strongly tell the Feds that they can either fix the illegal immigration problem or quit telling us what we can or cannot do in our state for citizens and non-citizens.

I am adamant about this: Employers who are trying to do things correctly shouldn't be concerned about any law we pass. If they have made a good faith effort to verify residency status of potential or current employees under the current system for such verification and have documentation to that effect, then OK by me. However, the fines/penalties etc. for those employers who do not have proper documentation should be super-duper strong.

My Federal Plan Idea:

First: Secure the Border. We are Americans for the love of Pete!! We can do anything we put our minds to and a secure border should be an easy one for us. Build it, patrol it, hire the people - whatever it takes.

Second: Create a valid "Guest Worker Program." Give all immigrants 120 days to come forward (120 is arbitrary - it could be 90 or 180 days - whatever). If they have an employer sponsor (ie. gainfully employed by an employer who will sponsor them and acknowledge that they have a job) then: 1) get identification/biological data/etc. to properly identify the individual & 2) give them a "Guest Worker Identification" card which is not easily duplicated - similar to the new passports. This would create an id number with which employers can withhold taxes, FICA, etc. If they change jobs, they are required to let INS know the change and the employer they left is required to let INS know they are no longer the employer-sponsor.

Third: After 120 days, any immigrant who is found without this "Guest Worker ID" is immediately deported. No ifs, ands or buts. Zero Tolerance.

Fourth: The "Guest Worker ID" and the corresponding legal status is good for five years. At that time, the immigrant must return to his/her home country. If the employer still agrees to sponsor that employee, then the process is easy for coming back. The person goes to the "front of the line" so to speak, is re-issued a new guest worker id and returns within 30 days or less.

Employers caught hiring workers who do not have the "Guest Worker ID" would be subject to substantial fines and imprisonment.

Guest Workers who choose to seek citizenship while they are here must go through the proper channels to apply and meet all of the requirements for citizenship just like any other person seeking citizenship to this great country. No "easy path to citizenship" nor "amnesty" just for walking across our border.

If we are serious, that is...........

Fundamental Changes

2008-01-24T19:42:00.000-05:00

Three weeks into the 2008 Legislative Session, I have come to the conclusion that some changes need to take place in the South Carolina House of Representatives because I think that we waste an enormous amount of time. If you have followed the House calendar thus far, you would agree that we have not had very much legislative action on the House floor and the only reasoning that I see behind actually going into Session each day is to record attendance and introduce bills. We did take up an important rule change dealing with earmarks, but that could have been taken up anytime prior to the budget. Here are my thoughts - which might formulate into a piece of legislation:

There has been talk in the past of shortening the Legislative Session. I don't think we should shorten it - just reorganize our order of business:

For the first four weeks of the Session, sub-committees and committees should meet - just like they are doing now. If you are a member of the sub-committee or committee, have a bill before one of these committees, or if you are interested in the topic/hearing, etc., then you come to Columbia. If you have legislative work to do during this time, you come to Columbia. There would be no floor time....no recorded attendance.

If you are there during the first four weeks, you record your attendance with the desk administrator on your office floor and you will get paid normal per diem, mileage, etc. just like now. the only savings for the House would be for the members who don't come down on certain days - but the goal isn't necessarily about fiscal savings - it is about being productive.

Let the committees meet and crank out some legislation. Allow bills to be introduced and read across the desk, assigned to committee just as if the body were in Session. All the committees could work and would have a more flexible schedule for committee meetings. I believe that the bills would get a more thorough study by the committees, we could possibly get through the budget quicker since Ways and Means could have multiple sub-committee hearings on the same day, and once we got on the Legislative calendar we could have more productive floor time.

Maybe one day.................

Defining Renewable

2008-01-17T11:53:00.000-05:00

The South Carolina House Environmental II sub-Committee, Chaired by Rep. Dwight Loftis, met yesterday to take up a Senate bill that attempted to define "renewable energy."

The SC Senate had included "nuclear energy" as a renewable resource. Listening to the debate, I asked myself "What is the underlying question here?" I concluded that the question yesterday was whether or not to keep "nuclear" in the definition of "renewable" and whether nuclear is renewable. The environmental community testified that they did not want nuclear energy included. I have given the topic a lot of thought and research, so here is a summary of my thoughts:

Isn't the environmental community sort of at odds with itself over this issue, when taken in the "Global Warming" context. There are virtually no air emissions issues with nuclear energy, especially carbon emissions. The real concern is the by-product or waste product produced in nuclear energy. How do we dispose of this waste, safely for human populations as well as the environment? I share this concern and plan a visit to Yucca Mountain to see the national storage site for myself soon, as part of my education on the issues of the day.

Even with my concerns over the future of storing nuclear waste, I believe that nuclear energy expansion is the answer to many of our future energy needs - and I believe that the US is behind the curve on nuclear energy supply and technology. In addition, I believe that nuclear produced electricity is cleaner and more friendly to the atmosphere than any other conventional means of electricity production. And, unlike air emissions, we have some control over the nuclear waste in that it is in a manageable, tangible form that we can contain.

The question of the day, though, was: should nuclear be included in the definition of "renewable." My research concludes that: 1. The US Dept. of Energy does not include it in the definition, but they have also been part of the policy implementations of the past 30+ years that delayed and discouraged the proliferation of nuclear energy for electricity; 2. Well respected nuclear physicist Bernard Cohen (Google his name for more) stated as early as 1983: "We thus conclude that all the world’s energy requirements for the remaining 5×10⁹ yr of existence of life on Earth could be provided by breeder reactors without the cost of electricity rising by as much as 1% due to fuel costs. This is consistent with the definition of a “renewable” energy source in the sense in which that term is generally used."

All sides will have a differing opinion on the definition of renewable, just as we will all have differing opinions over the extent of man's impact on the environment versus the earth's own natural cycles. I am currently not advocating one position over the other. Nor am I falling for a lot of spin on the issue of Global Warming. I am educating myself on the issues in the hope of forming my own opinion, and I don't have an economic gain or loss either way, unlike many others in the debate. I personally don't see a problem with including nuclear in the definition of renewable, if it helps move the ball down the field toward the goal of more nuclear energy for electricity production; but, I don't see a problem with commonsense conservation either, and I applaud the environmentalist movement for encouraging energy conservation, investments in wind, solar and alternative fuels technologies.

All, I believe, are part of the solution to make us less dependent on foreign fossil fuels and better stewards of God's creation.

Immigration Reform SC Style 2008

2008-01-08T08:14:00.000-05:00

Well, with the 2008 Legislative Session scheduled to kick in gear today, January 8th, Immigration Reform is the "Topic de Jour." Speaker Bobby Harrell and the SC House Republican Caucus has embraced the idea and went public on Monday with the plan. Now the SC Senate is saying "Hey, just pass the Senate Bill currently sitting in a House Committee."

I am just glad to see this topic start to pick up steam. With the US Congress failing to do anything substantive, and with them focusing so much on amnesty (giving citizenship and citizenship rights to illegal immigrants), the states are having to address the issue of what state services we want to see our citizen's hard earned taxpayer dollars paying to provide to immigrants who are in our state and our country illegally.

That is really what it all boils down to with me: do we continue to use your tax dollars to pay for goods and services that we as a state provide for our citizens and allow them to be used to pay for illegal immigrant's access to healthcare, public education, corrections and the like.

Some folks say that it is "un-Constitutional" for the states to address this issue. I disagree and here is why: The US Constitution says that any power not specifically spelled out as a power belonging to the Federal Government, nor prohibited, by that same document - the Constitution, to the states (meaning that individual states may not exercise that power), shall be reserved to the states and/or to the people. I don't see anything in the Constitution that says that the individual states may not decide which goods and services the state will provide with state taxpayer dollars and to whom these are provided.

Press on South Carolina General Assembly, Press On!

Education Finance Reform - Let The Study Begin!

2007-12-03T23:20:00.001-05:00

Rep. Jeff Duncan picked to head Education Finance study committee

State Representative Jeff Duncan (Dist. 15 - Laurens/Newberry Counties) has been appointed as Chairman of the newly created Education Finance Act (EFA) Study Committee that is tasked with reviewing how our state funds education. The Committee is charged with thoroughly reviewing the state’s 30-year-old education funding formula, specifically, the Education Finance Act, Education Improvement Act and Education Accountability Act. In addition, the Committee will work to provide recommendations it deems appropriate to improve on our current system.

As Chairman, Duncan is slated to lead the bi-partisan committee through the process of looking at the formulas South Carolina uses to fund public education, how the money flows down to the districts, schools and teachers, and the categories or funnels through which this money flows. While South Carolina's system for school finance has many positive attributes, the system still suffers from substantial shortcomings that limit the ability of the state’s educators to use funding in ways that produce the best results for students, and especially for students who are most in need of academic improvement.

Currently, funds flow to the districts through 74 restrictive categorical programs, each with its own formula for allocation, criteria and prescription for use. “This is a landmark opportunity to have a positive influence on public education and our state itself,” Duncan said. “After 30 years, it is time that the state begins looking at the funding system, the spending restrictions placed on the districts and ways in which we can get more of the money allocated to public education down to where the rubber meets the road – in the schools and the classrooms.”

“My personal goals,” Duncan stated “would be to provide the maximum amount of flexibility for the districts in spending state dollars, allowing districts and schools to shift resources into initiatives and activities that can make a real difference for their students. The second goal would be to reduce and eliminate some of the burdensome accounting and reporting requirements now found in the EFA, EIA and EAA, possibly reducing some associated administrative costs.”

Speaker of the House, Bobby Harrell, appointed the members of the Committee and picked Duncan as its Chairman. “It is time for our state to review a funding formula that has not been looked at in over 30 years to determine if it reflects the goals and obligations our state has in respect to the education of our children,” Speaker Harrell said. “To ensure our children are given the proper tools to succeed, we need to make sure they have a system that is set up for success.”

Duncan has set the first organizational meeting for Monday, December 10th in Columbia, when the 15 members of the Committee will begin their work.

I am Thankful For A Lot of Things

2007-11-22T08:24:00.000-05:00

It is difficult to list all that we have to be Thankful for. But I do want to point out a few of the most important to me.

Family: The Lord blessed me with a wonderful wife, Melody. Then He added to that blessing when she gave me three terrific sons. I am Thankful that our parents are still alive and close enough to enjoy time together regularly.

Service: I am Thankful that I have been given the opportunity to serve in the SC House of Representatives - it is a tremendous experience!

Things I enjoy: I am Thankful for the outdoors, the outdoor traditions of hunting and fishing and for all things wild.

Friends: I am Thankful for all of my close friends. You guys/gals are great!

Opportunities: I am Thankful for all of the opportunities that the Lord has given me: Business, travel, meeting people, challenges.

Grace: Not enough is said or Thanks given to God for His Grace. What a powerful word.

Happiness: I am Thankful for happiness and laughter. As I write this, I hear my youngest son laughing downstairs! What a great sound it is. I am happy with my life.

I am Thankful for you, the readers of this blog and your comments. It all helps me be a better father, husband, small business owner and Representative. HAPPY THANKSGIVING!

Georgia Governor has right idea

2007-11-13T12:41:00.001-05:00

From AssociatedContent article:
"Georgia Governor Sonny Perdue is going to tackle North Georgia's drought problem like any intelligent, thinking politician would do.

He's going to pray for rain.

The Baptist governor, who enjoys strong support from Georgia's Christian conservatives, has sent out invitations to a prayer service for rain at the Capitol next Tuesday.

Perdue's spokeswoman Heather Teilheit said, "Georgia needs rain. The issue at the heart of our drought problems is a lack of rain. And there is nothing the government can do to make that happen."

Fair enough.

Teilheit continued, "The governor recognizes that the request has got to be made to a higher power.""

The rest of the article is found here: www.associatedcontent.com/article/444481/georgia_governor_to_tackle_drought.html by AssociatedContent writer Jack Oceano. I copied the above and want to give him his credit.

I applaud Gov. Perdue! The author of this article is more than a little whacked out, though.

Sonny Perdue is right on track. Hey, Governor Perdue: We need rain here in South Carolina, too. Can you lift us up in prayer as well?

Power & Energy 2

2007-11-05T21:39:00.000-05:00

I have given a lot of thought to my power and energy post concerning Santee Cooper's proposed plant in the Lowcountry. First off, let me say that I do not and will not, as a Legislator, have a vote in this. The permitting process lies with DHEC/EPA and public hearings are underway. But this is not just a Lowcountry issue. It is a South Carolina issue - from an environmental angle and from a future power angle.

I have heard that some folks say that if Santee Cooper and the other power producers would just raise their rates, companies like Alcoa and Nucor would leave South Carolina, lessening the demand for power and negating the need for a new power station. I, for one, don't want to see Alcoa and Nucor, or any other business providing wages for South Carolinians for that matter, go away. In addition, meeting the power supply demands of future businesses and industries is important to job creation in South Carolina - and that is important to me.

I don't believe that wind farms and solar arrays can provide enough power to meet these demands - because if they could, you would see entrepreneurs lining up to get these things up and running. That is not to say that theses sources are irrelevant - because they are not. They are a part of the formula for lessening our dependence on foreign oil and providing clean energy, not the solution. The solution has yet to be found - it is not hydrogen, it is not ethanol, it is not biodiesel, it is not wind, it is not solar, and it is probably not LNG - yet. Right now, it is a combination of all of these things that are helping us reduce our addiction to Arab oil. By working on these things, I hope and believe that we will find a solution. And to be honest, I like having electricity at my home or office when I flip the switch.

Power & Energy

2007-10-30T20:32:00.002-05:00

Santee Cooper plans to build a new coal-fired power plant in the Pee Dee region and a lot of the environmentalists are up in arms. Let me try to put some things in perspective. From what I have read, this plant will be the most state-of-the art coal burning power plant in the United States, with the best technology for clean emissions. Sure, it is a business proposition for Santee Cooper. Just as important, having the power supply for business and industry, manufacturing and residential demands may help South Carolina compete globally for jobs or be the deciding factor that keeps these jobs here and not moved to China.

It is not funny that I mentioned China. If we want to discuss clean air and emissions from coal-fired power plants, we need to note that China is bringing a new power plant on-line weekly if not daily! Most of which are coal burning. There are no regulations on these plants - none - concerning the emissions. That is why the U. S. didn't sign the Kyoto Protocol - because the regulatory burden would have been on U. S. manufacturing and power producers, not China and other developing nations. I am not saying that we need to have a laissez-faire attitude about the environment. We need to make sure that Santee Cooper does what it plans to do - use the latest technology to insure that the emissions there are as clean as possible. But at the same time, I think the environmentalist dollars (and there are a bunch) could be better spent encouraging Congress to put as much pressure on China to do something about its emissions. I mean, heck, something would be better than nothing, right?

If we want to talk clean power, then nuclear is the answer. There again, the environmentalist movement has been its own worst enemy in that arena. The U. S. has not permitted a single new nuclear power plant in over 30 years, due to the efforts of the environmentalist movement. Now, however, even the environmentalists have come to agree, in part I believe, that nuclear power is the cleanest power available at the present time. We need to get moving in this country on permitting nuclear power - for the environment and for lessening our dependence on foreign fossil fuels. The failure to do so has put us behind nations like France and England in terms of clean energy production. Furthermore, thanks to an Executive Order issued by President Jimmy Carter, the U. S. only gets about 5% of the available energy from each uranium fuel rod by not recycling. France gets about 95% of the available energy from each fuel rod, resulting in less waste and more proficiency.

Don't get me wrong here. I, too, am concerned about air and water quality in South Carolina and I will go to bat for the environment any day when it makes sense. But commonsense tells me that the environment in South Carolina is at the mercy of states to our west, really. The prevailing jet stream winds bring a lot of crappy stuff to our air. Instead of blowing on by us and out to sea, they hit another wind source, coastal winds blowing in from the ocean, which stall the jet stream, stymie the pollutants and cause them to fall in our state. Maybe a lobbying effort to have power plants in Georgia and Tennessee put on the latest scrubber technology on their exhaust stacks would be better for South Carolina than fighting the Santee Cooper plant.

"Port" is a four-letter word

2007-10-17T15:22:00.000-05:00

Ok - so "Port" is a four-letter word. But I think it is a dang good four-letter word that should be used more often by officials in South Carolina! Let me advocate a little for the Port of Charleston and SC Ports Authority.

Why did Charleston, South Carolina become a major city in the 1600's and lead to South Carolina's dominance as an economic player in the early years of this country? Yes, rice and indigo, along with other great agriculture crops of the plantation era contributed. But without a way to get the goods to market (think port here, please), South Carolina would not have been the leader that it was and still can be.

I recently heard Senator Leatherman give opening remarks as the chief Delegate to the Southeast U.S./Japan trade conference in Tokyo, juxtaposed alongside Governors and Secretaries of Commerce from seven other Southeastern states. He said some great things in his remarks about South Carolina. But how can you discuss international trade and not mention the SC Ports Authority and the Port of Charleston?!

Everybody in South Carolina talks about the need for jobs and has an eye on foreign investment as a means to make these jobs happen. We praise the Dubai announcement in Orangeburg County and hold BMW out as the State's poster child for economic development. But without the Port of Charleston, would these be realities in South Carolina?

There is no doubt that we will have to continue to improve and expand our highway systems in order to support Port growth. One attractive thing about the Port of Charleston is how quickly the container trucks can hit the open road (Interstate Highways) delivering the goods. A terrific rail access and interstate system is what helped Dubai make its decision to locate the inland port in Orangeburg, I'll wager.

Some highlights that I would love to see SC Governor Mark Sanford, Sec. of Commerce Joe Taylor and Senators like Hugh Leatherman be able to cite off the cuff: 1) The history of the port at Charleston; 2) 45' deepwater-plus channel to handle the largest container ships in the world; 3) 3 container terminals with one new terminal under construction; 4) tremendous private investment in distribution centers around the Charleston area to handle distribution functions at no cost to the state; 5) averaging 41 container moves per crane per hour; 6) two hours or less to open ocean sailing.

The Port of Charleston is a jewel in the State of South Carolina's crown. Use it to make South Carolina shine on the world stage. I can assure you that Virginia, Georgia and Florida all held their ports out as shining examples of their states being "OPEN FOR BUSINESS" to companies like Sony, Canon and Toyota.

Lost Respect for Nobel Prize

2007-10-16T19:16:00.000-05:00

Al Gore wins Nobel Peace Prize? Well, all that means to me is that I have less respect for the Nobel Peace Prize now. I plan on writing about global warming at some point. I am still studying the issues and learning. Is the earth warming - no doubt in my mind - but in the 1970's we were hearing of a new ice age. I think things run in cycles, though. Even political topics run in cycles; prior to the global warming debate it was concern over the hole in the ozone layer. Have you heard of that topic lately - nah..... We are on to the next crisis that can fund our campaigns/lobbying efforts/causes. I am amazed that someone like Al Gore can spout half-truths (much of what was used in his movie has been revealed to be inaccurate spins) and be heralded by the Nobel group as the new champion. If not for the hypocrisy.....I would have an easier time with it all. Please check back for later blog posts on global warming and energy........JD

Attending SEUS Conference in Japan

2007-10-14T14:45:00.001-05:00

Representative Jeff Duncan attends Southeastern US/Japan trade conference in Tokyo.

Continuing my research and education about the global economy and how the world is changing, I have chosen to attend the Southeastern US/Japan trade conference in Tokyo this week. All of the General Assembly had been invited to participate by the South Carolina Department of Commerce, with only Representative Billy Witherspoon and myself from the House and Senators McGill and Leatherman from the Senate attending.

This trip, paid for myself, will further my introduction into the Orient, the Pacific Rim economic development arena and it's close alliance with the Southeastern United States. South Carolina is blessed with many Japanese companies and we hope to attract even more, as Japanese firms are wonderful corporate citizens and employers. In the Laurens/Newberry areas, we have firms like Kimura, Fukoku, Komatsu, along with Fuji in Greenwood and a heap of other SC/Japanese ventures.

Senator Leatherman offered the opening remarks on behalf of South Carolina, along with representatives from other states including Gov. Purdue of Georgia; Gov. Bredesen of Tennessee; Gov. Riley of Alabama; and the Sec. of Commerce from Virginia, North Carolina and Mississippi.

I look forward to future Blogs about how the world is changing and, more importantly, how South Carolina can change to embrace it.

21st Century Great Wall of China

2007-10-07T11:10:00.000-05:00

I have been doing a lot of thinking about the global economy lately and the things I saw in China when I was there in 2005. We traveled to Guangzhou and Beijing on the trip and I was amazed at all of the new construction, infrastructure and growth I witnessed. And the cars! My previous thoughts of China did not include that many vehicles.
South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford is criticized for quoting Thomas Friedman's The World is Flat, but I would guess that most of those critics have not read the book. I have; and what I saw in China makes it hit home even more.
In Guangzhou, we met with some logistic businesses centered around the brand-new Guangzhou-Baiyun airport, which we flew out of later. This airport had opened just 30 days prior to our visit. There was a new superhighway leading out to the airport, beautifully landscaped; there were tremendous logistic, custom and banking facilities surrounding the airport. You can GoogleEarth this airport and see what I am talking about. Wow! Here is the point:
While meeting with the logistics folks, jet-lag set in for me, so I got up and walked around this new office building. Looking outside into the logistics park, I noticed some Chinese workers installing a storm drain or sewer line - pre-cast concrete pipe probably 3 feet in diameter. We had seen the shanty area on-site where the workers lived earlier. This group of men were installing this pipe with shovels, wheelbarrows and hoes. In fact, I could see a good distance in this area where the new construction was taking place. The only modern equipment I saw was a roller packer. These guys were installing all this by hand.
Now, I juxtapose this with a quick side trip to the Great Wall on the Saturday morning before we left. The Great Wall runs high along the mountains' ridge in the Baldaling area where we were, just north of Beijing. This fortifying wall was built by hand, by peasant labor. Huge granite block by block, brick paving stone by brick paving stone, were carried up to the ridge and laid in place, all by hand. A tremendous task covering thousands of miles.
My impression was that the new Chinese economy is being built by modern-day Emperors using the labor of peasant workers, much the same way that the Great Wall was built. The buildings, the ports, the logistic areas, the airports, the highways. All being built the same way.

Barnwell & DHEC

2007-09-16T10:32:00.001-05:00

This is a Letter to the Editor I sent to The State:

Recently, The State has published articles relating to the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control and the Barnwell Low-level Nuclear Disposal Site operated by Energy Solutions. As Chairman of the Environmental I Sub-Committee of the House Agriculture, Natural Resources and Environmental Affairs Committee, let me clarify a few things for your readers:
This past spring, my committee began hearing testimony on legislation which would extend the life of the Barnwell site by allowing Energy Solutions to continue accepting nuclear waste from states which are not part of a regional compact. The committee heard both pro and con testimony from concerned citizens, business leaders, environmental advocacy groups and experts in the field of nuclear waste. The total time of this testimony was close to eight hours, with all sides having been given ample time to make their argument and for our Committee members to have their questions answered. During day two of the public hearings, officials from DHEC were available to answer the questions of committee members and provide whatever data was needed. DHEC officials were also available to the members of the General Assembly outside of the public hearings to provide any available information concerning Barnwell, just as they are available for assistance with any other matter we may have arise. We learned of the radioactive element tritium, pica curies and milirems.
The maps obtained by The State through a Freedom of Information request were stamped “Confidential,” meaning that at one time they were considered proprietary for the operator of the Barnwell site. In addition, one must take into consideration the world events in place at the time the maps were provided to the Agency – shortly after 9/11, when the Federal Government was issuing strong concerns to the states concerning any nuclear waste which could be used in the fabrication of “dirty bombs.” The Committee heard of the tritium plumes, the contaminated church property adjoining the site, which the operator cleaned up, and we discussed the possibilities that the Savannah River tributary known as “Mary’s Branch” may be carrying contamination toward the river. All these things, along with the history of the Barnwell site and South Carolina’s role in the disposal of the nation’s low-level nuclear waste were taken into consideration in the Committee’s decision to not extend the life of the Barnwell site by a vote of 16-0.
Throughout the Barnwell hearings, prior to the Barnwell hearings and since, DHEC has always been extremely responsive in providing the necessary information for legislators to make informed decisions. Do we always agree with the Agency – No. But for anyone to insinuate that the Agency purposely withheld information or attempted to misguide the General Assembly is ludicrous.

Senator Verdin Sends mail on Illegal Immigration

2007-07-21T06:53:00.000-05:00

Way to go Danny Verdin. Senator Verdin recently jumped on the illegal immigration bandwagon in a BIG way (not that he wasn't already on it) by sending out a mail piece that was excellent.

From the piece: "State Senator Danny Verdin says that illegal immigration has become a harsh reality in South Carolina and Congress isn't acting fast enough to fix the problem. He and his Senate colleagues have found a way to address the issue at the state level.

Many southern states, including Georgia, Tennessee and Lousiana have already enacted laws preventing businesses from hiring illegal immigrants. Verdin says that if we don't act soon, South Carolina will become a safe haven for illegal immigrants fleeing other states, putting a massive burden on taxpayers."

It goes on to say: "We must welcome legal immigrants in South Carolina. But we cannot allow those who entered our nation illegally to stay here on the backs of hardworking taxpayers." Senator Verdin continues, "At the Federal level, amnesty is the absolute wrong thing to do."

Thanks, Senator Verdin and colleagues, for pounding the rock on this issue!

Too Much Government

2007-07-07T08:21:00.000-05:00

Public School Choice - Open Enrollment

I am a big fan of parental choice in all aspects of our children's lives. I have been an advocate for more parental choice in education and I support public school choice as a component of the total choice package. It was interesting this Spring to watch the debate on the Open Enrollment bill in the South Carolina House of Representatives - to see the players involved, to hear and read the rhetoric, etc. What was interesting is that the past opponents of school choice issues involving private schools, such as the Put Parents In Charge bills, were using the same arguments that the supporters of the Put Parents In Charge bills used. Now, though, they were using these points in support of their position on the Open Enrollment bill. Interesting, to say the least!

I support the idea and ideals behind this legislation. The problems revealed during the debate, most articulately by Rep. Ted Pitts, were that there was just too much government in this bill. With the district caps, the application bureaucracy and red tape for parents, the transportation issues and the funding issues - it was just a good idea gone wrong.

Why can't we take the easy and simple road?

My thoughts are this: If a school district has extra capacity then make it availabe, allowing parents who wish to move their child to do so on a 1st come / 1st served basis until the capacity is met; the parents making the choice provide the transportation, period; let the state and federal dollars flow with the child to the receiving district and let the home district retain all of the local funding. I realize that this may cause an underfunding dynamic per child to the receiving district - but it is a start and seems fair to the home district as well as the receiving district.

It can be just that simple.

Prayerful Consideration

2007-07-05T17:00:00.000-05:00

Dan Hoover with The Greenville News called today to ask if I was considering running against Lindsey Graham for the United States Senate. I don't know how he heard this - but I answered his questions truthfully. Yes - I am prayerfully considering the possibilities. Why?

A number of folks from all across the state have asked me to consider this.

You see, it seems that people in South Carolina are just as upset as I that our senior Senator would work with members of the other party, namely Ted Kennedy, to craft a comprehensive piece of legislation dealing with Immigration Reform in secret. I have a lot of concerns about this legislation and the processes I am seeing take place in Washington which could and do affect this great country of ours.

Should the Lord guide me to run against Lindsey Graham, you will hear more about these concerns as well as my visions for America.

I know there are a lot of people searching for someone, anyone, to run against him. As I search for this decision, I ask for your continued prayers and positive thoughts - for me and my family, as well as Lindsey Graham.

Prayers for Whetsell Family

2007-07-04T10:28:00.000-05:00

The prayers of my family and mine go out to the Whetsell family. It hit home for me as I was at Camp McCall - an RA camp in Pickens County - this week with one of my sons. I am at a loss for words about this tragic accident. God Bless you Walter and your family....... Jeff

GO BIODIESEL

2007-06-20T05:40:00.000-05:00

We are so glad that Greenlight Biofuels chose Laurens County, specifically Clinton, for its new operation. Erik Lytikainen, VP for Development and the lead man for Greenlight here in SC, has been great to work with and we are thankful that he and Greenlight decided to locate in Laurens County. I envision the day when all of the County vehicles will be burning biodiesel fuels. Here is a link to Greenlight's website: http://www.glbiofuels.com/

What is so cool about this biodiesel fuel is that there is no conversion needed to standard diesel engines. Here is the announcement from the SC Department of Commerce:

Greenlight Biofuels Announces Carolina Gateway Project in Laurens County, S.C.
Facility to Produce Renewable Fuel and Bring New Opportunity to Laurens County

Columbia, S.C. – The South Carolina Department of Commerce and the Laurens County Development Corporation joined Greenlight Biofuels, LLC today in announcing that the company will develop a biodiesel production facility in Laurens County, South Carolina. Once completed, the Carolina Gateway project will produce up to 10 million gallons of renewable biodiesel fuel each year and will create up to 15 full-time jobs. The company expects to begin construction of the facility before the end of 2007.

Greenlight President Allen Cunningham remarked, “We are excited to be a part of an industry that contributes to national energy independence, local economic growth, and a cleaner environment. This project will continue Greenlight’s rapid advance into the biodiesel market.”
“Today’s announcement works hand-in-hand to preserve the quality of life we enjoy in South Carolina while providing an economic benefit to the local community. Also, given the jobs connected with this type of industry, it’s another step towards diversifying our economy and creating new opportunities in our state,” said Gov. Mark Sanford.

"Everyone is challenged to keep pace with the increasing cost of fuel and energy. These day-to-day costs can make or break a farm or any business. Renewable fuels energize the economy, add to our nation’s security, and protect the environment while giving a boost to farm profit,” said Hugh Weathers, South Carolina Commissioner of Agriculture. “Production of renewable fuels like Greenlight Biofuels’ biodiesel allow South Carolina’s rural communities, farmers, and entrepreneurs to benefit economically and, at the same time, helps our nation work towards greater energy independence. I welcome Greenlight Biofuels to South Carolina and commend them for energizing the state’s economy."

“We are very pleased to have a company of this type coming to Laurens County. It shows that Laurens County is a very pro-business county. We have been very impressed with the company and look forward to an excellent working relationship,” said Jim Coleman, Chairman, Laurens County Council.

“The alternative energy field is a very high profile industry and has significant potential in the future. This could be a stepping stone for Laurens County to attract other high profile companies in the future,” said Marvin Moss, Sr. Project Manager, Laurens County Development Corporation.

Greenlight Biofuels, LLC was founded by Greenlight Energy Resources to develop, build, own, and operate biodiesel facilities in North America. Greenlight Energy Resources was formed by the principals of Greenlight Energy, Inc (GEI) following the $100 million sale of their wind energy company to BP Alternative Energy North America, Inc. At the time of the sale in 2006, GEI was one of the largest independent wind energy companies in the country with a 6,000 MW development pipeline comprised of large-scale wind energy projects in 15 states.

Immigration Round 2

2007-06-19T13:16:00.000-05:00

Special Note: The picture of the flags on the post below is a shot of the flags hoisted by Hispanic demonstrators in California. Notice that it is a Mexican flag flown above an upside down American flag.

I travel around the state a lot - probably around 60,000 miles per year - in my business. Let me be clear that the opinions I have on immigration are formulated from hearing what a lot of folks are saying in a lot of different areas about illegal immigration. Most South Carolinians, from what I ascertain, want and expect the Legislature to began working on the illegal immigration issue here in South Carolina. They are not sure what we can do, but they do expect us to begin doing something. I don't really know what we can effectively do, either, but I want to see the debate begin.

The House passed three immigration bills, with the main focus on a study committee process. I refiled these bills in May as one bill, since the Senate is insisting on S392 and not taking up the House's bills. House Judiciary is not taking up S392 since we have already passed the three House bills. I had hoped to recall S392 in order to amend that bill to this version of three and keep the debate alive. That is the reasoning behind my thwarted efforts to recall S392.

I commend Senator Graham for having the statesmanship to tackle controversial issues such as this. I think he needs to take this one step at a time, though, and secure the borders first - I mean, it is already the law in the United States that we are not enforcing - and then we can tackle the other issues. But maybe that is too simple.

My apologies go to the agriculture community and the manufacturing community if I unfairly singled them out in the last post. Most importantly to Farm Bureau and to the SC Chamber of Commerce. These groups represent a constituency, too, and do a GREAT job advocating for them. It was not a shot at them or even a shot across the bow - I simply stated that in contrast to what I am hearing out of these camps - "the majority of citizens in this state want to see us tackle the immigration issue. And we can do a few small things to make the environment less attractive to illegals...."

Now, I realize that most folks do not differentiate between illegal immigrants and legal immigrants, legal workers and legalized citizens. I further realize that even legal immigrants will only tolerate harassment for so long before they leave for more hospitable environments. We don't need that, nor can our economy afford that.

I also know that industries such as agriculture, horticulture, home building and construction, along with the hospitality industry have trouble getting and keeping folks to do the necessary work.

This issue is on the minds of a lot of folks. My opinions here and in the previous post are meant to help us think through the issues at hand and begin the healthy debate.

If it needs to be only addressed at the Federal level and cannot be effectively dealt with at the state level, so be it. Just make sure that some of the money collected from the immigrants under the bill currently being debated in Congress comes back to the states to make up for the money we spend on services we have provided here.

Why worry about immigration in South Carolina?

2007-06-16T21:34:00.000-05:00

South Carolina needs to act, and has every right to act, on the illegal immigration issue. Why?

You see, with Georgia passing a comprehensive immigration bill (passed in the spring of 2006) and North Carolina and Tennessee working on one likewise, it just seems to make sense that the illegals would come here since we are giving away state services to them - such as taxpayer supported education, medicaid and other social services.

For instance, just think about the non-english speaking impact on public education and PACT results as one example.

But, hey, this is a Federal issue, right? Come on, folks, it is your tax dollars here in South Carolina that pay for a lot of the freebies for these immigrants. That is why it is a state issue - and even more so with the Congress failing to do anything substantive.

Rep. Mike Pitts filed a comprehensive bill this winter, as did Sen. Chip Campsen. We have tried to recall Senate Bill S392 from House Judiciary all spring. I know I have tried numerous times, as has Rep. Mike Pitts, Rep. Eric Bedingfield and Rep. Dwight Loftis. Thanks to these guys!

Boo to Rep. Gloria Haskins, Rep. John Scott, Rep. Harry Ott, Rep. Chris Hart and Rep. Bakari Sellers for blocking any immigration debate on the House floor. Contrary to other opponents like the State Chamber of Commerce and Farm Bureau, the majority of citizens in this state want to see us tackle the immigration issue. And we can do a few small things to make the environment less attractive to illegals - and that is what we are talking about - illegals - folks who have broken one major United States law by crossing the border.

Just Food for thought: It is my understanding that there is no Federal cap on the number of agriculture workers that can be brought into the US with a green card work visa. They shouldn't need illegals, then. Work with us here, guys. I don't think anyone wants to hurt the agriculture community's ability to grow, pick or milk this nation's food.

(EDITED INSERT - June 19th - see also IMMIGRATION ROUND 2) I fully understand that the agriculture industries have trouble getting and keeping the necessary labor. And the lack of a Federal cap doesn't mean that there is an unlimited supply of laborers, as one would assume. But the question to ask is "Is there a means to work within the current system to bring in the necessary legal workers to satisfy the demands of the agriculture industry?"

And to the manufacturing community: Make a good faith effort to check immigration status, document everything and then don't worry about the state penalizing you. All the bills that I have seen simply want you to make a good faith effort. I know you are already doing this - because you shouldn't want to - and don't - hire illegals, right?

To our Congressional Delegation: First Things First: SECURE OUR BORDERS! The will of the people is there. Spend what it takes. You can justify it, since that is what the American people seem to want. If we don't stop the tide, the rest is just rhetorical anyway. A monumental task? Sure it is. But we are Americans and we can do anything we put our minds to. Build what you need, hire what you need - and "git 'er done." You eat an elephant one bite at a time. And while we are stopping the flow, you guys in Washington can work out how we deal with the 12 million or so illegals that are already here, as well as the "who, how and how many LEGAL immigrants" that we Americans want to let into OUR COUNTRY every year.

The Impact: I stumbled onto this video clip which puts the numbers into perspective. It is worth watching for the 14 or so minutes it takes.
www.video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4094926727128068265

In layman's terms

2007-06-03T08:07:00.000-05:00

You are in the cashier's lane at Wal-Mart. You have a few items which you regularly purchase and you watch the cashier ring up the sale. She overcharges you. You ask her to check the total - she re-figures - admitting to overcharging you, but she remains insistent that you overpay for the goods/services that you bought.

Reality Check: South Carolina has overcharged and over-collected from the taxpayers to the tune of $1.5 Billion - the amount over and above the expected revenue amount used to calculate and spend in last year's budget. It is called a "Budget Surplus" but in reality it is an amount that was collected over and above the needs of the state.

In real numbers it looks like $1,500,000,000. As my colleague Rep. Walt McLeod says: that's a lot of dough!

South Carolinians that are paying attention are asking for a refund of the overcharges.

Now, I don't think that South Carolinians mind a reasonable growth of government - mirroring the growth of the state's population and it's thirst for services from state government. Nor do I think that most South Carolinians really mind seeing the state spend money fixing roads and bridges or investing in the state's port, a jewel in the state's crown in my opinion. That is common-sense stuff. I don't, however, believe that the taxpayers want to see Columbia spend all of the money they were overtaxed.

The Budget Conference Committee is arguring over a $170 million tax cut (income tax and groceries). Let's see - out of $1.5 BILLION that amounts to 11% plus or minus returned to the taxpayer - while 89% or $1.3 BILLION is still spent.

We could and should do more to limit government's growth and return some of this hard-earned money to the taxpayer. We are setting ourselves up for a fall (really a fall in many forms). Those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it.

For me, it comes down to one basic question of "What is the proper role of government and the government's use of taxpayer dollars?"

Evolutionary Politics

2007-05-31T15:10:00.001-05:00

It is an evolutionary process. The legislative process, that is.
Every law, every regulation, every filed bill, every idea - is in constant flux, evolving toward something else. I have either heard or read somewhere that there are around 3000 pieces of legislation filed during every Session of the General Assembly. New ideas or the discovered need to tweak current laws are addressed in each bill.
You see, sometimes either current events or the application of the current law can reveal caveats or issues that weren't thought about during the original passage of the bill. And most times, bills rarely end in the same form that they began - due to the process of discussion, debate, public input, amendments, etc. I am a firm believer in the legislative process which has been in place for over 200 years.

I guess that is why I get so ticked off by the media's initial reporting on most bills filed in the General Assembly - they either only read the title and not the meat of the legislation, or they don't take the time to investigate and talk with the sponsors to discover the reasons behind the legislation - before they rush to report. Not all reporters are so quick to opine and I respect reporters who seem at least willing to talk with legislators prior to writing a story. I told Aaron Gould Sheinin @ The State that very thing the other day. My local paper, The Clinton Chronicle, was a prime example of this recently. They chose to report on the "Campus Carry Bill", relying on other media reports for their information (which had it wrong to begin with) and not bothering to contact me to say "Hey, Jeff - what's up with that legislation you filed?" I had to call them - after two weeks of their reporting and editorial columns, not to mention letters to the editor, all based on wrong and poor reporting in other journals - to ask when they were going to bother to call me. Go figure.

And how in the world does the press justify not commenting on Sen. John Land's rant and filibuster against the Worker's Comp Reform bill, when he profits hugely every year by practicing before the Worker's Comp Commission? In my opinion, he should have recused himself from the debate and not voted due to a conflict of interest. If that had been a Republican lawmaker doing the same thing, I believe the press would have hollered loudly!

I spoke recently with an acquaintance, who considers herself a liberal in the political sense, who was discussing something she saw on CNN. She watches all of the cable news channels, so I asked her: "Do you believe everything that FOX News says?" She said "Heck no - they spin it to their view!" I said: "Well, why do you believe that CNN or MSNBC reports accurately on everything they report on?" I can tell you that they don't - they report it how they want it to sound. That is OK for an editorial or opinion column, and for opinion shows like "The Factor." But when you are reporting the news, or holding yourself out to the public that this is news, I would love to see you guys in the press get it straight and let the opinions form from correct information. It is all coming so fast these days with the "McNews" formats that the lines between opinion and facts get blurred. Go Figure again.

Trying to Make Sense of it All

2007-05-24T20:25:00.000-05:00

The thirst for power trumps all responsiblity to the voters.
There are two realities in South Carolina - the first is one that most of the citizens live in - the one where you work hard, raise the family and figure out how to pay the light bill sometimes.

The other is the reality around the capital in Columbia. That is the reality which tends to cloud judgements and helps people find ways to justify their actions. It is a false reality, too. Recent votes and actions prove the first sentence of this post. Add the power of the purse - the ability to spend money without fear of accountability - and you create a scary mixture. Food for thought: Years ago I read that "Absolute power corrupts absolutely."

Why do we work so hard to pass pro-business legislation like Tort Reform, Medical Malpractice Reform and Workers' Comp Reform - along with bills supporting conservative ideals such as the pro-life Ultrasound bill, the support for Right to Work laws, protection against Eminent Domain abuse and affirmation of the institution of marriage between man and woman - if we aren't going to try to put like-minded judges on the bench?

These judges will one day have cases that deal with all of the issues just mentioned. That is why groups like BIPEC, SC Policy Council, NFIB and the Palmetto Family Council got involved. They have worked just as hard to support our efforts to pass legislation on the issues just mentioned.

I am putting this Supreme Court vote behind me and moving on as of today.

I am going to focus on what I consider to be a poor budget - one that spends way too much and doesn't give enough back to the taxpayers from whom it was taken. I don't know what I can do at this point, though. It looks as if we will spend all of the $1.5 Billion that we overtaxed you this year and I am truly sorry. (Excuse me - we did have $81 Million in tax relief in the House budget. So, the House's version spends $1.419 Billion of your money.)

The Colonials in the 1700's protested about taxation without representation. Remember the reality that you live in and think about where your representation is.

In the Shadow of a Massacre - Are we Safe?

2007-05-20T21:40:00.000-05:00

Here in South Carolina, and the Nation for that matter, we have two choices when thinking about the tragedy on the campus of Virginia Tech. We can put our head in the sand, hide from the issue, hope and pray that nothing like this, God willing, will ever happen here. Or we can choose to be proactive in addressing whether or not our campuses are as safe and secure as they should be. I have chosen the latter of the two because I would not want, at some time down the road, for something terrible to happen here and have South Carolinians ask “What did our elected officials do to make sure we were safe following the Virginia Tech massacre?”

Here is what I know: In 1996, the South Carolina Legislature wrote our current Concealed Weapons Permit (CWP) laws and in doing so, created a number of exemptions in the right to carry laws, one being an exemption from the right to legally carry a firearm with a concealed weapons permit on college and school campuses. In the 10 years since this law was enacted, South Carolina has issued almost 54,000 Concealed Weapons Permits. There has not been a single documented case of a CWP holder in a crime where a firearm has been involved. Not a single one. To obtain a CWP in this state, you must be 21 years old or older, undergo both a criminal and mental health background check, and complete an 8 hour firearm safety class with instruction on the state’s concealed carry laws.

The Bill: I didn’t draft a new bill to address the issue. I had legal counsel take the existing CWP law, with its campus exemptions, and strike everything that dealt with school campuses. Why? So that we would have a clean slate as we began the process of discussing this issue, because safety and security are important enough for us to consider everything, leaving no stone unturned or argument unanswered. I knew that there would be cynics and critics, and that I would catch a lot of heat over this issue. That heat I am willing to take for tackling the difficult and emotional issues in order to insure that our children and college students are as safe as we can make them.

Many folks think the idea for this legislation came directly from the Virginia Tech incident. It did not. As a matter of fact, a Clemson student asked us to look into this same issue late last spring, as he was concerned for his safety and the safety of other students in the wake of several violent episodes on and around the Clemson campus. There was no time at the end of the Legislative Session to begin the process of changing or creating laws. Then the massacre happened and the idea bubbled back to the surface. So we began looking into the way our state had created the so called “gun-free zones” on school and college campuses, to see if there was anything we might need to address.

What has it gotten us? Exactly what I had envisioned. Now we are thinking about and discussing the issues surrounding campus and school security. I have talked with the chiefs of campus security at Clemson, USC, MUSC, the College of Charleston and Columbia College. And although they may not agree with the legislation, they do agree that it is healthy for us to be talking about security at these venues, much the same way our Nation began talking about the security and safety of our country in the days which followed 9/11.

The national media has sensationalized the events at Virginia Tech to the point where normally rational and reasonable people are speculating that this legislation’s intent is to “arm school children and allow college students to carry firearms around in their book bags.” That couldn’t be further from the truth and simply reading the legislation would answer those questions.

More that I know: I am alarmed to find that not every school in South Carolina has a Resource Officer. If this is a budgetary issue, we could address it from Columbia or we could encourage our School Boards to put more emphasis on security by allocating the necessary resources for these officers. I also am aware that the current laws prohibit any firearm from coming onto campus, even if it is lawfully carried in the vehicle of a parent who is simply dropping off his children at the school in the morning. That would be a felony violation. Ever had a firearm in your vehicle when you have traveled to a Clemson or Carolina football game, for your protection and that of your family if something were to happen on the late-night drive home after the game? Once you are on school property, you are technically in a Felony violation of the law.

I chose the existing law as the template from which to work as we move forward. I have stated very clearly that it has NEVER been the intent to allow CWP holders to carry firearms into the stadium or coliseum for sporting events, and I would support an amendment addressing that. Some folks, however, would use the sensationalizing of this one facet of the bill to cloud the true objective – the safety of our campuses and that simply is not fair.

This bill is most likely not the answer and it does have its legitimate questions. Even with 20 Co-Sponsors, I am not pushing it. But rather, I am letting the tried and true legislative process of discussion, public input and debate work. The issue is so important to the American people that the topic has made all of the major newspapers in the state, every Columbia TV station, along with national news channels like CNN, CNN Radio, HNN, FOX NEWS, CBS, ABC and multiple radio stations across two states. The discussions cover everything from school/campus safety to a citizen’s right to personal protection on down to the meaning of the United States Constitution. Who can argue that it is not healthy for us to discuss the issue?

Conclusions: I do know that Virginia’s law on this topic is very similar to South Carolina’s law. I also know that, while it's not clear that a CWP holder would have stopped the Virginia Tech shooter, it is clear that the ban of firearms on campus did nothing to hinder the murderer there. Persons intent on committing these type crimes are not going to “first check in at the office” prior to going onto the campus. Remember, it wasn’t very long ago that Presbyterian College (in my District) had an intruder, who ultimately killed himself on campus, but who could have just as easily entered a building on campus and committed a Virginia Tech style shooting instead of just wandering around there for half an hour or so.

Just Added: Good Read: A Principal & His Gun

http://www.davekopel.com/2A/OthWr/principal&gun.htm

Senator Mike Fair has an arm!

2007-05-19T19:13:00.001-05:00

"Its a hard drive deep to left-center field...getting by Sen. Kevin Bryant I believe...Duncan rounds second, rounds third...he is headed for home!... Sen. Mike Fair takes the relay throw and fires towards homeplate...its going to be close, folks ... Duncan plows into the catcher and has an in-the-park HOMERUN!!"

I am feeling my 41 years today while nursing the huge strawberry on my arm.

The Filibusters beat our Amenders at the 14th annual Legislative Softball Game - Score 22 to 5. (Only 4 Senators played - the rest were staffers!)

How To Protect the Constitution

2007-05-18T18:00:00.000-05:00

My deskmate in the House, and one of my closest friends in life, Rep. Mike Pitts (R-Laurens/Greenwood) had a quote which he used in his first House race.

He said: "I keep my voter's registration card in my gun cabinet. They protect each other." Mike, I am giving you my pocket copy of the United States Constitution to put in your gun cabinet for protection, too.

Walk-On Legislator

As Fitting for Today as it was in 1964

Duncan gets "FITS NEWS" shout out

Duncan Supports "Government Ownership Exit Plan Act of 2009"

Now - The Clyburn Amendment

Stabilization or "Stimulus" Fund - The Bill

President Obama: "We're out of money..."

Tell Me - Not in America!!

Weighted Pupil Funding (Backpacking)

This article is from Lisa Snell's Blog:

Out of Control Policy Blog

Reason Foundation's New Weighted Student Formula Yearbook

A Cartoon from the Past.....Wake Up America!

Congressional Run

Even Germany Gets It......no more spending

Way to go Anderson!

By the Seat of Your Pants.....

There's Oil in them there hills!

Not afraid to profess your faith.....even as an elected official!

Religious Freedom

What they are saying now......

Why not bring back the RTC?

Outraged!!

Thomas Jefferson on the Bailouts.....

Merry Christmas from the Duncans!

What is UnConstitutional about it?

2008 Presidential Election Map - by County

Duncan Elected Chairman of House Ag Committee

In Case You Missed It.....More on Energy

Op-Ed on Conservatism with Senator Kevin Bryant

Op-

Real Economic Stimulus...Cheap Gas!

From UPI.com

Crude oil prices down as demand falters

Obama on Firearms

Agriculture is BIG in South Carolina!

Study: Agribusiness is a $34 billion economic engine in state

Agriculture, forestry eclipse manufacturing and toursim as S.C.'s cash cow

Justice Clarence Thomas is Right on the Money

From the Wall Street Journal - Monday, October 20, 2008How to Read the Constitution

Southern States Energy Board

Thoughts on "Going Back"

SC Club for Growth Scorecard - A+!

Why It Is Important

A Historic Perspective on the "Bailout"

Selling in the Capital

Lyman Bostock

Continuing the Rememberance.......

Remembering

Global Effects!

No Sun Spots Means Bigger Problem: Global Cooling, NOT Global Warming

Played on the Peninsula

I am a FAN!

What is Wrong with This Picture

Left out of the debate.......

McCain Housing Crisis? Please......

If there can be an upside.....

The Clock is Ticking for Energy Independence

ENERGY!

Energy

FAQ's About OCS 5-year Plan

Helping to Solve America's Energy Crisis

Funding Education

Democracy in Our Time

No Apologies for Being Conservative

If Sweden can do it..........?

Government's Growth is "Smokin'"

Energy

South Carolina Trade Mission

Legislators Meet with German Parlimentarian

Trade Mission to Germany

Obama on Guns

Marriage

HOPE

Campaign Season 2008

Why Iraq?

Re-Election Press Release

Outer Continental Shelf Policy Committee

Burning Our Food

Energy Frustrations

From the Wall Street Journal - Monday, October 20, 2008
How to Read the Constitution