South Carolinian’s have come to expect affordable and dependable telephone service, whether through their cell phones or conventional land lines. The Universal Service Fund (USF) was originally created to ensure just that.

Businesses and residents had access to telephone communication regardless of where they lived. This meant that if a business or individual were located in a high cost or rural area, they would still have an equal and affordable opportunity to phone access. When the USF was established, 20 years ago, land lines were the conventional method of communication. These consumers are now in the minority and mobile phones dominate the land line telephone market by a 4 to 1 ratio.

Today, mobile providers do not pay into the USF, but they rely upon the infrastructure USF creates to ensure access to business and other land lines. In the mobile phone world, “wireless” is not totally wireless.

In fact, “Wireless mobile calls don’t happen in the cloud. They require a cell tower that transmits your call through land line facilities to a tower nearest the person you’re calling or directly to their land line or VoIP phone. Without land-based networks, wireless mobile phones don’t work,” said Dukes Scott, executive director of the S.C. Office of Regulatory Staff.

Read the full article by clicking the link to the Greenville News Below:

http://www.greenvilleonline.com/story/opinion/contributors/2015/02/22/senate-bill-levels-playing-field-cell-phone-fee/23761659/

The amount of money South Carolina gets from the federal government for roads has dropped since 2008, but that is only a small part of the funding problems for a crumbling highway system.

Figures compiled by The Associated Press show the total amount of money the state has received from the Federal Highway Trust Fund dropped by nearly $43 million, or more than 6 percent, during the five-year period ending in 2013, the latest year for which numbers were available.

Lawmakers trying to figure out how to get more money toward roads said that is still a significant amount — enough to maybe add an extra lane to 15 or 20 miles of interstate or repave a lot of secondary roads.

But there were bigger problems. Road funding has never matched the state’s growth with a gas tax that remained unchanged for nearly 30 years while road construction prices have risen considerably and vehicles are burning a lot less fuel.

Too often, both the proponents and opponents of legalizing casinos in South Carolina cite extreme cases in support of their positions, as is reflected in The Post and Courier’s editorial, “Don’t gamble on road needs” (Feb. 15).

As a South Carolina taxpayer, I find casinos to be an important and interesting public policy issue. But in addition, I also happen to be one of the most published and experienced experts on the economic and social impacts of casinos in the United States, and my work has been cited in the recent ongoing debate in the local editorial pages. I have worked as a consultant to regulatory agencies or testified before legislatures in Florida, Iowa, Maryland, Massachusetts, and Missouri, when they were debating casino legalization or expansion, based on my academic work in this area, which includes two books and more than fifty academic articles.

Thus, I feel compelled to comment on this issue, especially since the editorial specifically cites one of my own research papers (on casinos and corruption) in arguing against casinos in South Carolina. Casinos are a legitimate policy option for our state, and if they’re going to be debated, we should at least to consider both the costs and benefits.

Read the full article by clicking the link below:

http://www.postandcourier.com/article/20150219/PC1002/150219278/1021/don-x2019-t-deal-selective-facts-on-casino-debate

It’s a safe bet that some South Carolina lawmakers will keep suggesting casino gambling as a way to pay for our state’s long-overdue road needs. But the General Assembly has repeatedly and wisely resisted past pitches for that supposedly easy money — and it should do so again.

As reported in Monday’s Post and Courier, House Minority Leader Todd Rutherford, D-Richland, wants to let voters decide, via statewide referendum, whether to legalize casino gambling.

Rep. Rutherford made his case this way last month: “If you have casinos on the coast and dedicate them as a funding source on our roads, you have something that goes into fixing a problem.”

But if you have casinos on the coast you also have other problems, including a notoriously unreliable source of funding from a cruel tax of sorts imposed to a significant degree on the poor, the gullible, and compulsive gamblers.

Yes, the costly tab for fixing our highways is unlikely to be fully met by Gov. Haley’s call for a gas-tax hike in combination with an income-tax cut.

Yes, the S.C. Education Lottery has produced more than $3.4 billion in state revenue since its launch in early 2002.

Yet such casino attractions as slot machines, video poker, roulette and card games exert a much stronger grip on habitual gamblers than lottery tickets.

For the full article click the link below:

http://www.postandcourier.com/article/20150215/PC1002/150219543

Members of the South Carolina House of Representatives have filed two bills with very different agendas. If either were to become law, it would have a huge impact on road construction in the state. In section 5 of House Bill 3579, introduced Wednesday, includes language that would not allow new road construction until July 1, 2020.

“This section must not be construed to prohibit the expansion of roads that existed on June 30, 2015,” the bill language clarifies. “This section applies to the department and any other entity authorized to construct roads in this State.” Section 13 of the bill calls for a reduction of the state gas tax from 16 cents to 10 cents per gallon. Section 17 outlines an excise tax on the wholesale price of motor fuel could not exceed 16 cents per gallon, and that all funds must go to the State Highway Fund. The bill can be read in its entirety here.

Read the full article by clicking the link belwo: http://www.equipmentworld.com/bill-introduced-to-sc-house-seeks-to-increase-gas-tax-while-another-wants-to-halt-all-road-construction-for-5-years

There is gas tax outrage over raising taxes on the right. And there is outrage over the specter of spending cuts on the left. This “same ol’ same ol’” response to Gov. Nikki Haley’s plan to trade a gas tax increase for an income tax cut has missed the big point. And it leaves most South Carolinians with little faith that we’ll ever overcome our challenges.

In any corner of our state you’ll find people united by a shared desire: They want the opportunity for a good job to provide themselves and their children with a better future.

How do we attract and grow these jobs? For a long time, we’ve relied on our status as a right-to-work state. But as more states like Michigan — home of the United Auto Workers — discover this secret, we’re losing that competitive advantage. In fact, South Carolina has fallen to 31st on the Rich States, Poor States Economic Competitiveness Index. (Our neighbors, North Carolina and Georgia, are sixth and ninth respectively.)

So how do we stay in the game as a state and still fund critical priorities like our crumbling roads? The single greatest thing we could do to ensure a bright outlook for South Carolina’s future is comprehensive tax reform.

Read the full letter by clicking the link below:

http://www.postandcourier.com/article/20150213/PC1002/150219737/1021/

Two different bills to get more money to South Carolina roads have been introduced in the state House.

One bill is the idea of a special House panel that would lower the state’s gas tax and raise the sales tax on fuel. That bill was written by Rock Hill Republican Rep. Gary Simrill and started with 64 sponsors including House Speaker Jay Lucas.

The second bill is Gov. Nikki Haley’s proposal to raise the gas tax 10 cents. That bill was introduced by Greenville Republican Rep. Tommy Stringer and started with 36 sponsors including Majority Leader Bruce Bannister.

Haley says she can only support that tax increase if lawmakers lower South Carolina’s personal income tax rate by 2 percentage points.

Both bills would raise about $400 million a year.

Legislation offering two different ways to raise more money for South Carolina roads will be introduced in the House this week, House Majority Leader Bruce Bannister said Tuesday.

The bills released Wednesday will include both Gov. Nikki Haley’s plan to increase the state’s gas tax by 10 cents and reduce income tax rates by 2 percentage points over 10 years and a special House committee’s idea to cut the gas tax while adding a sales tax on fuel, Bannister said after House Republicans met behind closed doors for 90 minutes.

Both plans would raise an additional $400 million a year for highways and bridges. Haley was invited to the caucus meeting and promoted her plan for more than 30 minutes. As she left, she said only that she had a good meeting.

Bannister said she was received warmly. But he said members decided it was best to put both plans on the table. He had no prediction which one might get more support.

A new bill introduced to the General Assembly last week proposes major changes to South Carolina’s Business License Tax.

The Business License Tax Reform Act affects cities across the state. Currently, each municipality is in charge of its own licensing rates. In Myrtle Beach, the amount varies based on a business’ gross income rate. The new bill proposes that a uniform tax rate of no more than $100 be placed on all businesses.

According to Spokesperson Mark Kruea, Myrtle Beach receives $19.1 million in business license fees. If the bill goes through, that amount will drop to $500,000 annually.

 “How do you cut 19 million dollars worth of service that’s the real question,” said Kruea.

He said the changes will lead to massive cuts or a massive deficit in the city’s budget. An existing law prohibits the city from increasing the property tax by more than 3.8 mills, so Kruea said the funds would have to come out of city services.

To read the full article click the link below:

http://www.wbtw.com/story/28076720/new-bill-proposes-uniform-tax-rate-on-business-licenses