POLICY COUNCIL SAYS MORE JOBS WOULD BE LOST WITH FEDERAL MONEY, TEACHERS UNION DISAGREES

The clock is ticking for Gov. Mark Sanford to decide what to do with more than $700 million in federal stimulus money.

The governor opposes including the funds in the state budget, but is reportedly working with legislators on a compromise.

And today Sanford joined with 11 members of the General Assembly to present a study by the South Carolina Policy Council on the economic impact of accepting stimulus money.

“What we have here is a very different point of view than what we’ve traditionally been hearing over the last couple of weeks, which is, if you don’t do the stimulus package, there is no other way,” said Sanford. “The fact is, there are other ways.

“If you pair down the stimulus money itself, you’re looking at $2.8 billion. And if you pair down to the part that we’re discussing, and look at that portion and you were to allocate it to debt, you would say, that’s a good idea.”

The research backed up Sanford’s idea by showing that the federal funds would inevitably have a negative economic impact on South Carolina.

“This is complex stuff,” said Policy Council President Ashley Landess. “This is difficult data, this is a very big issue, it’s an important issue, and we wanted to take the time to go through and analyze the impact to see what the numbers looked like.”

The Policy Council found that using stimulus money to prop up state government could eventually cost South Carolina up to 35,000 jobs.

The independent data also showed that government spending would rise 3.3 percent under the stimulus. As a result, private sector output would decline 2.5 percent.

Said Landess, “If you’re looking at this just in terms of stimulating the economy, we have to say, ‘well does that really work?’ As you know, a government dollar can only come from the private sector, there’s no other place to get it.”

And the legislators in attendance agreed that the Policy Council’s findings showed the dangers of accepting stimulus cash.

“There’s no such thing as a free lunch,” Sen. Larry Grooms (R-Berkeley) said. “And this is not free money coming from Washington… it comes with strings, and not a lot of people are talking about those strings.”

Sen. Danny Verdin (R-Laurens) echoed Grooms by saying, “The message is loud and clear, we’re hearing a lot of chatter about chaos and possible calamity. The real chaos that I fear is what’s been pointed out by the Laffer Group and the Policy Council and that is the diminishing role of the private sector in South Carolina.”

Verdin’s colleague, Sen. Lee Bright (R-Spartanburg), added that government has “Gotten involved in the banking industry and the automobile industry and now they’re trying to overreach and control our state budgets and the South Carolina Senate needs to send them a message that our constitution is not for sale.”

The South Carolina Education Association, however, disagreed with the Policy Council’s report.

A statement from SCEA President Sheila Gallagher called on Sanford to “stop blocking the stimulus package.”

Gallagher cited the fact that 3,000 teachers may lose their jobs and said, “Sanford couldn’t resist the allure of getting on national TV. He locked himself into extreme positions that his ego won’t let him back away from.”

But the Policy Council reiterated that the number of jobs lost with the stimulus would be far greater.

“One of the numbers we have heard is that without this stimulus package, we will lose around 4,000 government jobs,” said Landess. “The Laffer Group estimates that with the stimulus, that number will be anywhere between 23,000 and 34,000.”