I’m pretty sure we don’t want the senators from California, Diane Feinstein and Barbara Boxer, meddling in our state’s affairs. So let’s have our senator, Mmmm DeMinty stay out of municipal affairs in California, shall we?
February 12, 2008
February 7, 2008
According to the South Carolina Energy Office’s 2005 Energy Statistical Profile “South Carolina spends $10 billion per year on energy and ranks 18th in the nation in total energy consumption per capita”. The profile also states that our per capita energy consumption is above the U.S. average.
Now if I’m not mistaken, except for some hydro electric, South Carolina imports practically all of its energy for consumption. We have no coal. We have no natural gas. We have no oil. Even our nuclear industry imports the fuel that keeps it running. So while we certainly need to import these energy sources for the good of our state and overall economy, I think we all can also hear that giant sucking sound as our state bleeds itself of wealth by not taking energy conservation completely seriously. It’s time to stop the bleeding.
Our stated goal should be 50th on the states list of per capita energy consumption. Fiftieth by a mile. We should be looking to ourselves for an immediate 10% reduction in per capita energy consumption followed by at least an additional 10% by the end of 2009.
There are many steps that will need to be taken for this to happen, but first is the regular collection and publication of energy consumption data. In this day and age when financial data is collected and tabulated on a daily basis, there is no reason that we can’t collect this information from energy providers in a timely fashion and for very little cost.
By publishing this information, and relying on a concurrent public service campaign as well as expecting the involvement of the fourth estate, we will be able to put forth a significant measure. Rather than depending on us to watch our individual energy usage numbers, which incrementally mean very little, we will have a large measure that we all can contribute to and be a part of. For example, based on the 2005 statistical profile a 10% energy usage reduction would be a $1 billion dollar a year savings for the people of South Carolina, and that ain’t no chicken feed.
February 5, 2008
The Spartenburg Herald-Journal has called for the creation of a state water board “in order to study the state’s water resources, their current use and future needs.”
I’m pretty sure that’s what the hydrology department in the Department of Natural Resources already does for us. Yes, when I read the departments mission statement that is pretty much what I get. Lest there be some doubt, here is the first sentence of their mission statement: “The mission of the Hydrology Section is to provide guidance, counsel, and data to the State government and the general public for the beneficial use, conservation, and management of South Carolina’s water resources.”
Does the Spartenburg Herald-Journal have no concept of what it takes to control the size of our state government? The creation of such a board would unnecessarily increase the size of the state bureaucracy and would no doubt be used as another state sponsored political vehicle, as if we don’t already have enough of those crashing around the corridors in Columbia.
Let the Department of Hydrology do their job and report to the legislature and the Governor, our elected officials, who in turn will develop and implement our statewide water policy.
February 4, 2008
South Carolina politicians, both Democrat and Republican, send hundreds of thousands of dollars of our political contributions out of state by paying for out of state consultants and media production.
First off, if a politician has to go out of state to craft their political message, it’s not showing a lot of respect for our state’s citizens, and perhaps they are an individual who is not properly cut out to serve in our state’s government.
Second, if a politician is willing to send our campaign dollars out of state, that doesn’t bode well for how they would manage their fiscal duties in our state government. Our politicians are fond of speaking of creating jobs, but how can we believe this when they pack up our very own campaign dollars and ship them right out of the state? That money should stay in South Carolina for South Carolina.
So let us suggest that individuals running for state office no longer spend thousands and thousands of dollars on out of state consulting and media production, and let them at least pledge to account for all campaign money spent in this manner, so a proper reckoning of their relationship with their constituents can be had.