South Carolina Policy Council

South Carolina’s Policy Council appears to be a good thing as far as citizens are concerned. It is working so well and saving South Carolina taxpayers so much money that it is probably something that the federal government should consider. While it is doing a great job as far as economics are concerned, what about the viability of a project in terms of its total impact on an area’s quality of living standards? Should air quality, transportation, utilities and other quality of life concerns be examined and reported on by the South Carolina Policy Council?

By Robert E. Freer, Jr., President of The Free Enterprise Foundation

Since 1986, South Carolina taxpayers have had a friend in Columbia watching that their purse does not get picked by the legislature. The South Carolina Policy Council, founded by a respected up-state business leader, Thomas A. Roe, has kept an eagle eye on the state legislature for the past quarter century. Its weapon of choice is not the schmooze but the solidly researched article or press release setting out the defects of proposed legislation that will pick the public’s pocket.

The Foundation is dedicated to the proposition that the public be well informed whenever the legislature appears to have deviated from the conservative path of small responsive government staying off the backs of South Carolinians. Although, Ashley Landess, its Executive Director, does not like labels in referring to The Council’s philosophy, it is more libertarian than anything else and solidly pro market system.

If our economy presents the most diverse set of opportunities for all our citizens, The Council may be satisfied that it is has accomplished its goal to protect the freedom of South Carolinians. The Council posits that can only be achieved in a solidly capitalist economic system. Recourse to government for any but the most essential of services must be measured against the lost freedom it brings with it and is to be avoided wherever possible. The private sector will provide better, more diverse and cost effective solutions in almost cases.

Most recently, The Council has become involved in assessing the wisdom of tax incentives for The Sempler Mall near Oakatie in the Southern part of our state. Like their approach in opposing tax incentives for Cabela’s in North Charleston in 2006, they commissioned a study. This time it was by Peter Calcagno, an associate professor at The College of Charleston to take a rigorous look at the proposal. They published his conclusions demonstrating no net effect to employment and/or a countervailing effect on existing firms in South Carolina and nearby Georgia, negating the likelihood of the predicted outcome cited by the legislation’s sponsors. More close to home, The Mercury has become interested in plumbing The Council’s wisdom on the appropriate role for government in the operation of our own port.

In assessing the implications of the downturn between 2007 and 8 in container volume in Charleston as compared to a sizeable increase in Savannah, Carroll Campbell has proposed a major increase in state funding of our facilities in Charleston on the thought that we need to give our Port operator state of the art facilities sized for what is inevitable increased ocean traffic between now and 2015.

Ms Landess asks a more basic question. Do we have the right model for the operation of our port in Charleston? She sides with Governor Sanford in noting that there is no way we can raise the massive amounts of capital required to keep Charleston competitive and points to an outdated model of operation in Charleston which sees the Port dominated by the Port authority rather than, as in our major competitors, acting as a landlord for facilities operated by others.

Ms Landess points to billions in private capital on the sidelines waiting for South Carolina to adopt a model that provides a role for private enterprise that proffers a possibility for a fair rate of return. She scoffs at the threat of Union takeover in such a model by noting that even the current Model is subject to the master agreement with the ILA which will see union membership grow as our major customers require more stevedores to handle the increased loading and unloading that growth will bring.

My own perspective on this tussle is that Ms Landess is right but is focused on only one of what are numerous issues to be handled in preserving our Port as a major economic engine for the state. Private industry participation is a must. Only if business is a major player will we create the conditions for the viability of the port by giving private enterprise major skin in the game. We must work with operators, and shippers to fashion an attractive package that binds them to Charleston for the long haul to warrant a corresponding investment by the state in creating the facilities that are needed.

Part of the equation, however, must include adequate operating restrictions for vessels to minimize the potential harmful effects on our air quality as a result of the use of higher sulfur fuel and lack of sophisticated environmental controls on vessels while in our port. Our other problem is that created by its success. Vessels traffic is only one part of the environmental hazard of increased operations. The earlier model has thousands of trucks a day calling at a facility in North Charleston and then returning to I 26 to wend their way whence they came.

I admit to a closed mind on this issue. There is just no way that our highways, our by-ways; our way of life can absorb this increase without causing major damage. With only one Interstate serving our area, our roads are not adequate, and even if they were, this level of traffic won’t abide our lifestyle and the major financial and emotional investment we have made in our heritage.

For our Port to be viable as a major player in the long run, both the inflow and outflow of the tonnage being transported must find a compatible form of transit to be acceptable. The obvious answer is rail. Whether in conjunction with an inland port in Orangeburg or otherwise, a major expansion of traffic in and out of Charleston requires a rail solution that won’t adversely affect the character of our style of life.

The solution has eluded our best thinkers so far. I urge the players back to the table and for our local and state government officials to knock heads together to get this done. Keeping Charleston as a viable major port is essential to our future. The role of private industry as the driving force is clear. As for the rest of it, let’s get it done!_._

Copyright © 2010 by Robert E. Freer, Jr. All rights reserved

About the author: Robert E. Freer, Jr., is president of the Free Enterprise Foundation. He is also a professor at The Citadel and was selected in 2005 to be their first John S. Grinalds Leader in Residence and in 2009 to be their first BB&T Visiting Professor in Ethics and Free Enterprise Leadership. A regular contributor to the Mercury, Prof. Freer may be reached at Robert.freer@citadel.edu. If you would like him to appear before your group or organization to speak on any of the subjects about which he writes, please contact him at The Citadel. Copies of his earlier columns may be found at The Free Enterprise Foundation

If you’d like to contribute an article to this collection please e-mail it for review .

Go to 2010 Business Ethics Articles from South Carolina Policy Council