Joel Sawyer Quotes (49 Quotes)

That doesn't seem to make a whole lot of sense given this year's budget situation.

That's great news. The governor welcomes his support. We hope and, ultimately, believe it's indicative of the level of support Gov. Sanford will receive from the larger business community.

The governor looks forward to outlining his vision for South Carolina for this year tomorrow night. We'll leave the politics to the politicians.

We've been very clear where we are on this.

Virtual schools are something that this charter school bill has certainly laid the groundwork for. It's something that we're certainly open to in terms of a way to expand choices for students and parents.

This is about whether the House is going to pass a budget this year that limits state spending and shows sympathy for the hardworking taxpayers of our state.

The way the bill was gutted in committee today means achieving significant savings is far less likely. With the changes in this bill, it does a lot more to protect the interests of personal injury lawyers and a lot less to protect the interest of small businesses and injured workers.

It strikes the appropriate balance by allowing local school districts to retain some flexibility in the starting date while also addressing the needs of the tourism industry.

One of the biggest things we can get out of it is finding out what stakeholders expect from state government.

Our state is spending more than it ever has before on higher education. At the same time, tuition is continuing to increase by double digits year after year.

Whether you have one bill that grows government at 10.9 percent or try to spread the spending over three different bills, this is still not consistent with the House's previous statement on the need for a true spending cap. We don't understand why some in the House now appear to not be willing to live within the cap they've already passed on themselves.

We believe she's leading the department in the right direction. She's helping lead Sanford's efforts to change the workers' comp system and helped more property insurance companies take up business on the coast.

We are going to work with law enforcement in whatever way we can. This is an incredibly important safety and quality of life issue. In the process of assisting Katrina evacuees, we want to make sure the laws are followed in this state.

We will be making an announcement tomorrow regarding the Department of Commerce, but I can't comment specifically about the announcement in advance of it.

Based on that information, we determined it was a 'pass through' to hire a specific individual to a particular job. The fact that being the son of a senator entitles you to a state position is complete counter to what we've been working for.

It's no surprise that trial lawyers in the Senate who are lining their own pockets on the backs of South Carolina's businesses would want to delay much-needed reform of a broken workers' compensation system.

This is not about any one individual. It's about making sure that, whether it's a mayor or judge or legislator or constitutional officer, preferential treatment should never enter the realm of law enforcement.

You can have one budget that grows government at 10 percent or break the budget into three different bills, but the bottom line is this does not seem to be in keeping with the notion of a true spending limit.

It shouldn't cost the taxpayers of this state 64,000 to keep the lieutenant governor 's speedometer out of the triple digits.

Most homeowners would say it's important to treat everyone equally. This bill singles out a particular industry group for preferential treatment.

We're very pleased the House and Senate are moving forward on this. This bill is incredibly important to our state's ability to preserve and protect large tracts of land.

People forget sometimes that this money belongs to the hard-working people of this state. The governor has been very consistent that after all the trust and reserve funds have been repaid and money remains beyond what is needed for core services, the rest ought to go back to the people of this state.

With less than 30 charter schools, we don't believe that they are having the kind of impact on the overall picture that they could be having.

The governor has consistently said, in any kind of port expansion, he'd like to see some kind of public-private partnership, but he'll defer the nature of that partnership to the State Ports Authority.

The governor see this as an once in a lifetime opportunity to redevelop the port, but he wants to make sure there is balance between development and quality of life.

We would ask that anyone in the House who is serious about reforming the workers' compensation system to work toward strengthening this bill when it gets on the House floor.

This is good-old boy budgeting. The fact that being a son of a senator entitles you to a state position is completely counter to what this administration stands for.

This bill continues to change in the legislative process and he will make a determination once it reaches the governor.

You don't get credit for doing what you have to do anyway.

Tuition caps are a way to not only help control those increases but also to force more collaboration in the higher education system that in many ways is duplicative and inefficient.

The governor's agenda has always been one of smaller government, less spending, more choices for parents and government restructuring. The fact that the House shares that agenda with the governor in the coming year is welcome.

The purpose is for the governor to get some feedback from folks in the area about what they'd like to see happen with this land going forward.

This bill singles out one particular industry.

In Congress, Gov. Sanford had a record of opposing providing social services to illegal aliens.

We're always open at looking at ways to make health insurance more affordable for small business owners. But the governor has long been on the record as being against any kind of tax increase unless there is a corresponding tax decrease.

It's certainly not something we'd support. The governor has been talking for the better part of five years about restructuring government to make it more accountable to the executive branch. This runs completely counter to accountability in government.

We believe it's an incredibly important step toward creating an education system in South Carolina that recognizes the diversity in children and the diversity in learning styles that exist.

At the same time, taxpayers should be outraged that the Senate is spending almost a billion dollars more than what was being spent last year - and not a dime of new money is going to be returned to the hardworking people of this state.

To try and make this a fight between the governor and the General Assembly is to confuse night and day. This is really simple. It's about spending.

When Dan Cooper puts together a budget that shatters state spending records, I can understand why he's sensitive about someone looking over his shoulder. But Gov. Sanford's job is to look out for the hard-working taxpayers of this state, and that's always going to be his top priority.

We're going to have to go to some kind of Plan B. The funding we have for this is totally dependent on the federal government.

We will review the bill and make a determination once it has finished going through the legislative process.

If you look at our labor force, despite a slight decline in the past month, our labor force is still the fourth fastest growing in the U.S..

The governor doesn't believe that people should be rewarded for illegal behavior. But the resolution is unnecessary.

We don't believe the House plan represents a true spending limit. This budget is completely at odds with what the House indicated we could expect.

A group of people from diverse backgrounds say the solution is in better collaboration and better governance. That is something the governor has been advocating for higher education on the whole since he was on the campaign trail.

It's something they are going to address internally to make sure it doesn't happen again, and we're going to continue working hard to try to bring this project to South Carolina.

This is not an attack on anyone. This is about whether or not as a state we are going to follow a fiscally sound path.

To create an entirely new division and place it somewhere other than the State Housing Authority runs completely counter to what we've been talking about for the better part of four years, which is government restructuring and government efficiency.