FEEDBACK: Letters on S.C.’s death spiral, alimony reform

Look at quality, not size of government

To the editor:

Your most recent article regarding the “death spiral” of our state government was quite interesting.  My belief is it’s not necessarily the size of government but the quality of those individuals running, or ruining, the show!

I spent my career in the private club industry managing some of the finest private clubs in the Southeast:   Sedgefield Country Club  in Greensboro, N.C.; Quail Hollow Country Club in Charlotte, N.C.;  and the Piedmont Driving Club in Atlanta, Ga..  I witnessed, firsthand, the transformation of really great individuals turn into complete self-absorbed jerks when they became board members and then later officers.

I believe the exact same thing happens to public servants. They get eat-up with the dumb-a** in no time at all.  I believe term limits is the answer for all!

— Harry Waddington, Okatie, S.C.

Substitute “taxes” with “user’s fee”

To the editor:

Andy is right on target.   Where did this theme, I hate taxes” originate?   Do the same folks hate paying for a cart full of stuff at Walmart?

Perhaps we need to ban the word “taxes” and substitute “user’s fee.”  A year ago, Gov. Nikki Haley spoke at a meeting I attended and I asked why we did not raise the gas tax. Her response:  “Just because we have the lowest tax does not mean we have to raise it..

When we establish a need (fix highways), we (our legislature) is COMPELLED to fix it.  Ignoring the problem is not an option.   Voting in responsible new legislators is a viable answer.

— Fred Sales, James Island, S.C.

Kicking the can down the road

To the editor:

The theology of Grover Norquist controls the minds and behaviors of our legislators and elected leaders. Our leadership has adopted the myth that shrinking government and taxes is a key to future economic growth.

South Carolina will always be in a constant state of repairs and poverty as our politicians have made the kicking our problems down the road into an art form. There is always a price to pay for nonfeasance, misfeasance and malfeasance, but our leaders choose to ignore that fact for another generation to solve.

— William Heitsman, Darlington, S.C.

Reform the state’s alimony laws

To the editor:

It is time for the archaic alimony laws in South Carolina to be reformed in order to make the laws fair for both the payer of permanent alimony and the payee.

Our organization, SC Alimony Reform, has been trying to reform the laws for going on seven years, but we have been scuttled by a few members of the legislature each year. I believe we have enough votes in the legislature to reform the laws if our bills are allowed to have an up or down vote. I believe that everyone should have the right to retire without the burden of permanent life time alimony.

Our legislative supporters have re-introduced the following Senate bills that would:

  • Create public policy seeking equity for both parties. No one form of alimony would be preferred over another.
  • Create transitional and fixed-term alimony which would give judges more options.
  • Allow payers to seek a reduction or an end to alimony at retirement.
  • Bar consideration of subsequent spouse’s earnings.

Our House Representative supporters have also re-introduced a comprehensive bill that includes the main points of the Senate bills.

It is time to bring South Carolina into the 21st century and bring our alimony laws up to date. No person should have to pay another person for the rest of their life simply because their marriage failed.

— Wyman Oxner, Orangeburg, S.C.

  • Have something to say? Send 200 words or less to feedback@statehousereport.com

One Comment

  1. Robert Sell says:

    State alimony laws are the unconstitutional elephant in the room. When you get down to the basics, alimony is the creation of a debt by the government between two people who no longer have a private relationship to each other. The basis of the debt is fabricated by consideration of the contributions of one of the individuals to that private relationship but, not in like manner the other. Any normal thinking person can read the list of qualifying factors to receive alimony and understand that it favors one side of the relationship without considering the burden(s) the other person in the relationship carried. Basically, the state is forcing one individual to give up their life for the benefit of another individual by forcing them to work until the day they die so that the other individual doesn’t have to. It’s time to get the state out of our marriages and force people to be responsible for themselves and the decisions they make about their own lives. Isn’t THAT what liberty guaranteed by the Constitution is all about?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *