South Carolina Suffers While Gov. Rejects Stimulus Funds

On a recent visit to a state whose Republican governor rejected $700 million in federal stimulus funds, I got a sense of how deep the economic slide has been. Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, is a prime resort destination for families from New York and New Jersey to Ohio and North Carolina. But the unemployment rate in Horry County, home of Myrtle Beach, reached 14.3 per cent in February, with the state as a whole at 10.7 per cent, among the worst in the nation (where the average in February was 8.1 per cent).

Nevertheless South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford has said he will reject federal stimulus funds – to keep the government off our backs, of course. Now Republicans competing to succeed him are debating his decision.

Tourism is life on the Grand Strand, with its long, long beach lined with miles of high-rise timeshare condos and hotels and more than a hundred golf courses in the area. But for families coping with job loss, cancelling the summer vacation at the beach is one of the most obvious moves – which means economic disaster here.

The Myrtle Beach Sun-News compared the current drop in hotel occupancy rates to the period following 9-11. One travel expert, Jeff Higley of Smith Travel Research, told the Sun-News that "it took six years for rates to get back to pre-Sept. 11 levels," and suggested that 2009 could bring a similarly protracted decline.

The Grand Strand claims the third highest number of timeshare resorts in the country, after Florida and California. But current timeshare sales have been crippled not only by the paucity of buyers but by changes in the resorts' ability to provide financing. Timeshare mortgages used to be bundled and sold as securities, but "the ability to do that stopped in August," according to Howard Nusbaum, president and CEO of the American Resort Development Association, quoted in the Sun-News. Marriot, a major timeshare developer in Myrtle Beach, reported that sales declined 28 per cent in the fourth quarter of 2008, and further declines are inevitable.

As the timeshares go, so goes the rest of the economy here. At a strip mall on the main drag in North Myrtle Beach, Goldberg's Deli continues to offer pastrami and corned beef to any New Yorkers who show up, but much of the rest of the mall is empty – the gym is gone, along with the coffee place, the mailbox store, and the nail salon. Upscale steak houses that cater to visiting golfers were mostly empty on a recent weekend. Myrtle Beach also claims to be the world capital of miniature golf, but there was little action on those courses either.

Another sign of the times: the biggest new tourist attraction here in decades, Hard Rock amusement park, a $400 million operation, opened in April and went bankrupt in September and closed.

Governor Sanford will be termed-out at the end of next year, and Republican hopefuls are already jockeying for position in the primary. At a recent debate in Columbia, Republicans debated whether to accept the stimulus money. Attorney General Henry McMaster, one possible candidate, is considering whether to rule that the legislature can accept the $700 million without the governor's approval.

Lt. Gov. Andre Bauer, another candidate, has already urged the governor to accept the money. The issue is difficult for Republicans candidates, who have to run to the right, as "fiscal conservatives," in their primary, but then in the general election will have to face economically suffering mainstream voters.

The next big weekend here, after spring break and Canadian-American days, is the Harley Davidson rally in May. "If the bikers don't show up," one local told me, "we'll really be in trouble."

Comments (47)

1. Name the tourist destinations and associated industries and businesses that are NOT suffering during the economic downturn with loss of jobs and higher unemployment and that might impress someone?! 15 states don't want Obamanation and the Demoncrats "hand tying" their future revenue and may reject the porkulus social engineering that comes with it!

   Posted by comancheamerican at 03/29/2009 @ 11:03pm

2. WIENER: Tourism is life on the Grand Strand,....But for families coping with job loss, cancelling the summer vacation at the beach is one of the most obvious moves – which means economic disaster here.

   South Carolina is in the Northern Hemisphere....the problems now are not due to lacking summer vacationers.......it's the Yankees in NYC and CT and the MidWest who aren't taking breaks from the cold.

   ALL resorts dependent primarily from out-of-region tourists will suck big time for years.....people need to save money now, for real....as the Gubbers become ever less responsible, the People will take the opposite tack!

   Posted by Happy at 03/29/2009 @ 11:16pm

3. We got 2ft. of snow yesterday and blizzard conditions drifts up to roofs throughout the NW 1/3 of the state. The beach at corpus or galveston would be a nice change!

   Posted by comancheamerican at 03/29/2009 @ 11:32pm

4. Looks like its snowing a blizzard in Demoncrat land also!

   "A video purporting to show Ashley Biden -- daughter of Vice President Joe Biden -- snorting cocaine reportedly is being offered for sale.

   The New York Post reported that it was shown a 90-second clip of a 42-minute video by a lawyer claiming to represent an anonymous "friend" of the vice president's daughter. The lawyer, Thomas Dunlap, and another man say the video shows Biden's daughter using the drug at a house party this month in Delaware.

   Dunlap reportedly told the Post that the video was legally obtained, and that Ashley Biden was aware that she was being filmed. The Post reported that it refused to pay for the video, though Dunlap told the newspaper that one news organization had offered $250,000 for the rights to the tape."

   Must be open season again like it was on the Bush girls!

   Posted by comancheamerican at 03/29/2009 @ 11:40pm

5. This article was kind of all over the place.

   Posted by Cccomfo1 at 03/30/2009 @ 12:21am

6. beaufort and surrounding area is a way better place to hang out.

   anyhoo:

   Obama Denies Bailout Funds for US Automakers, Sets Restructure ...

   FOXNews - ‎59 minutes ago‎

   Neither GM nor Chrysler submitted acceptable plans to receive more US government bailout money, the White House says, setting the stage for a crisis in Detroit.

   ¡¡¡¡¡

   but the restructuring plan is so simple: declare themselves banks.

   Posted by frosty zoom at 03/30/2009 @ 12:41am

7. "Timeshare mortgages used to be bundled and sold as securities."

   HELP!

   Posted by frosty zoom at 03/30/2009 @ 12:44am

8. "The next big weekend here, after spring break and Canadian-American days."

   hey,

   here's a plan:

   send the $700,000,000 to say, 700,000 canadian families.

   they (we) accept the money under the proviso that they (we) must spend the money on vacation in south carolina.

   talk about stimulating!

   Posted by frosty zoom at 03/30/2009 @ 12:49am

9. "If the bankers don't show up," one local told me, "we'll really be in trouble."

   Posted by frosty zoom at 03/30/2009 @ 12:50am

10. Citibank today announced plans to purchase General Motors for an undisclosed amount in "legacy" bonds.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 03/30/2009 @ 12:58am

11. hey, that's only $1000 for each family.

    you guys need to send us billions.

    we are ready to stimulate.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 03/30/2009 @ 12:59am

12. Look, EVERYBODY knows that Sanford isn't concerned with South Carolina or its debt or its unemployment rate...

    he's concerned with IOWA and NEW HAMPSHIRE and NEVADA...3 years from now.

    He's a bidding war with Bobby the Exorcist and Prom Queen Granny and he wants to be "high bidder", i.e. the guy who "turned down the MOST of Obama's evil money".

    But he'll let his legislature AND his local Republicans override his decision, so that he doesn't have to fight too hard for his own state in that same primary season.

    Posted by Mask at 03/30/2009 @ 07:55am

13. Obama should force the Governor to resign! If he can do that to the CEO of GM why not South Carolina! I can't wait to see Obama's new lineup of cars for 2010!

    Posted by abell12ct at 03/30/2009 @ 09:07am

14. Blah, Blah, Blah.

    Wiener and the chorus of other socialists here railing because the Federakl govt doesn't bailout every city and industry.

    And then leftists like Mask and others here protest that they really aren't socialists.

    Right, and Madonna's a virgin.

    Why not get honest and admit you folks are socialists and get it over with? Instead you just keep advocating for the govt to run everything; to make the decisions for the states eliminating the 10th amendment which you despise.

    Posted by antisocialist at 03/30/2009 @ 09:26am

15. Posted by antisocialist at 03/30/2009 @ 09:26am

    When you admit you are right wing anarchist with theocratic leanings.

    Don't forget Rev, it is the guys at the top of the pyramid that have asked for the govt to "run" their businesses, AIG, CIT etc. This didn't come from "the left".

    Then you guys tell the car companies that they have to re-negogiate their UAW contracts, but somehow the CEO should be removed from that deal?

    What gives?

    Posted by crabwalk at 03/30/2009 @ 10:19am

16. If SC does not want the money, send it north. We will rebuild OUR roads and schools and pay our kids medical bills.

    If it is good enough for the Sunnis in Iraq, Shirley, it should be good enough for those that reside closer to me.

    I heard there were some wmd's in Grand Rapids....where do I sign up for no-bid contracts?

    Posted by crabwalk at 03/30/2009 @ 10:21am

17. "Why not get honest and admit you folks are socialists and get it over with? "

    to say something, or someone, is socialistic is not an argument in and of itself.

    Posted by darladoon at 03/30/2009 @ 11:24am

18. Posted by antisocialist at 03/30/2009 @ 09:26am

    Larry, you want to go back to the days of child labor, with kids 10 years old digging coal in mines where the owners, not the evil Gub'mint, decides what is or is not safe.

    At your standard, even Reagan was a "socialist".

    Posted by Mask at 03/30/2009 @ 11:32am

19. "At your standard, even Reagan was a "socialist"."

    whose tax brackets during his "revolution" were further to the left than obama's.

    Posted by darladoon at 03/30/2009 @ 11:43am

20. Posted by darladoon at 03/30/2009 @ 11:43am

    Already posted by me @11:40am, DD

    A Progressive Victory In New York posted by Katrina vanden Heuvel on 03/30/2009 @ 09:57am

    "Reagan Recovery" 1983-1984?....top marginals were 50% on incomes over $175,500.

    Obama proposed that, they'd call him a Communist....oh, wait, they already do...and he's just talking 39.4%.

    Posted by Mask at 03/30/2009 @ 11:49am

21. Posted by darladoon at 03/30/2009 @ 11:43am

    Already posted by me @11:40am, DD

    A Progressive Victory In New York posted by Katrina vanden Heuvel on 03/30/2009 @ 09:57am

    "Reagan Recovery" 1983-1984?....top marginals were 50% on incomes over $175,500.

    Obama proposed that, they'd call him a Communist....oh, wait, they already do...and he's just talking 39.4%.

    Posted by Mask at 03/30/2009 @ 11:49am

    Mask, you indeed are a master of half truths. You always conveniently leave out the rest of the context.

    1. the 50% was the initial tax cut from 70%

    2. It was followed by the eventual lowering before Reagan left office to 28%

    Reagan knew that he could not get the entire tax cut through a Democratic Congress in one move. He had to do it in phases.

    The bottom line being that during his time in office the tax rate decreased by 60 Percent--

    It doesn't matter what interim stages you quote. The bottom line is by the time he left office, Reagan had reduced the top tax rate by 60 percent to a max of 28%.

    Without his tax cutting, you would not have had the available capital for much of the 90's dot.com boom.

    Posted by antisocialist at 03/30/2009 @ 12:04pm

22. I wonder if the know-nothing/no-everything types use socialist and communist because even their friends won't accept racial epithets anymore. In any event, some socialistic Republican is bound to win in South Carolina by a slim margin against some communistic Democrat unless all these invincibly ignorant wingless wrongs to move to South Carolina and establish citizenship real quick. What a blessing for the rest of us to have all this bloviage come from one benighted place so that the rest of us can move on.

    Posted by JFHill at 03/30/2009 @ 12:20pm

23. "Without his tax cutting, you would not have had the available capital for much of the 90's dot.com boom"

    clinton reversed much of reagan's tax cuts right away, which pretty much destroys the dot.com argument.

    Posted by darladoon at 03/30/2009 @ 12:36pm

24. clinton reversed much of reagan's tax cuts right away, which pretty much destroys the dot.com argument.

    Posted by darladoon at 03/30/2009 @ 12:36pm

    1. Clinton did not reverse Reagan..rates did not climb back to either 50% or the 70% rate.

    2. The capital available was used during the period of the late 80's into the early 90's to fund most of that dot.com boom prior to the Clinton taxes increases.

    3. If Clinton and the socialist Dems had not raised taxes, we probably would have had an even greater expansion, since the Reagan tax cuts brought a doubling of tax revenue to the US.

    Posted by antisocialist at 03/30/2009 @ 1:00pm

25. "If Clinton and the socialist Dems had not raised taxes, we probably would have had an even greater expansion, since the Reagan tax cuts brought a doubling of tax revenue to the US."

    (quote of the week)

    Posted by darladoon at 03/30/2009 @ 1:02pm

26. "If Clinton and the socialist Dems had not raised taxes, we probably would have had an even greater expansion, since the Reagan tax cuts brought a doubling of tax revenue to the US."

    (quote of the week)

    Posted by darladoon at 03/30/2009 @ 1:02pm

    I agree that you should keep it Darla since you have such a difficulty with facts and you (and others) are always claiming that Reagan gave to the rich:

    according to the IRS in 1981 the top 1 percent paid 17.6 percent of all personal income taxes, but by 1988 their share had jumped to 27.5 percent, a 10 percentage point increase.

    The share of the income tax burden borne by the top 10 percent of taxpayers increased from 48.0 percent in 1981 to 57.2 percent in 1988. Meanwhile, the share of income taxes paid by the bottom 50 percent of taxpayers dropped from 7.5 percent in 1981 to 5.7 percent in 1988.

    http://www.house.gov/jec/fiscal/tx-grwth/reagtxct/fig-1.gif

    Posted by antisocialist at 03/30/2009 @ 1:47pm

27. "If Clinton and the socialist Dems had not raised taxes, we probably would have had an even greater expansion, since the Reagan tax cuts brought a doubling of tax revenue to the US."

    FACT of the week! and basis of the late 90s recession exaserbated by 9-11 and corrected by BUSH tax cuts that turned it around economically!

    -------------------------

    Name the tourist destinations and associated industries and businesses that are NOT suffering during the economic downturn with loss of jobs and higher unemployment and that might impress someone?! 15 states don't want Obamanation and the Demoncrats "hand tying" their future revenue and may reject the porkulus social engineering that comes with it!

    Odd not even the thread author can defend the LIE the premise of the thread is founded on!

    Posted by comancheamerican at 03/30/2009 @ 1:52pm

28. Posted by antisocialist at 03/30/2009 @ 12:04pm

    "Interim stages"? The recovery was underway in 1983-1984. Reagan won re-election on it.

    and the fact remains it was a 50% top marginal rate. Which meant the LESS "capital" (from people personal income) to invest....yet...

    the economy recovered.

    The only thing you're left with is..."It got even BETTER" or "would have gotten even better" when talking about Clinton.

    But it was a recovery and it was a 50% top marginal. Yet 39.4% will "kill the economy and cost jobs"?!?!?!?!??

    Posted by Mask at 03/30/2009 @ 2:02pm

29. If Biden:

    - Pulled strings to get his daughter sentenced differently

    - Imported the cocaine

    THEN you'd have a story.

    Posted by snowball666 at 03/29/2009 @ 11:54pm | ignore this person | warn this person

    Like I said, must be OPEN season JUST like it was on the Bush girls? We remember that vividly!

    Posted by comancheamerican at 03/30/2009 @ 2:04pm

30. Like I said, must be OPEN season JUST like it was on the Bush girls? We remember that vividly!----Posted by comancheamerican at 03/30/2009 @ 2:04pm

    So you're now JUST LIKE "those Democrats who used personal attacks on innocent girls"?

    And you're okay with being a hypocrite???

    Posted by Mask at 03/30/2009 @ 2:11pm

31. Reagan pushed tax burden onto those less able to afford it and blew money out his ass (created > 300k new govt jobs for all his 'big govt' blather and turned the DoD into a candy store).

    Posted by snowball666 at 03/30/2009 @ 2:04pm

    As I noted in an earlier post, your facts are completely backwards. Middle and lower income brackets paid less of the burden of taxes than prior to Reagan.

    It seems obvious you were not a taxpayer during Carter. Now that was suffering.

    Posted by antisocialist at 03/30/2009 @ 2:28pm

32. If the revenues were so awesome, where'd all that debt come from?----Posted by snowball666 at 03/30/2009 @ 2:43pm

    "Democratic Congress spending" will be the answer of course. And no mention of the increase in defense spending or a throwaway about how THAT spending is "what ended the Cold War".

    Posted by Mask at 03/30/2009 @ 3:17pm

33. Posted by Mask at 03/30/2009 @ 2:11pm | ignore this person | warn this person

    Oh, I forgot the leftist DO NOT believe in fair and equal treatment so they call it hypocrisy! My mistake, Multimillionaire Biden and his family debauchery is not to be discussed or compared with Bush's daughters underage drinking that was all over the papers and TV!

    Posted by comancheamerican at 03/30/2009 @ 3:26pm

34. Posted by comancheamerican at 03/30/2009 @ 3:26pm

    No, I just know you, RIO.

    And any post here on the Bush Twins, you'd be saying the EXACT OPPOSITE from what you're saying now, because you have no princples.

    Posted by Mask at 03/30/2009 @ 3:31pm

35. Hard to defend the openly hypocritical leftist biased liberal national media coverage that went on for weeks and weeks over the Bush twins isn't it Mask?

    Want to LIE some to make it better?

    Posted by comancheamerican at 03/30/2009 @ 3:55pm

36. Every time the Republicans have pushed thru major tax cuts for the highest earners we have had speculative booms followed by the inevitable bust. The top 5 or 10% walks away richer than they were and the rest of us get to hear about how important it is to sacrifice. Each and every time.

    Posted by Mtnlynn at 03/30/2009 @ 4:37pm

37. Hard to defend the openly hypocritical leftist biased liberal national media coverage that went on for weeks and weeks over the Bush twins isn't it Mask?

    Want to LIE some to make it better?

    Posted by comancheamerican at 03/30/2009 @ 3:55pm

    comancheamerican=antisocialist=Rush Limbaugh= The Poor Marginalized State of the Republican Party.

    LOL!!

    Posted by MATTMAN at 03/30/2009 @ 5:01pm

38. Posted by Mtnlynn at 03/30/2009 @ 4:37pm

    As clear and evident as that calculable pattern may be, there are standards at stake-- no, priniples!-- that supercede the perception that this matter even warrants discussion. The only real equation that ever has, or ever will matter is as follows:

    Taxes=bad.

    End of discussion liberals.

    Posted by MATTMAN at 03/30/2009 @ 5:09pm

39. Chris Dodd(D)- AIG & Fannie/Freddie funds recipient! Obama- same thing!!!!!

    Posted by barry25 at 03/30/2009 @ 5:35pm

40. 2. The capital available was used during the period of the late 80's into the early 90's to fund most of that dot.com boom prior to the Clinton taxes increases.

    Posted by antisocialist at 03/30/2009 @ 1:00pm

    No, it was the low interest rates that fueled the boom. Along with a "why not me?" attitude among investors. The fed funds rate went from about 18% in 1982 to about 3.5% in 1994. URLs didn't start appearing on ads and billboards until about 1995. And that was mainly from major enterprises that were just beginning to realize they would need a web presence. The "boom", of irrational exuberance fame, came along a little later, around 1998.

    Posted by FLaim at 03/30/2009 @ 5:54pm

41. comancheamerican=antisocialist=Rush Limbaugh= The Poor Marginalized State of the Republican Party.

    LOL!!

    Posted by MATTMAN at 03/30/2009 @ 5:01pm | ignore this person | warn this person

    If you had a clue about those you mentioned that might be insulting, but its obvious you don't.

    Posted by comancheamerican at 03/30/2009 @ 6:10pm

42. Well, autoworkers of the world, look at WS and look at yourselves. What'd you give me?

    ---------

    Workers say Obama treated autos worse than Wall St Autoworkers say Obama's 'tough love' more tough than love, they get worse treatment than banks Jeff Karoub, AP Business Writer Monday March 30, 2009, 8:17 pm EDT

    DETROIT (AP) -- Many assembly line autoworkers reacted with skepticism and anger Monday to the Obama administration's tough tactics, which stoked long-simmering feelings that the people who put the country on wheels get treated differently than the wizards of Wall Street.

    Posted by HelenDAO at 03/30/2009 @ 9:13pm

43. RE: South Carolina ...

    Ah, Confederate people, they may suffer not accepting other people's money. What if no state takes the money (I wouldn't call this govt money; this's the people money)? The country wins.

    Posted by HelenDAO at 03/30/2009 @ 9:25pm

44. Posted by HelenDAO at 03/30/2009 @ 9:25pm

    Hey, Helen....how's the last of the PUMAs?

    Posted by Mask at 03/31/2009 @ 07:54am

45. "If the bikers don't show up," one local told me, "we'll really be in trouble."

    "Hey, Johnny, What are you rebelling against?"

    "What've you got?"

    Posted by gangpapist at 03/31/2009 @ 2:07pm

46. I wonder if the know-nothing/no-everything types use socialist and communist because even their friends won't accept racial epithets anymore.

    Posted by JFHill at 03/30/2009 @ 12:20pm

    I talk about left-wing honkies all the time?

    Posted by gangpapist at 03/31/2009 @ 2:15pm

47. Dear Antisocialist,

    I still have yet to read a single post from you demonstrating that you understand even the basic principles of Socialism. You don't like Socialism...You don't like Obama...therefore Obama and democrats are socialists. This line of reasoning fails 1st grade logic!

    Please think (past your "common sense") before you type...I fear that some of your posts are actually killing the brains cells of those who read them.

    Posted by A.D.H.D. at 04/01/2009 @ 1:36pm