… McMaster that is, not my new boss who started work yesterday. In fact, we should all hope Henry Haitz turns out as well as The State‘s new publisher as Henry McMaster has as S.C. attorney general.
To go into a bit of awkward history, Mr. McMaster was not our first choice for that post four years ago. He was not our second, either. He wasn’t even… well, we’ll just stop there.
It was nothing against Henry in particular — I always liked the guy — but he had just spent the last few years being chairman of the S.C. Republican Party. And as long as there were other qualified candidates (in the Republican primary, the runoff and general election), we preferred not to go with anyone who had been on such consistent public display as a partisan’s partisan.
His opposite number, Dick Harpootlian, would have had the same trouble with us. We actually had endorsed Dick for attorney general — eight years earlier, when his opponent was Charlie Condon. But in 2002, after we’d become accustomed to Dick and Henry trying to outdo each other in silly partisan statements every day (and Charlie outdoing them both, and then some), we were looking for something a little different in the state’s top lawyer.
In Henry, we got it. Henry has been more than a breath of fresh air after the Condon years. He has gone out of his way to do the right thing, even when it was not at all helpful to him or his party (although often it was; I’ll never give up on the idea that good policy, and upholding the law, make for good politics).
If only he had primary opposition this year, we could give him a rousing endorsement.
Anyway, his opinion Monday that the House GOP caucus is a public body that must meet in the open is not calculated to endear him to his fellow partymen. Sure, it applies to the Democrats, too. But so what? The Democrats can’t decide matters of law while hiding in their clubhouse. The Republicans, being the majority, can. (And one can only smile at Jim Merrill’s assertion that they don’t take binding votes in caucus. If they do the difficult hashing-out in private, under circumstances designed to shape measures that are more likely to help a party than the state of South Carolina, what possible difference does it make to us that they make the formal vote in public? It’s not that they’re being civic-minded; that’s just a technicality they must go through in order to pass the bill.)
Sure, lawmakers can change the rules so that they CAN meet in private. They’re the Legislature; they make the rules.
But making it legal won’t make it right.
Related Posts
The problem is that politicians meet in closed sessions, in secret, outside of the legislative chambers all the time. The law has no teeth in it. Any legislation passed after a secret meeting should not be enforcible as law.
Brad,
Maybe I missed it but has Andre Bauer met with the editorial board?
Mike Campbell?
If Andre wins this thing I think I’ll have to buy a boat load of anti-nauseau products.
Why in the world people can’t see this guy for the fake that he is – I’ll never understand.
Spratt voted against exploring for oil off the Continental Shelf. Everyone who is concerned about high gas prices needs to think about his vote to keep America dependent on Arab oil emirates. He also voted to give illegals social security payments. Can one person possibly be more wrong on so many issues for SC?
Andre will be in on Friday. We normally have a rule against Friday meetings because it’s such a tough day here, finishing up all the pages for the weekend. But this was the only time we could work out with him, so we made a special accommodation.
Mike Campbell came in last week. I did a short blurb about that in my Sunday column (about halfway down). I haven’t written a more complete item on that yet. Basically, the candidates are coming in so close together that I don’t have time in between to write about them. I’m trying to catch up, though.
Hey, Dave… delusionals who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones.
Dear Leader opposed raising CAFE standards as late as February. The Rethug controlled Congress has refused to raise CAFE standards since 1995.
Dead Eye Dick thinks that conservation is “a personal virtue” (for suckers, poor people or tree huggers but not for real red-blooded Americans). Policy-wise, he wouldn’t want to take away the federal tax dollar teat that Big Energy sucks on. That’s why he had industry lobbyists write his energy bill.
WH spokesman Ari Fleisher confirmed in 2001 that energy conservation as governmental was basically un-American.
Q Is one of the problems with this, and the entire energy field, American lifestyles? Does the President believe that, given the amount of energy Americans consume per capita, how much it exceeds any other citizen in any other country in the world, does the President believe we need to correct our lifestyles to address the energy problem?
MR. FLEISCHER: That’s a big no. The President believes that it’s an American way of life, and that it should be the goal of policy makers to protect the American way of life.
Conservation and new sources of energy are the answers, not destroying our ecosystems with oil rig pollution.
I haven’t even mentioned the looming climatalogical catastrophe of global warming.
I guess that you’ve just got to be in the reality-based community to see the danger of having an administration bought and paid for by Big Energy.
Bush proposed a 900% increase in alternative energy research in his first budget, and Democrats voted against it. The GOP has had to fight Democrats to promote research, except for pork subsidies in South Dakota for ethanol.
The quickest way to reduce energy consumption is to deport the 23,000,000 illegal aliens, and make it economically unattractive for them to come here.
Hey, Lee,
Keep up the dishonest and deceptive posts. Spin would be too kind.
There were plenty of reasons to vote against Bush’s first budget but to allege that Dems voted against an increase in funding in alternative energy research is tantamount to lying.
Bush’s first budget rewarded his investors in Big Energy and encouraged expensive boondoggles that promise further pollution.
From the Environmental News Service:
WASHINGTON — President George W. Bush’s first federal budget would slash funding for environmental programs, energy conservation and agricultural preservation.
Although the budget met praise from industry and congressional Republicans, it was roundly condemned by Democrats and environmental and public interest groups
[…]
… But smart growth programs, natural resources and the environment, agriculture, energy and transportation all face substantial cuts.
The Bush budget, “cuts environmental enforcement, fails to provide enough funding for the National Science Foundation and cuts support for small businesses,” House Democratic leader Richard Gephardt said.
Among the funding cuts are $162 million from the Wetlands Reserve program, which provides assistance to farmers who wish to restore and protect agricultural wetlands. Energy efficiency research programs would be cut by 30 percent, and renewable energy programs by 40 percent.
[…]
Energy: Some of the largest cuts in the president’s budget proposal are in the alternative energy sector.
The budget provides $19.0 billion in 2002 — $700 million, or 3 percent, below the 2001 budget. The reductions come largely from $277 million in cuts for renewable energy research and development programs. Energy efficiency programs would be cut by up to 50 percent.
“Continuing and expanding programs that have been in place as the country drifted to the brink of an energy crisis does not appear to be a wise course of action,” said Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham.
[…]
“This proposal is the opposite one would expect from an administration that has used the word ‘crisis’ to describe our current energy situation,” said Sen. Jeff Bingaman of New Mexico, the top Democrat on the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee. “This is an anti-energy policy budget.”
Meanwhile, research into cleaner coal technologies would gain $2 billion over 10 years.
Funding for nuclear power expansion would increase, while funds for cleanups at existing nuclear sites would be slashed.
The budget pledges to fund alternative energy research through anticipated revenues from opening the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) and other public lands to energy exploration. Beginning in 2004, the budget would dedicate $1.2 billion from ANWR leases to fund increased research on solar and renewable energy technology research and development.
The Democrats are currently blocking funding of nuclear cleanup and recycling of nuclear weapons into electrical generation fuel rods.
Solar News
Bush promotes largest increase in funding in 25 years
February 17, 2006
SEIA Reacts to President Bush’s Upcoming Visit to Solar Energy Facilities
In response to reports that President Bush will be visiting a solar manufacturing plant and the National Renewable Energy Laboratory’s solar research facilities next week, Solar Energy Industries Association President Rhone Resch issued the following statement:
“Next week, President Bush will see first-hand the growth of solar energy in the United States. The President and Federal Reserve Chairman Bernanke recognize that natural gas prices are limiting our economy and that solar is one clean energy source that can make an immediate impact easing natural gas demand and prices. We cannot drill our way out of this energy crisis – but we can manufacture and innovate our way out. Solar energy is a rock-solid technology that consumers are installing today to address the current energy crunch.
“Already, the President’s leadership has resulted in the first solar tax credits for homeowners in two decades. As of January 1st, the solar tax credits are in effect and helping consumers across the country to cut their energy bills and save money.
“More recently, President Bush became the first president in 25 years to urge solar power development in a State of the Union address. The President’s Solar America Initiative, unveiled February 1st, proposes the largest funding increase for solar energy research in U.S. history. By 2015, this initiative aims to make solar power cost-competitive with conventional energy.
http://www.seia.org/solarnews
To get back to what I said earlier — I HOPE Andre is coming in Friday…
… well, he didn’t. Which is certainly to be expected, given his latest condition reports.