Governor should show up, debate Lovelace
By BRAD WARTHEN
EDITORIAL PAGE EDITOR
MARK SANFORD has disappointed a lot of people who supported him four years ago. He shouldn’t disappoint us again on June 7.
So far, the governor hasn’t told the folks at ETV whether he’ll show up to debate GOP challenger Oscar Lovelace that night (and no, I’m not a panelist on this one; I just want to see it happen). He said he’d make up his mind when the Legislature goes home.
Well, lawmakers are going home today, so it’s time for an answer — past time, really. It needs to be an unequivocal “yes.”
This coyness is most unbecoming in a guy whom many of us have respected because he supposedly doesn’t like playing political games. And a secure incumbent dodging a debate with a challenger in order to avoid risk is one of the gamiest of such games.
Of course, that’s not the reason given. It never is, whether with cheesy politicians or with Mark Sanford. The reason given, by Sanford campaign manager Jason Miller, is that “Gov. Sanford takes his day job very seriously.” In other words, he’s just too busy to decide whether he’ll have time to spend a critical hour defending his performance a full six days after lawmakers are gone.
Yes, I know he takes his vetoes very seriously, and it’s one of the things I admire about him.
But he promised — as part of his unseemly effort to rush lawmakers (see the editorial at left) — to have his vetoes done by Monday. That leaves him time to prep for the debate, as long as he’s not too busy grandstanding about the Legislature’s failure to follow his schedule. (Lawmakers, you see, understand that they need to go home and justify themselves to the voters. The governor could learn from that attitude.)
Note that I referred to his being a “secure incumbent.” One of the great ironies here is that a governor who has pleased so few remains secure; that’s a testament to the shameful reluctance of better candidates to challenge him.
“Better” in terms of political viability — as in, “threatening.” If we’re talking character, intelligence or understanding of the issues facing South Carolina, Oscar Lovelace is a good man. Whether he is a better man by those standards is, ahem, debatable.
Dr. Lovelace is certainly better at making his case than the governor is — so far. When he talks about being a product of the public schools who actually cares about the public schools, for instance, you find yourself wishing that this guy had a chance. At the very least, he deserves a chance to talk it over with the governor, in front of the rest of us.
The challenger is one of the 578,841 South Carolinians who voted for the governor in 2002.
After Mr. Sanford was elected, the family practitioner from Newberry County was proud to be appointed to his task force to recommend health care policy. He was surprised that the governor only showed up for a brief press conference. He was shocked that there was no follow-up.
Since then, Dr. Lovelace has learned that people who labor in other vineyards — law enforcement, education and the like — have been similarly let down. He has tried to address such matters with the incumbent in ways short of running against him.
He tried “to get his attention” by riding alongside the governor in one of his celebrated bicycle treks. He tried bringing up substantive topics by running with him in a footrace (not an easy forum, in case you haven’t tried it).
So now he’s trying this. Here’s hoping he, and TV viewers, can get the governor’s attention without the huffing and puffing.
It’s not like the governor has all that much to lose, even if he were the sort to value re-election over doing the right thing.
Shrewd political observer that I am, I believe Mark Sanford is going to be governor for the next four years. And yes, he has done us the honor of sitting down with my colleagues and me to discuss his re-election for a full two hours.
Surely he can spare half that time for Dr. Lovelace, and for the 578,840 others to whom he owes his office. Many of them will vote for him anyway, but Mark Sanford should not be satisfied with that. He should stand up and give them a reason to do so.
Related Posts
Oscar who?
Is this another case like with Kevin Fisher, where you encourage challengers, but don’t endorse them, because you only want a horserace for stories to fill the newspaper?
Oh, I want a horse race all right, but not to fill the paper. I want it to fill the vacuum in this state’s leadership.
Unfortunately, I’m far from satisfied with any of the actual horses who are running.
Any politician asking for our vote should be willing to step up and debate a challenger.
Brad, no one thinks your really believe Sanford is not leading. You just don’t like his slowing the growth of Kudzu Government.
If the city, county and state keep growing at four times the rate of the economy, they will theoretically be taking 100% of every taxpayer’s income and property.
What do you have against setting spending priorities ending pork spending?
Apparently a majority of the General Assembly doesn’t believe the governor is leading, as witness the number of vetoes he’s had overridden. That’s a function of the disproportionate power the legislative branch has in South Carolina, but, hey, the President believes that, with him in office, we don’t need legislative or judicial branches, so I guess it all balances out . . .
Most of the leglistators are miserable failures at controlling spending. With $950,000,000 of new revenue from the sparkling economy, they spend it all and look to borrow more. Many of them have become rich off legal fees from the same government agencies they vote to fund.
So Lee, ask yourself: Why doesn’t he want to appear on live TV — as other candidates for statewide office have done (even poor Andre, limping all the way) — and defend his record against a country doctor who has never held public office?
Why be afraid of Oscar Lovelace?
I think Governor Sanford should avail himself of every opportunity to state his reasons for his policies directly to the people. Oscar Lovelace at this point seems to not have a cohesive vision for Sanford to differentiate himself, so Sanford’s handlers follow the standard playbook of keeping the leader out of debates. That is a mistake.t
Sanford not debating doesn’t mean Dr. Lovelace has any good ideas, nor that the legislature is suddenly wise and frugal.
Great column urging Sanford to debate Oscar Lovelace. Four years ago Sanford wanted debates and said he wanted to discuss ideas. Now, with over $6 million in contributions he can go on TV as much as he wants and say what he wants without being challenged. Actions like this discourage good people from running for office.
Why is he scared to debate a non politician who was educated in SC public schools? Could the SC doctor hang with the private academy educated Governor? I sure would like to see it.
The reason given, by Sanford campaign manager Jason Miller, is that “Gov. Sanford takes his day job very seriously.” In other words, he’s just too busy to decide whether he’ll have time to spend a critical hour defending his performance a full six days after lawmakers are gone.
He’s just too busy goin’ on TV and droppin’ his g’s and talkin’ ’bout all those politician folks fussin’ an’ fightin’ in Columbia and how he’s just lookin’ out for us regular folks.
I want it to fill the vacuum in this state’s leadership.
Vacuum? But Governor Sanford is a leader, not a politician. He told us so in his first campaign.
Brad, the vacuum is in the Legislature.
Mr. Warthen should worry more about the news vaccuum over at The State.
Seriously, how about some real reporting of the campaigns instead of this recipe stuff?
Is anyone else tired of an “anti-politician” governor who is the ultimate politician! If the governor is going to misrepresent the “facts” about public education and embrace out of state interest groups sending tons of money into our state to further these misrepresentations….I would just love for someone to ask him this question. Are you ignorant or a liar? It has to be one of the two. If he is ignorant – and does not care to educate himself beyond his “beliefs” – then he doesn’t deserve to be our governor. If he is a liar – knowing that what he is proposing with education is faulty – that it will lead to greater “segregation” between the haves and the have nots – then he definitely does not deserve to be our leader. I just want to know which one it is.
Are you talking about Hodges, or Riley?
Which out-of-state groups? NAACP, NEA, ACLU?
Basic questions the journalists won’t ask themselves, much less the candidates:
* Which programs don’t work and should be abolshed right now?
* Why did management make yet another mistake of starting such failed programs?
* Can’t we save enough money by ending the failed programs to pay for the next batch of new programs?
* How much more money should taxpayers spend on government schools (roads, aquariums, ballparks, whatever)?
* What exact results will come from that spending?
* How do you KNOW that the spending will produce those results?
* What will be the rewards for success of those programs? What will be the punishment for failure?
* How will the taxpayers audit these programs to measure their cost effectiveness?