With the Legislature coming back Tuesday, you may want to take a look at our lawmakers as we last saw them.
Basically, they were furious. Gov. Mark Sanford had just vetoed the entire state budget. This was his way of complaining that the Legislature had not stuck to the entirely arbitrary numerical cap that he proposes to place, permanently, on state spending. Rather than make line-item vetoes to get down to the number he likes — that would have made him very unpopular in an election year — he vetoed the whole thing, knowing beyond a shadow of a doubt that the Legislature would override him.
Here’s footage from the House debate on the subject on June 14, 2006. The man doing most of the talking is Rep. Doug Jennings, the Democrat from my home town of Bennettsville (his daddy used to be my doctor). No one of either party was arguing with his characterization of the governor’s action. In fact, the members of both parties laughed when he challenged Ways and Means Chairman Dan Cooper to say whether he thought the governor was showing "leadership" by vetoing the budget.
The longer clip that follows is from the Senate. It starts with my own senator Sen. Nikki Setzler, D-Lexington, essentially saying the same sorts of things Rep. Jennings had said in the other chamber. Senate Finance Chairman Hugh Leatherman, R-Florence (at the podium), is not at all shy about showing his agreement with the Democrat’s complaint. Then Lexington Republican Jake Knotts gets in a few licks on the governor as well. Finally, we see Sen. Greg Ryberg rise and take the podium to defend the governor. He’s wrong, but he is showing the courage of his convictions, which is one reason we endorsed him in his failed bid for S.C. Treasurer. By the way, at the VERY end we see Sen. Bill Mescher playing freecell during the debate.
The governor’s veto was a moment of revelation. We knew that the governor was into empty ideological gestures that had nothing to do with governing South Carolina, but he at least had been a conscientious, detail-oriented grind when it came to the budget. This trashed his reputation for that particular virtue.
This is relevant now because the governor has already indicated that he wants to play the same game again this year — putting together a DOA budget that meets his capricious limit, so that he can say, "See, it can be done." Never mind the fact that it can only be done by cutting the good (the state’s endowed chair fund, higher ed in general) along with the bad (pork projects).
He’s already ticked off legislative leaders with this behavior, despite his re-election promises to try to work with them to actually get things done rather than devoting his energy to gestures that please his out-of-state libertarian admirers.
Related Posts
Brad, your wholly negative slant on the Governor might have a shred of credibility if you weren’t at the same time trying to make the legislature look good. There is absolutely nothing good about this legislature, in fact I believe that the pee poor legislature in this state is a main contributing factor to our placing first on all the bad lists and last on the good ones. The only thing sadder to me than our sorry legislators is the fact that their constituents continue to re-elect them. And, yes I’ll be honest…I don’t even know who my state legislator is. I could find out in about 5 minutes, but does it matter? Yes the governor is a lousy one, but seen beside the legislature, he looks OK to me. Ed
Um — how was I making the Legislature look good? They may have had good reason to be angry, but they still sort of come across as an angry rabble. The only guy who comes across really well here is Grey Ryberg, and he’s DEFENDING the governor.
I even point out the slacker playing solitaire.
If they look good, it escapes me. Read my column today.
Brad, good column on the low expectations in our state. We really do fail to do anything well. You need to go one step further. You raise the issue of state government’s failure to devote resources to important issues such as highway safety and mental health. But you fail to connect the dots between our lack of resources on these problems and the collosal waste of resources elsewhere. A huge part of our national wealth is wasted in Iraq, but that’s just part of it. Let’s have a discussion about wasted resources in general.
As an aside, I’m really scratching my head trying to figure out the logic behind the choice of stories for the front page. The story concerning the troops send-off @ Williams-Brice stadium was fine. It reflects the State’s pro-war bias but I’m okay with that. But what is really a mystery is the story concerning the disappointed Columbia movie goers who were unable to view “Dreamgirls” on Christmas Day! That story MUST hold the record for lamest frontpage story in the history of journalism. Not only is this not a frontpage story it shouldn’t even be a frontpage metro section story. For that matter does it even belong in the paper at all? Wouldn’t the avalanche story on page x be a better choice for the front page A-4? Or if there is some requirement for a local story how about the follow-up story to the Thursday’s plane crash?
To me it shows that this legislature is owned lock stock and barrel by a mixed bag of special interests. Tobacco (farmers), insurance and fees (car dealers), education (teacher lobby), real estate (builders), and the list goes on and on. The only people NOT represented are the people who actually work and pay taxes who don’t have time to grease the skids with the wheelers and dealers in the legislature. Governor Sanford in many ways represents that group, and that is why he is supposedly so unpopular yet keeps winning.
Let’s see . . . tobacco farmers don’t work and pay taxes, nor do car dealers, nor do teachers, nor do builders. Huh? This is one small businessman who doesn’t mind working and paying taxes (as long as I’m making money), although I wish the tax structure were different. Non sequitur, anyone?
“Angry rabble” are good descriptive words that I’d buy Brad. So are words like self-serving, puerile, juvenile, fractured and aimless. Maybe you weren’t trying to make the legislature look good after all. In fact, I think we agree that they pretty well suck. Ed
In reference to the state legislature Ed writes that “they pretty well suck”. Since it’s controlled by Republicans why not support Democrats in the next election?
I’m not angry with all republicans, just the ridiculous lot that pass for republicans in our legislature. When true republicans embrace conservative principles, I’m there! Meanwhile, I’m gonna be looking for some libertarians to vote for. I haven’t yet come to the point where I can vote for democrats, I don’t believe they have any principles whatsoever other than big government, income redistribution and abortion rights. These are all deal busters for me. Ed
Bobby Harrell is huffing and puffing, but he cannot blow down the House of Corruption.
He can’t fix Workers Compensation until he has the guts to stand up to lawyer-legislators like John Land who are milking the system.
He can’t fix Medicare until he has the guts to get all the illegal aliens and tag-along immigrants out of the trough.
He can’t fix the latest state agency scandal until he admits they are all just as corrupt and broken, and cleans up the whole mess.