They say Kevin Geddings has done some awful stuff up in North Carolina, and that’s why they’re putting him away for four years.
But nothing for which he was indicted sounds nearly as bad to ME as what he did in South Carolina — and I’m not just talking about what John Monk wrote about in Sunday’s paper.
The worst thing he did was take one of the better members of the S.C. House, Jim Hodges — a fine, principled lawmaker who, among other things, was possibly the most articulate critic of state-sanctioned gambling in our state — and talk him into running a campaign for governor built around creating a state lottery, and financed by the video poker industry.
I still don’t know how he did that. Based on the few interactions I had with him, I don’t think Kevin Geddings could have persuaded me to have a drink of water in the middle of the Sahara — not because I’m so goody-goody, but because I found him so unpersuasive. His ability to get otherwise sensible people to do his bidding will always be a mystery to me.
To this day, a lot of people think I had some personal animus against Gov. Hodges. Not true. As I told Kevin Geddings the one time he and I had lunch:
"I only have one problem with Jim Hodges. You."
Related Posts
Hodges’ focus on and prioritizing education was unusual and could have been a great impetus to improve such an important part of this state.
His focus seemed to shift immediately upon election to campaigning for re-election. I held my nose to vote for him and still have a bad taste in my mouth.
Brad, what do you hear about Joel Lourie? Will he run for state office?
Big Papa Brad… defender of those who can’t be responsible for themselves.
Any factual evidence to demonstrate the negative impact the lottery has had on South Carolina? or is that just another one of your paternalistic views that Father
Knows Best?
Not sure if there have been any studies done for South Carolina yet. In Georgia, prior to the lottery scholarships, 1 of 4 students who scored 1500 or higher on the SAT’s stayed in state. Now, it’s 3 of 4.
I would think South Carolina would like to see its best students stay in state as well.
And let’s not make Geddings into some kind of Svengali who hypnotized Hodges. The fact that a politician gave into his quest for power by sacrificing his ethics is hardly a unique story. It’s the rule, not the exception.
I don’t know. I’ll ask him. I think I’ve asked in the past, and didn’t get a reply I recall. Probably noncommital. Few people are ready to say things like that — or even sure of their own minds on the point — until they actually get ready to run.
Not many state senators choose to run for statewide office. In S.C., that can mean giving up power. That may sound facetious, but it can be true. Where would McConnell have more power? Nowhere.
I really think that’s why Tommy Moore didn’t run harder. Why would he want to be governor? Those guys really think like that, I believe. And while he claimed he had the fire in the belly, I believe that on some level, he was just as happy to lose.
Here’s my reaction. I think that Geddings knew how to talk polling and influence to folks who wanted power. Foreplay was his forte, but he could deliver in part because he could draw on the resources of the lottery companies chasing business in both Carolinas, as well as the video poker barons down here.
Even a well-meaning, straight-laced politician can be lured onto the rocks by the sirens’ song:
Back in 2000 we all knew that the lottery companies had targeted the Palmetto State; they even disclosed as much in their annual reports. What no one could find out is how exactly they were spending their money, or how much they were spending. Sure, some lobbyists made some disclosures, but they were probably financing polls and using locals to inform key politicos of the results.
Look at Geddings’ email to me from the link above. He simply had to tell Hodges that the only way to get $200M for education, Hodges’ mission, was the lottery; that was a simple song. Geddings’ mistake along the way in both states was to supplement his income by unconventional means such as theft and influence-peddling.
He’ll now have four years to think about that.
In the meantime we see yet another lesson on the difference between those who stand on principle and those who stand for whatever’s popular and will get them votes or influence or a little cash in the pocket for a rainy day.
Doug –
You cite what the lottery funds — no one denies that scholarships for those with good grades and high SAT / ACT scores are helpful.
During the 2000 lottery campaign here in SC these positive aspects were cited, but the negative aspects were too. Among those are these:
From a libertarian perspective, there’s nothing wrong with this. From that perspective, however, state-sponsored gambling is to be avoided because it requires lousy odds and removes the sense of fiscal responsibility from elected officials who can budget with “free” money the lottery generates. Moreover, if one wants a society of responsible citizens who can function with the minimum of government, one should restrict government’s encroachment in activities like gambling that should be private.
Now if you want state-sponsored / -sanctioned gambling, the libertarian will agree provided that all government safety nets are removed: no Medicaid, school-lunch programs, income subsidies, affordable housing plans, etc.
Conservatives and progressives have inconsistent views; some in each group support lotteries, others oppose. But the data are clear, poor folks fund scholarships for the rich in hopes of striking it rich, a long shot, and legislators don’t have to make tough policy decisions to fund education or whatever.
Finally, from a policy perspective, lotteries provide a short-term boost to revenue that declines over time. State lottery commissions have to stay on their toes generating new games to entice players, legislatures tend to add new lotteries.
My favorite example is Maryland look at their state’s lottery page! Two semi-weekly six-digit games, a daily five-digit game, and three-digit and four-digit games twice daily! In addition they have the $1 Million-Instant Prize, the $2 Million 2nd Chance Mail-In Drawing, and the $25 Million Frenzy. Ooooh, they have Keno too!
That Maryland is adding slots to their racetracks is just another reason to visit.
Brad, what’s your take on JL? I read up on him during his last campaign and was very impressed. I understand his dad was a good man so the values run in the family?
Would being Jewish negatively impact him politically – state wide that is?
He’s a very fine man and an excellent senator. And yes, it runs in the family.
And I’m sorry to say that it probably would be an issue with many voters that Joel is Jewish. How much of a challenge that would be to overcome is hard to tell. I had sort of hoped we would be able to test that with Joe Lieberman’s candidacy in 2004, but by the time the process got the SC, the bandwagon effect for Kerry and (in SC only) Edwards had caused Democratic primary voters to ignore all the other candidates. I have a feeling not many of the voters paid enough attention to Lieberman to know he was Jewish — or to know that his values probably paralleled theirs much more closely than those of the other choices.
Unfortunately, I think that the issue of a jewish candidacy in South Carolina for higher office has been tested on more than one occasion. Just go back to the early 1970’s for one example. The infamous Campbell/Heller race for the 4th congressional district when a polling question brought up the queston that subjected respondents to think about Heller’s religion. Heller was Jewish and was leading in the polls up until that point. He was also a wildly popular mayor of Greenville. When his faith was brought up he rapidly sank in the polls and ultimately lost the race to then state Senator Caroll Campbell.
Similarly, the issue of a Jewish candidacy was tested again with the name Tenenbaum in 2004 in the US Senate race, when Inez Tenenbaum ran a perfect textbook campaign against eventual winner Jim Demint. In this campaign, Demint commited more than enough gaffes to lose the race but he still managed to eek out a victory showing that in the state that still worships the confederate flag, having the right name on the ballot in most cases gives you the win.
I personally would love to see Joel Lourie get into the race for Governor in 2010 and show that South Carolina, in the second decade of the 21st century has moved into a new era. Joel is a proven leader that learned the hard lessons from his father that life is about compromise to make a better life for all South Carolinians.
Newspaper reports from Charlotte indicate that Kevin Geddings got hundreds of thousands of dollars in the short time he helped the lottery to be introduced into North Carolina. Wonder how much he got when it was started here in S.C.? Wonder how much of that when to Hodges campaign for governor?
I wish I knew, Pete. It would be nice for the feds, with their subpoena powers, to look into it. We couldn’t even quantify what the video poker people were doing when it was commonly accepted that they were bankrolling the 98 campaign. The kinds of contributions we’re talking about here are even harder to know about.
And paul, I meant a direct, statewide test. Yes, there was Heller in the Upstate, and a lot of people didn’t know Inez was Methodist, and probably voted their anti-Semitism there. But I don’t know that.
I do know what I thought was going on with this SCRG blog post I wrote about.
Pete –
The long story is here. The short version is that I think that between 1999 and 2005 Geddings took in at least $758,296, of which $0 went to Hodges. That’s not to say that he did not take in more and send some of that to Hodges’ ill-fated 2002 gubernatorial race; that certainly must have happened. But the $758K went into his business’s pocket. You’ll find references supporting my guess at the link above.
That $758,296 total is just from three sources: a state salary, state contract-holder Just Care Inc., and lottery company Scientific Games. There may have been more.
Why do I say that none went to the then-governor? As John Monk reported Sunday, Geddings took the $30K that Just Care intended as a 2002 campaign contribution and pocketed it. Hey, this was in February, during the run-up to the November 2002 election. Whether this was out of habit or just his personal insurance policy in case Hodges lost, it seems clear to me that Geddings was looking after numero uno and Hodges was no higher than #2.
Being a teacher, I was a huge supporter early on. I even volunteered to help with his campaign a couple days. When I saw how willing Hodges was to jump in bed with Collins, I walked away disgusted. I still am.
Beasely wasn’t any better.
Compared to them, I find Sanford a breath of fresh air and I’m not a fan of his.
Vote Lourie 2010
It has been my observation that there is as much internal friction within the Jewish community in Columbia as there is external discrimination. Don’t think it doesn’t matter which temple a candidate attends…
It seems that Scientific Games and Just Care gave Kevin Geddings about $700,000 (reported) and no telling how much was paid upreported.
A couple of questions:
What did Geddings do for this money? He had to have accomplished something in return for their money or they would not have continued paying him. Whose influence was he buying?
Was taking this money to influence state contracts legal?
Is any investigation into this on-going at the present time?
What other businesses or organizations are
buying their way into contracts with the state of South Carolina?
Who else is on the take right now?
Why do we continue to allow this to happen in state and federal government when we can easily see how corrupt it is?
Is The State Newspaper willing and able to pull the scab off this corrupt sore and see what lies beneath it?
Pete –
I know for a fact that folks were trying to figure out what Geddings and others were up to at the time. I did research of public records and exchanged emails with several reporters over Geddings’ involvement with the lottery campaign. Of course, Scientific Games paid him for the lottery campaign, insight, and who knows what else. That company also paid real lobbyists to influence legislators.
It’s quite possible that Geddings fished Just Care — took their money while pretending to do something for them. I don’t know.
For what little it’s worth, I’m a contracts manager in the information technology area. I’ve seen lots of contracts with governmental units, including SC, and believe that the state’s procurement code and personnel are top notch in the IT area: they hold fair bids, award based on the solicitations requirements, and demand performance from the winner. I know of a couple of companies that have lost considerable sums on SC state work because of that.
In pursuing a contract with another state several years ago, we were approached by an older attorney who said that nobody wins nothing without having someone like him on board to smooth things out during the bidding and after award. We don’t do things that way and simply told him we weren’t interested. The competition was tough, but we had a great technology and a great price; we won and ended up doing a great job.
Other companies probably hire guys like that old coot, and it probably does them no real good, but they don’t know it. Heck, if they get to meet a house committee chairman, they’re pleased as punch. They’re getting fished.