Category Archives: South Carolina

No, but he’s got time for THIS

If you read Elizabeth Holmes’ recent story in The Wall Street Journal, you know that the reason Mark Sanford couldn’t endorse John McCain back before the S.C. primary — and he was asked not once, but three times — was that his schedule was just so darned tight:

    Mr. Sanford says the time commitment needed to fully support a
presidential campaign was too great, given his responsibilities as
governor and as a father. "If you hop in, it’s not like you can just
sorta hop in halfway," Mr. Sanford said in an interview. "If you gotta
do it, you really gotta do it."
    … "You do not have an unlimited number of hours," he said.
    …Even though the time commitment to campaign with Sen. McCain would be minimal — maybe a week — Mr. Sanford still refused.

I wonder what McCain — or any of the other GOP candidates who could have used a kind word from the gov back in those days — would think of this release I just got:

              Contact: Danielle Frangos
              For Immediate Release – April 23, 2008                                             

KATRINA SHEALY ENDORSED BY GOVERNOR MARK SANFORD
LEXINGTON, SC – Governor Mark Sanford today endorsed Katrina Shealy in her campaign for State Senate.
    “I’m supporting Katrina in this race quite simply because I believe she’s committed to the conservative ideals of lower taxes and limited government that people I talk to in Lexington County believe in very strongly,” Gov. Sanford said. “I believe Katrina will be a real leader in terms of working to make South Carolina a better place to do business, work, and raise a family, and to that end I’m pleased to endorse her.”
    Katrina Shealy thanked the Governor for his endorsement, saying, “I am so pleased to receive Governor Sanford’s endorsement.  The Governor’s support is truly a validation of my pro-business and pro-taxpayer message of fiscal responsibility.  I look forward to working with the Governor to improve our state’s business climate and help create new jobs and opportunities for our hard working families. I believe the Governor’s support is a major step towards the Republican nomination for the State Senate.”
    Katrina Shealy is the former Lexington County Republican Party Chair running for State Senate in District 23. Katrina resides with her husband Jimmy in the Red Bank area of Lexington County.
                # # #

Well, I guess that we should all feel glad that the infamous "list" never materialized. If the governor’s just going after Jake Knotts, that’s way better than trying to remake the whole Legislature in his image.

One thing I will say for Jake, though — he did manage to find a few minutes in his busy Sanford-baiting schedule to endorse Sen. McCain, well before the primary.

Is Bill Clinton wagging his finger at us AGAIN?

Bill_clinton_wart

Speaking of The New York Times this morning, did you see how it described Bill Clinton’s reaction at being reminded of his attempt to ghetto-ize Obama back here in S.C.?

More Finger Wagging From a Miffed Bill Clinton
By KATE PHILLIPS
Published: April 23, 2008
WASHINGTON — Wagging his finger once again, former President Bill Clinton chided a reporter on Tuesday for what he deemed a misinterpretation of his remarks during a radio interview in which he said the Obama campaign “played the race card on me.”
    Mr. Clinton confronted the issue of race again on Monday when he was asked by an interviewer for WHYY radio in Philadelphia about his remarks earlier this year on the results of the South Carolina Democratic primary. At the time, he likened the victory of Senator Barack Obama to that of the Rev. Jesse Jackson in 1998; Mr. Clinton’s comparison was denounced widely by black officials who believed he was marginalizing Mr. Obama’s victory with a racially tinged allusion to Mr. Jackson’s failed presidential bids…

What I’d like to know is, was he literally wagging his finger — you know, the way he did before? And if you don’t remember, the video is below.

Unfortunately, I have no video on the latest incident, so I’ll just have to assume the wagging was figurative this time. But we do have some nice, clear audio. Be sure to turn up your volume at the end so you can hear him say, "I don’t think I can take any s..t from anybody on that, do you?" (Some listeners hear it as "don’t think I should take any s..t," but I think it’s "can"…)

Now, having listened to that, do you feel chastened? Do you feel guilty for having thought less of our former president, even for a moment? Are you gonna stop giving him s–t now? Are you listening, you Obama supporters? Shame on anyone who would dare question Bill Clinton, as he makes clear in this other video…

Michael Koska, H77, Republican

Koskam_008

10:31 a.m. —
Michael Koska, a professional photographer, is an interesting candidate in a number of ways.

First, he’s a white Republican running in the district that has been represented by John Scott since 1990. That’s often a sign of someone making a purely symbolic, quixotic gesture. But he’s quite serious.

More than that, for someone running for office for the first time, he’s unusually well-informed and thoughtful about issues. His knowledge is born of experience.

He got interested in serving his community after hearing about a school teacher dying on a road he travels every day — Hard Scrabble. He found out that local government didn’t plan to fix the road for another 20 years. So he started a campaign to do something about it. He collected 10,000 signatures on a petition, and went to Sen. Joel Lourie and Rep. Bill Cotty for help. He got $400,000 to fix a problem right in front of the school, which he calls a "very small victory," as a true fix for Hard Scrabble will run $70 million. And, as he just discovered, that’s just the beginning of local road needs that we haven’t figured out how to pay for. (He said he almost ran two years ago after he heard Mr. Scott offer light rail as as answer to our transportation woes — but he discovered the filing deadline had just passed.) He’s for borrowing the money now to fix these problems, as it will only be more expensive later.

He’s also, as a small business owner, very interested in the state finding a way to provide affordable health coverage. He’s had to pay an exorbitant amount for insurance that doesn’t meet his needs — he was charged $20,000 for his wife to go through a perfectly normal, healthy childbirth. But he doesn’t dare try to switch policies because it took him so long to get this one.

And he recognizes the issue as one that goes far beyond his own case. He sees how small businesses in general are held back, which is a millstone around the state’s neck economically. He speaks of all the people who are trapped in jobs they can’t quit, because they can’t do without the insurance.

The video below shows the knowledgeable way in which Mr. Koska speaks of these issues.

On other matters:

  • He favors a move to a Cabinet system of state government.
  • Unlike me he may not love light rail, but he’s all for the state doing what it can (since the federal government has failed so miserably) to move us toward energy independence. "We’re financing both sides in the War on Terror." He’s for going nuclear (in terms of peaceful use, that is), and promoting electric cars.
  • In general, as a Ronald Reagan Republican, "I think taxes should stay as low as they can." But he refused to sign Grover’s pledge, bless him.

So you’re thinking I’ve gotta love this guy, right? Well, nobody’s perfect. He’s for private school vouchers. He thinks it would mean we’d have fewer public schools to build, and help with overcrowding.

Like I said, nobody’s perfect. Here’s the video (sorry about the wiggly picture — it’s the stripes on his shirt):

David Herndon, S.C. House Dist. 79

Herndondavid_044
9:35 a.m. —
David Herndon turned 40 a few months ago, looked around, and decided it was time to get involved with politics. His business (trucking) was in good shape, and his kids at an age that he could free up the time.

First, he replaced Sherri Few as chair of the Kershaw County GOP. Then, when he heard Bill Cotty would not seek re-election, and Ms. Few was the only Republican contender for the seat (at that time), he filed for that.

He cites two main differences between him and Ms. Few, who as you may recall ran against Mr. Cotty last time:

  1. She’s the private-school voucher (or tax credit) candidate, and he stands in opposition to that. With three kids in public schools he says he feels like he’s got too much investment in them to give up now. He says his opponent’s support of private school "choice" isn’t overt, but all you have to do is look at where her money comes from. The current holder of the seat, of course, has been a favorite whipping boy of the out-of-state interests that have financed the private school "choice" movement in S.C.
  2. He’s a businessman, who’s made a payroll and knows what it’s like to make his way in the real world. By contrast, Ms. Few’s main experience is in the nonprofit world, with "most of the money coming out of Washington."

Beyond his opposition to vouchers, however, Mr. Herndon doesn’t have much to propose in the area of education, beyond paying teachers better.

He does have other reforms he’d like to see. He’s one of those all-too-few candidates who brings up government restructuring before we can ask him about it. He would get rid of the Budget and Control Board, and reduce the number of constitutional officers.

He says that "in general" he’s against tax increases — except for the cigarette tax. He wants to bring more of "a business approach" to government, but his emphasis is less on taxes than on spending. He’s an advocate for setting priorities, and an opponent of such pork spending as the Green Bean Museum in Lake City.

He also wants to work to make health care coverage more accessible. He learned the hard way — through having a child with cancer — that health insurance "is one of the most important things a family can have."

Looking ahead to the general election, he said he sees himself as having an advantage over Democrat Anton Gunn, in terms of having lived in the district 30 years, and having his roots there.

AP says S.C. House poised to nix lawmakers’ pension COLA

The Associated Press is reporting that a majority of the subcommittee in whose lap the legislator-pension increase was dumped are saying they want to kill the measure:

{By JIM DAVENPORT}=
{Associated Press Writer}=
   COLUMBIA, S.C. (AP) – South Carolina lawmakers are expected to scrap plans to sweeten pension checks for legislators when they meet Tuesday, according to members of the subcommittee debating the increases.
   "This year, we’re not doing employees very good in their regular pay. I don’t see this as a year to be raising ours," Rep. Herb Kirsh said Monday. Three other lawmakers on the five-member House Ways and Means Panel said they also want the pension boost nixed.
   Two weeks ago, the full House gave initial approval to legislation that would add a 2 percent cost of living adjustment for lawmakers’ pensions. The vote came the same day the Senate’s budget-writing committee scuttled raises for state workers in its $7 billion spending plan for next year because of slumping tax collections. The seemingly conflicting moves drew a rebuke from Gov. Mark Sanford and, in an unusual move, the pension boost was sent back to the House Ways and Means Committee the following day.
   Kirsh, who is one of 333 current and former legislators already drawing a retirement check from the system, said he estimated the proposed increase would have added about $6 monthly to the nearly $32,000 annually he gets from the system.
   "We’ve got a pretty good retirement now," said Kirsh, a 78-year-old Democrat from Clover.
   Republican Reps. Jay Lucas, of Hartsville; Chip Limehouse, of Charleston; and Brian White, of Anderson, all said they also opposed the pension boost. Limehouse said he first thought the legislation only offered state employee raises.
   "No matter how woefully underpaid we may be, it’s easier just not to have all the controversy," Limehouse said.
   The pension proposal "sends a horrible message in a terrible budget year. I think the retirement the General Assembly gets is fair, to be honest with," Lucas said.
   Kirsh also said Rep. Denny Neilson, the subcommittee’s chairwoman, also was backing him. She did not immediately return a message Monday.
   Eliminating the legislative retirement increase still won’t address a key concern Sanford raised.
   Sanford said the cost of living adjustment for the rest of the state’s retirees ignores serious problems with the retirement system because it is tied to changing assumptions about how much investments will grow in the state’s retirement system.
   Sanford two weeks ago said he is "not willing to stake our retirees’ benefits and our taxpayers’ futures on the hope that this bill’s predictions come true, and I’d urge the House not to either."

Here’s hoping Dav has it right.

Not everyone at the Journal is clueless about McCain and Sanford

My earlier post reminded me of something — a couple of weeks back, someone at the Journal was trying to reach me to talk about Sanford and McCain. Elizabeth Holmes and I traded phone messages, but never got in touch. Then I forgot about it.

Remembering that today, I sent Ms. Holmes a link to today’s post on the subject. She wrote a quick line back asking whether I had ever read her story, which I had not. I just found it. It ran on Saturday, March 29. I don’t know if this link will work for you or not, but essentially the piece drew the sharp contrast between 2000, when Sanford co-chaired McCain’s S.C. campaign, and 2008, when he wouldn’t give the McCain campaign the time of day:

    Mr. Sanford didn’t endorse anyone during the primaries this year, after having co-chaired Sen. McCain’s bitter battle in South Carolina during the 2000 race. He brushed off requests for support by the McCain team at least three times, according to people familiar with the matter, including a period last year when the campaign was at a low.
    The snub could cost him his chance at the vice presidency. "Loyalty is a big, big commodity in McCain-land," said a McCain aide familiar with Mr. Sanford’s involvement…

As for why there’s so much talk out there about Sanford in defiance of all reason… Ms. Holmes is hip to that as well. After the 2000 campaign, Mr. Sanford became governor, and as she notes, "As governor, he began speaking at conservative think tanks — such as
the Heritage Foundation and the Cato Institute — and continues to do
so."

Add to that the governor’s most ardent cheerleaders at the Club for Growth. The Club was pushing Sanford for national office as early as the Republican National Convention in 2004. Here’s an excerpt from a piece I wrote at the end of that week in New York:

    Even our own Sen. Lindsey Graham and Gov. Mark Sanford were being mentioned. As I wrote earlier in the week, Sen. Graham spent the convention going between interviews like a bee going from flower to flower.
    For his part, Mr. Sanford calls all the talk "the last thing in the world I’m looking at or thinking about." But that’s about all he’s got time to say about it because he’s too busy participating in things like a "Four for the Future" panel over at the Club for Growth.
    On Wednesday, he invites the delegation to a soiree at a friend’s home on the Upper East Side. He urges them to come see "how a real New Yorker lives. They live in small boxes." His host’s home may be a little narrow, but if that’s a box, it’s from Tiffany’s — and it’s gift-wrapped.
    At the reception itself, when the governor silences the assembled gathering to thank Howard Bellin for the use of his home, the host says, "I fully expect to be his guest at the White House in another four years."

One nice thing about the Club, though — maybe nobody else reads my blog, but they certainly do. This appeared on the S.C. chapter’s Web site roughly an hour (either 47 minutes or an hour and 47 minutes, depending on how their site treats time zones) after my last post went up.

So, let me close with a big shout-out to my pals at the Club, which believe it or not actually has a blog devoted to pushing Sanford as Veep.

McConnell spends 30 grand on big ol’ gun

A colleague calls this story in the Charleston paper to my attention. Golly, maybe Mark Sanford’s right; maybe our legislative leaders exercise no spending restraint whatsoever — with their own money, that is…

    Some middle-aged men blow big bucks on a sports car, a bass boat or a nice set of golf clubs, but the man who some consider the most powerful in South Carolina government had something else in mind.
    Senate President Pro Tem Glenn McConnell recently spent almost $30,000 on a reproduction of a bronze cannon, complete with a Palmetto engraving.
    "Anybody will tell you a bronze gun has just got a different sound to it," he said. "I knew this gun would make noise, and it does. It is a loud, talking gun. … It really splits the air."…

If you can stand to read more, here’s the link.

‘Sanford as veep’ AGAIN? Geez, would you people give it a rest?

Back when I did the editorial stating fairly succinctly why naming Mark Sanford as running mate would be stupid for John McCain, and disastrous for the country, I got a call from a reader who said I was manufacturing the whole thing, that nobody mentioned it but us, and if I’d just shut up, it would go away.

I wish.

Unfortunately, even though most Republicans see no reason for McCain to choose Sanford, and those Republicans who actually know both men (that would be S.C. Republicans) mostly think such a move would be insane, there is one subfaction in the GOP coalition that continues to push him, against all reason and all odds. That is the economic-libertarian faction represented by the Club for Growth and The Wall Street Journal, among a few others.

Sanford_promo_2
The Journal‘s latest effort along these lines was to devote the big "Weekend Interview" to Mr. Sanford on Saturday, and to promote it from the front page, complete with a front-page, full-color caricature of
our gov. It’s fascinating the way the Journal — truly one of the best papers in the country — continues to sully its reputation by taking Mr. Sanford more seriously than does any paper in South Carolina, with the possible exception of the Post and Courier.

The Journal apparently justifies continuing to float this idea on a basis that simply isn’t true, that Mr. Sanford "is on nearly every Republican strategist’s shortlist for vice president this year." To back that up, the piece names three people: "Newt Gingrich, Karl Rove and Sen. Lindsey Graham (a stalwart John McCain backer) have all floated Mr. Sanford’s name for veep."

Sen. Graham is on that list because of the three, he’s the only one that anyone might believe has Sen. McCain’s ear. Well, I’ve shown you what Sen. Graham has to say about his old friend Mark’s status as a veep candidate or as a party leader of any kind; you may want to watch the video again.

So I don’t know where that’s coming from.

Anyway, the "hour-long interview" with the governor is said to have taken place at the State House; one must sincerely doubt that the interviewer bothered to ask anyone else about the governor on the way in or out of the building. That would have been damaging to the Journal‘s premise that the governor would be an asset to a national ticket. Of course, if you buy into the premise that Mr. Sanford is involved in a lonely, "prolonged fight against the political status quo in South Carolina," then you wouldn’t want to talk to any of those people, anyway.

But six years after he was elected, one has to be rather gullible to buy into that myth. The truth is that the State House is dominated by conservative Republicans who are much, much more representative of the national party and rank-and-file Republican voters (much less the independents that McCain must continue to appeal to) than Mr. Sanford ever has been or ever will be.

Yes, you can believe the myth if you don’t actually know him, and if you read the quote that starts the piece:

"Our system was put in place in large part based on the fear that a black man would be elected governor. So traditional functions of the executive branch were diffused . . . to mean that if a black man was elected governor, it wouldn’t matter anyway because he wouldn’t have any responsibility . . . That is an insane operating model."

And if you like that, you can read the much more extended version, written by me in 1991 as part of our "Power Failure" series (you’ll also learn that keeping the governor weak was not an innovation of the 1895 constitution, but the continuation of a 300-year South Carolina tradition). The governor read our reprint of that series back in 2002, and based much of his electoral platform on that. That’s why we endorsed the guy. But ever since he was elected, he’s put far more effort into his more marginal, anti-government libertarian proposals than he has into anything that would reform our system.

Several statements in this piece need to be addressed individually, to set the record straight (to the extent I can do such a thing, my pulpit being decidedly less bully than the Journal‘s):

  • After noting the rather obvious fact that no South Carolinian could help the GOP ticket, the author protests, "But Mr. Sanford is popular on the right because he understands markets." No. The truth is that he is popular among economic libertarians because he agrees with them, right down the line, perfectly. Such people are not the same as "the right," although they overlap with that set. And no one can be said to understand markets when he believes that distributing vouchers to people in a thinly populated, poor community that can’t attract a grocery store would lead to the spontaneous generation of an excellent private school.
  • "Mr. Sanford’s main governing problem is the state’s constitution." As someone who has been pushing for 17 years for the same restructuring reforms that Mr. Sanford says he’s for, I wish that were true. But Mr. Sanford’s main governing problem is that he can’t get along with other Republican leaders — and that doesn’t augur well for one who would lead his party nationally.
  • "…the state has leaned left on spending…" Oh, Good Lord have mercy. That’s so idiotic, so utterly marinated, rolled and deep-fried in fantasy, that it’s astounding a bolt of lightning didn’t strike the Journal’s presses as they pushed that one out.
  • "Over the past six years, he has helped shepherd through three big tax reforms: the state’s first cut to its income tax; a grand tax swap that slashed property taxes and increased sales taxes; and the virtual elimination of grocery taxes. That last one is not the tax cut Mr. Sanford wanted to spur investment. But he took what he could get…" Our "left-leaning" Legislature loves nothing more than to cut taxes. A session seldom passes without a tax cut; and the only suspense is what kind of cut will tickle lawmakers’ fancy that particular year. The governor can pretend that the Legislature keeps doing what comes naturally as some sort of response to him, but it’s just not true. (The closest it comes to truth is that some lawmakers pointed to the income tax cut as being kinda, sorta like a cut the governor wanted, and they used that as an excuse to say they don’t always ignore him. But even in that case, the cut what they wanted to cut, as they always do. But that’s the only instance in which it made sense for him to say he "took what he could get.")

Aw, geez, I can’t spend any more time on this, but if you’re able to call up the piece, you’ll find more absurd assertions than you can shake a stick at. Obviously, the only person this writer — the Journal‘s assistant features editor, if you can wrap your head around that — spoke to in South Carolina (or, perhaps, anywhere) for this piece was Mark Sanford.

And no matter what sort of goals it may have of bending the world to its ideological will, the Journal did its readers a disservice by publishing it.

A black, Jewish Texan walks into a police station…

and ends up cleaning up the whole town.

A reader sent me a link to this article that reminds us of the accomplishments of Reuben Greenberg, who had such a distinguished career as police chief in Charleston. As we mull over just how big a mess the Columbia police department is in these days, and view the latest Highway Patrol video, we might long for such a top cop:

Reuben Greenberg was undoubtedly the ultimate "man bites dog" story, for what could be more unlikely than a black, observant Jew from Texas transforming a city in the heart of the Confederacy from a crime-ridden center of corruption to a uniquely well-managed place that cracked down on crime at the same time it virtually eliminated police brutality — and even rudeness? Greenberg told his cops that their job was not to punish (that was up to the courts), but to make arrests, and in order to do that they had to be on good terms with the citizens. Thus, he said early on in his memorable tenure, he would defend a policeman for using "excessive force" to make an arrest, but he would fire anyone who used abusive language with a citizen.

OK, so I jumped to a conclusion

After years of Democratic and Republican seats being made safer and safer for their respective parties by way of increasingly sophisticated partisan (and incumbent-protective) gerrymandering, one forgets sometimes that members of underdog parties DO occasionally take a run at a seat in the opposing column — particularly when the seat is open.

So it is that, without thinking about it, I made a mistake when I said that Joe McEachern would be the third candidate we’ll talk to who is seeking to fill the seat John Scott is vacating. As a colleague corrected me:

Mr. Byrd is indeed the second candidate we’ve had in for H.77. But Joe McEachern is not the THIRD candidate we will meet with. He is the third DEMOCRAT we will meet with. The THIRD candidate for this seat whom we’ll see is Michael Koska — one of the two or three Republicans in the race. (I say two or three because there’s one candidate whose district is listed as 77 on one GOP document and 79 on another — and I haven’t gotten a call back from him yet).

———————————-
Cindi Ross Scoppe

So now you know.

Now that I think about it, Republicans have taken a run at that seat before — just unsuccessfully.

By the way, I was going to tell you HOW unsuccessfully (I was curious to see if the numbers indicated any sort of opening that would make a Republican candidacy anything other than purely quixotic), but the state election commission Web site isn’t providing that information today — which is inexcusable.

Good for Nikki

Still catching up on the e-mail, and just now saw this one from yesterday:

For Immediate Release
Contact: State Rep. Nikki Haley

Tuesday, April 15, 2008

REPRESENTATIVE NIKKI HALEY INTRODUCES THE 2008 SPENDING ACCOUNTABILITY ACT

COLUMBIA, S.C. – State Representative Nikki Haley today announced that she has introduced legislation that requires a roll call vote on any legislation that expends taxpayer dollars. Currently, the Legislature can appropriate funds with a simple voice vote.

“Taxpayers deserve the right to see the spending habits of their legislators,” said Haley. “Over the past three years alone, state government spending has grown by over 40%. I believe the 2008 Spending Accountability Act will encourage legislators, myself included, to take a long, hard look before committing to spending taxpayer dollars.”

Haley said roll call votes on taxpayer spending remove any confusion on where individual legislators stand.

“We should never have another incident like we did last week where something as important as cost of living adjustments for retirees and legislators is not clearly on the record. Voters have the fundamental right to know how their legislators are spending their hard-earned money, and when they do, we can expect to see wasteful spending take a dramatic downturn,” said Haley.

        ###

Good for you, Nikki.

Dan Ross, father of S.C. GOP presidential primary, dies

Earlier in the day, I had received notice from a Republican source telling me that Dan Ross had died. Unfortunately, he was state GOP chairman — apparently, the very prototype of a GOP chairman — before I came back to S.C. to work, so I didn’t fully realize the role he had played in Palmetto State politics.

A release from Henry McMaster set me straight:

STATEMENT BY SC ATTORNEY GENERAL HENRY MCMASTER ON PASSING OF FORMER SCGOP CHAIRMAN DAN ROSS

COLUMBIA, SC – South Carolina’s preeminent place in presidential politics was guaranteed by Dan Ross, whose leadership and vision resulted in the first GOP presidential primary in state history (1980).  He is the undisputed father of the “First in the South” South Carolina Republican Presidential Primary.
    Over the past fifty years, Dan worked tirelessly to build a two party system of state government, seeking nothing but good government in return. 
    Determined visionaries like Dan come along rarely and we will miss him.

            ###

When you think back on how our state was in the spotlight back in January, that’s quite a legacy…

‘I know you are but what am I?’

Being the sophisticated sort that I am, I had remained aloof from the "excitement" of having yet another motion picture being shot here in our fair city — although I admit that perhaps even my pulse would speed up a bit if I were to run into that Jessica Biel person, assuming of course that I were half my current age (ahem). I believe I did see her in something once, and as I recall she was rather symmetrical and pneumatic and so forth.

But that hasn’t happened. However, brother blogger Adam Fogle has experienced the next best thing (if you’re willing to reach far afield) — he bumped into ‘Pee-Wee Herman’ himself.

He wrote about the experience here. From his account, he’s still holding out hope of encountering Ms. Biel, so the lad still has his priorities straight.

Benjamin Byrd, S.C. House District 77

Byrdbenjamin_012

9:45 a.m. —
Benjamin Byrd is the second candidate we’ve spoken to who is seeking the seat being vacated by Rep. John Scott. The first was D.J. Carson; the third Democrat, Richland County councilman Joe McEachern, will come in next week. Mr. Byrd is retired after three decades with the state Department of Transportation, where he helped start the minority business enterprise program, before becoming the freedom of information officers in the agency’s legal department.

Mr. Byrd is a soft-spoken man who does not boast — for instance, when he said he was running on the basis of his "experience" and Cindi asked about those experiences, he did not mention that he had served on the Richland County planning commission. What he did mention was his time at DOT, but also his involvement as a parent when his two children were going through public schools — both with PTA and the school improvement council.

While recognizing that the Legislature’s primary responsibility is to pass laws, he is very interested in providing constituent service, and would want to exercise leadership in the community beyond legislation — for instance, he would work to encourage district churches to get more involved in education, through after-school activities, mentoring and homework centers.

His response to the private school "choice" movement is that we "need to make sure all of our schools are financed or operated to where there’s no need to be talking about school choice," because none of the public schools would be inadequate.

While he didn’t use the term, when asked about taxation he asserted the need for considering the system comprehensively, rather than reacting to this or that tax piecemeal. One change he mentioned specifically: "When you buy a car, you enjoy" paying no more than $300 tax, "but that’s not realistic."

His planning commission experience came up in connection with the state’s relationship to local governments. He spoke of the wisdom of merging city and county planning commissions to be cost-effective and more efficient, and in general observed that "I think we have too many little governments."

Mary Barber Kirkland, S.C. House Dist. 70


4 p.m. —
Mary Barber
Kirkland
, whose father and grandfather were both school principals and
has spent 39 years in public education herself, is challenging Rep. Joe
Neal. Originally from Hopkins, she has been involved in a lot of
community efforts in lower Richland. She says she’s running because she
"wanted a leader who is visible and focused." She declined to criticize
the incumbent, although those points are common to candidates who have
opposed Mr. Neal (unsuccessfully) in the past — assertions that he is
not engaged enough locally between elections.

But Mrs. Kirkland
preferred to talk about what she would do, and she would concentrate on
education and economic development, the latter being particularly
sorely needed in her district.

She believes that parental and community
involvement are the main elements needed for children to succeed in
school, and she has seen her share of children struggling — and says
she has seen gang involvement as young as the second grade — "I can
see the little ones joining now… seeking that family that they don’t
have at home."

She also favors programs that enable senior
citizens to share their wisdom with younger generations.

Stanley Robinson, S.C. House District 80

Robinsonstanley_011

1:30 p.m. —
Stanley Robinson,
who is retired from the Air Force, is opposing incumbent Jimmy Bales in
the Democratic Primary. He has no particular criticism of Mr. Bales’
stewardship of the seat, but he thought this would be a good year —
"an exciting year, an historical year" — to try to get into politics.

He readily acknowledges that he is "a rookie," but figures he ended up
doing well at other things he’d never tried before, such as when he got
married 36 years ago, and the first time he was ever stationed overseas
— daunting, but not insurmountable.

He’s interested in improving
access to health insurance. "The patients seem to think the doctors are
getting rich, but they’re not," he says from his experience the last
few years working in the health insurance industry.

He wants to improve
public education, particularly in the distressed areas in the Pee Dee.
He sees early childhood education as key.

While he is a Democrat, he’s
"just as conservative as anyone else," and believes that "picking up
litter isn’t partisan… people are people."

   

Mike Sturkie, S.C. Senate District 23

Sturkiemike_016

10 a.m. Michael Sturkie
is one of two challengers going up against Jake Knotts in the
Republican primary for this Lexington County seat. Mr. Sturkie has
lived in the district 26 years, and owns two businesses, S & T
Grading and Excavating, and S&T Landfill.

He says he thinks the
people of the district want more focus on "major issues," rather than
what he says is an overemphasis on "good ol’ boy issues." I asked him
for a definition of the latter (since a lot of folks use it, sometimes
meaning different things), and he meant "favoritism" in appointments
and such. Beyond that, he said of Mr. Knotts, "It seems like he’s
picking fights" all the time, whereas Mr. Sturkie said he would present
a lower profile: "I can take a back seat."

He suggests he would never
vote otherwise than in accordance with the wishes of his district,
whatever the facts, and believes more issues should be settled by
referendum rather than through representative government. He wants to
do away with property taxes altogether, and pay for everything with an
even higher sales tax. He said he’s "not looking to pad my pension,"
and would want to "fix" the overgenerous deal afforded lawmakers. Of
teachers, he said "they’re getting paid a lot less than they deserve.

Andy Brack on Queensland

Over the weekend (as in, before my Sunday column appeared), Andy Brack sent me the following e-mail. Andy, by the way, hosts S.C. Statehouse Report:

Brad,

Hope you’re well.

Peter Beattie was over at our house last night for dinner and mentioned that you and he had talked about some of the things that Queensland has done well.

I was in Queensland last year and did a series of columns on what’s happening there compared to here…thought you might be interested:

SC can nurture Queensland relationship better, July 29, 2007

Collaborating with Queensland for economic success, Aug. 5, 2007

South Carolina can learn about life from Queensland, Aug. 12, 2007

South Carolina leaders need to start thinking big, March 7, 2008

Best,

Andy

How lawmakers voted on their pension COLA

Cindi sent me the following stuff to post as a supplement to her column today:

    Here’s the recorded vote from last Wednesday, when the House sent the bill that contained the legislative COLA back to committee, in hopes that the committee will remove the legislative COLA and report the bill back out, so it can be passed. This is a convoluted way of doing things, but it’s the only option representatives had available at this point other than 1) killing the entire bill or 2) passing it.
    A yes vote was to send the bill back to committee. A no vote was to allow it to pass with the legislative COLA included.
    The bill is H.4673.

Yeas 58; Nays 51

Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Agnew                  Allen                  Anthony
Ballentine             Bannister              Bedingfield
Bingham                Bowen                  G. Brown
Cato                   Chalk                  Coleman
Crawford               Delleney               Erickson
Frye                   Funderburk             Gullick
Hagood                 Haley                  Hamilton
Harrell                Harrison               Haskins
Hiott                  Hodges                 Hutson
Kelly                  Kirsh                  Leach
Limehouse              Lowe                   Lucas
McLeod                 Miller                 Mitchell
Moss                   Mulvaney               Neilson
Owens                  E. H. Pitts            Rice
Sandifer               Shoopman               Simrill
D. C. Smith            F. N. Smith            G. M. Smith
G. R. Smith            J. R. Smith            Spires
Stavrinakis            Talley                 Thompson
Toole                  Walker                 Witherspoon
Young

Total–58

Those who voted in the negative are:

Alexander              Anderson               Bales
Battle                 Bowers                 Brady
Branham                Brantley               Breeland
R. Brown               Clemmons               Clyburn
Cobb-Hunter            Cooper                 Daning
Dantzler               Duncan                 Gambrell
Govan                  Harvin                 Hayes
Herbkersman            Hosey                  Howard
Jefferson              Kennedy                Littlejohn
Loftis                 Mack                   Mahaffey
Merrill                J. H. Neal             Ott
Parks                  Perry                  Phillips
Pinson                 M. A. Pitts            Scarborough
Scott                  Sellers                Skelton
Stewart                Taylor                 Umphlett
Vick                   Weeks                  Whipper
White                  Whitmire               Williams

Total–51

Capt. Smith in the news

A family member gave me a heads-up that a Reuters photographer named Goran Tomasevic has put some photos of Capt. James Smith in Afghanistan.

So I did a Google search and found:

All of which made me wonder, when will Capt. Smith get to come home, along with the bulk of the 218th? I’ll let you know when I know.