Category Archives: South Carolina

Howard, I don’t think YOU need more time on strong mayor

While I was giving blood yesterday, I saw a TV news report about the strong mayor issue, and there on the tube was Howard Duvall, former head of the state municipal association, standing in front of a group of people who are against the reform.

What struck me as weird was that Howard was asking that the referendum be delayed. For a month. He wanted this delay in part because people weren’t going to have time to study it adequately:

“If the people speak to a change in our form of government, let us do so with full awareness and knowledge,” group spokesman Howard Duvall said on the steps of the Eau Claire print building.

And I thought, Really Howard? People don’t know what they think now? And they’re not going to have enough time to wise up on the issue in the next seven weeks? But another four weeks will make it just right?

It’s just that Howard was not an ideal vessel for that message. I already know what Howard thinks about strong mayor. He’s said he was against it for years. Just as I’ve said I was for it for years. (Which will prompt Kathryn to say nobody cares what I think, since I don’t live in the city — which I’ll be happy to address separately.) Howard is fully informed on the issue, and well-equipped to disseminate his views on the matter. Seems to me that if he hasn’t reached people with his message by Nov. 5, things aren’t going to be that different by Dec. 3.

And yeah, Howard’s a special case, but it’s a bit hard to accept the idea that this has somehow snuck up on informed voters. We hammered it home at The State for years, and the paper most recently actually published a front-page editorial — something that never happened in my day — on the subject. Mayor Benjamin advocated for a referendum when he ran for office in 2010, and so did Moe Baddourah (although he reversed himself as soon as he was elected). The city council has had how many votes on it this year? At least two I can think of off-hand. This has been one of the hottest local issues for months (and years and years, for those paying attention).

So I wasn’t persuaded on that point.

But Howard had another point as well, which was “Let’s make sure that the process of change does not taint the outcome.” Which is a slightly dense statement, but let’s dilute it a bit. As The State paraphrased,

Duvall said the bipartisan group does not want a change in form of government to become a referendum on Mayor Steve Benjamin, who is seeking a second term and is a strong advocate for changing the mayor’s office into the chief executive of the city with the hiring and firing power now vested in a city manager.

Now that’s a different and intriguing point to consider.

I can see how a person might favor Steve Benjamin’s re-election but be opposed to strong mayor, and be worried about other people agreeing with him or her on the referendum, and worried they might also vote against the mayor. Of course, there’s a converse scenario in which Moe Baddourah’s chances are swamped by a big pro-strong mayor vote.

But I think people who are smart enough to find their way to the polls ought to be able to make two decisions instead of one. And… it seems like a sort of bait-and-switch to elect a mayor without knowing what that mayor’s powers will be. In fact, it would be better if the referendum were held before the mayoral vote — like, a couple of years ago, ideally (which should have happened). But it seems that same-day is the best we can do — Columbia voters can choose their mayor, and choose the powers of that office, at the same time.

Also, I appreciate having a mayor who is willing to stake his re-election, to some extent, on his stance on this reform issue. Someone who wants to be elected, or re-elected, to the office should share whatever vision he has for the city’s future. And if strong-mayor is part of that vision, I appreciate his willingness to run on it.

Kevin Fisher, in his column this week, raises another concern — that having the referendum too soon could backfire into a vote against the reform. Which, in fairness, is another way to read Howard Duvall’s concern about the process tainting the outcome. I think there’s something to that concern. This issue has been on the front burner so long that it’s kind of ridiculous that anyone would consider this a rush to judgment, but I have no doubt that some will feel that way. Never underestimate voters’ ability to completely ignore an issue until the last minute.

But in the end, I’m unpersuaded by calls to delay yet again. I agree with Warren Bolton:

Yes, it’s imperative to hold forums and disseminate information to help voters learn about the current council-manager structure as well as mayor-council, or strong mayor. But I can’t imagine that it would be too difficult for voters to comprehend a helpful nuts-and-bolts presentation on council-manager and mayor-council soon enough to vote in November.

Truth is, many voters know more about strong mayor than they do the people running for mayor and City Council. Nobody is asking for more time so voters can be educated about the people who will help run the city the next four years.

With it apparent that petition organizers have collected enough signatures to trigger an election, it only makes sense for the city to go ahead and schedule a vote on Nov. 5, along with other municipal elections. If that doesn’t happen, then the council would have to spend around $150,000 for a special election on the referendum.

And for what? A few more weeks to get information out to voters? Let’s be real. Voters need enough information to help determine which form they prefer. They don’t need a 16-week course that counts toward a college degree.

Oh, and by the way: Speaking of public forums, the Greater Columbia Community Relations Council (of which I am a member) is holding a public informational session on the issue next Wednesday, Sept. 25, at the Eau Claire Print Building, 3902 Ensor Avenue. As with the forum we had last year on the penny sales tax referendum, both sides will be presented as fairly and completely as possible. David Stanton will again moderate.

Oh, yeah… what about Nikki Haley and the Savannah port?

23 Replies

Kristin Sosanie over at the SC Democratic Party brings up something I hadn’t thought about for awhile, but which we’re likely to hear more about as Nikki Haley tries to get re-elected:

Vice President Biden will be in South Carolina’s lowcountry today to talk about the importance of the Port of Charleston for the state and national economy. Governor Nikki Haley will attend, and we can only imagine she’s hoping beyond hope that the people of South Carolina have forgotten how she sold out the Port of Charleston and the South Carolina economy for $15,000 in campaign contributions.

Actions speak louder than words, and no matter what she says today, South Carolinians remember that when it came down to it Nikki Haley chose to give Georgia the competitive edge over South Carolina in order to stuff her campaign coffers. Take a look back at the coverage of Nikki Haley’s infamous “Savannah Sellout”:

Haley Received $15K from a Georgia fundraiser prior to port deal that gave Savannah an edge over Charleston and hurt the state’s economic future. “Gov. Nikki Haley faces increasing questions over her role in a decision that helped Savannah gain a competitive advantage over the Port of Charleston, the state’s main economic engine. New concerns arose over two recent events: Haley’s refusal to attend a Senate hearing next week on the matter, and revelations that she raised $15,000 at a Georgia fundraiser 13 days before the S.C. Department of Health and Environmental Control approved dredging Savannah’s harbor. That Nov. 10 approval came about six weeks after the agency denied the request over water-quality issues the dredging would cause.” [Post & Courier, 11/24/11]

Haley Sold Charleston Port Down River. “Last week, Georgia Gov. Nathan Deal put out a statement to thank our own Nikki Haley ‘and others’ for helping out with the expansion of the Savannah port. That sure was nice of him. Of course it’s the least he could do, seeing as how our governor and “others” — her hand-picked Department of Health and Environmental Control board cronies — sold out South Carolina and the Charleston port for him. The DHEC board recently approved a controversial permit to dredge the Savannah River, a move that literally will put the river on life support and could cost this state billions.” [Post & Courier, 11/20/11]

Pay to Play Politics at its Worst. “An investigation has uncovered plane rides and large campaign contributions that some say show a cozy relationship between Gov. Haley and the DHEC board….Gov. Haley attended a fundraising event in Georgia just two weeks before DHEC approved the Georgia dredging permit. The event raised money from Georgia businesses to fund Gov. Haley’s 2014 re-election campaign. Before Gov. Haley appointed them to the DHEC board, campaign records show that Kenyon Wells and his family gave the governor $50,000, while DHEC Chair Allen Amsler gave $3,000. A third DHEC board member and Gov. Haley-appointee gave the governor $570 in 2010.” [WIS, 11/30/11]

Opposition from Democrats & Republicans. “Republican and “South Carolina House Republicans and Democrats alike blasted Gov. Nikki Haley on Tuesday for vetoing their resolution expressing displeasure with a state agency’s move to clear the way for the deepening of Georgia’s Port of Savannah. The House overrode Haley’s veto of that resolution by a 111-to-1 vote. ‘This is a political ploy,’ state Rep. Jim Merrill, R-Berkeley, said of Haley’s veto. ‘Once again, (Haley) is working more on behalf of Georgia, when it comes to this permit and this issue, than she is on South Carolina.’” [The State,2/28/12]

Congratulations to Ted Pitts, and to the gov for picking him

3 Replies

Y’all probably think I don’t praise Nikki Haley enough (y’all are just hypercritical, you know that?), so here goes…

I think she made a great decision choosing Ted Pitts — my former representative — to be her new chief of staff:

COLUMBIA — Gov. Nikki Haley has named her former fellow Lexington County legislator, Ted Pitts, as her new chief of staff.

Pitts succeeds Bryan Stirling, who was the S.C. Department of Corrections director last week.

Pitts served with Haley while she in the General Assembly from 2005-11. He was in the legislature from 2003-11 before he chose not to run for reelection when his S.C. National Guard unit was deployed to Afghanistan. He also ended a bid for lieutenant governor…

Ted’s a good guy who has his head on straight, and I think most people agree with me on that. And unlike her first chief of staff, he actually knows South Carolina.

So good one there.

Two thoughts about ‘Carolina Conservatives United’

22 Replies

I had two thoughts about this release:

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE September 4, 2013

CONTACT: Bruce Carroll

Chairman, Carolina Conservatives United

Email: bruce@carolinaconservativesunited.org

Phone: (704) 804-4854

CAROLINA CONSERVATIVES UNITED URGES CONGRESSIONAL DELEGATION TO VOTE “NO” ON MILITARY ACTION AGAINST SYRIA

(YORK, SC) — Carolina Conservatives United has announced its opposition to the use of United States military force and assets against the Syrian government and urges the entire South Carolina Congressional Delegation vote against this measure.

Chairman Bruce Carroll today issued the following statement:

We share the humanitarian concern for the Syrian people who have been killed and injured by conventional weapons and chemical weapons and the millions of refugees that are suffering due to that nation’s two-year civil war.

However, we strongly believe the situation in Syria will not improve, and could well deteriorate, due to American military involvement. Additionally, we do not believe President Obama has adequately made the case that any national security interests are at stake, a minimum requirement for military actions abroad.

Therefore we would like to, in the strongest terms, urge our Members of Congress, especially Senators Lindsey Graham and Tim Scott, to vote against military action against the Syrian regime. We urge our fellow citizens in South Carolina to call their Congressmen and Senators immediately so that our elected officials are completely aware of the views of the people on this important matter.

September 4, 2013

Page 2

Carolina Conservatives United will be sending a letter today to each Member of the South Carolina Congressional Delegation requesting a “NO” vote on Syria use of force. Our organization will also track the vote for authorization of force in Syria as a “key vote” for purposes of our ongoing Congressional scorecard that aligns to our organization’s fundamental principles.

# # #

Carolina Conservatives United is a grassroots, non-profit political association based in South Carolina.

CCU supports and promotes the long-standing American values of limited Constitutional government, low taxes, freedom of the individual, entrepreneurism, free enterprise, and strong national security and sovereignty. CCU’s mission is to support political candidates who support conservative values and oppose those who do not.

For more information, visit www.DefeatLindseyGraham.org.

# # #

The first was the same reaction I have when I see anything referring to “Carolina,” as though North and South Carolina were one state or something — or as if they had any more to do with each other than SC and Georgia, which they don’t.

That reaction is, “This must be out of Charlotte.” Because only people from that ambivalent city, lacking a clear identity with either state — sort of the Danzig Corridor of the Deep South — use the term “Carolina” in an inclusive way like that.

And sure enough, there’s a 704 area code on it.

The second reaction is, Yeah, boy, I bet old Lindsey is just sittin’ up nights wondering what the folks at DefeatLindseyGraham.org want him to do…

How was that not a campaign trip? And why the secrecy?

10 Replies

Still scratching my head over the state Ethics Commission fixin’ to slap Nikki Haley’s wrist, then changing its mind:

Gov. Nikki Haley’s campaign will not have to repay the state for the cost of a SLED security detail that accompanied her on a trip to North Carolina in June, the State Ethics Commission’s executive director said Wednesday.

Haley attended a late-June N.C. event sponsored by the Renew North Carolina Foundation, a 501(c)4 that supports Republican N.C. Gov. Pat McCrory. Tuesday, reports surfaced the state-owned vehicle Haley was riding in on that trip was involved in a minor car accident June 27. Haley, along with her political adviser and a campaign fundraiser, were passengers in that vehicle, according to a public incident report.

Cathy Hazelwood, the attorney for the state Ethics Commission, said Wednesday morning she had sent a letter to Haley’s campaign asking it to reimburse the state for providing the Republican governor with a security detail on a campaign fundraising trip. “I can’t fathom why you have campaign people in your car and that’s not a campaign event,” Hazelwood said…

But then, the director of the agency said never mind, once he got “the whole story” from one of the governor’s attorneys.

So… what IS the whole story? I mean, what’s with the governor of our state getting in a wreck in another state, and we hear about it months later?

And how was that not a campaign trip?

First, Vincent, you need a huge SC flag

3 Replies

Normally, I don’t go in for the big stage props in politics. I still recall the time, in a barn at the agricultural experiment station outside Jackson, TN, in the late ’70s (or was it early ’80s?), when some national political figure stood to make a speech in front of two symmetrically-stacked ziggurats of hay and a tractor. I also remember how hot it was, and how the runnels of sweat rolled off the beautiful young network camerawoman standing on a platform just above me, her thin garments saturated and clinging to her…

But that’s beside the point. The point is that I don’t usually go in for the big, fakey stage props in politics. I thought the hay and the tractor were kinda cheesy. It was the first of many experiences I would have with such cheesiness.

That said, Vincent Sheheen has little choice now. He must find a really, really big South Carolina state flag and launch his campaign standing in front of it. The opening handed him by his opponent is just too inviting.

With her announcement yesterday, Nikki Haley made it clear that if you thought she was running a cookie-cutter, national, ideological campaign with no bearing upon South Carolina at all back in 2010, you ain’t seen nothing yet.

First, she stands in front of a U.S. flag that must have been bought second-hand from the people who filmed “Patton.” (The State said it was “tennis court-sized.” I think maybe they were playing doubles.) Then, she stood not with South Carolinians, not with people who have anything at all to say about South Carolina or who care a fig about South Carolina, but with Bobby Jindal of Louisiana, Rick Perry of Texas and Scott Walker of Wisconsin (which the New York Daily News calls her “blue-shirted band of merry men.”)

Oh, wait, Tim Scott was there — you know, the guy she elevated to the Senate, and who therefore owes her big-time.

The other governors were there to back her up as she said things such as this:

“When it came to Obamacare, we didn’t just say ‘no.’ We said ‘never.’ We are not expanding Medicaid just because President Obama thinks we should.”

Because, you know, that’s what it’s all about — fighting the big, national ideological fight. By the way, to fully understand that second sentence, you put a comma after Medicaid. Because the reason she’s saying “no” to expanding Medicaid is, of course, “just because President Obama thinks we should.”

Maybe the governor should talk with her former employers over at Lexington Medical Center about the jobs that will be lost there because of her standing in the way of Medicaid expansion. Not to mention the impact on South Carolinians’ health. But she’s not going to do that, and not only because she didn’t leave her old job under the best of terms. She’s not going to do that because she doesn’t care about the impact on South Carolina. It’s all about the national, ideological fight.

Which is something that Vincent Sheheen should seize on as a way to contrast himself to the current governor. He’s done that already, of course. He just needs to drive the point home a bit more firmly.

The big SC flag would be a good start. Not necessarily tennis court-sized. Just big enough to make the point — tastefully, which would be a nice change in and of itself.

Democrats react to Haley announcement with both barrels

4 Replies

Locally, and nationally, Democrats rushed to heap scorn upon Gov. Nikki Haley as she announced her re-election campaign today. From the Vincent Sheheen campaign:

Dear Brad, Today in Greenville Nikki Haley will take the stage with governors from three other states as she officially announces her re-election campaign. She’s bringing in people from outside of South Carolina because it’s hard to find three people who actually live and work in the Palmetto State who think she deserves a second term.

But those three governors are bringing with them thousands of dollars from out-of-state interests for Haley’s campaign….

And from the Democratic National Committee:

Later today, Governors Bobby Jindal, Scott Walker, and Rick Perry will descend on South Carolina in an effort to boost the reelection chances of their embattled colleague, Governor Nikki Haley. In the wake of their 2012 electoral losses, Republicans have looked to their Governors for leadership, calling them in their Autopsy Report “America’s reformers in chief” and claiming they “point the way forward” for the party. Nothing could be further from the truth.

When you look at the records of Haley, Jindal, Walker and Perry you can see that not only are these Republican Governors failing to “point the way forward,” they’re taking their states backward, pursuing the same far-right policies that cost Republicans the White House in 2012.

Gov. Haley’s policies have failed hardworking families over and over; during her tenure as Governor, South Carolina is one of the hardest states in the country to earn a living in, is one of the hardest places in the country to live the American dream of economic mobility, and has an unemployment rate higher than 36 other states.

And the colleagues that Haley is bringing in on her behalf are doing no better for their states. Bobby Jindal is currently the least popular Republican Governor in the country. Under Scott Walker, job growth in Wisconsin has lagged behind the nation. And over Rick Perry’s three terms as Governor the unemployment rate has gone up….

Something I wondered about was her decision to launch in the Upstate — rather than, say, in her home county of Lexington. Maybe she felt the need to go someplace where a) people don’t know her as well, and b) they’ll vote for a Republican no matter who it is.

More poor SC kids than ever are obese

24 Replies

Remember that good-news story that I included in a recent Virtual Front Page, about how fewer poor kids are obese than previously?

Well, that doesn’t apply to SC, as you probably saw already:

The CDC study released in early August drew a lot of attention because it found childhood obesity rates were decreasing in 19 states and rising in only three. The study didn’t include data from 10 states.

South Carolina was omitted because a CDC request for data in 2011 went to an inactive email account at the S.C. Department of Health and Environmental Control, according to agency spokesman Mark Plowden. Because South Carolina didn’t send in timely data that year, it wasn’t included in the study of four-year trends.

The percent of obese children ages 2-4 years in the WIC in South Carolina has grown from 13.3 percent in fiscal year 2009 to 14.1 percent in 2010, 14.7 in 2011 and 15.6 in 2012, Plowden said…

This, to me, is another argument for restricting the kinds of foods that can be obtained with “food stamps” — with caveats for availability, considering “food deserts,” etc. I see the problems with such a move. But I also think we should work to overcome the problems, because kids are killing themselves with food that we’re buying for them.

Whatever we’re doing now to ensure proper nutrition for the poor obviously isn’t accomplishing everything that it should..

SC mayors for Sheheen, 1st installment

10 Replies

I thought this was kind of interesting, partly because it seems sort of early for making such endorsement announcements as this:

SC Mayors Endorse Vincent Sheheen for Governor

Local leaders cite Sheheen’s economic vision, bipartisan approach & record of results for why he’s the right leader to fix broken state government

Camden, SC – Today 12 mayors, representing urban and rural areas around the South Carolina, endorsed Vincent Sheheen for Governor citing his focus on growing the economy from within South Carolina, his record of working across the aisle to get things done, and his common-sense approach on how to fix the broken state government and move South Carolina forward again.

The 12 mayors make up the first round of endorsements for Mayors for Sheheen:

Joseph Riley, Mayor of Charleston

Welborn Adams, Mayor of Greenwood

Junie White, Mayor of Spartanburg

Steve Wukela, Mayor of Florence

Andy Ingram, Mayor of Cheraw

John Douglas, Mayor of Chesterfield

Ann Taylor, Mayor of Heath Springs

Doug Echols, Mayor of Rock Hill

Tony Scully, Mayor of Camden

Wayne Rhodes, Mayor of Kershaw

Joseph McElveen, Mayor of Sumter

Lovith Anderson, Mayor of Lake City

In their statements of support, the Mayors praised Sen. Sheheen for his success in expanding 4-year-old kindergarten to improve public education, creating an Inspector General to ensure the best use of tax dollars, fighting to restructure government and cut bureaucracy, and creating a Taxpayer Protection Fund to help those hurt by the Department of Revenue hacking scandal.

A selection of endorsement quotes is below:

Joseph Riley, Mayor of Charleston

“Here in Charleston, we are creating jobs and supporting local businesses with great success, and we need a Governor in Columbia who is ready to do the same statewide. Vincent Sheheen will be a strong advocate for building South Carolina’s economy from within. Vincent understands the importance of Charleston’s port for our economy, as well as the economy of the entire state, and he stands with us in supporting its dredging. He stands with our region in building a clean-energy economy and supporting our local, small businesses to grow jobs. Vincent stands with Lowcountry families in improving public education and expanding access to 4-year old kindergarten. Vincent Sheheen is the right candidate to move South Carolina forward, that’s why I’m proud to stand with him.”

Steve Wukela, Mayor of Florence

“Vincent Sheheen will be a change for the better for South Carolina and especially for the people in the Pee Dee. Vincent knows that growing our economy is more than just showing up at ribbon cuttings. He understands how important it is to support local businesses as much as those the state is trying to recruit – because that’s how we stay strong in the long run. Vincent Sheheen has the right plan to improve the economy and grow jobs right now, while investing in our future through better education to make South Carolina successful in the long-term as well.”

Welborn Adams, Mayor of Greenwood

“Here in Greenwood, we know the serious impact that incompetent government can have on the safety of our citizens. We need real leadership in the Governor’s office with accountability in our state government to create a better South Carolina. Vincent Sheheen is the right choice to not only fix the broken government, but also deliver results on improving education, public health, and supporting small businesses so we can get back on track.”

Junie White, Mayor of Spartanburg

“For the past several years we’ve seen what an absence of leadership from the Governor’s office gets South Carolina: crumbling roads, struggling businesses and general government dysfunction that is unacceptable. I support Vincent Sheheen for governor because he’s the only candidate with the vision to lead and the track record of working across the aisle to actually get things done. Our infrastructure has been crumbling and it costs our residents and businesses more and more each year. Vincent Sheheen would make the smart investment to finally fill our potholes and strengthen our bridges which will improve our economy now and into the future. That’s the kind of leadership we need for the upstate.”

Tony Scully, Mayor of Camden

“Vincent Sheheen has been a strong and effective leader in Camden for nearly his entire life. Whether he’s helping businesses and families in our town as an attorney, building coalitions in the legislature, or simply being an active citizen committed to the highest ideals, with his honest, common-sense approach, Vincent Sheheen is the right man to be the next governor of South Carolina.”

Lovith Anderson, Mayor of Lake City

“Vincent Sheheen’s common-sense approach to governing and his pragmatic approach to honest and ethical leadership is just what we need to finally get things done in South Carolina. For too long, towns like ours have been ignored by leaders in Columbia who care more about political grandstanding than delivering results. Vincent Sheheen has proven he isn’t afraid to up his sleeves and stand up for folks like us – and he’s the only candidate with a solid track record of positive results.”

###

Of course, the only three mayors on there whose party affiliations I think I know (fortunately, most cities and towns in SC have nonpartisan municipal elections) are Democrats. But it’s still a pretty impressive list.

And think about it — since these people are not elected in partisan elections, they have little motivation to stick their necks out for a Democrat or a Republican simply because of that person’s affiliation.

Also, I find myself wondering: Could Nikki Haley get a group like this to back her? It seems unlikely, and I say that in part because mayors tend to be practical folk. They tend to be unmoved by ideology (the coin that Nikki, and those who support her, value), and tend to go for pragmatic governance.

But it’s early. We’ll see. In the meantime, there will be more announcements like this one from Sheheen. Steve Benjamin is a notable absence from this list; I suppose the campaign wanted to save a major-city mayor for the next release…

The envious Holy City, sick and pale with grief

9 Replies

This morning, Adam Beam to brings my attention a pair of columns, the first from The State:

By NEIL WHITE — nwhite@thestate.com

Hey, everybody, great news!

In fact, this news is so great that I’ve been asked to write about it instead of reporting on the South Carolina football team’s backup long snappers.

It seems that some outfit called Kiplinger’s has ranked Columbia as the No. 5 city in the United States on a recent Top 10 Great Places to Live list. It’s true, I swear.

Of course, there is one caveat. This list only includes cities with a population under one million in the metropolitan area, which means that Columbia didn’t have to compete with beautiful bigger cities like Detroit….

… and the second from The Post and Courier:

It’s so nice to see Columbia finally get some national recognition and long-overdue accolades.

After years of watching Charleston rack up all those awards — Most Mannerly City, Greatest Tourist Destination in the Universe, Best City in the South (Especially in South Carolina) — a lot of folks in the Lowcountry have been worried that our sister city to the north might develop a case of list envy.

But now Kiplinger’s, the personal finance magazine, has ranked Columbia No. 5 on its 2013 list of “10 Great Places to Live.”

Frankly, folks around here are probably surprised Columbia lost the No. 1 spot to Little Rock…

Of course, what these dueling columns are about is not which city is greater, but which paper employs a bigger smart-ass.

Sorry, Neil, but I’m afraid Brian Hicks wins that one, for this bit:

Instead, we should just lament that Kiplinger’s failed to mention the stirring sound of a rooster crowing, which is broadcast throughout downtown on Fridays during football season.

Now that’s culture…

I’m afraid that just beats out Neil’s classy parenthetical:

(I’m sure if horse poop had been one of the criteria, Charleston would have rocketed up the list.)

But then, the losing party is often capable of putting a sharper edge on its gibes, an edge born of bitterness. Of course, we knew the Holy City could do snobbery. Unfortunately, it has yet to breed a humorist capable of concocting anything that touches this classic:

Q: How many Charlestonians does it take to change a light bulb?

A: Six. One to change it, and five to sit about talking about how grand the OLD bulb was…

Democrat announces for SC schools superintendent

7 Replies

I had told Tyler Jones yesterday that I would attend this announcement over at Hand Middle School yesterday (I like to actually get out to campaign events sometimes, if only to get some new images for my random header, above), but a client meeting came up at the very same time, so here’s the release about the event instead:

Rep. Mike Anthony Announces Bid for Superintendent of Education

Retired teacher, football coach to make bid to lead SC’s public schools

Union, SC – Retired public school teacher and three-time state champion high school football coach Mike Anthony formally announced his intention to run for Superintendent of Education on Thursday.

Anthony, 63, spent over thirty years as a high school teacher in South Carolina pubic schools before retiring in 2004. He was elected to the South Carolina House of Representatives in 2002 where he served on the Education Committee for six years.

“I never thought I’d be announcing a campaign for anything – let alone statewide office,” said Rep. Anthony. “But our schools are in desperate need of new leadership, and who better to lead our schools than a teacher with over thirty years of in-the-classroom experience.”

Coach Anthony announced his candidacy in front of friends and family at Union County Stadium, the same place he coached his alma mater Union High School to three state high school football championships in 1999, 2000, and 2002.

“As a high school football coach, I taught kids about accountability,” said Anthony. “If someone wasn’t working hard enough or doing their job, they got benched and replaced by someone who could do better. The current administration isn’t getting the job done and it’s time to bring in someone new.”

Anthony vowed to take the politics out of the office of Superintendent of Education.

“Educating our children shouldn’t be a partisan issue,” said Anthony. “If I’m elected Superintendent, you won’t be getting a Democrat or Republican. You’ll be getting a lifelong public school teacher who has a passion for seeing kids succeed. ”

Anthony will hold a press conference at Hand Middle School in Columbia before speaking to the Charleston County Democratic Party’ this evening in North Charleston.

Learn more: www.AnthonyForEducation.com

I, too, will gladly consider becoming president of College of Charleston

20 Replies

I figured I might as well put my name out there in light of this report:

The Associated Press

CHARLESTON, S.C. — Former South Carolina first lady Jenny Sanford says she’s interested in the president’s job at the College of Charleston.

Sanford tells The Post and Courier of Charleston (http://bit.ly/15JmNz8 ) she would be crazy not to look at the opportunity. And she says that not all schools need to be led by someone with strictly an academic background.

The 50-year-old Sanford says she has management skills from running her former husband Mark Sanford’s campaigns, and working in the governor’s office gave her an understanding of higher education budgets and other state issues….

If Jenny Sanford is at any point seriously considered for the job, and those are her qualifications, then I feel obliged to point out:

My own management skills have been honed over a period of 29 years supervising reporters, editors, and others involved in different aspects of producing several different newspapers in three states. This means I’m very much accustomed to supervising extremely independent-minded, egotistical people with intellectual pretensions, which I submit is far, far more like supervising a university than bossing a team of volunteer true believers who agree with you about everything. As head of the editorial board, I daily convened a group of strong-opinioned people and led them to reach agreement on an unlimited variety of extremely controversial issues, agreements written out and published within 24 hours — which is quite different from telling people, here’s the party line and stick to it.
I have obtained a far broader — certainly less ideologically narrow — working acquaintance with “higher education budgets and other state issues.” Not only that, but I have demonstrated over the years that I actually believe in public higher education and its importance to our state’s future, unlike certain other possible candidates I could name.
I’m well known to state political leaders and many key business leaders, and despite all those critical opinions I’ve caused to be written over the years, have probably done less to permanently irritate them than the team of people of which Jenny Sanford was a part. These folks know me as someone who has strongly advocated well-considered, pragmatic policies for our state, even if they didn’t fully agree all of the time. Among them I have some detractors, but probably not as many as my worthy competition.
I get along great with the mayor of Charleston, for whom I have the greatest respect. For what that’s worth.
Two of my children have attended the College of Charleston, with one of them graduating just this summer, which gives me a passing acquaintance with the institution.
I know at least one former president of the institution pretty well, and can call on him for advice.
I’ve actually done consulting work for two college presidents in South Carolina. It’s not a huge part of my resume, but it’s something I don’t think she has.
I’m very comfortable wearing bow ties, and own no fewer than four seersucker suits, one of which currently fits me.

I could go on, but this should be sufficient to persuade the trustees to consider me — if they’re considering her. And if they really, you know, don’t care about academic qualifications…

We’re No. 1! We’re number one! (In incarceration rate)

11 Replies

Let’s see if I can get this gif to work. There’s supposed to be a tumbleweed blowing across the barren crossroad. It’s meant to illustrate this point: “this is what it looks like when you take all of the countries that jail more people than we do and put them into one GIF.”

In other words, nobody exceeds the US of A in this important statistic. And among your more-or-less advanced sort of nations, the OECD nations, No. 2 Israel is way, way behind us.

A list like this is totally unfair to us, of course. It ignores the special problems we have. For instance these other countries don’t have as many poor, black males as… Oh, wait. That doesn’t make us sound any better, does it?

On a brighter note, it seems that among the United Prisons of America, South Carolina is only at No. 9, way behind Louisiana, which has more than triple our rate.

Of course, last time I heard, we had the dubious distinction of spending less per prisoner than any other state — meaning less on security, less on rehabilitation, etc. I was unable to determine in a quick search whether that was still true…

Columbia City Council jealously guards the status quo

57 Replies

In The Federalist No. 59, Alexander Hamilton asserted that “every government ought to contain in itself the means of its own preservation.”

Whether it ought to or not, every system seems to contain in itself, and anxiously embrace, that capability.

That’s certainly the case with the Columbia City Council, which voted last night not to allow the city’s residents to move to a more rational and accountable system of government, that is to say, a strong-mayor system.

At the risk of sounding like a believer in direct democracy, which I am not, allow me to remind one and all that this was not a vote on whether to institute a strong-mayor system, but merely whether to allow the people of the city to choose.

And the council said no. Perceiving a threat to their own power, the council members refused to allow even the possibility.

By doing so, the members in the majority demonstrated that they are not worthy to wield the power that they so jealously guard.

Trees, both old and new, in South Carolina

47 Replies

Some of the few old-growth trees left standing, in Congaree National Park.

Heard a pretty cool story out of South Carolina on NPR this morning:

Like much of the United States, South Carolina was once covered in old-growth forests. By the mid-20th century, virtually all of the virgin wood in the state was gone, either hauled away on trains or floated down rivers to be cut into lumber at saw mills.

But not all that timber made it to its destination. Some sank on its way down the river, where those old-growth logs have been preserved for about a century. Now, these precious leftovers can be worth up to several thousand dollars each.

But getting that treasure out is no easy task. First, anyone hoping to dredge the logs, known as sinker wood, must obtain a permit from the state. The logs weigh tons and are buried deep down in the muck. Once removed, the wood must be properly stored before milling to avoid cracking. And then, there are the alligators…

I learned several things from that piece, the most surprising of which was that wood that had been underwater for generations, even centuries, could still be useful, even valuable. I would have thought it would be ruined….

Anyway, I listened with particular interest because of an interesting project I’ve been working on. ADCO is doing some work for Hobcaw Barony. If you don’t know what or where that is, it would take a lot of words to tell you. But basically: It’s a 16,000 acre tract of land, essentially the southern end of Waccamaw Neck, just above Georgetown. It was originally a land grant to one of the Lords Proprietors, had been broken up into multiple rice plantations, and had been mostly reassembled around the time of the Recent Unpleasantness. After the end of slavery made it tough for SC planters to compete with cheaper rice from out west, the owners started using the mostly wild land for hunting clubs for rich Yankees. Bernard Baruch, the Camden native who had made an immense fortune on Wall Street and would become a close adviser to seven presidents (he’s the guy who put the term “Cold War” into circulation, in a speech to the SC Legislature), bought the tract and some additional land to more or less assemble the original royal grant. He used it as a winter home and hunting preserve.

His daughter, Belle, bought it from him in chunks, starting in the mid-30s. When she died in 1964, she left it to a foundation that was to preserve the land in its natural state in perpetuity, and open it to the state’s colleges and universities for educational and research purposes. Both USC and Clemson have operated institutes on the land since the late 60s — USC studying the estuary, Clemson the forest.

Anyway, one of the projects is to re-establish long-leaf pine, which was mostly cut down for naval stores in the age of sail. One challenge in doing this is the wild hogs on the land — descendants of swine left there by some early European settlers — which love tender young long-leaf pine roots.

OK, so it’s a thin connection, but since that’s what’s on my mind these days, that’s what caused me to be particularly interested in this NPR story…

The King’s Highway running through Hobcaw, looking much as it did in colonial times.

SC GOP chairman doing what party chairmen do

44 Replies

That’s Matt Moore, second from right, with some other modern SC politicos and some fugitive from the early 19th century, at a political forum last fall.

You’ve probably seen this silliness:

COLUMBIA, SC — The chairman of South Carolina’s Republican Party says he will not allow CNN or NBC to broadcast debates of Republican presidential candidates in South Carolina unless the networks refuse to air a documentary on Hilary Clinton, a possible Democratic nominee for president.

NBC plans to broadcast a miniseries starring Diane Lane as Clinton, the former First Lady, U.S. Senator and Secretary of State. CNN has also announced plans for a feature-length documentary on Clinton’s career.

Monday, Reince Priebus, chairman of the Republican National Committee, sent letters to NBC and CNN telling them he would ask the RNC to ban any Republican candidates from participating in presidential debates hosted by NBC or CNN unless the two networks agree to not air the programs.

Matt Moore, South Carolina’s newly elected Republican Party chairman, said he agreed with Priebus…

Matt Moore is doing what party chairmen do — inspiring ire toward the opposition (and, if you’re a Republican, toward media, which is perceived by the most ardent loyalists as the opposition), inspire the constituency to say “hell, yeah!,” and keep them giving money.

Making sense is not a job requirement.

It is extremely unlikely that I will watch either of those programs, mainly because the chief reason I have a TV is to have something to watch movies on. These programs do not seem to fit into the category of things I deem worth spending time on.

But it seems to me that given the far less interesting and compelling figures who have inspired docudramas in the past, Hillary Clinton certainly qualifies as legitimate fodder. I found it interesting to see what Emma Thompson did with the Hillary-inspired character in “Primary Colors” — a movie that, by the way, was far from laudatory.

People make too much of such things. And they ignore the fact that these things can do as much harm as good to candidates. I’m mindful of the how media overexposure (much of it on her terms) eliminated Sarah Palin from consideration for the presidential nomination in 2012, despite her popularity for a year or so after the 2008 contest.

People have always made too much of such things. I vividly recall the way full release of “The Right Stuff” was delayed to avoid charges that the filmmakers were boosting John Glenn’s chances in the 1984 Democratic nomination process.

If only they had been able to do so. If that awesome film (which never got the attention it should have, due in large part to its on-again, off-again release) could have gotten him elected or even nominated, I would have been much happier than I was with the choice available to us that November.

Before “stand your ground,” was there such a thing as a “run to the wall” law?

41 Replies

Here’s something for you lawyers out there, or you martial artists, or somebody.

I attended the University of South Carolina for exactly one semester, the fall of 1971. On top of my regular classes, I took a free short course in the evenings, not for credit.

It was karate. A friend from the Pee Dee and I took it, and we probably spent more time practicing our moves outside of class than we did studying for any of our academic classes. Or at least, I did. (We never hit a dorm elevator button with our fingers — we always used our feet.) One night, we staged a huge sparring match in the hallway of Bates House, and drew quite a crowd. We were really over the top, leaping into the air, kicking, and generally pretending to be Billy Jack, since that movie was huge that fall.

Amazingly, none of the guys watching us cracked up laughing. I think we actually fooled some of them into thinking we knew what we were doing.

Anyway, the guy who taught the classes — I remember his name as being John Bull Roper, which I thought was a great name for a black belt — used to tell us that in South Carolina, there was something called a “run-to-the-wall” clause in the law.

What that meant, he said, was that if you were an expert at killing with your hands and feet, as we believed him to be, you had to do everything you could to avoid a fight. You had to “run to the wall,” and only when there was nowhere else to retreat to could you defend yourself with your skills.

I forgot about that over the years, until everybody started talking about “stand your ground” laws. Which, of course, would be the opposite thing.

Was there ever such a thing? Anybody remember it? I can’t find it on Google. Maybe I’m remembering the words wrong; I don’t know…

Profumo showed what Sanford, Weiner, Spitzer should have done

18 Replies

Peggy Noonan’s column this week is a good one.

After recounting the Profumo Affair that rocked Britain (and broke a government) 50 years ago, she draws a clear contrast between what a man of honor — which is what John Profumo proved in the end to be — does, and what the likes of Mark Sanford, Anthony Weiner and Eliot Spitzer do.

In case you’re confused — in case you are thinking, “Well, a man of honor wouldn’t get himself into such a situation” — let me remind you that we’re all sinners, in one way or another, some more spectacularly than others. What this is about is whether you do the honorable thing after you’ve done something terribly wrong.

Here’s the best part of the column:

Everyone hoped he’d disappear. He did. Then, three years later, he… announced he’d deepened and matured and was standing for Parliament “to serve the public.” Of course, he said, “It all depends on the voters, whether they can be forgiving. It’s all in their hands. I throw my candidacy on their mercy.”

Well, people didn’t want to think they were unmerciful. Profumo won in a landslide, worked his way up to party chief, and 12 years later ran for prime minister, his past quite forgotten, expunged, by his mounting triumphs.

***

Wait—that’s not what happened. Nothing like that happened! It’s the opposite of what happened.

Because Profumo believed in remorse of conscience—because he actually had a conscience—he could absorb what happened and let it change him however it would. In a way what he believed in was reality. He’d done something terrible—to his country, to his friends, to strangers who had to explain the headlines about him to their children.

He never knew political power again. He never asked for it. He did something altogether more confounding.

He did the hardest thing for a political figure. He really went away. He went to a place that helped the poor, a rundown settlement house called Toynbee Hall in the East End of London. There he did social work—actually the scut work of social work, washing dishes and cleaning toilets. He visited prisons for the criminally insane, helped with housing for the poor and worker education.

And it wasn’t for show, wasn’t a step on the way to political redemption. He worked at Toynbee for 40 years…

What Profumo did addresses what I’ve written about in the past, about actual remorse and penitence.

He did the right thing under the terrible circumstances that he himself had brought about. Sanford, Weiner and Spitzer have not. Shame on them for that. And shame on voters willing to let them get away with it.

John Profumo

Sheheen makes entirely unobjectionable speech at summit

22 Replies

Vincent Sheheen, speaking to the Clean Energy Summit this morning.

Does that headline sound a bit odd? Well… I was trying to capture what I tend to think, or perhaps feel, whenever I hear Vincent Sheheen speak publicly.

He says a bunch of perfectly fine things that I personally agree with, but he doesn’t make you go away all charged up and ready to do something — such as vote for him. Which could be key.

The speech was just fine. He was the keynote speaker at the Clean Energy Summit over at the convention center, and I thought all the points he made were good ones. I have every reason to believe the audience thought so, too.

The essence of what he said is captured in this excerpt from the op-ed he wrote to publicize the event ahead of time:

Now is the time for South Carolina to step forward as a leader in clean energy, which will benefit our state in many ways and move us toward a more prosperous future.

First, clean energy will help our state’s bottom line and create reliable and affordable energy sources for our citizens. When we create more energy from our own resources, we can stop sending South Carolina dollars out of state and keep them here to build our economy from within.

Currently South Carolina is a net energy importer. About $8 billion a year, a huge outflow, goes out of state to buy energy either as liquid fuel or fuel to power our electric-generating plants. By strengthening our own clean-energy sector, we can keep more of that money here to build our own economy.

In the next decade alone, we could create more than 30,000 jobs directly by attracting clean-energy companies or supporting homegrown ones. Add to that the tens of thousands of additional jobs that will be created in industries that support clean energy, and there’s a tremendous ripple effect.

Plus, with our great capacity to grow, South Carolina could expand further in the recycling, wind and solar industries to employ more than 60,000 within a decade, and our total clean-energy work force could jump as many as 74,000. That means more jobs, better jobs and good pay for the long-term for middle-class families. All we need is the right leadership to look ahead and build a more prosperous future.

Our state is blessed with natural assets that give us great potential to lead the nation. For solar projects, we have an abundance of sunny days. For wind, we have an expansive coastline. For biomass, we have 500,000 acres of available land that could provide great opportunities to sow and harvest energy crops. And of course, we have great people…

And so forth.

He tried creating a little suspense by saying he was going to, here and now, make an announcement about an industry that would bring lots of jobs to South Carolina… but I’m sure before he actually said “the Clean Energy Industry,” everyone figured out that was what he was going to say, so I don’t think the effect worked too well. Maybe if he’d done it a little more quickly… I don’t know.

Vincent always comes across as a really nice guy, so that’s good. He smiles a lot. He likes to salt his speeches with the little self-deprecating politician jokes that tend to go over well with Rotaries and similar audiences. For instance, he suggests that if wind turbines were placed outside the Senate and the governor’s office, “we can power the whole state.” People respond politely. And that’s about it.

I write this way because, as you no doubt have gathered in the past, I think Vincent Sheheen would make a good governor. He’s someone I would trust to make sound policy decisions on a wide array of issues. He would run an administration that would be open and honest, and he would strive for needed reforms to make government be more responsive and do its job better. He’d be a good-government governor, instead of an anti-government governor, which is what we’ve been accustomed to for more than a decade.

But can he get elected? I tend, when I hear him speak, to worry about his intensity, or seeming lack thereof. I don’t doubt that he will work hard as a campaigner, but I worry about his ability to connect sometimes, to motivate people to get on his bandwagon.

Maybe I worry too much. He came so close to winning last time, and now Nikki Haley has a record to run against, so maybe Vincent can win just by being Vincent. I don’t know.

I said something about all this to a friend who was there for the speech. I said Vincent comes across as a good, smart guy whose attitude is, “Sure, I’ll step forward and be governor, if no one better does.” My friend said, “Well, isn’t that what we want?” Meaning a citizen-leader who’s not power-starved or driven by some destructive ideology?

Well, yes. As long as such a person manages to get elected. We’ve seen enough of where good speakers get us. Nikki Haley is a good speaker, partly because she taps into the well of chip-on-the-shoulder demagoguery that has been popular in recent years. Actually, it’s been popular a lot longer than that in SC. Ben Tillman rose to power starting with a rip-roaring populist speech in my hometown of Bennettsville in 1885.

We definitely don’t need more of that.

But can an unassuming good guy get elected? We’ll see…

New York has SC’s 1st District to blame for Spitzer return

19 Replies

Sanford, having his Spitzer moment. Now Spitzer wants to have a Sanford moment.

“The Fix” over at The Washington Post mentioned it in the lede of their Spitzer story:

It’s officially the year of the political comeback, with Mark Sanford winning a congressional seat and Anthony Weiner and Eliot Spitzer attempting their own second acts in New York City…

The New York Times was discreet enough to save it until the 3rd graf:

…His re-emergence comes in an era when politicians — like Representative Mark Sanford of South Carolina and the New York mayoral contender Anthony D. Weiner — have shown that public disapproval, especially over sexual misconduct, can be fleeting, and that voters seem receptive to those who seek forgiveness and redemption….

“It,” of course, is the embarrassing decision by the voters of South Carolina’s 1st District to send Mark Sanford to Congress again.

It’s apparently just given all sorts of bad actors bad ideas.

It shouldn’t. Just because voters in one state elected one guy who couldn’t keep his pants zipped (or even stay in this country when he was supposed to be on duty as governor of SC) doesn’t mean a whole other set of voters will vote for a whole other guy who also spectacularly engaged in misdeeds of a sexual nature. Particularly when the two men are so different politically, and their respective electorates are so different. It’s not like they’re all running on the “adultery” ticket, and that’s the political flavor of the month or something.

But national media too often act as though there is a real connection, and I fear that the backers and political consultants and hangers-on who talk these guys into making these comeback attempts do take such absurd, superficial, incidental correlations into consideration.

These things have been inextricably joined by national media since the start. The day that Mark Sanford did his super-painful (to watch, anyway) confessional presser, I was walking over to the State House for it, not exactly knowing what to expect, when an editor from The New York Post (in whose behalf I was on the way to cover the thing), called me on my old Blackberry to ask what I knew. Not much, I had to tell him. He asked, “Is he going to have a Spitzer moment?” I said again I didn’t know, although yeah, it was possible. I had been hearing things the last couple of days, but what I had heard was so sketchy and dubious that I didn’t want to embarrass myself promising such wild stuff when I had insufficient reason to believe any of it. (The only thing I had to go on was the governor’s bizarre disappearance, and his showing up that morning on a flight from Argentina.)

Then, when Sanford finally came out and started talking, I kept thinking, Wow, it was all actually true.

So now, they’re all like, Spitzer’s gonna try to do a Sanford.

Thanks, 1st District. Thanks so much.

bradwarthen.com

All The News That Gives You Fits