Category Archives: This just in…

There’s just me, and 41,999 other people

4 Replies

Just saw this item at SCBiz:

South Carolina’s most populated areas have lost nearly 42,000 jobs during the past 12 months, according to numbers released Tuesday by the U.S. Department of Labor.

The hardest-hit areas were the two top tourist destinations, Charleston (9,300 jobs) and Myrtle Beach (9,100 jobs). As a percentage of total jobs available, the Myrtle Beach metro area had the biggest decline of any one region, at 6.9%.

Overall, South Carolina lost more than 77,000 jobs in the past year….

The Columbia area lost 6,300 jobs during the year.

So now at least I don’t think I’m alone. (But wait — does that mean I actually am?)

Of course, I never thought I was. I was among 40 who left The State in one swoop (Robert and I were just the ones you heard the most about most), so I’ve always had company in this unemployment thing.

Do you MEAN it this time, Andre? If so, it’s settled: Sanford should go

5 Replies
How about it, Gov? (2006 file photo by Brad Warthen)

How about it, Gov? (2006 file photo by Brad Warthen)

The State is trumpeting the latest word from Gov Lite Andre Bauer that he would NOT run for governor in 2010 if only we’ll let him serve in the job as a temp between now and then:

EXCLUSIVE – Lt. Gov. Andre Bauer plans to call on embattled Gov. Mark Sanford to step down during a noon news conference today. Bauer will also renew his pledge to bow out of the 2010 gubernatorial race should Sanford resign within a month or so. By early October Bauer will formally announce his intentions to seek the GOP nomination for governor in 2010.

Bauer is the first constitutional officer to join a growing chorus of lawmakers pushing for Sanford to resign, including a majority of Republican state senators.

Today’s announcement, according to a source close to Bauer, is intended to send a message to State House leadership that Sanford needs to step down and Bauer won’t stand in the way. Some lawmakers have been hesitant to push for Sanford’s resignation because it would give Bauer an unfair advantage in the 2010 race, as he would be running for governor as an incumbent.

There are several points to make about this development:

  • First, does he really mean it this time? Andre floated the “I won’t run if you let me be governor now” balloon before, then added a sotto voce “maybe” to the non-pledge. If we can hold him to it this time, it makes all the difference.
  • All the difference, I say again. It changes everything. Before some (such as my friends at The State) have maintained it was too dangerous for South Carolina for Mark Sanford to resign now, because it would give Andre a leg up in the 2010 race, and the actual election of Andre Bauer as our governor for four years would be disastrous. I have disagreed. I mean, I agree that Andre winning in 2010 would be horrific. But I disagree on whether an interim elevation would help him. Here’s the thing, folks: As things stand, Andre has about as good a chance as any other Republican of being elected if he runs. Scoff if you will, but I have watched this unlikely fellow win election after election when it made no sense at all. In a crowded field, he would not get nearly the scrutiny he should get. But put him in the top job now, at a time when the governor’s office is under the closest scrutiny I have ever seen in this state, and his many flaws would be magnified; they could not be missed. To me, the one way to make sure Andre Bauer is not elected governor is to give him the job now. But if he promises not to run, and we can hold him to it, there’s nothing left to argue about. There is no question that it would be in the best interests of the state to let him occupy the seat for a few months.
  • And no, we wouldn’t be giving up anything in the leadership department. Even before the current scandals, Mark Sanford was a dead loss for this state as governor. The limitations of the office, the circumstances of his promotion, and the wariness of State House leadership would prevent Andre from doing real harm. And since there was no chance Mark Sanford was going to do any good, there’s nothing lost. Yes, this state needs real leadership from the governor’s office. But letting Andre have the job now increases the chance that the voters will get serious and elect somebody good next year.
  • Unfortunately, “Sanford should go” is a lot easier to say than to make happen. The man is immune to political pressure from within his own party or from any other quarter. He does what pleases Mark Sanford. He always has, and always will. And the rumblings about impeachment are unpersuasive to me. The idea that South Carolina Republicans will actually summon the will power to impeach one of their own — even one whom they despise as much as they do Sanford — is hard for me to imagine. We’ve seen some unlikely things happen in the news lately — Santee Cooper backing down on the coal plant, the Rev. Jimmy Jones deciding not to build a duplicative homeless service shelter, neither of which I expected to see — but SC Republicans summoning the chutzpah to do that would be truly stunning. Anyway, the deal Andre is offering doesn’t seem to apply in the case of impeachment. Sanford has to resign, and he’s under a deadline to do it — by the first of October, roughly. So if anyone has the lever that will move our gov, now is the time to insert it and start prying.
  • Talk about your ironies: By making this gesture, calling upon the governor to resign and making his promise, Andre Bauer is exercising true leadership. In fact, one would have to go back a few years to find an instance of leadership by a governor or would-be governor that compares to this. Yes, the idea of Andre Bauer being our governor is appalling. And yet he’s doing this. Whatever else we say, I give him credit for it. Sure, he’s probably banking on the smart bet that there’s no way Sanford will quit. But it’s still impressive.

What do y’all think?

And Tameika would make three

11 Replies

Am intrigued by the prospect of Tameika Isaac Devine running for mayor:

… and I find myself wondering, what would be the effect?

We were already looking at probably the most closely contested race since Mayor Bob beat Patton Adams two decades ago, with Steve Benjamin bringing a gun to what is usually a knife fight (or maybe a slap fight, at most).

Several times in the story, Ms. Devine suggests that she still likes her ally Mayor Bob. Which causes me to wonder whether a Devine candidacy might actually have the effect of helping Coble, as it would split the anti-incumbent vote — as well as the presumed “black” vote. And could that even be the strategic intent.

There are other considerations as well. Tameika origninally won citywide office at the head of a coalition of unusual suspects, such as Rusty DePass and other conservative business types. So what dynamics would her candidacy introduce?

Whatever happens, Columbia voters are going to have some interesting choices for once. Who knows? Maybe even some of them will turn out for a change.

Something I didn’t need to hear today

2 Replies

Here’s the way the world works. I’ve been out of work how long now — five months? I’m pressing on all fronts to get a job while doing freelance things when I can. I’m trying all kinds of things — for instance, I’ve started putting out some feelers to people who I hope might help me with getting some ads on my blog.

Also, the last few days I’ve started camping out in an empty office at a local ad agency, which I will not name at this time in order to protect the innocent. The president of the company is a friend who is trying to help out, and who also thinks some synergy might emerge from my hanging here; I might have some ideas that could be helpful to some of his clients. Hasn’t happened yet, but I just started this Monday.

I haven’t actually given the synergy thing much time to work, though, as personal business has called me away from the office in the middle of the day each of these three days so far. Monday and Tuesday it was fun stuff — I was watching the twins back at my house. (So if I write about that, does that make this a “Mommy blog?” Or maybe a “Mr. Mom blog…”)

But today, I’ve got to be back at the house by 2 p.m. because of something that is pretty much the opposite of fun. My wife says the people she called out to find out why the sump pump under the house has been running constantly recently have told her that we have a burst water line under the master bedroom, which has been liberally spraying the underside of our floor and apparently done all sorts of damage. So I’m meeting plumbers, and then I’ll have to meet insurance adjustors, then contractors, then who knows?

When it rains, it pours. Even upside-down, under the house.

You know what? I’m starting to wonder how I ever found time to hold a full-time job in the first place…

Harry Ott stays out of it, backs Sheheen

4 Replies

Well, the rumors I was hearing at the Jim Rex event last week turned out to be untrue — Harry Ott is not running for governor. Instead, he’s backing Vincent Sheheen:

OTT BACKS SHEHEEN IN RACE FOR GOVERNOR

“I believe it’s time we elect a governor we can all be proud of…

Vincent Sheheen is that person.”

St. Matthews, SC – Following his announcement over the weekend that he would not run for governor, House Minority Leader Harry Ott announced today that he is endorsing state Senator Vincent Sheheen in the race for governor.

“South Carolinians are yearning for a trustworthy, hard-working governor – one who can build the coalitions and provide the leadership necessary to address the challenges we face,” said Ott. “On the issues that will define the success or failure of our next governor – particularly creating good jobs and revitalizing our public schools – Vincent Sheheen is the candidate with the independence, experience and vision to move South Carolina forward.”

Ott and Sheheen served together in the South Carolina House from 2001 – 2004. Since 2004, Sheheen has served in the state Senate, where he represents Chesterfield, Kershaw and Lancaster counties.

“I have had the pleasure of knowing Vincent over the last decade and I believe, without a doubt, that he and I share a common vision of what South Carolina can be with the right person at the helm,” Ott continued. “Vincent has a longstanding reputation for forging partnerships and getting results. And perhaps most importantly, he believes deeply, as I do, in the value of our public schools and knows that they are the cornerstone for economic development and job creation.”

“South Carolina is at a pivotal juncture,” Ott said. “I believe it’s time we elect a governor we can all be proud of – one who has the character and integrity to help this great state find its way again. Vincent Sheheen is that person. I am excited to endorse Vincent Sheheen for governor of South Carolina, and I will work to help him get elected.”

This seems a good call on Rep. Ott’s part. The field was crowded enough, and he didn’t want it badly enough to claw through all that, from what I could tell at the one campaign event I heard him speak at.

This is good news for Sheheen, as Harry Ott is the sort of Democrat who pulls toward the center, and whoever gets the nomination will need that kind of appeal in November 2010. (Of course, the big question is always whether primary voters will have the sense to appreciate that.)

Vincent comes out swinging against Dwight on Day One

11 Replies

Vincent Sheheen hasn’t wasted any time pointing out new contestant Dwight Drake’s vulnerabilities. Dwight did a conference call with journalists at 1 p.m., and at 3:24 Vincent sent out this:

Sheheen’s Statement on Democratic Primary

Camden, SC – State Senator and Democratic candidate for governor Vincent Sheheen today issued the following statement regarding the Democratic primary for governor:Which candidate can return trust to the governor’s office?  That is the ultimate question that South Carolina voters must decide.

“In the South Carolina Senate, I have focused on fighting the special interests and insider politics that too often control our government in Columbia at the expense of the people. Whether it be predatory lenders, big tobacco companies, or environmental polluters, I have been willing to stand up to them — and stand up FOR hard-working South Carolinians and our families.

Next year, we have the opportunity to end business as usual and elect a new governor who will put the people of this state first.  South Carolinians deserve a state government that will reward their faith and hard work with good jobs and strong public schools.

Democrats in South Carolina must make a statement about the values of our party and of our state. The future of the Democratic Party and the quality of our state government in South Carolina is at stake.

In this election, Democrats must carefully choose a candidate who represents our values and the values of South Carolina.  We must make a new start, with a new direction and vision to rebuild our state. This is our chance and we cannot afford to miss it.”

###

I told you this was going to be interesting, and it already is.

Dwight Drake’s running! What an election this is shaping up to be…

21 Replies

What an election year 2010 is turning out to be!

You know the wild rumors that led to me being asked whether I was running for governor, at the behest of Jim Hodges and Dick Harpootlian? Apparently, the candidate that rumor was really about was Dwight Drake. (UPDATE: Jim Hodges just told me he’s not backing Dwight or any other gubernatorial candidate — yet.) This is not as shocking an idea as it being ME, but it’s still pretty wild and surprising. Dwight’s done well — very well — working the corridors of power without being the front man, so this is quite a step for him.

Dwight dealt with the Legislature for Dick Riley, and has been doing the same for clients, ranging from Big Tobacco to the high school girl who sued over the stimulus (in that latter case, the aforementioned Dick H. was his co-counsel), ever since.

In fact, if you drew a spectrum of political figures in terms of their effectiveness with lawmakers and put Mark Sanford on one end, Dwight would be on the other. He’s the anti-Mark Sanford, whether you see that as good or bad.

FYI, here’s his bio from the official Nelson Mullins Web site:

Dwight F. Drake is a partner of Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough LLP in Columbia where his practice focuses on government relations, legislative issues, and disputes involving government contracts. Maintaining an active litigation practice, Mr. Drake regularly argues before the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals and the South Carolina Supreme Court.

Since joining the firm in 1983, Mr. Drake has been at the forefront of every significant issue considered by the South Carolina General Assembly — from tort reform to the Economic Development Bond Act. Additionally, he has held numerous positions in firm leadership and management.

In 1981, Mr. Drake was named Lawyer of the Year in Government by American Lawyer, and he is widely recognized for his prominent role in governmental and political arenas. Mr. Drake has twice received The Order of the Palmetto, the highest honor bestowed by a Governor of South Carolina. Mr. Drake’s successful litigation practice led to his selection as a permanent member of the Fourth Circuit Judicial Conference, and his advocacy skills are valued by legislative and litigation clients alike.

Mr. Drake served as a member of the Hodges for Governor Transition Committee. Prior to joining the firm, he served as Executive Assistant for Legislative and Political Affairs for South Carolina Governor Richard W. Riley. Mr. Drake served as legal counsel to South Carolina Governor John C. West.

In 1972, Mr. Drake earned a Juris Doctor from the University of South Carolina School of Law where he was president of the Student Bar Association and held membership in Phi Delta Phi and the National Moot Court Team. Mr. Drake earned a Bachelor of Arts from the University of Georgia in 1967.

Later today, I’m going to a fund-raiser for Jim Rex, and see what’s going on there. But it’s clear that this election is shaping up as the opposite of 2006 for Democrats. Then, no viable candidate stepped forward, and that party ended up with Tommy Moore. This year, you have have a statewide name in Rex, an idealistic young reformer in Sheheen, and the ultimate get-it-done guy Drake. Meanwhile, the party is keeping up a steady pounding on the likely GOP candidates, hitting them with Sanford like battleships softening up the beach with artillery before an amphibious landing.

2010 is going to be very different for South Carolina.

Oh, and just so you have all the details, here’s Dwight’s announcement:

Dwight Drake Announces Run for Governor to Get South Carolina Working Again

Drake Led Efforts to Bring BMW to State and Protect Public School Funding,
Will Keep Working for Jobs and Education as Governor

COLUMBIA – Dwight Drake, an attorney and experienced public servant with a long record of fighting for job creation and improved public education, announced today that he will run for Governor of South Carolina as a Democrat in the 2010 election. Drake announced his candidacy in a video emailed to voters across the state and posted at http://www.DwightDrake.com.  [NOTE FOR TV PRODUCERS: Broadcast-quality versions of the video are available for digital download at http://www.box.net/DrakeAnnouncement .]

“We need to get South Carolina working again,” said Drake. “The past eight years have been wasted, and South Carolina is now first in unemployment in the South.  Mark Sanford made a lot of news when he disappeared this year, but he’s been AWOL on jobs since the day he took office.

“I know from my experience working with two Governors who made education and jobs their priorities – John West and Dick Riley – and working to bring BMW to South Carolina, what it takes to create good-paying jobs in our state.”

Drake has been a tireless advocate on behalf of education and job creation in South Carolina.  He headed up the successful, bipartisan effort to attract BMW to locate in South Carolina and later to expand their operations in the state, resulting in more than 15,000 new jobs for South Carolinians.

Drake also helped lead Choose Children First, a coalition of business leaders, lawmakers, and supporters of public education who came together to defeat Governor Mark Sanford’s attempt to drain money away from public schools with a voucher program.

Most recently, Drake represented South Carolina students Casey Edwards and Justin Williams in their legal fight to force Governor Sanford to accept federal funds for economic recovery and to put that funding to work for South Carolina’s public schools.  Both students appear in Drake’s announcement video and speak about the work he did to make their victory possible.

Drake’s years in public service include serving as legal counsel to former Governor John West and as former Governor Dick Riley’s top legislative aide, where he helped pass landmark legislation, including the Education Improvement Act, as well as efforts supporting early childhood development and state government reform.

Drake’s first priority as Governor will be bringing jobs to the state, after years of neglect by Governor Sanford.

“The first thing a Governor should do when he wakes up in the morning is think, ‘What can I do today to bring good jobs to South Carolina?'” said Drake.  “And the last thing he should do at night is ask himself, ‘Did I do enough today on jobs?’

“My mother and father taught me always to tell the truth and do my best.  Well, the truth is we’re not doing our best in South Carolina.  That’s why I’ve decided to run for Governor.”

Dwight Drake is a native of Spartanburg County, where his father worked in the mills and Drake joined him to help pay for his college education.  He is a U.S. Army veteran who served in Vietnam, and he earned his law degree from the University of South Carolina.  Drake lives in Columbia with his wife Beth, a federal prosecutor, and their two daughters, Marshall, 12, and Eliza, 9.

Drake will hold a press conference call at 1:00pm TODAY to discuss the announcement of his candidacy for Governor.

No, I’m not running for governor — to the best of my knowledge

12 Replies

Y’all will enjoy this — so I’m driving home this afternoon, having run some family errands after Rotary, and my Blackberry buzzes. And it’s Corey Hutchins from the Free Times.

He says there are rumors flying that someone is about to announce a candidacy for governor. Then he mentions something about it being someone whom Dick Harpootlian and Jim Hodges are backing (which makes the next part really wild).

Then he asks whether I’m the one. I had to get him to repeat it. He was asking me whether I’m running for governor.

I got a good laugh out of that — not at Corey’s expense, though. On the contrary; I respect him for being so conscientious as to take the trouble to run down a wild rumor before dismissing it. And he knew it was wild. In his defense, he said, “You should hear some of the names being mentioned.” Presumably, some are even wilder than mine. I hesitated to use Corey’s name here (and if he asks me to, I’ll take it down) because I didn’t want to embarrass him. But I thought that detail lent credence to a post that you might otherwise think was a hoax.

What I’m laughing about was that for him even to have heard it means that there’s at least one person, and possibly two or more, who found it credible enough to pass on…

But anyway, just for the record:

  • I am not currently running for governor. Nor do I have actual plans to do so.
  • I’m not aware of anyone out there who is working in behalf of a Warthen candidacy. And I’d know about that. Wouldn’t I?
  • Jim Hodges would not be putting my name forward. I mean, he and I get along fine these days, but still. Nor would Dick, far as I know.
  • I am the founder of the UnParty, and my party has yet even to come up with a nominating process.

Of course, on the other hand, there are the following items arguing the other way:

  • I’m not gainfully employed at the moment. (When Corey called, I was thinking about my job search.)
  • I’ve certainly thought a lot about what it takes to be a good governor. For a platform, I could start with my last column at The State, and build from there.
  • I know, without a shadow of a doubt, that I could be a better governor than the current one (not a high standard, but it’s something).

But no, I’m neither a candidate nor plotting with anyone to become a candidate. What I am doing is hunting for a job.

It’s interesting how susceptible the rumor mill is, though. Remember my thinking out loud, very briefly, about running for Ted Pitts’ House seat, since he’s running for Gov Lite? Well, that had legs. A couple of weeks back, when I dropped by the Lexington County GOP event at Hudson’s BBQ place (I was there to talk to Jake Knotts for this post, when we were all still wondering where the governor was), several people in the crowd asked me about it. And I think some of them were serious.

So it doesn’t take much to get this kind of thing going.

Anyway, to iterate once again — right now, my goal is full-time, paying employment. If I found a job that met my family’s financial needs and allowed me to run for office, too, I might think about it. Someday. But that’s a really huge “if.” Most employers would probably frown on that sort of thing.

Bottom line: I got a good chuckle out of this, and I needed one. So, to whoever started this ball rolling — thanks…

Joel Sawyer calls it quits

28 Replies
scgov_ss_062409_15standaloneprod_affiliate74

That's Joel at right, with his hand on the governor's arm.

Looks like I’ll have to contact somebody else to add me to the e-mail distribution list for the gov’s weekly schedules. Press spokesman Joel Sawyer, whom the governor left high and dry with no hint of where he actually was when he went AWOL, is leaving that increasingly thankless job, according to The State:

Gov. Mark Sanford’s communications director, Joel Sawyer, said today he is leaving for an unspecified private-sector job, effective Aug. 5.

Sawyer said his decision to leave his $65,000-a-year job had nothing to do with Sanford’s recent six-day disappearance and the Republican governor’s subsequent disclosure of an affair with an Argentine woman.

“I want to be crystal clear that my departure is purely about what’s best for me and my family on a personal and financial level,” Sawyer said in a statement. “I wish Mark and the rest of my talented and dedicated colleagues the best.”

I’d like to take this opportunity to say that, while we may have disagreed about some things, Joel Sawyer was always thoroughly professional in my dealings with him. I would trust him with my life — in fact, I have. I hope he found a great new job.

Eckstrom declares stimulus failure after 13 days

39 Replies

I saw that among the gov’s appointments on his public sort-of schedule was a briefing from S.C. Comptroller General Rich Eckstrom, having to do with the stimulus. The schedule didn’t say when or where said meeting would take place, but maybe it was today, since we now have this report:

Eckstrom: Revenue down 10% in June; stimulus not working

Monday, 13 July 2009
Staff Report

COLUMBIA — State general fund revenues for June were down 10%, or $71.7 million, compared with revenues for June 2008, evidence that the stimulus funds are not having the desired effect, S.C. Comptroller General Richard Eckstrom said.

For the past 12 months, the general fund revenues were down 12.5%, or $828 million, Eckstrom said.

“While everyone wants to see our economy improve, these revenue numbers indicate that it’s just not happening, even months after the president’s trillion-dollar stimulus spending bill. State and national unemployment rates keep climbing higher, so there’s certainly no evidence that jobs are being created or saved through the massive deficit spending that’s occurring in government,” he said.

How do you like that? We finally get the full stimulus coming to us after months of his ally doing all he can to stop it. It was to be spent in the budget that started 12 days ago, on July 1.

But ol’ Rich has already declared it a failure on the 13th. How about that?

You don’t suppose that, like some folks of the other party with regard to Iraq, he wants us to fail — do you?

$41 million for SC, and everybody’s in on it

15 Replies

You get used to press releases from congressional offices in which Rep. This or Sen. That announces that his district or state is going to get X amount of federal largesse. Even when the member had nothing to do with it, by announcing it, he gets credit. It's routine.

But this one was so big that the president and the veep had to get in on it, which is something new for me:

President Obama, Vice President Biden, U.S. Transportation

Secretary LaHood, Announce Availability of Nearly $41.2 million in Public Transportation Investments for South Carolina

More than $8 Billion Made Available
Across the Country for Mass Transit

President Obama, Vice President Joe Biden and U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood today announced the availability of $41,154,218 from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) for South Carolina in public transportation funding.  The funding was part of $8.4 billion made available to repair and build America’s public transportation infrastructure.
    “All over the country, resources are being put to work not only creating jobs now – but also investing in the future. A future that strengthens our transit system, makes us more energy efficient and increases safety,” said Vice President Joe Biden.  “With this recovery package, we will be creating jobs, saving jobs, and putting money in people’s pockets. And with these resources, we’ll not only be rebuilding roads and bridges and schools, we’ll be rebuilding America.”
    “Investments in public transportation put people to work, but they also get people to work in a way that moves us towards our long term goals of energy security and a better quality of life,” said Secretary LaHood.  “That is why transit funding was included in the ARRA and why we think it is a key part of America’s transportation future.”
    The U.S. Department of Transportation has already committed $540 million in federally financed loans, about one-third of the total cost, for the intermodal center, which is proceeding on time and on budget.
    The U.S. Department of Transportation will monitor state compliance and track job creation. The projects will be web-posted for the public to see with information on projects accessible at www.recovery.gov.

###

WashTimes picks on SC schoolgirl

41 Replies

More than one friend has brought to my attention this piece from Salon, taking up the cudgels for a schoolgirl here in South Carolina:

Friday February 27, 2009 06:11 EST

Criticizing Ty'Sheoma Bethea

I
thought it would come from Michelle Malkin or Rush Limbaugh, but Malkin
is too busy planning her anti-tax tea parties while Rush gets ready for
his close-up at the Conservative Political Action Committee this weekend (which is a collection of nuts so nutty even Sarah Palin stayed away).

No, it was the conservative Washington Times that cast the first stone at Ty'Sheoma Bethea,
the Dillon, S.C., teenager who wrote to Congress seeking stimulus funds
for her shamefully dilapidated school. Obama used her statement, "We
are not quitters," as the coda of his speech Tuesday night, but now the
Moon-owned paper tells us what's wrong with Bethea, in an editorial
with the condescending headline, 'Yes, Ty'Sheoma, there is a Santa
Claus."

Obama "presented" Bethea "as a plucky girl from a
hopeless school who took it on herself to write the president and
Congress asking for much needed help," the Times began, ominously.
Wait, she's not a plucky girl from a hopeless school? The editorial
depicts her instead as a player in Obama's "mere political theater"
because the president has been using her school, J.V. Martin, as a
"political prop" since he first visited in 2005. Wow. Dastardly.  I'm
getting the picture: Obama, that slick Democrat opportunist, has
repeatedly visited one of the poorest schools in South Carolina, a
state that voted for John McCain.  You just know he leaves with his
pockets stuffed with cash every time he makes the trip.

It gets worse….

And you can read the rest of Joan Walsh's piece here.

You know, I long ago got cynical about these regular folks that presidents of both parties put on display
during their prime-time speeches. I'm actually capable of understanding that public policy affects real people without such smarmy concrete evidence. Such faux-populist gimmicks are the rhetorical equivalent of those insipid man-on-the-street interviews that local TV news shows do, the ones that make me want to scream, "I don't care what this person who has obviously never thought about this issue before thinks! Either tell me something I don't know, or go away!" Such things tend to strike me as manipulative, phony and insulting.

So I'm not here to imbue this little girl with some sort of oracular power or something. But come on, people — picking on a little kid who just wants to go to a decent school? This is where ideology gets you. You get so wrapped up in your political points you want to make, you forget that there's a real person there, even when she's staring you in the face.

Earlier this week, I called a guy in Latta who had rung my phone (according to caller ID) at least 10 times that day, refusing to leave a message. (As I've probably told you, ever since my department ceased to have a person to answer phones, I have to let the machine get it and get back to people when I can, if I'm to have any hope of getting the paper out each day.) But I called back on the chance that he was disabled or something, or there was a problem with my voice mail.

There was no phone problem. He just wanted me to be the latest of several people at the paper he had berated for saying J.V. Martin school was built in 1896, when PARTS of it were built much later. Some of it, I seem to recall him saying, in 1984. Does this seem like a huge distinction to you? It didn't to me, either, but it was VERY important to him. He wasn't saying it wasn't a substandard facility, mind you; he just had that one objection, and he maintained it was the height of irresponsibility on the part of the newspaper not to point out that distinction.

Anyway, the situation is what it is. J.V. Martin is a facility that stands out in a part of the state not exactly known for stellar school facilities, as you've read many times before in our paper, seen in Bud Ferillo's "Corridor of Shame," and read in Kathleen Parker's column last week. You know, that wild-eyed liberal Kathleen.

Is that Dillon County's worst educational problem? Probably not. There's the bizarre governing setup for local schools there, whereby the high school football coach, by virtue of being the only resident member of the county legislative delegation, decides who will be on the school board. The caller and I discussed that, and he thought it was worse that a certain other party — the son of the late South of The Border founder Alan Schafer — has too much influence. I don't know anything about that, but the Coach Hayes thing has always been weird and Byzantine enough for me.

South Carolina should be able to do better than J.V. Martin, and if it can't, that's an argument for getting some federal help, as much as I dislike federal involvement in school matters. All this kid did was ask for something better, and a newspaper derides her as an emblem of "irresponsibility." That's a hell of a thing.

McCain to go to bat for McMaster (as well he should)

4 Replies


The Hill reports that John McCain is going to be raising funds for Attorney General Henry McMaster's (yet undeclared) bid for governor in 2010:

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) is hitting the fundraising circuit to return the favor to a local Republican who proved a key supporter in the 2008 primaries.

McCain and many of his top advisers will throw a fundraising reception on behalf of Henry McMaster, the South Carolina attorney general who backed McCain during his run for president in 2008.

The event's host committee includes McCain loyalists like one-time senior advisors Charlie Black, former campaign manager Rick Davis and former Republican National Committee deputy chairman Frank Donatelli. McCain will make an appearance, a spokeswoman confirmed.

And well he should, because Henry was right with him through thick and thin in his most recent presidential bid. He and Bobby Harrell, all the way, even when people were counting McCain as out of the GOP race. Note the video from above (this is the slightly more extended version of my most-viewed video of all time, at 59,850 views), in which Henry warmed up the crowd for McCain one night in the Vista in 2007 (the night of the first S.C. presidential candidate debate, as I recall).

Rocky Mountain News to shut down

18 Replies

You know, I can hardly post something about the troubles in the news biz for y'all before something comes along and tops it. I tried to give y'all a roundup back in this post earlier today, and now this:

The Rocky Mountain News publishes its last paper tomorrow.

Rich Boehne, chief executive officer of Rocky-owner Scripps, broke
the news to the staff at noon today, ending nearly three months of
speculation over the paper's future.

"People are in grief," Editor John Temple said at a news conference later.

Boehne told staffers that the Rocky was the victim of a terrible economy and an upheaval in the newspaper industry.

"Denver can't support two newspapers any longer," Boehne told
staffers, some of whom cried at the news. "It's certainly not good news
for you, and it's certainly not good news for Denver."

This takes things to a whole new level, of course. Severe expense cutbacks are one thing, bankruptcies are another. But shutting down altogether — well, this is something new. Not only are they shutting down; they're shutting down tomorrow.

Some of us might be tempted to whistle past this graveyard. After all, what was Denver doing with TWO newspapers in the year 2009? Most two-newspaper towns went the way of the dinosaurs before any of us had HEARD of the World Wide Web. (The Columbia Record, for instance, closed in 1988, and that was toward the back end of the trend.) But that doesn't change the fact that, as Mr. Boehne said, "The industry is in serious, serious trouble."

Things are critical, and immediate, and things are starting to happen really, really fast — sort of the way they did with Lehman Bros. et al. last fall.

GOP dark horse steps forward

8 Replies

This just came to my attention, and in keeping with my efforts to begin chronicling the 2010 gubernatorial election (because the sooner we can get a new governor, the better), I share it with you:

{BC-SC-Governor-Nelsen, 2nd Ld-Writethru,0320}
{Furman professor plans GOP bid for SC governor}
{Eds: UPDATES with quotes, details from Nelsen, Bauer. ADDS byline.}
{By JIM DAVENPORT}=
{Associated Press Writer}=
   COLUMBIA, S.C. (AP) – A Furman University political science professor announced plans Thursday to be the first GOP candidate to formally enter the 2010 race for South Carolina governor.
   Brent Nelsen says he'll file paperwork Friday to set up his Nelsen for Governor Committee and launch a series of economic summits around the state that aim to come up with plans to increase employment and spur economic development.
   Nelsen has never run for political office and said he wants to put into practice some of the things he has taught. He wouldn't say how much he expects to raise in the next six months to wage a credible campaign in a primary that most expect will cost millions to win.
   "I'm going to have enough money in the next six months to make a run for this," Nelsen said. "I'm not going to put a dollar figure on it."
   Republican Gov. Mark Sanford is limited to two terms and leaves office in 2011. His tenure has been marked by high jobless rates – at 9.5 percent in December, South Carolina had the nation's third worst unemployment rate.
   Other GOP candidates flush with campaign cash and with better-recognized names in state politics have said they're interested but not yet ready to announce plans. Attorney General Henry McMaster is interested but isn't expected to enter the race before spring. Lt. Gov. Andre Bauer said Thursday he's probably running, but is too busy for now to announce his intentions. U.S. Rep. Gresham Barrett has begun lining up advisers for a possible bid.
   Democrat state Sen. Vincent Sheheen of Camden already has filed 2010 campaign forms so he can begin raising money, making him the only other candidate formally in the race for governor. Other Democrats considering bids include House Minority Leader Harry Ott of St. Matthews and state Sen. Robert Ford of Charleston.

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that Prof. Nelson isn't quite as viable a candidate as the subject of my Sunday column, Vincent Sheheen. Nor, and this is more to the point, as viable as the most active GOP candidate-to-be, Attorney General Henry McMaster. But I pass on this report nonetheless, so that you might make of it what you will.

For more on Dr. Nelson, I refer you to this piece he wrote for us recently, which appeared on our Saturday Online Extra on Jan. 17:

S.C. GOP must reform itself
By BRENT F. NELSON
GUEST COLUMNIST
The S.C. Republican Party is in trouble. If the party fails to seek new ideas and reach out to new voters, its dominance of state politics will end. It’s time to start a new debate within the party.
    Ironically, Republicans still look strong. The party holds eight of the nine elected state offices. Republicans control the state House and Senate by comfortable margins and have both U.S. senators and four of six U.S. representatives. Just as important, South Carolina remained “McCain red” in a presidential election that saw big gains for Democrats almost everywhere.
    But scratch the surface, and significant cracks appear in the GOP’s foundation. The most obvious problem is the dysfunctional relationship between the Republican governor and the Republican Legislature. To be fair, Columbia’s broken politics stems from a state constitution that hamstrings the governor, denying him the power to implement a coherent policy. But Gov. Mark Sanford has been unable — or unwilling — to employ the customary gubernatorial tools to shepherd his proposals through the Legislature. That Legislature is indeed overly protective of its anachronistic privileges, but he often uses that resistance as a pretext for political posturing of his own, rather than engaging opponents in a search for common ground. The party has gotten away with this petty bickering, but the state now faces the third-highest unemployment rate in the country, declining competitiveness and poor educational performance. Someday voters will notice.
    And Republicans face a cascade of worrying electoral trends. Only 54 percent of South Carolinians picked John McCain for president, down 10 points from Ronald Reagan’s vote in 1984. McCain’s showing is no anomaly but another point marking a rather steady decline for Republican candidates (not counting the three-way elections of 1992 and 1996). In the 2008 contest, the Republican vote dropped in 43 of 46 counties. Declines averaged 3.6 percent but were even greater (4.4 percent) in the 11 largest counties.
    The worst news comes from important demographic categories. In 2004 George Bush won every age group in South Carolina, including 18-29 year olds; John McCain managed to win only those 45 and older. Fifteen percent of African-American voters voted for Bush in 2004; only 4 percent chose McCain. Hispanic voters are too few in South Carolina to analyze, but Hispanics increased their share of the electorate from 1 percent in 2004 to 3 percent in 2008. Nationally Obama won 61 percent of the Hispanic vote, and South Carolina was probably no different.
    Is all lost for S.C. Republicans? Absolutely not — but the party must adjust to the new realities. Republicans must reach beyond white, married, religious voters — a shrinking base. To avoid becoming the next red state gone blue, Republicans must attract more young people, minorities and not-so-religious whites. Accomplishing this without losing the GOP’s conservative base will be tricky, but not impossible.
    Here are three suggestions.

— First, the party must stress what it is for rather than what it is against. It is no longer enough to be against government, taxes, gun control, abortion, gay marriage and immigration. Uncommitted voters want to know the alternative. Republicans should focus on establishing the conditions necessary to “human flourishing.”
Strong government should establish clear boundaries for behavior and then stand back and allow responsible citizens to act freely. Public officials must identify the social causes of poverty and low educational achievement and work with churches and neighborhood organizations to strengthen families and their communities.
We need politicians who can find compassionate ways to balance the need for employers to gain access to hard-working labor, citizens to feel comfortable in their neighborhoods and immigrants to realize the American dream. Governments cannot make humans flourish, but they can make the necessary room for this to happen. That is a conservative vision.
— Second, Republicans must reconnect with young adults, Hispanics and African-Americans. Many in these groups are social conservatives who fail to see in Republicans a concern for the economic and cultural issues important to minorities. Republicans must convince these voters that the party is committed to
the flourishing of all South Carolinians.
— Finally, the party must stop fighting and start solving problems. Education, enterprise and environment might be three places to start. The state must dramatically narrow the education gap between the richest and the poorest; it must regain its globally competitive position; and it must manage responsibly the natural beauty of this state.

    If S.C. Republicans focus on human flourishing and government that works, new supporters will help reverse the party’s decline.

Dr. Nelson chairs the political science department at Furman University. He is a lifelong Republican.

Palmetto Health comes out swinging

3 Replies

Well, you're not going to be surprised to know that Palmetto Health is not a BIT pleased that Providence Hospital and Lexington Medical Center have cut a deal on open-heart and left it out. Palmetto Health issued this statement at 4:37 this afternoon, after the other two parties made their big announcement:

IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Feb. 25, 2009

Statement by Charles D. Beaman, Jr., CEO, Palmetto Health

I have great respect for the dedicated professionals associated with Lexington Medical Center and Providence Hospital. However, I am surprised and very disappointed that the leaders of those hospitals excluded Palmetto Health when they negotiated a private agreement regarding health care delivery for the Midlands of South Carolina.

Palmetto Health is the largest provider of health care in the area.  We have been urging collaboration and cooperation from the beginning.

Frankly, I am at a loss to understand why a private agreement regarding health care delivery would be negotiated and announced that excludes the region’s largest hospital system.  Our goal is to provide the best, most efficient services to the families of central South Carolina.  It is simply not possible to develop a regional health care delivery plan that excludes Palmetto Health.  

Here are just a few of the questions left unresolved by the private agreement negotiated by only two of the region’s hospitals:

  • Will Lexington Medical Center agree to support Palmetto Health’s plan to build Parkridge Hospital in the Irmo area?  That plan was approved by state officials in August of 2007.  The community involved is eager to have a hospital in their area.  But progress has been blocked for nearly two years by legal maneuvers.
  • Will we have sufficient trauma coverage for our region? If open heart surgery must be provided in a hospital that has one of the busiest ERs in the area, why not consider providing trauma services in that same ER?
  • Will we have adequate behavioral health services for our region?  Right now Palmetto Health is the only inpatient provider for unfunded patients.  As the state continues to cut services for inpatients and outpatients, our regional hospitals need to work together.
  • Where are the oversight and the spirit of cooperation to provide care for the uninsured and underinsured who are showing up in growing numbers at the region’s only safety-net hospital – Palmetto Health Richland?  Is open heart surgery the only service worth sharing?

At Palmetto Health, we remain willing to cooperate and collaborate with other hospital systems to create a true regional health care delivery plan.  And we urge our colleagues in the health care delivery system to focus on the full range of services needed in these difficult economic times. 

In the mean time, our friends in Lexington County can rest assured we will continue to support them in their specialized heart care needs.  Just last week, a patient from Lexington County had his heart blockage removed within 19 minutes of his arrival at Palmetto Health Heart Hospital after being transported there by Lexington County EMS.  We remain ready and able to accommodate patients needing our care.

# # # # #

In those four bulleted items, Chuck Beaman sets out the biggest beefs that Palmetto Health has long held in terms of getting the short end of the stick on Midlands health care — it treats the most indigent patients, and it maintains the expensive trauma services that the other hospitals don't have to provide because IT does. That's why it was so important to Palmetto Richland to develop it's expanded open-heart program, because it brings in revenue it needs to offset those expenses.

That question, "Is open heart surgery the only service worth sharing?" is about as loaded as a question gets. Lexington has argued all along that it needed open heart because it was getting such a disproportionate share of acute cardiac cases coming into its ER. In that case, the other hospitals have said, why don't you beef up ER — which would COST money, rather than bringing it in the way open-heart does. Now, Providence isn't saying that, and is getting $15 million, and Palmetto Health is feeling very isolated and neglected.

Note that the release doesn't promise to keep opposing Lexington's CON request on open-heart, but says it will be happy to continue serving those patients at the Richland campus, which one of course reads as meaning the same thing.

Bottom line: Two of the combatants have made peace. But the war's not over.

But how about those spiffy MODERN blue laws?

44 Replies

Got a release today from the Distilled Spirits Council of the United States, calling my attention to a NYT editorial headlined "A Dry Sunday in Connecticut," and saying that in case I wanted to write anything about Sunday sales of liquor, to consider the following:

  • Archaic Blue Laws make no sense in a 21st-century economy where Sunday has become the second-busiest shopping day of the week.
  • Beer, wine and spirits are already permitted for on-premise consumption at bars and restaurants seven days a week.  Allowing the sale of beer, wine and spirits at off-premise retail outlets on Sunday would simply give adult consumers more choices and added convenience.
  • The state will benefit from the increased tax revenues generated by an additional day of package store sales.  Contrary to some who believe that Sunday sales will just spread six days of sales over seven, recent implementation of Sunday Sales in 12 states (Colorado’s repeal was too recent for data) shows that in 2006 Sunday sales generated $212 million in new sales for retailers.  This figure is expected to increase annually.  See economic analysis of those states here.
  • No legislation forces any package store to open on Sundays. It simply gives store owners the right to decide for themselves which days to open. 
  • Sunday liquor sales will not lead to increased drunk driving.  According to an analysis using government data on alcohol-related fatalities, there is no statistical difference in states that allow Sunday liquor sales compared to those that do not.

Which provokes me to say,

  • First, we have no plans to do any editorials on the subject. I doubt we would reach consensus, partly because I'm such a mossback. I miss having a day of rest, so pretty much anything that is still proscribed on Sunday, I'm for keeping it. And before you secularists have a fit and fall in it about "establishment of religion," yadda-yadda, I don't much care which day of the week you pick. Make it Tuesday, if that makes you feel less threatened and oppressed. Just pick a day on which we can all kick back and not be expected to run around and get things done, just because we can. And don't give me that stuff about how I don't have to shop just because the stores are open. Yes, I do. There is so much pressure on my time that I can't possibly get everything expected of me done in six days, and if you give me a seventh on which to do them, I'll have to use it. And if you don't understand that, there's no point it our talking about it. The only way to have a day of rest is for there to be a day in which we roll up the sidewalks, so to speak, and everybody understands that you couldn't do it that day, so they don't expect you to. Now I know we're not going back to those days, but I am not inclined to add anything else to the list of stuff going on 24/7. You remind me that "Sunday has become the second-busiest shopping day of the week," and you think that's an argument for doing something else on Sunday? You're kidding, right? It just makes me tired thinking about it. Get somebody else to write your editorial; you're barking up the wrong tree with me. And all of you kids, get off of my lawn! Dagnabit.
  • Is your use of the term "archaic blue laws" meant to suggest that there's another category of spiffy, modern blue laws that you don't mind so much? Or are you just being redundant?
  • Correct me if I'm wrong, but your point about increased tax revenues means that people will be buying more liquor, right? I see how that's a good thing for you and the fine folks at the Distilled Spirits Council of the United States, but how is that a good thing for the rest of us?
  • Yeah, right — nobody would be forced to open on Sunday. This reminds me of when I worked in Jackson, TN, and the owner of the largest department store in town fought against lifting the blue laws because he said that if you lifted them, the big chain stores would come to town and drive him out of business. Besides, he liked giving his workers Sunday off. And he was Jewish, by the way. The newspaper ignored him (even though he was its biggest advertiser, for those of you who keep track of such things) and kept advocating for lifting blue laws, that eventually happened, the big chain stores came to town, he had to open on Sundays, and he soon went out of business anyway. When it comes to competition, folks, "choice" can be a myth. If your competitors are all doing it, you have to.
  • I'll take your word for it on the drunk driving. Although it seems a bit weird that you'd be selling MORE liquor (remember the tax revenues thing), but people won't be driving drunk more. Whatever.

Just look upon me as a disgruntled beer drinker — one who was perfectly happy buying enough on Saturday to make it through the weekend, and thinks anybody who wasn't organized enough or self-aware enough to know ahead of time that he might want a beer on Sunday is pretty pathetic. Dagnabit.

Syria and WMD

31 Replies

Just when you think you have time to worry about what Michael Phelps is smoking, there's always somebody out there coming up with something more pressing, something you hadn't even thought about lately.

Like Syria and Weapons of Mass Destruction. So you thought the Israelis had taken care of that with the strike on the nuke facility? Well, think again, according to Jane's, which sent me a release today about the following:

Syria Appears to be Developing its Chemical Weapons Capability

IHS Jane’s examines satellite imagery

London (18th February 2009) – Jane’s Intelligence Review used satellite images from commercial sources gathered between 2005 and 2008 to examine activity at the chemical weapons facility identified as Al Safir in northwest Syria.  Imagery from DigitalGlobe’s WorldView-1 satellite and GeoEye’s IKONOS satellite shows that the site contains not only a number of the defining features of a chemical weapons facility, but also that significant levels of construction have taken place at the facility’s production plant and adjacent missile base. This does not suggest that Syria is arming itself for an offensive, but it could have regional security implications given Syria’s tension with its neighbour, Israel.

One of the clearest indicators that Al Safir is a military facility as opposed to a civilian industrial complex is the level of defences protecting the site.  The facility is accessed only through a military checkpoint and each element within the facility has an additional security point.

Christian Le Mière, editor of Jane’s Intelligence Review, explained: “Construction at the Al Safir facility appears to be the most significant chemical weapons production, storage and weaponisation site in Syria.  Its presence indicates Syria’s desire to develop unconventional weapons either to act as a deterrent to conflict with Israel or as a force enhancer should any conflict ensue. The satellite imagery that IHS Jane’s has examined suggests that Damascus has sought to expand and develop Al Safir and its chemical weapons arsenal.”

LeMière concluded: “Further expansion of Al Safir is likely to antagonise Israel and highlight mutual mistrust, even as peace talks between the two neighbours progress intermittently.  Although an Israeli air strike on the facility may not yet be likely, such developments only serve to underline and exacerbate regional tensions.”

            ###

Actually, I'd tell you more but you have to subscribe to Jane's to get more. And I've got enough to worry about… They even offered me a contact number in case I wanted to see the satellite image. But I just don't have time to spend half a day shaking off surveillance, doubling back on my tracks, to meet a guy in Lisbon with a magazine in his left hand who will say, "Do you like good curry?," to which I have to remember the right thing to say or he'll garrote me.

Even if I went to the trouble, bud still wouldn't believe me that the WMD exists…

Have you seen the PETA billboard?

38 Replies



While I disagree with the dope-legalization folks, I can at least see why they use the Michael Phelps case to promote their cause. A little more unexpected is the very local, specific way that PETA has used it to promote its agenda.

I think I mentioned before that PETA was putting up a billboard locally. Well, they say it's up now, over on the outskirts of Shandon, or Old Shandon, or whatever. I haven't seen it. Have you? That's it above, and below is the release about it:

IN WAKE OF MICHAEL PHELPS BONG INCIDENT, PETA'S NEW ANTI-POT (ROAST) BILLBOARD RISES NEAR USC

Meat Is a Bigger Health Hazard Than Marijuana, Says Group
 

Columbia, S.C. — The infamous photo of Olympic swimmer Michael Phelps as he tokes a bong has now given rise to more than just a few million eyebrows—namely, a brand-new PETA billboard. The billboard—which shows a cow's face next to the tagline "Say 'No!' to Pot … Roast. Don't Be a Meathead. Kick the Habit!"—aims to warn students about a substance that can be even more hazardous to their health than marijuana: meat. Click here to view the billboard, which is located at the intersection of Millwood Avenue and King Street in Columbia.

Bongs and needles aren't the only place drugs are found; meat often is loaded with drugs — including hormones and antibiotics. Consumption of artery-clogging meat and other animal products has been linked to heart disease, obesity, diabetes, and several types of cancer — not to mention other hazards, such as E. coli, salmonella, and listeria. So while smoking marijuana is illegal, eating meat can be deadly.

Not only is eating animal flesh responsible for the horrendous suffering of billions of chickens, fish, cows, and pigs, it also wreaks havoc on the planet. A recent U.N. study found that raising animals for food creates more greenhouse-gas emissions than all the cars, trucks, trains, and planes in the world combined and contributes to water pollution and land degradation.

"While Michael was busy apologizing for smoking pot, millions of Americans should have been apologizing for eating pot roast—to animals, to the planet, and to their own bodies, " says PETA Executive Vice President Tracy Reiman. "We want to remind USC students that while smoking pot might land them in front of the dean, eating meat burgers and chicken nuggets could land them an early date with their maker."

To view the ad, go to PETA's blog. For more information about the benefits of going vegetarian, please visit PETA.org.

            #

You know, for my part I've been eating less beef lately. I've eaten a lot of turkey burger instead, so I don't think PETA's going to be proud of me on that score.

So you can assume I am NOT sharing this with you in order to endorse the PETA agenda. But I do hope that if you pay enough attention to PETA, with its campaigns for the rights of George the Lobster and so forth, you'll turn back to me and see me as reassuringly moderate and sensible…

You know, if these folks stuck to vegetarianism as a health and environmental issue they'd gain more traction — and they're wise to emphasize those points. It's when it's all driven by a view of animals as having RIGHTS akin to those of people that they lose me.