Panel finds probable cause for charges against Sanford

State Ethics Commission doesn't specify what the allegations are

joconnor@thestate.comNovember 19, 2009 

  • The case against Sanford

    What the State Ethics Commission reviewed in its investigation of Gov. Mark Sanford.

    Commissioners determined there was "probable cause" Sanford violated the law - but refused to provide details about whether Sanford possibly broke ethics laws or criminal

    Misuse of state airplanes. State law bars any use of state planes other than for official business. Sanford, according to state documents, used a state plane to ferry family members and to attend political functions, possible violations of state law.

    Using expensive airfares on foreign trips. State law requires the use of the most economical travel available. Sanford used more expensive airfare, according to state documents. Sanford has defended himself, arguing other governors have paid for similar travel.

    Failure to disclose private plane trips. The Associated Press reported Sanford accepted 35 rides on private planes that he did not disclose in his state ethics report, a possible violation of state law. Questions have arisen since about whether Sanford should have paid federal taxes on those plane trips.

    Use of campaign funds. Sanford has refused to say publicly why he reimbursed himself more than $1,800 for expenses from his campaign account in the past 18 months. The Ethics Commission has likely reviewed those expenses.

    Meet the commission

    The nine members of the State Ethics Commission, who Wednesday decided there was probable cause to charge Gov. Mark Sanford after the commission investigated Sanford's travel and campaign spending.

    DISTRICT REPRESENTATIVES

    Dr. Richard H. Fitzgerald, Mount Pleasant, representing the 1st Congressional District

    Edward E. Duryea, Beaufort, representing the 2nd Congressional District

    E. Kay Biermann Brohl, Aiken, representing the 3rd Congressional District

    J.B. Holeman, Greenville, representing the 4th Congressional District

    Jonathan H. Burnett, Florence, representing the 5th Congressional District

    Priscilla L. Tanner, Johnsonville, representing the 6th Congressional District

    AT-LARGE MEMBERS

    Susan P. McWilliams, Columbia, chairwoman

    G. Carlton Manley, Simpsonville

    Phillip Florence Jr., Columbia

    SOURCE: State Ethics Commission

A state ethics panel has found evidence Gov. Mark Sanford may have broken state law, charging him with "several" undisclosed violations after an investigation into his travel and campaign spending.

State Ethics Commission director Herbert Hayden on Wednesday would not provide details of the charges, nor would he clarify whether the violations were ethical or criminal.

But Sanford's attorney, Butch Bowers, said the charges were "minor, technical matters" that did not include criminal violations.

A three-member panel of the commission now must hear witnesses, weigh evidence and decide whether Sanford is guilty of the charges at a later date, Hayden said. Sanford can make that a public hearing, but has not yet chosen to do so.

"They found probable cause exists on several allegations," Hayden said, reading from a short, prepared statement. "(The commissioners) wanted me to point out that a finding of probable cause is not a finding of guilt. It is only one phase in the process."

Hayden said the commission hopes to set a hearing date, likely for early next year, and to release the list of charges on Monday.

The ethics panel is scrutinizing Sanford's travel and use of campaign funds stemming from his five-day clandestine trip to Argentina in June. Sanford later admitted an extramarital affair with an Argentine woman and reimbursed the state more than $3,000 for a 2008 trade trip during which he saw his lover.

The two-term Republican governor, who cannot run for re-election, has 14 months left in office.

But the trip to Argentina and the ethics probe have lawmakers weighing whether to remove Sanford from office.

The ethics investigation is the first of its kind for a sitting South Carolina governor, the Ethics Commission said. Eight Ethics commissioners studied and discussed evidence behind closed doors for about seven hours Wednesday before reaching a decision.

The commission is appointed by the governor and confirmed by the Senate. Once appointed, the commissioners cannot be removed.

Bowers said Sanford has cooperated with the Ethics investigation. He declined to say whether Sanford would allow his hearing to be public.

"We look forward to our opportunity to finally present our side of the case to the commission and get this matter resolved," Bowers said. "We believe that once all of the facts have been considered, it will once again confirm that this administration has been a good steward of tax dollars and public resources."

Hayden said his office will send a copy of the investigative report to Attorney General Henry McMaster. McMaster is a Republican candidate for governor. McMaster's office would decide whether to press criminal charges against Sanford. McMaster has said his office will not comment on the Ethics Commission report until it has decided whether any evidence of criminal action exists.

Sanford, a self-proclaimed champion of open government, has objected to the report's public release in court, arguing it could undermine his defense. The S.C. Supreme Court ruled Nov. 5 that the State Ethics Commission could make the report public, but House Speaker Bobby Harrell, R-Charleston, has asked the court to clarify its ruling. That decision is not expected until next week.

This week House lawmakers introduced an impeachment resolution against Sanford for abandoning his duties in June. The House leadership is waiting to see the investigative report before moving forward with impeachment.

State Sen. Jake Knotts, R-Lexington and a long-time Sanford critic, said the Ethics Commission decision increases pressure on the House to begin the impeachment process.

Harrell said, as of Tuesday, he did not think there was enough evidence to remove Sanford from office, and some members have been frustrated that the House has yet to open its investigation.

"It needs to come to the floor of the House for a vote," Knotts said. "I think South Carolina needs to know what they got."

The State is pleased to provide this opportunity to share information, experiences and observations about what's in the news. Some of the comments may be reprinted elsewhere in the site or in the newspaper. We encourage lively, open debate on the issues of the day, and ask that you refrain from profanity, hate speech, personal comments and remarks that are off point. Thank you for taking the time to offer your thoughts.

Commenting FAQs | Terms of Service