Tuesday, Jun. 30, 2009

Bolton: Much ado about nothing

GOV. MARK Sanford deserves every bit of the public shellacking he’s getting for leaving the country for several days without telling anyone.

But are calls for his impeachment or resignation warranted? After all, nothing happened.

A hurricane didn’t strike South Carolina. There was no nuclear meltdown. No need for the National Guard to be scrambled.

As a matter of fact, so little happened that nearly all of us — from the media to those state leaders who were reachable to the rest of South Carolina and much of the nation — had countless hours and energy to spend commiserating over the question of where, oh where, had our long-lost governor gone. But for the governor’s ill-advised trip, many of us in these parts would have had precious little to worry about.

Mr. Sanford’s actions were indeed irresponsible. You don’t leave without telling anyone where you’re going and how to get in touch with you or leaving someone in charge, even though, as an elected official, you’re not required to have set hours, set vacation or a published schedule.

While he let this state down and broke a trust with citizens, it doesn’t appear at the moment that Mr. Sanford broke any laws or rules, either in leaving the way he did recently or on a 2008 trip to Argentina during which he saw his mistress. (The governor should clear up the 2008 question by producing all records related to the trip.)

It’s not clear exactly what Mr. Sanford was required to do when he left town. While there is a process of succession, it’s vague, — something many in the Legislature now have known for years but have done nothing to fix.

Was the governor obligated to empower Lt. Gov. Andre Bauer? I don’t know. Frankly, he could have covered himself by simply announcing he’d be away a few days and providing a contact number. Instead, he did nothing.

That’s simply wrong, whether he broke a rule or not. The chief executive can’t leave his state unprotected. That’s why many question his ability to continue to lead. I certainly go back and forth on it. Then I think about the fact that nothing happened, even though some have stirred up a hornet’s nest worthy of a calamity.

I’m not simply saying “no harm, no foul.” Much embarrassment was heaped on South Carolina after the governor dumped his SLED detail, lied to staff and misled us all to go off gallivanting in Argentina.

But here’s the thing. In this state where the governor in general — and Mr. Sanford in particular — has little power, if there had been even a hint of an emergency, it would have been taken care of. Those same vague rules some are complaining need to be changed to clarify succession and other issues would have been used to put Mr. Bauer in charge.

There may well need to be some clarification in state law about succession. But lawmakers had better be careful not to make changes based solely on their response to Gov. Sanford.

As serious as this matter is, it’s been injected with an extra dose of venom because of how people feel about Mr. Sanford, whose disappearing act came at the worst time possible, and not just because it was over Father’s Day weekend and he was away from his four boys.

The governor had just come out of a legislative session marked by a grueling fight over federal stimulus funds. Not only had the fight further strained Mr. Sanford’s poor relationship with the GOP-controlled Legislature, but many everyday Joes and Josephines, some of whom were already angered by the governor’s threat to delay unemployment benefits in a spat with the state’s unemployment commission, had grown weary of this governor.

When he went missing, it gave rivals an opportunity to stoke the fires and whip people — some already had been calling, ridiculously I might add, for his impeachment or resignation because of his wrong-headed stance on the stimulus — into a frenzy.

The governor many now love to hate would get no benefit of the doubt.

Sen. Jake Knotts led the pack. There’s no love lost between these two. The governor campaigned to defeat the Lexington County Republican in the last election.

Mr. Knotts and others have called for an investigation into the 2008 Argentina trip. Some people want to know whether Mr. Sanford committed an impeachable offense by leaving town the way he did. I doubt there are going to be any clear-cut answers.

Let’s hope the governor has come clean on everything; if he hasn’t, now is the time. Other folks ought to come clean as well.

Take, for example, Mr. Knotts. He wanted Mr. Sanford’s head because the governor had left town without giving notice. When Mr. Sanford admitted to his infidelity and asked for forgiveness, Mr. Knotts was one of the first on national TV saying he had forgiven him and that he wanted to help him. Now, Mr. Knotts is after the governor again. What gives?

Those looking to make political hay out of this — whether they’re Republicans settling old scores or attempting to better position themselves or their preferred gubernatorial candidate or Democrats trying to sully the GOP to gain a political advantage — should tread lightly.

If we’re not careful, this already-shameful affair could turn into an ugly political brawl far removed from a debate over good governance and responsible leadership. When it’s all said and done, our political landscape could look like a hurricane indeed had swept through our state.

Reach Mr. Bolton at (803) 771-8631 or wbolton@thestate.com.

Get The State newspaper delivered to your home. Click here to subscribe.