Letters to the Editor

The beauty of New York has lured Haley away from her home state of South Carolina

Keynote speaker Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley addresses the 73rd Annual Alfred E. Smith Memorial Foundation Dinner Thursday, Oct. 18, 2018, in New York.
Keynote speaker Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley addresses the 73rd Annual Alfred E. Smith Memorial Foundation Dinner Thursday, Oct. 18, 2018, in New York. AP file photo

A few weeks ago, U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley received much media attention when she announced plans to convene her fellow delegates for meetings in several locations in South Carolina so they could appreciate the wonderful attributes of her home state. Now we learn that she has sold her residence here to remain in New York City. One is reminded of modified lyrics of that grand old song from the last century, “How you gonna keep ’em down on the farm (After they’ve seen Paree)?” Stay tuned.

Cermette Clardy Jr.

Isle of Palms

McMaster’s old school politics is status quo

Henry McMaster’s election insured that South Carolina’s socioeconomic and quality of life data will remain some of the worse in the country.

He is showing a propensity to appoint former state leaders from his generation to key positions. Note the appointments to the Ports Authority and Commission on Higher Education chairmanships. Where are the new ideas coming from if you simply reinstitute the old guard. If I am remembering correctly, South Carolina as a whole has not fared well under the last 30 years of Republican dominance. Wed this to the allegiance to the Trump agenda and one knows a train wreck is coming. Trickle down ain’t working, and bigotry and racism don’t pay bills.

Farmers, due to tariffs, now receive public welfare to not compete. Where are these mythical new manufacturing jobs? Did your cost of living go up? Did your taxes go down or simply transfer to state and local municipalities? Are you better off? Is disenfranchisement and voter suppression sustainable, long-range strategies? Do you want better for your children or to continue to reinstitute the confederacy?

Sadly, it will take the collapse of the Trump regime to prove once again that our leaders don’t make good decisions. The base got played, and now all of us must pay.

Stanley Cooks


Voters were right not to allow governor to chose SC education superintendent

The staff writers for both The State and The Free Times have expressed their disappointment that the voters did not choose to make the S.C. superintendent of education a cabinet position appointed by the governor. I sensed that they believe that the poor, ignorant voters just didn’t understand the issues involved. Former S.C. superintendent of education Dr. James Rex spoke to several of these issues in his Dec. 2, 2018, column. I would like to underscore a couple of points.

I would suggest that many voters may feel as I do. We want an experienced professional educator in this job because the quality of our children’s lives will depend, to a large degree, on the quality of the education they receive. We believe that the education business is different from other enterprises, and that the person in charge needs to truly understand how it should operate. We have observed that the quality of political appointees is uneven (remember Michael Brown, FEMA director during Hurricane Katrina?).

At the present time, we rely on the political parties to evaluate and present candidates from which the voters can choose. In my view, this system has been reasonably successful in providing our state with the experienced professional educator that we need in this position. Bottom line: The position of superintendent of education position is really important, and the populace doesn’t wish to delegate this decision to the governor.

Andrew Gowan

West Columbia

The State publishes a cross section of the letters we receive from South Carolinians in order to provide a forum for our community and also to allow our community to get a good look at itself, for good or bad. The letters represent the views of the letter writers, not necessarily of The State.