This is a printer friendly version of an article from
www.goupstate.com
To print this article open the file menu and choose
Print.
Back
Article published Mar 18, 2004
Sanford strikes for reform and against runaway privilege by vetoing
bill
Gov. Mark Sanford struck a blow for legislative reform
this week when he vetoed an important economic development bill that was
burdened with unnecessary amendments.Sanford wanted the economic development
bill. It is an important part of his agenda to bring more and better jobs to the
state. But he didn't want the amendments lawmakers tacked on to it.By vetoing
the bill, Sanford sent a clear message to lawmakers that he will not be forced
to accept their pet projects just because they can tack them onto important
legislation. The governor's veto was aimed at the selfishness of lawmakers who
place a higher priority on local interests and their own re-elections than they
do on the best interests of the state.The economic development bill is
important. It sets up a venture capital operation that could bring more
businesses to the state. It includes measures that will build up the research
efforts of the state's universities. It was expected to play a leading role in
luring a new plant to Greenville.That's why it was expected to pass the House
and the Senate by wide margins. And for those reasons, the governor was supposed
to be under immense pressure to sign it.So lawmakers pounced on it. They wanted
to get their pet projects added to the bill, regardless of whether those
projects are good for the state.For instance, an amendment to the bill would
make the University of South Carolina Sumter a four-year school rather than a
two-year institution. Everyone in charge of higher education for the state is
against this idea. It's not an efficient use of the state's higher education
resources.But when Sumter lawmakers want this done, other members of the House
and Senate give their support because it's something Sumter lawmakers can take
home to their community. And other legislators will want Sumter's lawmakers'
support for their own pet projects. So the General Assembly passes it in the
bill.To his credit, Sanford held firm and vetoed the bill. He opposed the united
front of lawmakers, who were defending their privilege against the concerns of
responsible government.The reality of the situation is that the General Assembly
will override the veto. Lawmakers know that, and Sanford knows that.The outcry
from lawmakers is not about the danger that the state will not have this law
enacted. Their outrage stems from the fact that Sanford stepped, in a very
public way, on their prerogative.The governor had the temerity to declare that
lawmakers should not always get their way on pet projects in their districts
when they conflict with the priorities of the rest of the state. That's why
they're upset.