|
|
 |
email this
print this
reprint or license thisSanford budget veto overidden
Legislators make quick day’s work of restoring spending plan in its entirety
By JOHN O’CONNOR
johnoconnor@thestate.com
They came. They overrode. They left.
During a one-day special session that turned into a flurry of veto overrides, lawmakers worked quickly Wednesday to overturn Gov. Mark Sanford’s veto of the state’s $6.6 billion budget less than a day earlier.
Lawmakers also advanced bills ranging from price-gouging rules to economic development incentives for manufacturing, while sustaining some vetoes.
The abbreviated session followed Tuesday’s primary. A handful of House members who lost a day earlier offered emotional goodbyes.
But it was Sanford’s sole veto of the entire budget, rather than using his line-item veto power to single out unnecessary spending, that drew the most attention.
Because he could not trim enough from the budget without also cutting essential, intertwined spending, Sanford said he instead vetoed the entire budget.
The veto was announced late Tuesday, leaving lawmakers perplexed about how they should respond Wednesday.
With just two weeks until the fiscal year begins, House Ways and Means chairman Dan Cooper, R-Anderson, said the House and Senate had two options: Override the veto or shut down state government.
“It’s a big cop out,” Cooper said of Sanford not using line-item powers.
Sanford defended his decision Wednesday, saying he seldom takes the easy route.
Rapid budget growth the last two years — among the top five fastest-growing, according to the National Association of State Budget Officers — will mean budget cuts, Sanford said, if the economy weakens.
The governor pegged budget growth at 13 percent this year. Legislators said it was just over 9 percent. The two differ on what figure should be used for the base budget.
The budget needed to be about $400 million smaller to reach his target of 5.65 percent growth, a function of population growth plus inflation. But Sanford refused to say how the Legislature should cut $400 million.
He did identify $50 million he would have cut, as well as $85 million in savings. Sanford’s January budget totaled $5.9 billion.
Because some items are contained within larger department spending, Sanford said he could not trim the budget without also cutting essential services.
Sanford did not expect the Legislature to cut spending as much as he wanted.
“The point is not could you get there, but could you get to some extent there,” Sanford said. “There are very real limits to, at the end of the day, our mechanical ability to impact the budget.”
Sanford spokesman Joel Sawyer said the governor “laid out very clearly” where the Legislature should go with his original executive budget. Lawmakers noted most of that budget was contained within the final package Sanford vetoed.
In the Senate, members called Sanford “irresponsible” for his attempt to halt state services.
Sanford allies in the Legislature, such as Rep. Nathan Ballentine, R-Richland, were disappointed by his choice. Ballentine said he would have rather had an opportunity to sustain individual vetoes of less needed items.
Rep. Nikki Haley, R-Lexington, said she wanted more information from the governor.
“The details are what makes good governing,” she said. “You can’t just say after months of work, ‘I don’t like what you did.’”
Expecting dozens of budget vetoes, lawmakers had allowed themselves three days to complete their work. With just one budget veto, they adjourned the session Wednesday night.
Only one major issue was left incomplete. House and Senate negotiators tried to work out a compromise to limit governments’ ability to take private property. House members refused to give the two-thirds vote needed on one piece to the legislation to approve the compromise.
Before adjourning, Reps. Joe Brown, D-Richland, Becky Martin, R-Anderson, and Thomas Rhoad, D-Orangeburg, all long-serving lawmakers who lost primaries Tuesday, said goodbye to the House.
Reach O’Connor at (803) 771-8358.
