Actually, the governor's 22 vetoes only involved a total of $7.6 million in expenditures, and that includes the $5 million he described as "wish list" money. Those funds were put into the budget by the Senate and approved by the conference committee without the sanction of the Board of Economic Advisors. Hopes were pinned on getting $10 million in one-time money from insurance reserve accounts that would go to the state if, as anticipated, a number of mutual insurance companies change their ownership structure.

The economic advisors were only willing to sanction an estimated $5 million from that source, and the governor vetoed the other $5 million, which had been intended to ease the pain of cuts to such agencies as the departments of Social Services and Public Safety. Maybe the state will get lucky and that $5 million will materialize between now and January. But the agencies shouldn't spend it now as though it were money in the bank. The governor was right to make them face an even tighter budget reality now rather than later.

The governor also vetoed a long list of fund transfers to general operations totaling about $2 million. To the applause of Senate President Pro Tem Glenn McConnell, the vetoes restored interest funds to a number of trust accounts, including the Nongame Wildlife and Natural Areas Funds. Sen. McConnell noted that he had been able to save only some of those trust fund monies, including one for Patriot's Point, during the budget deliberations.

One veto eliminated the two-person staff of the Commission on Women -- which will remain in existence -- at a savings of nearly $100,000. The executive director already had resigned, and the remaining staffer will be offered a job with the governor's office, which has a number of vacancies. The governor's office will provide any needed staff work for the commission.

The veto of such items as $60,000 for the S.C. Leadership program made an excellent point. According to the governor, such programs should be funded totally by the participants and/or their organizations.

It should be noted that this governor was in the unusual position of knowing his vetoes would stick until at least mid-January when the Legislature returns. That's because the Senate voted to go home before the vetoes had to be returned.

Lawmakers were well aware that under the circumstances the governor could have wielded a far bigger veto stick. Indeed, the Republican leadership of both bodies was complimentary of the restraint and the philosophical approach he used.

House Speaker David Wilkins noted the governor left intact the legislative priorities -- education and health care -- and said he doesn't expect any of the vetoes to be overridden early next year. Rep. Bobby Harrell, chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, talked about the "night and day" difference in attitude in this year's budget vetoes and the "attack mode" of recent years under the previous governor. That doesn't mean Rep. Harrell is happy with all Mr. Sanford has done, but he is optimistic that most of his disagreements are fixable. Where he and the governor may remain most at odds is over the actual writing of the budget.

Keep in mind that the governor only has the power to veto distinct sections or items of the budget. Rep. Harrell's committee clearly has tried to make the budget as veto-proof as possible by lumping numerous appropriations together and labeling them as one item. Citing the balance-of-powers doctrine, the governor asked that in the future the Legislature do a better job of separating the budget items so that he can properly exercise his power. That's what we call a reasonable request.