The Local Paper Goes After South Carolina's Governor: Boos for stimulus drama

Rather than continue to play political games with $700 million in federal stimulus funding for schools, Gov. Mark Sanford should have simply agreed to use the money as intended. The drama grows wearisome, and public schools and colleges need the assistance.

On Friday, the governor’s office insisted that it had met the deadline for stimulus funding by filing paperwork with the White House. Maybe so, but Mr. Sanford continues to maintain that the money won’t go to schools, as Congress intended. State Education Superintendent Jim Rex rightly questions whether the governor’s latest gambit will pass White House review.

“The White House has made it clear, on two separate occasions, that federal stabilization funds can’t be used to retire state debt,” Dr. Rex said. “These funds are aimed at creating jobs and saving jobs. For the governor to get his way, the General Assembly would be forced to create some sort of bookkeeping sleight-of-hand that, believe me, the federal government isn’t going to permit because the law approved by Congress doesn’t permit it.”

Nevertheless, Gov. Sanford continues to insist that restoring school budgets with stimulus funds would be a dangerous precedent for the state. In a column on our Commentary page, he essentially declares that the budget problem doesn’t exist.

Read it all.

print

Posted in * Economics, Politics, * South Carolina, Economy, Politics in General, State Government, The Fiscal Stimulus Package of 2009

6 comments on “The Local Paper Goes After South Carolina's Governor: Boos for stimulus drama

  1. tgs says:

    Why don’t we just go ahead and abolish state government and turn complete control over to the federal government? I’m sure that it wouldn’t bother the “local” paper at all. In fact, they would probably applaud it. Indeed, that’s where we’re headed anyway. Ah well, so much for the U.S. Constitution and states rights.

  2. Dan Crawford says:

    Another ideologue contributes to the “common weal”, and adds to the ever-widening legacy which only guarantees that rather than doing what has to be done to fix the mess we’re in, some states will continue to be left at the mercy of those who love ideological purity and personal political ambition more than a strong and compassionate society. Perhaps the good governor can tap (voluntarily, of course) the bonuses of his good corporate friends to fund the schools. And he could engage the PTAs to have more bake sales. Maybe he could increase the ticket prices for high school athletics events (building more impressive fields and scoreboards would at least increase construction jobs).

  3. Sarah1 says:

    Woo hoo! That’s my governor — go Mark Sanford!!!

    He is dead right — SC needs to live on its own budget and refuse the stimulus money. The only problem with Sanford is his not refusing MORE of it.

    But wait — maybe Sanford could just be [i]fired[/i] by Washington if he doesn’t play ball with them. That’s a good idea. Maybe Washington could simply appoint a governor more suitable to their needs once he is ousted.

  4. Grandmother says:

    Funny thing, seems we elected Mark Sanford to the Congress, strongly believing he would be a fiscal conservative, and then as Governor he hasn’t changed. SHAME on the “beggars” in the streets (TV etc.).
    Do they actually believe the Federal Government has money of its’ own to distribute?

    It is a sick, sick scheme, and it seems even those who know better, are falling in line to promote the Federal Takeover of everything.
    Grandmother in Sc

  5. Jeffersonian says:

    Don’t you just love a guy who takes your (and your kids’ and grandkids’) money and then tells you what you have to do to get some of it back?

    What’s the purpose of the federal government taking money from states and then block-granting it back to them? Why not just let states tax themselves?

  6. Eric Swensson says:

    [blockquote] Another ideologue contributes to the “common weal”, and adds to the ever-widening legacy which only guarantees that rather than doing what has to be done to fix the mess we’re in, some states will continue to be left at the mercy of those who love ideological purity and personal political ambition more than a strong and compassionate society. [/blockquote]

    Ideology is used twice above but I am not so sure that “strong and compassionate society” isn’t an unatainable ideal.

    Our politicians and our political discourse are such a problem today I don’t think any one knows how to “fix” any thing. The best thing we could ask is to be left alone, and, of course, that is not the way we are moving.