Remember when South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford wanted to use $700 million in federal “stimulus” monies to pay down the state’s debt?
And, remember how he was villified by Democrats nationally and a host of state officials, saying he was gonna put teachers and prisoners on the street because the money … sob! … won’t be there … wail! … to pay salaries …. moan! … and keep criminals in jail .;.. boo hoooooooo! ?
Remember?
The Wall Street Journal reported Thursday the White House is considering applying some money from the $700 billion financial bailout bill to deficit reduction, and that Cabinet agencies have been asked to submit two budget plans for next year, one that freezes spending at existing levels and one that trims spending by 5 percent. Congress has long history of taking those requests and piling on money for programs it favors. The only way Obama can prevent Congress from imposing its will – a tactic he has been reluctant to do during his presidency – would be to threaten vetoes.
Rewind five months:
Sanford initially tried to require that any stimulus money pay down the state debt, a stance rejected by the Obama administration.
And what did Democrats think of Sanford’s idea?
South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford is being attacked by the Democratic National Committee (DNC) because he wishes to use the 700 Million dollars his state has received from the Stimulus package to pay down the states debt rather then develop Government agencies to spend the money that has been allocated for programs that will be funded for two years.
The Democratic National Committee has released a new television ad entitled “Playing Politics” that calls on South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford to stop playing politics with federal job creation and economic recovery funds.
And, of course, leading the Democrats charge was South Carolina’s own Representative Jim Clyburn:
Clyburn charged during Wednesday’s call with reporters that Sanford’s move amounts to “political posturing.”
“If he were looking out for the state he would be looking out for the people of the state,” said Clyburn. “He’s got a political agenda that runs contrary to the needs of his constituents.”
Clyburn wants South Carolina’s legislature to try to gain access to the funds by passing a concurrent resolution. The measure would be passed on a simple majority vote and could not be vetoed by the governor.
Congressman Clyburn, President Obama called from Europe. He said to tell you to “Sit! Roll over! Sit up! Speak!” And then go piss on the legs of those folks who don’t want to spend $700 BILLION to pay down debt. OH…. DON’T FORGET … if they disagree, do like you did last time and call them RACISTS!
Great post! The hypocrisy is shown in the brightest light by this. Thanks!
I want the Fed to print up enough money so that no one has to pay income taxes for this year.
Considering what else they’ve done, would there be a better way to stimulate the economy?
Sanford may have wanted to reduce the deficit but he also is on record saying he wanted to ” shore up” state retirement funds.
He never clearly articulated what he wanted to do other than not help hurting people and that was THE problem.
Incidentally, Fidelity Management and Research dba Fidelity Investments is where a large amount of “the people’s” money is located. It’s not a coincidence that the lawmakers and Judges money is being held by some other company.
Thanks for a great post. I find it interesting that some things are coming to light after Gov. Sanford has been harassed and every little mistake has been amplified by the Misstate. I had to respond about funds for the State Retirement. I hope you remember that it is grossly underfunded and the Gov. was trying to make it more sustainable. How about the Employment Security Commission. I see that some members now think the Dept. head should be a cabinet position. And as was so eloqently stated in this post. We do need to try and pay off debt. Do you realize that had we done so, we could probably replaced that debt with new obligations at a more favorable interest rate due to the current economy. Gov. Sanford will not go down as one of the best Governors, but I believe he may be one of the most saavy governors. Gov. Campbell accomplished more but he did not have to fight the Legislature and the media all the time either.
I like to think of Governor Sanford as a stepping stone in the right direction in regard to his politics. It’s a shame he proved so seriously flawed in his character but I have to admit that he has done some good if only symbolic things in office here and in D.C. What could he have accomplished as a hard worker if he had been so inclined instead of spending his energy on an illicit love affair?
And we really have to put some of his actions in a historical light: he actually stood up to the federalis and REFUSED money!
How often does that happen on such a large scale in this fascist-socialist nation–much less involving our statehouse full of corrupt money-sucking vampires? Yeah, it was purely symbolic considering the power structure in this state but he did do it.
On a related note: why are people who refuse to suckle at the federal teat scorned by those that drain the pig dry and then demand more?
Is it shame forcing them to be defensive or is it some perverted ideal of noble intentions that they hoist high like the skull and crossbones as their banner?