Loading ...
ALLEGED OFFENSES MAY NOT RISE TO LEGAL LEVEL FOR REMOVAL, ‘SILVER BULLET’ STILL OUT THERE
The talk of the town in Columbia over the last two months has centered around one thing: disgraced Gov. Mark Sanford.
Recently, many folks have begun to ask if there are enough votes in the State House to impeach him over allegations that he used state aircraft for personal travel, violated state law by using high-priced airfare, and didn’t report the use of private aircraft. Some House members have even begun drafting articles of impeachment.
But all of that may be irrelevant, because few people have bothered to consider state law — in particular, whether Sanford’s offenses, guilty or not, deem him impeachable in the first place.
Article XV of the South Carolina Constitution only provides for impeachment “in cases of serious crimes or serious misconduct in office by officials elected on a statewide basis, state judges, and such other state officers as may be designated by law.”
The wording is somewhat vague, but it raises an important question: Do Sanford’s ethical and legal violations rise to the level of “serious crimes” or “serious misconduct in office”?
The answer depends on who you ask. Two different state Constitutional experts gave The Palmetto Scoop differing opinions on whether Sanford could legally be impeached.
“A serious crime and a serious misconduct is whatever the House say they are,” said one of the experts. “They can impeach for whatever they want to.”
The other expert, however, largely disagreed.
“[Legislators] have a better case going after him for dereliction of duty,” he said, referencing the governor’s five day disappearance to Argentina to continue an affair with a woman there. “But even there it’s hard to make a solid case that what Sanford has done thus far is ’serious’ as defined by the Constitution.”
But if legislators really wanted to impeach Sanford, they would forget his possible travel violations and forget his leaving the state without anyone in control for five days, and instead focus on something else entirely; something I would refer to as the “Silver Bullet” for impeachment.
What is it? More on that to come soon…
This is about politics. Pure and simple.
Has Sanford done wrong. Yes. Has he done anything worse than Bauer, or many others? No. Do I consider that an excuse or pardon for him? Hell no!
But when sober people sit back and look at this they will come to the conclusion that the people of SC are doing a poor job of picking its leaders, and that we need to do a better job. While our elected leaders may be getting the headlines for their shenanigans, we must look inward, and wonder how we continue to elect such foolish men.
Sanford, Bauer, etc., deserve a butt kicking. They deserve heckling and the rest of it. But we have better things to do than play politics like this and stymie state government from doing its job.
Unless more serious infractions are found, I say we move on, and resolve to remedy these problems at the ballot box.
If secretly leaving state for 10 days without communications isn’t serious misconduct, then the words have no meaning at all
So does this theory have something to do with drinking Coors Light?
The man had a marital affair. Perhaps he had marital problems no one knew about. I say give the man a break.
Andrew Bower is the one that should be impeached and never even allowed to run for office. How many times has he been busted for speeding drunk that could have taken the lives of many – and is is only his fortune that such did not happen.
Now Bower smells the opportunity to move in like a shark and take Sanfords office. What a looser.
The attacks against Sanford are generated by those that didn’t like him to begin with, and now they have something to go after him.
The man had an affair. Wrong yes, but a big crime – I don’t think so. Give the man a break.
And the girl with whome he had an affair? I’d like to see how many men could escape the seduction of a fox like that.
Very very few. Very very few.
Charles Parks
Can I get An Amen for Charles Parks?
@ Jeff Carpenter,
No, you can’t get an “Amen” for Charles Parks, but we do need to get him an English teacher and a subscription to The State.
@ Fogle,
Why no names for your con law “experts”?
Thanks Rinaldi, but I surrr don’t need a subscription to the State – I’m boycotting that ragedy paper.
But I will take you up on my spelling !
How many times has Andre “Bower” been charged with DWI?
Not only no but hell no! Read the law… The only thing those advocates for such are doing is to the detriment of the SCGOP. In the end the dumb ass political opportunists will do themselves and the party in and for what?
[...] the claims are expected to be released soon. Some state legislators, however, are already drafting impeachment letters and insiders say there may be enough votes to remove the governor from office. Posted in SC [...]
[...] Republicans — who have recently dominated national headlines with the well-publicized antics of Gov. Mark Sanford and a nationally-televised outburst by Congressman Joe Wilson in which he [...]
[...] announcement came as Sanford was in the midst of a State Ethics Committee investigation over allegations that he used state aircraft for personal travel, violated state law by using [...]
[...] proceedings. In other words, Sanford doesn’t want the General Assembly, which is considering impeaching the governor, to be able to see the results of the Ethics Commission’s [...]