Litmus Tests

By fitsnews • on February 20, 2009
Comment Print

Which Republican members of the S.C. Senate are true conservatives?

And which ones only play that role on the campaign trail, or when the mainstream media microphones are set to “record?”

The breakdown between these two camps became a bit clearer earlier this week when the Senate overwhelmingly passed a politically-motivated, knee-jerk, big government “solution” to the current crisis at our battered and bleeding State Ports Authority (SPA).

The status quo bill – championed by Senate Majority Leader Glenn McConnell – does absolutely nothing to address the flawed, socialist business model that is at the heart of the Ports Authority’s problems.

Instead, it would place the agency under a virtual legislative stranglehold and remove the executive branch’s right to remove board members at its discretion – a key accountability component that Gov. Mark Sanford, for whatever reason, has failed to utilize during his six years in office.

But just because Sanford has refused to remove big government liberals like Bill Stern from the Ports Authority Board, that doesn’t mean South Carolina should move to a legislatively-dominated system that strips away accountability from future governors.

In fact, Sen. Tom Davis (R-Beaufort) and S.C. Rep. Jimmy Merrill (R-Charleston) have the best idea, which is to get rid of the Ports Authority board altogether and replace it with a Chief Executive who reports directly to the governor.

Of course that would make too much sense for our ever-meddling State Senate.

Anyway, the breakdown of Republican votes on this bill represents the first real snapshot of where the GOP is heading ideologically this session.

Not surprisingly, Senators Hugh Leatherman, Luke Rankin and Billy O’Dell (all former Democrats) enthusiastically embraced McConnell’s bill, along with longtime RINO’s Thomas Alexander, Ronnie Cromer, Jake Knotts and Larry Martin.

Those seven Senators might as well put “D’s” by their names, people.

Paul Campell and Ray Cleary also voted for the bill, which surprised us, but not as much as the votes cast by three Senators from very conservative districts – Mike Fair, Wes Hayes and Harvey Peeler.

The biggest surprise of all, however, was the fact that Larry Grooms, typically a very consistent conservative, “volunteered” to serve as the bill’s lead sponsor.

Throughout the debate, Grooms repeatedly put himself in unfamiliar (and dangerous) territory by extolling the virtues of a government-run port system as opposed to a free market model.

Those are quotes we have no doubt will come back to haunt him – unless of course he reverses course.

McConnell did the same thing, which will probably put a damper on those Goldwater credentials he’s so fond of invoking.

So … which Republicans took the pro-business, pro-free market, pro-accountability position by voting against McConnell’s bill?

These twelve: Lee Bright, Kevin Bryant, John Courson, Tom Davis, Shane Martin, Shane Massey, Mick Mulvaney, Mike Rose, Greg Ryberg, Phillip Shoopman, David Thomas and Danny Verdin.

Of those, Courson and Thomas were pleasant surprises, while the other ten all seem to be consistent conservative votes.

Incidentally, these twelve Republicans were joined by two Democrats, Sumter’s Phil Leventis and Democratic gubernatorial candidate Vincent Sheheen, who obviously doesn’t want to unnecessarily limit the appointment power of the office he’s seeking.

Republican Chip Campsen did not vote, although he would likely have fallen in with the conservative camp.

Assuming that to be the case, the GOP breakdown on this litmus test vote would be dead even, 13 big government backers versus 13 true conservatives, although we expect there to always be some movement at the margins.

We’ll continue to follow this so-called “Republican majority” in the Senate as it votes next week on another critical conservative litmus test, Sen. Hugh Leatherman’s Tax Realignment Commission proposal.

Stay tuned …

Comments

By StupidShouldHurtMore (SSHM) on February 20th, 2009 at 12:04 pm

Ryberg as a true conservative? Are you kidding me?

Did you miss the piece of “nanny-state legislation” he has put forth? For those that have missed it, read on:

SC Senator: If You Weigh More, You Pay More
http://www.wjbf.com/jbf/news/state_regional/state_govtpolitics/article/sc_senator_if_you_weigh_more_you_pay_more/10258/

What of personal responsibility? Why do we need the government to tell us we are fat? Don’t stand among the conservatives crying for smaller and less intrusive government only to turn around and start labeling people with a government-mandated label.

Conservative? No way. Hypocrite? All the way.

- SSHM

By Just Checking on February 20th, 2009 at 12:06 pm

Lee Bright, Kevin Bryant, Mick Mulvaney, Mike Rose, Greg Ryberg, Phillip Shoopman, and Danny Verdin —- the sooner they are unelected the better we all are

By sid on February 20th, 2009 at 2:27 pm

“…remove the executive branch’s right…”

If you are going to put forth the impression you are the true compass for all things “conservative,” you better start getting the language correct. The executive branch has “powers” and “authority.” The people have “rights.” Rights, it is understood, exist even without whatever form of government is in place. Whatever governement that is in place has the power and/or authority to do certain things, and in a true republic, this power and/or authority is granted to the government by the people.

By fitsnews on February 20th, 2009 at 2:37 pm

Sid-

You need to get laid. That’s the most nitpick comment we’ve ever heard.

We are “power to the people” more than any news outlet this state has ever seen, which is why morons like you are grasping at straws to find anything you can micro-analyze and misrepresent in a desperate effort to blunt the momentum.

You’re trying to slow down a rocket with a rubber band, dude.

-FITS

By sid on February 20th, 2009 at 3:36 pm

That’s the best you’ve got? I’m disappointed. I know your “conservative” credentials are focused predominantly on money and how government spends it, but that’s not all it takes to be “conservative.” Your definition of a RINO is pretty myopic, as it seems to ignore many issues that are key to what most consider to be “conservative” standards.

That said, if you’re so thin-skinned you can’t take a little jab when you screw up a pretty basic concept like who has rights and what does not, then it may be you who needs to release a little fluid.

What, exactly, am I trying to slow down? Did I question your stance on the differing views for correcting the problems with your Port Authority? I don’t think so, but perhaps you can point me to that passage where I did.

Or am I trying to slow down the “rocket” that is FITS? By correcting you when you misapplied a term in a way that most true conservatives would find problematic? Just accept that you screwed up, and I’m sure your “rocket” will do just fine.

Keep proclaiming to yourselves that you are “power to the people” all you want. Sometimes I see it, and sometimes I don’t. If you want to call me a “moron,” that’s fine. I’ll shed a little tear, if it makes you feel better. But in reality, I couldn’t possibly care less what you think of my mental abilities (or, at least, what you want to project as what you think). I’ll call you out when I see you screw up in the future, whether it’s a big mistake or something nitpicky.

To summarize, you screwed up, I didn’t say anything about what should be done to fix the Port Authority, and you can’t seem to take it when someone points out you screwed up, so you lashed out blindly. Good job, if that’s what your job requires of you.

By Silence Dogood on February 20th, 2009 at 6:48 pm

FITS, Thanks for another hard hitting piece (of crap) article. Based on your backasswards analysis, numerous Republicans were cast into the neither world of being RINO’s. Therefore, does that mean at the same time we are supposed to belive that Sheheen and Leventis are not “conservativ” or maybe “DINO’s?” We will just assume Sheheen is running for governor and Leventis is not.

Yet, maybe…just maybe…and I am going to go out on a limb here, as much as you try to make complex, nebulous and often very intricate issues into true/false, black/white questions with clear colorcoded graphs of what is “‘conservative’ or ‘liberal’ people” perhaps the world, and particularly the messy world of politics and running a state, just aint that easy. And to your chagrin, just doesn’t break down as simply as you might like.

By baker on February 20th, 2009 at 7:56 pm

Will’s handed out two or three “moron” tags today.

GOP in-fighting is kind of an interesting deal. I sometimes wonder if folks wouldn’t be happier if we had a legitimate two-party system in our state.

By Silence Dogood on February 21st, 2009 at 4:43 am

FITS, I am still curious to hear, if this vote was a “litmus test” as you have entiled the entire piece, for who is conservative and who is liberal – Then does this mean Sens. Sheehen and Leventis are conservatives?

Leave a Comment