Assuming it is called into session, the S.C. House of Representatives would have no trouble reaching the two-thirds majority necessary to impeach embattled Gov. Mark Sanford, multiple lawmakers have told FITS.
The only question? Whether or not S.C. House Speaker Bobby Harrell will ever let that happen.
“If all the Dems are voting to impeach, we(‘ve) got over 100 right now,” said one GOP lawmaker who attended this weekend’s contentious Caucus retreat in Myrtle Beach, S.C, at which not a single Republican spoke in the governor’s defense.
That assessment was echoed by two of the lawmakers’ Republican colleagues, both of whom also attended the retreat. Clearly, that’s more than enough pro-impeachment votes to suspend Sanford from office and send charges against him to the State Senate, which would then vote to either reinstate him or remove him from office.
Here’s the math …
The House would need 83 votes to impeach Sanford – meaning that at least 32 Republicans would have to join 51 Democrats. In the Senate, 31 votes would then be needed to remove the governor from office, a figure that most observers agree is a “done deal” given the intense hatred for the governor that has long existed in that chamber.
Add it up, and it would certainly appear that the governor’s days are numbered.
Speaker Harrell, however, is giving the governor a stay of political execution by refusing to go along with what appears to be the overwhelming majority of his Caucus.
In fact, Harrell refused to even permit House Republicans to circulate a letter (Round Robin-style) calling on the governor to step down, fueling even more speculation about his motivations for slamming the brakes on impeachment. Lawmakers are now openly speculating as to “what Sanford has” on Harrell, with that speculation beginning to make its way back to us.
The one Harrell backer we spoke with said that the Speaker was simply “keeping his options open” and that doing so would “enhance is negotiating power” in the weeks and months to come.
Stay tuned …
By Harrell Smarrell August 30, 2009 at 4:54 pm
The Governor is creating some collateral damage with his past and present antics. Nikki Haley is now “toast” where before she has a solid shot at 800 Richland. Ralph Normans re-election “shoe in” status is now in question and Bobby Harrell’s days as Speaker could be numbered if fails to lead on this issue.
By GamecockDude August 30, 2009 at 5:29 pm
If a majority of Republicans want to impeach, how can Harrell stop it?
I am not asking why? I am asking a question on the process/powers.
Is there no way under state law that a majority of legislators can call a special session?
I mean, what if the Governor was crazy, but the Speaker of the House was in a coma? It just doesn’t happen?
By Kyle August 30, 2009 at 5:57 pm
I heard there are three serious considerations concerning impeachment.
1. The investigations need to be started, finished, and published. Any clear instances of illegality (or not) must be clearly detailed, and the public must be well informed. Then decisions can be taken on fact, not rumor. Until then, talking about this stuff is a bit dodgy.
2. There is significant worry that Sanford’s problems, and Bauer’s problems are nearly identical (excepting the affair). In fact, several house members are afraid that as soon as Bauer takes office the investigations will begin on him…and he is at least as guilty as Sanford, if not more. One sage says Bauer’s non-disclosure problem is far more significant than Sanford’s.
3. Certain “key” legislators have significant unrealized ethics violations, especially relating to non-disclosure of anything of value (over $25.00> As people begin to look at the process, these people will be exposed.
Impeaching one governor is difficult, and stressful. Impeaching two is a disaster…and will leave the general assembly leadership looking as inept and crooked as the two impeached Governors.
By fitsnews August 30, 2009 at 6:04 pm
Kyle-
If what you say is true, then we are going to be busy, busy beavers around here.
-FITS
By Kyle August 30, 2009 at 6:09 pm
Mr. Fits,
I think you are already the busiest man in SC.
Kyle
By Quiet Voice of Reason August 30, 2009 at 6:20 pm
If Harrell lets impeachment procedures go forward, I’ll buy any Republican a drink or two or three. He simply won’t. They’ll come up with all kinds of excuses, but it won’t happen. So much for representing the people of SC. Why upset such a perfect balance of power?
Oh, and they all have ethics violations on each other. We knew that already. Let me think….. they’ll have this resolved in time for the 2010 election….
By beavermethis August 30, 2009 at 6:20 pm
The only “busy” Will Folks is is with actual beavers.
By Mark "The Sword" Sanfeld August 30, 2009 at 6:27 pm
I say “Bring It On!!!” If you think that dysfunctional collective of rejects from the Land of Misfit Boys can take me on, I say “more power to ‘em.” So it is written: Let he who is without sin cast the first condom. I shall smite you and your descendants with gallons of leftover gubernatorial tanning goo as I fart in your general direction. I am living art and I am assembling my greatest masterpiece. You shall never diminish me. Travel problems??? Catch me if you can. I am the Chosen One, and I choose to continue the journey of a lifetime on my own exclusive esoteric plane.
All together now…. “BURNING DOWN THE HOUSE!!!”……….. Word.
By Mark "The Sword" Sanfeld August 30, 2009 at 8:00 pm
Oh, BTW, Will o’ friend o’ mine:
Remember how I got all sanctimonious on your ass in your time of need after giving me the best years of your life? Innocent until proven guilty, right? No harm, no foul, si? Least that’s how I remember it….. Amigos por vida!
By Candi August 30, 2009 at 8:55 pm
Why doesn’t anyone report on positives of the story. A TV station taking a stance and yet nobody is jumping on it – Y? It is indeed a great perspective for the good of the people in SC.
http://www.wistv.com/global/category.asp?c=151146&clipId=&topVideoCatNo=3851&topVideoCatNoB=67010&topVideoCatNoC=125643&topVideoCatNoD=87934&topVideoCatNoE=138849
By shiya August 30, 2009 at 9:16 pm
how does the speaker get to have so much power? is there no way of getting around him?
By Not Sayin', Just Sayin' August 30, 2009 at 9:38 pm
Regardless of the charges, if Sanford is impeached and convicted, it will be for being an asshole. He has made almost no friends in the State House and he’s now given the enemies he’s loved to inflame the power to remove him from office. Although retarded and a Nancy Boy, Andre has lots of friends in the State House. If Andre did the same things as Sanford, he wouldn’t be impeached because he’s not remotely as hated or unpopular.
By Someone needs gov't education August 30, 2009 at 9:45 pm
Don’t you know the Speaker is the 3rd in line in the succession order?
By Sam O August 30, 2009 at 10:11 pm
I have it on very good authority that the Bauer people have consulted a well known lawyer to find ways to “finesse” over 70 private airplane flights which have not been disclosed to the Ethics Commission.
By Rylyn August 30, 2009 at 10:34 pm
Mark Sanford who is going through a mid-life crisis or Andre Bauer who hasn’t matured enough to have a mid-life crisis? Mmmmm are these the only choices?
By southernmapart August 30, 2009 at 10:47 pm
Hey! Here’s the deal in the Upstate.
We’ve not been too fond of some of Sanford’s policies, but overall, he’s been better for us than the majority of our disreputable legislators. If they try to impeach Sanford, some of us will be forwarding background ammo to Sanford’s office for use against the legislators during his “availability” blasts.
This is going to be a fun Fall, and it’s not even election year.
By BIN News Editorial Staff August 30, 2009 at 11:00 pm
Let’s take goob’ner sanfraud at “his word” and move on.
When sic(k) willie was charged with criminal domestic violence goober sanfraud described his actions as a “very stupid and tragic mistake.”
goober went on to say he could not condone “wrong behaviors” and that sic(k) willie’s actions were “flat out unacceptable.”
Yawn.
For the source and a great mug shot of sic(k) willie, go here:
http://www.wistv.com/global/Story.asp?s=3661510
sanfraud would be out in a “New York minute” except he would rather see Jakie as Governor before Andre. Same goes for the Legislature.
Let’s let the Ethic’s Commission do its investigation.
Yawn.
We all know that sanfraud is innocent.
Reggie Lloyd said so.
Why Mr. Lloyd even said,
“He wasn’t under polygraph at the time, so I’m going by his word.”
What?! So, let’s all go by his “word.”
It was all just a big mistake.
Besides, the next goob’ner might be an even bigger joke.
BIN News Editorial Staff
Flair and Balanced
By shiya August 30, 2009 at 11:35 pm
A nice parody of MS by Dwight. Check out the dark-haired woman in the clip; something tells me Dwight may well have the first picture of Maria in SC!!
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/08/30/mark-sanford-video-parody_n_272255.html
By Henry August 31, 2009 at 12:19 am
Harrell opposes removing Sanford because doing so would remove McConnell from his most-powerful-politician-in-the-state position.
McConnell has already been quoted, “I have my resignation letter already drafted” should this occur.
Is there a constitutional scholar who can provide his opinion on this rare (but very possible) circumstance?
McConnell and Harrell live three miles from one another, and Harrell carries McConnell’s water for him.
You heard it here first: McConnell, most powerful, may well decide everything.
– Henry
By Aprice August 31, 2009 at 8:06 am
If impeachment uncovers more “rot,” then bring it on. South Carolina has the opportunity to become the nation’s leader in “throwing-the-bums-out.” That’s the silver lining. These politicians had better start understanding that they WORK for the taxpayer.
By Bill August 31, 2009 at 8:14 am
If in fact Bauer has 70 undisclosed flights, the public should know that now. Not later. This is serious stuff.
How can we find this out?
By Jonny D August 31, 2009 at 9:01 am
He needs to send this to the Legislature forthwith!
“Dear esteemed colleagues, Luv Guv here, no harm no foul, so don’t do me like that. I just had to head south of the border for a little T & A. I realize that some of you may have you own agendas, jealousy being high up there on the list; she does indeed have a banging body, we’re talking lots of passionate and nasty sex, the kind you can’t even imagine in your wettest of dreams. But it’s more than that, we have this cosmic connection, she’s my soulmate, the woman I wished I’d met before I made the arrangement with the Ice Princess. Someday she and I should be one. But for now, just enjoy the music.”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ecRMHFR2MWE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BGsf1oyky8U
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c9Nrw-CpmWY
By SCHotline August 31, 2009 at 1:59 pm
We did not elect Governor Mark Sanford based on virtue of moral character but rather for his politics and therein lays no basis for impeachment. Let all in S.C. politics that are perfect character of moral virtues cast their votes for impeachment and the vote will be less than zero…
~Jeffrey Sewell
By fitsnews August 31, 2009 at 2:12 pm
Jeffrey,
In the context of roll call voting in the state legislature (which we need more of), it is mathematically impossible for any tally to end with a vote of “less than zero.”
Many votes have featured “zero” as part of the tally, but never “less than zero.”
-FITS
By Silence Dogood August 31, 2009 at 2:59 pm
FITS, is it really safe to assume that every single Demo-cat would vote to impeach??? That would probably be as unlikley as every single Repub-like-him voting against impeachment (clearly not very likely). I think the “over 100″ total is not very sound logically. Many of the dems, like the repubs, in the House are somewhat mature and may base their vote on what the articles of impeachment are, and how the factual basis of Sanford’s actions match those articles.
I know it seems like a silly thing to do in all this hub-bub, but some legislators might actually take their responsibility seriously on the matter – cleary not all, and maybe not even a majority…but some.
By Harrell Smarrell August 31, 2009 at 8:42 pm
Hey pundits…sit back and watch. Sewell, I hope you don’t get paid for your knowledge ’cause if you do somebody is gettin’ ripped off!
By Silence Dogood September 1, 2009 at 4:46 am
Jeffery, T-Rav is already out of office, no argument you make will get him back in…oh your are arguing for Sanford this time on that worn out basis, whoops, I couldn’t tell the difference.
By Calhoun Fawls September 1, 2009 at 6:37 am
It is about lowcountry power. A weak Governor and two lowcountry guys running the state. I don’t think you will find anything on Harrell. It is just about keeping the power at home.
By Calhoun Fawls September 1, 2009 at 6:39 am
Jeff, I find it ironoic you are using the same argument of Democrats about Clinton in 1998. But even Clinton did not go AWOL over his lover or act like such a damn idiot in interviews and the like. That does matter to SC. That costs us reputation points. Our Governor is a pissant, and that pisses a lot of us off.
By sam sosa September 1, 2009 at 10:45 am
Maybe the speaker’s been doing a little hiking of his own, comparing trail notes with fellow outdoorsman Sanford. Or maybe he’s getting some generous re-imbursement for piloting his own plane around the state.