S.C. Gov. Mark Sanford – whose groundbreaking executive budgets revolutionized the way Palmetto state governors approached the debate over state spending – gently scolded his hand-picked successor for her decision not to follow in his footsteps.
In an email sent to supporters on Wednesday, Sanford said he “concurred” with an editorial published in the Charleston Post and Courier that urged Haley to reconsider her decision to leave the budgeting to the S.C. General Assembly.
“Prior to this administration, governors were not materially involved in the budget process,” Sanford wrote. “Past governors set out their spending priorities only in the broadest terms, without getting into the details of how the state budget could be balanced and core government functions preserved. When we came into office in 2003, we changed that by delivering to the General Assembly a full Executive Budget, explaining exactly which functions should be funded, to what degree, and the reasoning behind our priorities.”
(To read Sanford’s message in its entirety, click here).
Believe us, there are plenty of Sanford’s footsteps that should be avoided at all costs … starting with the ones he never took down the Appalachian Trail.
But Sanford’s executive budgets – at least his early ones, anyway – were truly revolutionary. Like our famed 95 theses, they were comprehensive reform blueprints that still offer dozens of common sense suggestions that could save taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars.
As we noted in our coverage of Haley’s decision, abandoning the executive budget would remove “a key plank of (Haley’s) bully pulpit before she’s even been elected.”
“At $20.8 billion , this year’s state budget is South Carolina’s largest-ever – and Haley is throwing away her primary tool to frame the debate over how that money should be spent (and more importantly the debate over why we’re spending so damn much of it in the first place),” we wrote.
The Post and Courier agrees, dismissively referring to Haley’s refusal to draft a budget as “an apparent effort to make nice with her fellow legislators.”
“The next governor — whether Rep. Haley or state Sen. Vincent Sheheen — should make a clear statement of spending priorities in an executive budget,” the paper’s editorial board writes. “It should serve as the chief executive’s best case for managing the difficult fiscal situation at hand.”
Haley’s refusal to outline a spending plan also gives her Democratic opponent – S.C. Senator Vincent Sheheen – another opening to criticize her for not being transparent.
Governors are required by law to submit budgets, but in the past South Carolina chief executives have typically limited their input to a brief list of “suggestions.” These flimsy documents weren’t “budgets” at all, they were merely outlines for funding specific pet projects. The business of actually preparing a spending plan to run state government was left exclusively to lawmakers – which has produced disastrous results for taxpayers.
Sanford – to his credit – turned that process on its ear, submitting detailed spending plans each year during his administration that could have (and should have) been used to run state government. In the process Sanford – or more precisely, his former deputy chief of staff Chad Walldorf – argued in favor of numerous tax cuts, spending reductions and structural changes that could have saved taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars.
They also forced dozens of bureaucrats to appear at public hearings to justify how the money they were receiving helped them perform a core function of government.
Most importantly, Sanford and Walldorf pioneered an “activity-based” budget model that approached spending from a zero-based, outcome driven perspective (i.e. “purchasing” core functions first) as opposed to the legislative model, which basically just increases funding from the previous year to every state agency based on special interest wishes, electoral considerations or insider horse-trading.
Obviously, all of Sanford’s budget suggestions were ignored by lawmakers – which is Haley’s stated rationale for giving up on the process. It was also Sanford’s stated rationale for watering down his budgets considerably during the later years of his administration.
But as we said last week, “even if lawmakers were to ignore her fiscally-conservative budget proposals completely, Haley could hold their feet to the fire by issuing vetoes and campaigning against them (the latter being something Sanford failed to do in any meaningful sense during his term).”
Come to think of it, that’s precisely why Republican primary voters chose Haley as their nominee over three “go along to get along” status quo candidates – because she was (in the words of her new TV commercial) going to “take back our government.”
Thusfar on taxes, education and the budget, however, it appears that all Haley is more interested in waving the white flag than fighting for the best interests of individual South Carolinians.
As we’ve said, as the Post and Courier says and as Sanford is now saying, that’s too bad.
“All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men (and women) to do nothing,” Irish statesman Edmund Burke once wrote.
To which American poet Ella Wheeler Wilcox added, “to sin by silence, when we should protest, makes cowards out of men.”
Haley needs to stop being a coward and start being the reformer she promised us she was going to be.
By Insect September 8, 2010 at 11:20 pm
“When I eat Maria, this is how I hold her.”
By Groundball September 8, 2010 at 11:50 pm
This is all just bullshit to make it look like Haley isn’t Sanford in skirts. The only thing Sanford cares about is that he got another year of free rent and food from the state’s taxpayers.
By Public School Teacher September 8, 2010 at 11:52 pm
Your 95 theses ROCKS!
By OhNoNotAgain September 9, 2010 at 12:03 am
“S.C. Gov. Mark Sanford – whose groundbreaking executive budgets revolutionized the way Palmetto state governors approached the debate over state spending – gently scolded his hand-picked successor for her decision not to follow in his footsteps.”
If Nikki and/or Vince does not budget like Sanford budgeted, than it wasn’t much of a revolution, was it?
Lasted only while the “revolutionary” was in office, and did not live past him. So I’d say shenanigans on that.
By Al September 9, 2010 at 12:24 am
“This is how I commit air-adultery.”
By J. Gatz September 9, 2010 at 12:28 am
He looks like Jenny in man-drag.
Were they possibly related?
By eggaday September 9, 2010 at 4:36 am
who cares what Mark Sanfraud thinks?
Sanfraud, worst governor in America.
Haley= Sanfraud in a skirt
By Pussy Galore September 9, 2010 at 7:20 am
Gentle propping is key……..got time to eat me too?
By Jeff September 9, 2010 at 8:47 am
Sanford saying in his picture above: Ya see, I was telling Maria my wanger was this about this long (another SANFRAUDIAN SLIP) so I showed it to her. All of a sudden she burst in to tears and said some bullshit like “she couldn’t stop crying for me in Argentina”…..
By ceilidh10 September 9, 2010 at 9:58 am
She is showing her immaturity and weakness. She was a poor chpoice for the GOP.
Cannot wait until the debate when her 3 alleged affairs will be explored.
By sick of your sikh denial September 9, 2010 at 10:36 am
What a scam, Nikki. I cannot decide if you’re deceitful ot just dumb and dumber. Either way, you scare the hell out of me.
By tank mcnamara September 9, 2010 at 12:47 pm
“comprehensive reform blueprints” my ass! they were nothing more than libertarian anti-government drivel. the vast majority of the so-called “reforms” Sanfraud had in his budgets have been tried in other states and failed miserably. just be honest, sic, you and your ilk won’t be satisfied until the SC state government has essentially been eliminated. and as further proof of sanford’s arrogance, he has instructed all his cabinet agencies to submit their 2011-2012 budgets despite the fact that (thankfully!!!!) he won’t be here.
people, if you want 4 mores years of Sanfraud, then go ahead and vote for Haley.
By Scooter September 9, 2010 at 2:06 pm
Have you forgotten Sanford’s “Hit Lists”? He did on a number of occasions support a candidate, just to get even with someone who disobeyed him. He leaked information and half truths to the media, in an attempt to cripple those who did not do what he wanted. He was only occasionally successful, but he sure continued to try to “punish” those who stood in his way. And the manner he went about all of this was underhanded and mean spirited. So, you can’t say that he didn’t do enough to turn support around for himself, or to garner favor. It was the wrong way to accomplish that, but he sure tried. Haley put the Legislature on notice months ago by saying she would report to the media anyone not supporting her plans. (Is she in grade school? Report them?) Just to be plain. Mark Sanford was a strange and unsuccessful Governor, and Haley will be just like him in so many ways. None of them good.
By bqueen September 9, 2010 at 7:06 pm
“Come to think of it, that’s precisely why Republican primary voters chose Haley as their nominee over three “go along to get along” status quo candidates – because she was (in the words of her new TV commercial) going to “take back our government.””
Seriously FITS? You actually KNOW “why Republican voters chose Haley as their nominee”? Really? Could it have been because the Republican voters are tone deaf, stubborn, uninformed and refuse to be informed, and who vote-the-party-line no matter who the candidate theie? party puts up?
Your genius in figuring out exactly why Haley was the party nominee is…well…genius.
By Jerry September 9, 2010 at 11:32 pm
What a sick little man who does not have the decency to resign. Still speaking and popping off to the press. Does nto matter what he did to his family and the state. Another idiot.
By C20H26N2O September 10, 2010 at 8:58 pm
re:bqueen
“Seriously FITS? You actually KNOW “why Republican voters chose Haley as their nominee”? Really? Could it have been because the Republican voters are tone deaf, stubborn, uninformed and refuse to be informed, and who vote-the-party-line no matter who the candidate theie? party puts up?”
Really, and you of the party of rocket scientists, after months of careful thought, delivered Alvin Greene.
Haley’s name must have been first on the ballot as well.
By Captain Kirk September 11, 2010 at 12:37 am
Kirk to Enterprise; beam us up, Scottie. There is no intelligent life here for us to exploit. The place is full of political wackos.