Connect with us
Pawleys Front Porch

SC

Why Lee Bright Didn’t Filibuster The Confederate Flag’s Removal

Published

on

THREE WORDS: PRO. LIFE. CASH.

|| By FITSNEWS || In his song “The Big Muddy,” Bruce Springsteen observed that “sooner or later, it all comes down to money.”

Damn straight …

Take the ongoing debate over the removal of the Confederate flag from the grounds of the S.C. State House.  What’s being billed as a landmark moment for racial harmony (assuming the flag actually comes down) is really nothing more than transactional politics.

As we reported exclusively two weeks ago, the flag isn’t on the verge of coming down because a 21-year-old white supremacist slaughtered nine black people inside their house of worship.  True, the horrificracially motivated “Holy City Massacre” – which was perpetrated by a flag-waving neo-Confederate – is the root cause of the current discourse, but don’t forget that state lawmakers and S.C. governor Nikki Haley spent the first few days after the shooting with their fingers in the air.

And their ears on the phone …

And it wasn’t “racial reconciliation” that ultimately turned around their indifference and initial reluctance toward removing the flag … it was money.

Big money.

(And a big political threat we’re working hard to verify).

Such transactional politics – spearheaded by corporate behemoths BMW, Boeing, Michelin and Volvo – wasn’t confined to the “take it down” side, either.

We’re also told S.C. Senator Lee Bright – an ardent flag supporter – made his surprising decision not to filibuster the flag’s removal due to similar pressures.

Specifically, several major donors in the pro-life community told us Bright was given an ultimatum: Call off his planned filibuster of the flag or risk losing access to a steady stream of pro-life cash.  And Bright – who is likely to face multiple credible challengers in 2016 – simply couldn’t afford to do that.

Don’t get us wrong: It’s unlikely Bright’s filibuster would have kept the flag removal bill from clearing the State Senate.  As the chamber demonstrated not once but twice, there was overwhelming support for a clean bill to take the controversial banner down and move it to a government-run museum.

But lawmakers were leery of Bright’s possible filibuster … because voting to “sit him down” meant they would lose their ability in the future to employ the same tactic in pursuit of blocking bills they found objectionable.

Flag opponents and supporters are sharply divided in South Carolina … and extremely vocal.  But leaders on both sides of the debate aren’t following the voices of their constituents when it comes to their decisions, they’re following the money.

The debates may change, but the decision-making process doesn’t.

Sooner or later, it really does “all come down to money.”

***

Comments