|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
***
As a former South Carolina Senator, I have followed the recent proceedings surrounding Treasurer Curtis Loftis with a keen and concerned eye. Having listened to the testimonies presented before both Senate committees and the arguments put forth by Mr. Loftis’ legal teams, a clear picture emerges – one marred by deception, disrespect, and ultimately, a decision by the Senate that could have far-reaching and negative consequences for our state’s legislative body.
The evidence presented strongly suggested a deliberate effort on the part of the Treasurer and his staff to obscure information regarding the now-infamous $1.8 billion. While the funds themselves may never have truly existed in the manner initially implied, the pattern of withholding information and the subsequent evasiveness when the legislature began to inquire are deeply troubling. The shifting narratives and the lack of transparency eroded trust, a cornerstone of the relationship between the executive and legislative branches.
Adding to this concern was the undeniable disrespect displayed by Treasurer Loftis towards the Senate committees during the hearings. The dismissive tone and the apparent unwillingness to provide straightforward answers were unbecoming of a statewide elected official. Furthermore, the evolving explanations offered only served to deepen the sense of obfuscation.
***
It is worth noting a critical juncture in these proceedings: following the Treasurer’s initial statements and the presentations by his first two legal representatives, a different tone seemed to emerge. Had the defense team concluded their arguments at that point, with a more conciliatory and humble approach from Mr. Loftis, there was perhaps a path to swaying some votes. However, the closing arguments delivered by his final attorney, filled with palpable disdain and anger, effectively extinguished any goodwill that might have been generated. In that moment, any potential support for the Treasurer likely evaporated.
Despite these serious concerns regarding the Treasurer’s conduct and the actions of his office, the Senate’s response sets a precedent that I believe will inevitably return to haunt the legislature. While the frustration and disappointment with the Treasurer’s behavior are understandable, the path chosen could have unintended and damaging ramifications for the separation of powers and the future accountability of elected officials.
In a more constructive scenario, this entire episode could have served as a catalyst for meaningful reform. The focus should now shift towards establishing a more professional and qualified structure for managing our state’s finances. Ideally, the roles of both the Senate and the House should converge on creating legislation to transform the Treasurer’s office into a Cabinet-level agency. This would allow for the Governor to appoint the Treasurer, subject to the advice and consent of the Senate, ensuring a greater level of scrutiny and accountability.
Furthermore, it is imperative that we establish clear qualifications for holding the position of Treasurer. Requiring candidates to possess a background in accounting, finance, or mathematics would inject a necessary level of expertise into an office responsible for safeguarding billions of taxpayer dollars. It defies logic that such a critical role does not currently mandate a baseline of financial literacy.
***
RELATED | WHO VOTED TO REMOVE CURTIS LOFTIS?
***
The irony is that these necessary reforms could have been pursued proactively, well before the current Treasurer’s term concludes in approximately 14 months. Instead, we have witnessed a protracted and often acrimonious process centered around a phantom $1.8 billion – a sum that was never truly present and involved no theft or embezzlement.
However, the truth, as it often does in the political arena, lacks the sensationalism required for a captivating headline. The narrative of a missing $1.8 billion, while inaccurate, has undoubtedly generated more attention than a nuanced discussion about governmental transparency and the qualifications of elected officials.
It is my sincere hope that the lessons learned from this tumultuous episode in our state’s history will spur our legislature to enact meaningful changes. We owe it to the citizens of South Carolina to ensure that the management of their finances is entrusted to qualified individuals operating with transparency and respect for the institutions of our state government.
The precedent set in this instance is a stark reminder that even in the pursuit of accountability, we must remain mindful of the long-term implications for the delicate balance of power within our system.
***
ABOUT THE AUTHOR…
Katrina Shealy served South Carolina’s Senate District 23 beginning in 2012, championing tax reform, child protection, and stronger domestic violence laws. She’s been honored as Legislator of the Year by both the National Association of Social Workers and the South Carolina Coalition Against Domestic Violence and Sexual Abuse. Outside of the Senate, Katrina has spent over 40 years in the insurance industry and consults for Keenan Suggs in Columbia. She lives in Lexington with her husband, Jimmy, and their growing family. This article, reprinted with permission, first appeared on Shealy’s website, ‘While I Breathe.’
***
WANNA SOUND OFF?
Got something you’d like to say in response to one of our articles? Or an issue you’d like to address proactively? We have an open microphone policy! Submit your letter to the editor (or guest column) via email HERE. Got a tip for a story? CLICK HERE. Got a technical question or a glitch to report? CLICK HERE.
6 comments
Nice word salad, Jakie in a skirt. So glad you are no longer in The Senate.
Where the hell were the auditors in all of this. Surely a 1.8B accounting “error” is material?!? Elected state officers may be incompetent but I would think the cover up is how this got “missed” by the auditors.
I see the SC House has decided not to continue the Senate’s Witch Hunt! Excellent news and my faith in The House is restored.
Fits, please be a dear and publish a list of House members who righted this wrong so that they may be thanked and remembered in 2026 as the good people they have been.
Asked him for appropriation info one time. Nothing complicated, simply a report his office should have on record. His response, silence. Not even a go to hell. If being a pompous arse with a sense of entitlement and a holier than thou attitude is a removable offense, he is guilty. But, then the Legislature could be in a whole lot of trouble.
So if Loftis had kissed the ring of the almighty senate he would have been fine? Our state is run like a third world banana republic where only one branch of government controls all. It’s a pathetic throwback system created by former confederates who didn’t want “outsiders “ or former slaves to gain any power in state government. The courts are puppets who are beholden to the legislature and the governor is a mere figurehead who has no power to do anything. I mean there is actually a law that says the courts can’t make any rules unless they are approved by the legislature first
The sentiment of Shealy is seemingly in the right place but how can you write about the senates actions as something that will come back to haunt the legislature and then only focus on actions that can be taken regardless of whether Loftis is in office? They can fix the things spelled out here like mandating criteria for a Treasurer or making the office a cabinet agency, but what is the point of checks and balances if they don’t use them? The statute the senate applied is vague, sure. Doesn’t change the fact that Loftis should be out of a job. If this were a business, there’d be no question. And SC repubs should have no issue with that since the fed is now run like a business, per trumps own administration.
The house should’ve taken up the resolution before sine die. Let the state Supreme Court sort it out if it gets that far.
He doesn’t have the integrity to resign. It’s disgusting he gets to keep his job for another year, plus some.