|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
by WILL FOLKS
***
The increasingly contentious campaign for attorney general of South Carolina exploded all over the Palmetto State’s budget process this week when a Senate finance committee meeting unearthed allegations of legislative corruption.
Were the claims accurate, though?
The drama began when state senator Stephen Goldfinch – one of three Republicans vying to become the Palmetto State’s next top prosecutor – implied that one of his campaign rivals had been funneling money through his government office to powerful Democrat state lawmaker Gilda Cobb-Hunter.
Cobb-Hunter is an activist and social worker from Orangeburg, S.C. who runs a heavily taxpayer-subsidized nonprofit – one that pays her a six-figure annual salary. She is also the first vice-chair of the powerful S.C. ways and means committee, the legislative panel which gets the first crack at the state’s annual spending plan.
More than any other Democrat in Columbia, S.C., she has direct influence over how taxpayer funds are spent.
According to Goldfinch, Cobb-Hunter was the author and beneficiary of a budget proviso which for decades has steered S.C. Department of Juvenile Justice (SCDJJ) money to her through the office of S.C. first circuit solicitor David Pascoe, one of his rivals in the Republican race for attorney general.
***
Budget provisos are specific spending instructions found in a separate section of the annual state appropriations document. Using these provisos, lawmakers impede on executive authority – telling executive and judicial branch agencies how they can (and cannot) spend money. Like pork barrel earmarks, they are a hugely controversial method of appropriating tax dollars.
“I don’t really know where to start here,” Goldfinch told his colleagues on the finance committee, referring to the Cobb-Hunter line item. “Let me start by saying it brings me no joy to bring this to your attention but I feel like I have to.”
“During our subcommittee last week, we encountered a proviso, 67.6, which looked to send $350,000 through the first circuit solicitor’s office from DJJ to – for, personnel expenses – to Gilda Cobb-Hunter,” Goldfinch continued. “We’ve looked up those invoices – staff has pulled that file – and it looks like representative Hunter is being paid approximately $8,800 a month from state dollars that (have been) appropriated through this budget for many, many years.”
How many years?
According a review of the past quarter century of budget provisos, the first state spending plan to contain SCDJJ monies earmarked for the S.C. first judicial circuit was the fiscal year 2002-2003 budget. That year, the amount totaled $175,000. Five years later, in the fiscal year 2007-2008 budget, the total increased to $250,000 annually. In the fiscal year 2022-2023 budget, the total increased to $350,000 annually – and has remained at this level ever since. Since the proviso was first introduced 24 years ago, a total of $6.025 million has been routed to SCDJJ per its instructions.
***
***
How has a powerful Democrat allegedly feathered her nest for so long without Republicans catching onto it?
“I think it makes all of us look bad,” Goldfinch said. “But I think we all have to, when we see these things, we have to do something about it.”
Accordingly, Goldfinch moved to strike “the personnel expenses… specifically for the first circuit solicitor’s office,” suggesting the money be “equally distributed among the judicial circuits.”
Goldfinch said the domestic violence services subsidized by the proviso were “important services that should be funded.”
“We should support those things, but when a sitting legislator is the one receiving the funds I think we all have to take a breath and think about what that means – and what that means to the institution,” Goldfinch said.
Goldfinch added the proviso was originally requested by Cobb-Hunter.
“My understanding is that representative Gilda Cobb-Hunter asked for the proviso,” Goldfinch said.
Questioned by a colleague as to whether “senior personnel within (the first circuit) solicitor’s office” should have been aware of the transactions to Cobb-Hunter, Goldfinch took direct aim at Pascoe.
“It seems unlikely that the solicitor from that circuit would not know what was going on in that circuit,” he said.
***
RELATED | RALPH NORMAN BLASTS LEGISLATIVE PAY RAISE
***
The only problem with this line of attack? According to multiple sources familiar with the proviso in question, it does not send the money to the first circuit solicitor’s office. Instead, it merely instructs SCDJJ to procure certain services within the tri-county area comprising the circuit.
In other words, it is directing the agency to spend this money within Calhoun, Dorchester and Orangeburg counties.
“(The proviso) refers to a geographic designation, not a subsidy for a specific political subdivision,” a budget analyst familiar with the proviso told FITSNews.
Asked whether that meant Goldfinch misinterpreted the statute, the analyst was unambiguous.
“Yes,” they said.
While the proviso may improperly benefit Cobb-Hunter, Goldfinch’s insinuations that Pascoe was somehow steering the money to her appear to be unfounded.
Pascoe pounced on Goldfinch’s apparent error – rebuking the allegation that his office received any of the funding and accusing his rival of “defaming” him and Cobb-Hunter.
“We do not need an attorney general who does not even know how to read a proviso correctly – and who makes a habit of defaming elected officials,” Pascoe said. “This money does not come to the first circuit solicitor’s office. The proviso clearly states it goes to the Department of Juvenile Justice, which distributes the money.”
“They assumed it was the first circuit solicitor’s office,” Pascoe continued. “They assumed wrong. I have nothing to do with the disbursement of that money – which has been a proviso since before I was solicitor.”
“Mr. Goldfinch once again has proven that he should not be in charge of the attorney general’s office or the statewide grand jury,” Pascoe concluded.
Finance chairman Harvey Peeler noted the gravity of the allegations leveled against Cobb-Hunter, saying the debate over the spending item was one thing but “a representative potentially breaking the law is another.”
“You know we’re not just gonna sit here and let this happen,” Peeler said. “That’s a pretty serious allegation, senator.”
Senators ultimately recommended that Cobb-Hunter be investigated by state ethics officials.
Keep it tuned to FITSNews as we continue to track this ongoing political drama…
***
UPDATE |
SCDJJ has confirmed none of the monies earmarked by this proviso are routed through the S.C. first circuit solicitor’s office.
***
UPDATE 2 |
***
ABOUT THE AUTHOR…
Will Folks is the founding editor of the news outlet you are currently reading. Prior to founding FITSNews, he served as press secretary to the governor of South Carolina. He lives in the Midlands region of the state with his wife and eight children.
***
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.
4 comments
Why does the house leadership continually give democrats seats on any committees. Just shows they are all one and the same
The Attorney General is by far the singularly most powerful individual in state government in terms of the ability to directly affect the life, liberty and property of the common citizens of this State. The power he is granted to exercise, and the personal legal immunity he is draped with for his decisions in exercising those powers are unlike any other position in state government. A person holding those powers should not be someone who bullies, defames, blurs the truth, and exacts personal revenge over perceived slights. They should bend over backwards to faithfully and skillfully interpret the law in each and every scenario they encounter. Again and again we read of Goldfinch twisting and manipulating the truth, or using shady implication and innuendo to allow the public to draw an unfounded conclusion in order to make himself look better or cast someone else in a false light. He has demonstrated skill in these areas – rarely if ever just stating a flat, bald-faced lie – but always just walking right up to the line and hoping people will draw the next step conclusion. And then when the matter gets examined closely by anyone with just basic intellectual honesty, his subterfuge is made plain. It happens far too often to just be some random misunderstanding – there is clear intent behind these tactics. Maybe that’s fine for someone in the General Assembly, but it should not be for someone who wants to be AG.
And let me be clear – this is not in defense of Cobb-Hunter. There does need to be an investigation into her curious receipt of these funds.
Snob-Hubters corruption apans decades
Because she is black … .. .