WINNING SOUTH CAROLINA’S FUTURE: A PROPOSAL FOR POLITICAL ACTION
Patrick H. Caddell April 2009
A Summary-10 Reasons for Real Change, NOW!
1. Tipping Point - South Carolina is at a tipping point in its history. What we do in the immediate
future will largely determine the shape of our state’s destiny for several generations to come.
2. Status quo = death - If we continue on our present course, particularly SC’s failing education
system-with its staggering drop out rates, falling test scores, and devastated schools- the state will
become permanently relegated to the stagnate backwaters of the global economy of the 21st century.
3. This crisis is an opportunity - The current crisis and the opportunities it presents – when
coupled with innovative leapfrog strategies, the power of new technology, and real transformational
reform- affords our state its last best hope to join the economic mainstream in our region and realize
SC’s vast potential future.
4. #1 Michigan has the auto industry melt down – what’s SC’s excuse? - SC’s second
highest unemployment in the nation, and the rest of the current economic crisis, has exposed to all
how badly SC has fallen behind the rest of the country – not only the country at large but particularly
in our own region. It demonstrates how unsound our system is structurally and the weakness in our
creative economic dynamism and thus, the inevitable stagnation of economic opportunity in SC
5. First, do no harm - The state government has become so dysfunctional that its actions – or
failures to act - have actually deepen and intensified the current crisis in the lives of ordinary South
Carolinians.
6. Bubba Rules - South Carolina has become a one party state – the good old boy party. The
incumbents of both parties, aided by the corrupting system of lobbyist and special interest influence
and perpetuated by a grossly uncompetitive electoral process, have created a government totally
unresponsive to the vital needs of our state such as a quality education system, an equitable tax
system, a competitive economy, etc.
7. Times they are a changin’ - Record In migration and other demographic and social dynamics
are fundamentally changing the SC electorate. An analysis of these new trends, coupled with the
historic changes brought by Obama’s election, suggest a clear opening for real reform Democrats to
win statewide – for the first time in many years.
8. Don’t tread on me! – Anxiety over real economic decline and a rising tide of anger over Wall
Street fraud, corporate self dealing, and government corruption-(witness the fire storm over AIG
bonuses)-have awakened the American people. People are mad and many are truly afraid. On the
state level there has been a similar negative reaction to Gov Sanford’s blind ideological posturing- be
it on unemployment insurance or stimulus funding - and his apparent total insensitivity to the plight of
ordinary South Carolinians.
9. Who will lead us? – South Carolina’s citizens intuitively understand the system is broken and
transformative change is needed right now – but they do not see a viable vehicle for this change.
Republicans are in engaged in a civil war and the Democrats are effectively silent or absent. Only a
vibrant citizen movement can provide the creative energy and political power necessary to affect
transformational change.
10. The fierce urgency of NOW – The changing underlying factors in our state, coupled with
the passions and fears aroused by both state and national issues have ignited genuine outrage and
created a sense of urgency among the public demanding true change and meaningful reform. It is
this sense of urgency that offers real hope for Democratic- and other- reformers in South Carolina’s
2010 election.
Personal Note
I have come home. I was born in South Carolina and both of my parents were Charleston natives, our
family dates back for generations in this state. Because my father was a career officer in the Coast
Guard, except for several preteen years, I grew up in other places. Later, my education and career
led me to live in other states, most recently California. Now, drawn by 3 grandchildren under the age
of 3 years old I have happily come home.
I am not alone. Attracted by its climate, natural wonders, and livability tens of thousands of other
American’s have been flooding into South Carolina during this decade such that this state has the
highest rate of instate migration within the United States. I readily confess that I am not as versed in
all the political nuances that under gird the structure of South Carolina politics and government today;
nor all the currents of South Carolina history that shape today’s state. Although I have a background
of significant political experience and an avid student of history I understand that some might think
that my comments here one presumptuous. However I also bring what some may see as the
advantage of a fresh pair of eyes in looking at South Carolina.
In this short paper, which I have been encouraged to write; I hope to share some reflections and
ideas that might contribute to the debate of how best to bring political change to South Carolina.
Introduction: The South Carolina Moment
South Carolina is approaching a tipping point in its political history.
Thousands upon thousands of Americans are coming to South Carolina many of those seeking to
retire here others are younger families seeking better lives and new prospects. These new 21st
century arrivals, are not only coming on a scale that maybe not be widely recognized but also
represent a reversal of the trends of the last century that saw so many South Carolinians leaving their
state and a relative population stagnation that marked that period. Their coming is an important
signal for it suggests that beyond them there maybe many more that might like to come, bringing new
vitality and with it the potential of new economic growth for the benefit of all who are already here.
The question is whether South Carolina can provide the promise of sufficient opportunity such as to
make their desire a reality.
Despite the recent growth spurt South Carolina is far from realizing its full potential of what it could
be. But in truth much of what South Carolina could gain and become is being diverted to its
immediate sister states particularly, Virginia, North Carolina, and Georgia. This risk is that if South
Carolina does not seize the moment to transform itself for the future now, it faces the real prospect
that it will become the backwater, compared to the surging prosperity of its neighbors.
This is the supreme issue that must be put politically to the people of South Carolina to be decided in
next election: Are South Carolinians prepared to seize the historical moment and transform our state
with greater opportunity and prosperity or are they willing to simply let the moment pass?
So much of politics in this state are small bore. The political discourse is dissipated around fairly small
issues, sometimes absurd, while the over-arching issues that will determine the future too often
received barely passing attention.
The crisis facing South Carolina can not be minimized. The soaring unemployment rate and the loss
of jobs across every spectrum of the economy, the crisis in education at every level from kindergarten
through university, a budget deficit which is leading to mutilating cuts in the very fiber and bone of the
state, a dysfunctional and inbred political system, and daily exposure of incompetent, self-dealing and
rampant corruption are truly alarming.
Like all crisis, however, the current one also contains a silver lining that the opportunity for meaningful
change presents itself. South Carolina is in desperate need of a comprehensive political and
governmental reform. I however, sense a lack of overwhelming urgency among the State’s political
elite. But, I suspect that it may exist among the broader citizenry of South Carolina. The question is
whether or not a broad political movement can be mounted in 2010 to affect the kinds of reform in
structural changes that will allow South Carolina to meet the crisis and to secure the bright future that
lies within its grasp. I have heard it said that South Carolina is historically ambivalent even indifferent
to the need for political and governmental reform. If there ever will be a time to disprove that notion, it
will be now.
For all intensive purposes, South Carolina is a one party state dominated now by the Republican
Party. As I have seen in California, where the Democrats controlled, one party states are invariably
and inevitably in need of real political competition and meaningful reform. It is the very basis of
Democracy. One party states are inherently incapable of producing a real reform when their power is
unchallenged. The South Carolina Democratic Party is the only possible vehicle to bring the kind of
change that is necessary. However, to succeed the Democratic Party must itself change.
In 2010, the opportunity exists for a broad citizen coalition consisting not only of Democratic
constituencies but also the forward looking elements of the business community; voters who consider
themselves to be independents and many dissatisfied Republicans. It will be insufficient to merely
replace one set of partisan politicians with another set of professional politicians. What is necessary is
an Independent Democratic campaign that offers not merely a partisan alternative but rather a
change in the way South Carolina politics is conducted. Critical to such an effort must be a new,
vibrant, meaningful participation by a broad cross section of South Carolinians. Citizens who have
never been active in the political process must offer themselves as citizen leaders for the future of
South Carolina government. In short, if South Carolina is to succeed it will do so not merely by
changing professional politicians but rather on the broad shoulders of a new citizen politics.
I. THE CRISIS
A. Crisis of Condition
South Carolina faces nothing less than a full blown economic and structural crisis. South Carolina
unemployment, which consistently lower than the National average now consistently exceeds it by
several points. The unemployment rate is the second highest in America, matching that of California,
and has broken the 10% barrier. Worse the consensus of economic experts is that the State will reach
at least 14% unemployment in 2009 and that is only strict Federal definition of unemployment; it does
not include those that have been so discouraged that they have stopped looking for work or those
who work part-time but seek full-time employment. If those were included, we are looking at an
effective unemployment/underemployment rate of closer to 18%--1 out of every 6 South Carolinians.
What we face is not a deep recession but a real depression.
According to the fourth annual benchmarking report, Break Away South Carolina-(a joint partnership
by the SC Chamber of Commerce and the Palmetto Institute)- SC’s competitive situation is at best a
mixed bag. Particularly disturbing though were two of the core drivers that are considered essential
for sound economic growth. On “Education & Workforce Preparedness” SC ranked 45th in the nation
and significantly trailed its neighboring sister states. For the 3rd straight year on the factor of
“Dynamism/Entrepreneurialism”, which measures the creative process for business growth, SC once
again ranked dead last among the 50 states. By comparison NC ranked 7th and GA 33rd nationally.
This perhaps, in part, explains the mystery of why SC ranks 2nd in national unemployment only
behind the devastated industrial state of Michigan. Also this speaks volumes to the economic
challenge facing SC.
The problems of SC’s economy long preceded the current severe economic downturn. According to
one knowledgeable source, in 1973 SC’s textile industry employed upwards of 340,000 workers.
Today, the number of jobs is only about 40,000. yet that manufacturing base has yet to be replaced
particularly by high growth new technology jobs crucial ot economic success in the 21st century.
Similarly SC’s agricultural sector remains stagnate and many of the state’s rural communities
economically devastated. Despite having some of the nation’s most productive farmland, SC has a
sorely underdeveloped agricultural economy. For decades millions of acres of SC’s land has been
singularly allocated to timber in order to fuel the state’s paper mills at the expense of more
economically robust and job creating agricultural sectors.
The state government and budget are in shambles. Since July 2008 there has been a billion dollar cut
in state spending, with more coming. According to the National Council of State Government, in
January 2009, South Carolina faces a deficit for this year of 13.2% of it General Fund, only a hair less
than California’s projected deficit which has attracted such national attention.
The comparisons between South Carolina and California are not merely anecdotal. There is a
significant difference besides the obvious disparity in population size and wealth. In California, the
crisis has ignited a sense of broad urgency. In South Carolina there has been little evidence of a
similar outrage. That absence is curious, the proverbial “dog that does not bark.”
Fiscal Condition
South Carolina’s fiscal condition is obviously, a reflection of the country’s severe economic downturn.
But it was not only some unanticipated accident. By June of 2007, the legislature had completed a
several year period where spending increased by more than a third while taxes were being
dramatically cut. (Indeed, by one calculation SC’s spending increased by 42% over four years-5th in
the U.S. and 1st in the southeast.) That same month the chairman of the State Board of Economic
Advisors warned that a recession was possible and that spending increases and tax cuts could
“produce startling significant deficits” as much as a $billion in 2010. Unfortunately, those warnings
were not heeded and the predicted $billion deficit arrived 2 years early. Further during the period of
economic expansion the state set aside little money for hard times and the $13 million in the state’s
budget reserve fund was quickly devoured. As revenues evaporated, the legislature, by the second
half of 2008, was cutting services – particularly education—to the bone.
The expansion in state spending between fiscal 2004 and 2008 may be rightly criticized for some of
the specifics in management of the expenditures but not necessarily on the overall increase. In fiscal
2005, when spending began to increase sharply, the state was just emerging from the grips from the
last national recession. For the 5 years previous, state revenues were basically flat and spending had
been cut for 4 straight years. (Today, adjusted only for inflation, the state general revenue is lower
than 10 years ago, when the state had nearly a ½ million fewer residents.)
The trigger for the deeper crisis we are now in was the incredible act of cutting revenues while
expanding spending, essentially riding the tide of good times without the prudent understanding that
increased spending and reduced revenues are inevitably a prescription for disaster. By mid 2007,
with a recession clearly in sight, the Republican governor was commending the Republican dominated
legislature for eliminating the state’s sales tax on groceries and unprepared food and zeroing out the
State’s bottom income tax bracket which cost the Treasury almost a quarter of a billion dollars. But the
larger cuts in revenue were also in small doses as well including the notorious $15,000 2-day sales
tax holiday for gun purchases.
Perhaps the most egregious was the passage in 2006 of Act 388 which exempted owner occupied
homes from the property taxes that funds school operations to be offset by a $0.01 increase in the
state-wide sales tax. That increase was supposed to raise approximate half billion dollars schools
previously collected from homes. Instead there has been a growing short fall every year now totaling
almost $15 million since the passage of Act 388. The impact has been a direct and absolute cut in
public education. In a compromise that was meant to protect low income residents from the impact of
the increased sales tax, the legislation reduced the tax rate on unprepared food. The cut in grocery
sales tax in 2006 opened the door to the elimination of the entire tax on groceries in 2007.
Act 388 was a political response to the general unpopularity of property taxes. However it instead
exposed business enterprises to increased property taxes to fund local government since school
districts can collect and raise property taxes to pay for their own operations but in reality only from
commercial concerns since they can not tax home owners, hardly an action designed to inspire
business confidence. Worse the property tax cut was not all it seemed to be. Not only was it bad policy
to put increased reliance on the sales tax—which is the revenue source most vulnerable to economic
ups and downs—while creating disproportionate tax breaks for the most valuable home properties, it
included an insidious provision. The provision required properties to be immediately assessed when
they were sold which despite the current real estate downturn means a tax increase in most cases
and sparking negative impact on the State’s real estate sector which ironically sought Act 388 in the
first place.
This irresponsibility of cutting revenue while raising taxes in the face of a coming recession must be
laid directly at the door of the state’s Republican governor and GOP dominated legislature. The key
to South Carolina’s future success ultimately depends on its investment in those areas that will lead to
increased economic growth and better lives for all its citizens. To sacrifice that truth on the altar of
ideological rigidity is not only bad policy but violates common sense.
The illogical cuts in revenue reflect what is in it’s entirely an irrational tax system, it is filled with
inequalities a myriad of exemptions that have been secured by special interests, lobbying and
campaign contributions. Clearly the system needs an entire overhaul but one which must be
grounded in logic, coherence and ultimately fairness.
Education
In no area has the reality been more devastating than for education in South Carolina. For South
Carolina to prosper and attract growth industries and better paying jobs for its citizens, the foundation
must be the improvement of its public education system from K-University levels.
For 20+ years, South Carolina’s neighbor states of Georgia and North Carolina have seen rapid even
startling progress when one considers education levels, test scores, economic growth, and per capita
income. In 1985, these three states were closely matched. Nearly a quarter of a century later North
Carolina and only to a slightly lesser extent, Georgia, has seen sharp upward progress in the unity of
those measures while South Carolina’s progress has been far, far less. By 2006, the per capita
income in South Carolina at roughly $31,000 was $2,500 less than that of its neighboring states and
the level of economic growth significantly lower.
Without question, at the heart of the crisis in South Carolina is the quality of its education. Everything
depends on improving the quality and opportunity of education for South Carolina’s children. If the
Palmetto State is not to further fall behind its neighbors but actually equal them, then it can not
continue its almost suicidal policies in education.
One statistic says it all. South Carolina ranks 49th nationally in its high school graduation rate in all
the states of the nation. South Carolina’s graduation rate of barely 60% compares, for instance, with
North Carolina’s at almost 73%. Even worse as the result of years of poor education and an almost
nation leading dropout rates is the measure of failing job skills of our workers. 48% of 19-24 year
olds have a literacy rate below the minimum for entry level occupations. For those 25-40 years old,
the comparative rate is 44%. The inevitable result of the cold statistics are slow growth and high
unemployment and lesser opportunity for all South Carolinians—the truth of which is cruelly self
evident in today’s severe downturn. How many high-skilled, higher paying jobs that might have located
to South Carolina are absent because businesses will not relocate or expand in a place where the
skills of the potential workforce cannot meet its needs? I cannot be alone in hearing the statement
from people around the country who say, “I would move to South Carolina in a minute, except for what
would I do when I got there?”
The proposition of what will attract businesses and industry to South Carolina is low taxes and special
tax breaks for new comers is patently false. Every major study of business leaders and company
executives proves that the most important factors by far in their decision to locate are good schools
for their employee’s children and a well-trained workforce. For political leaders to pretend anything
else is an exercise in folly. Bluntly, if we don’t fix education, nothing else really matters.
Nothing speaks more eloquently to this problem than the embarrassing language that interprets the
South Carolina state constitution as giving every child in South Carolina the right to a “minimally
adequate education.” Some claim that changing this language is mere cosmetics, I would beg to differ.
For as long as that is the stated right of our children then we are creating our own future which will fail
our children and their children. After all, who do we really believe looks to bring their family to a state
whose promise is a “minimally adequate education” for their children?
K-12
Without doubt, there have been some improvements in K-12 education in South Carolina. But it has
hardly been enough to catch up with our competitors and even further short of what is needed to truly
prosper. There are some school districts in the state that are outstanding; unfortunately, they are few
and far between. Last years decision to cut the state budget by $1 billion has led to as much 1/3
reduction for education in the states 85 school districts. The most recent reports on the state’s school
system while showing that 60% of the public elementary schools are rated excellent, good, or
average; the middle school’s average is only 48%. In other words, 40% of the state’s elementary
schools and majority of its middle schools are below average or worse. The relationship to poverty is
startling. 97% of the middle schools are below average are located in districts where the poverty index
is 80% or greater. Such a result is not fated; one merely looks at the improvement in public schools in
Mississippi, which was well anchored at the very bottom nationally, to see what can be done when
there exists the political and moral will to do so.
South Carolina’s funding formula for its public schools are inadequate and worst of all inequitable.
The level of funding for a South Carolina child is not based on their existence as a person but on
where they live and the circumstances of their birth. While there will always be exceptions to the rule,
those individuals who excel in the worst of circumstances, the reality is that this state condemns its
least advantaged students, whether white or black, to a predetermined and lesser future. Such an
outcome is not merely unfortunate for them but stupid for everybody else. Just how far can our state
progress when so many of its children and future workers are condemned to be left behind? In a new
world economy, the quality of our education is everything. Do we not understand that this result is not
merely unfortunate for some but a shackle on the progress for everyone? However it is more than
merely a question of economic good sense it is ultimately and foremost a moral issue.
The Moral Crisis in South Carolina’s Public Schools
Perhaps the most astounding data that I have seen comes from the organization,
NeighborhoodScout. This group provides a rich data base for those looking to move to another
location in the country including measures of crime, quality of life, and education. In a complex
calculation which normalizes test data to a uniform standard, the group rates every public school in
the United States.
In their rating of the “100 Worst Performing Schools” they find that of the 25 worst schools, 11 are in
SC! In the 100 worst schools SC claims 38-or nearly 40%-of places in that roster of infamy!
These 38 worst schools are not isolated to the “Corridor of Shame” but rather can be found in every
region in the state. Importantly not a single school from VA, NC, or GA appears in the list of the 100
worst schools. Also it is not surprising that in the roster of the 100 best public schools not a single SC
school appeared.
These results not only expose the dimensions of SC’s moral crisis in education; they should be a
cause of shame for every South Carolinian; and the rallying cry for the movement of reform that is
necessary to transform South Carolina.
Higher Education
It the new world economy, it is not just our public K-12 education system that is in crisis but perhaps,
in some ways, even more South Carolina’s higher education. With all of South Carolina’s natural
advantages and attractions, its road to prosperity lies in the development of higher technology
industries. Indeed, it is much easier to create new industries in places where old industries do not
have to be displaced. But that depends most on the quality of our higher education. (By higher
education, I clearly mean primarily our colleges and universities but that is not to overlook the
importance of quality vocational education and training available not only to our youth but also, to
older workers with inadequate skills.)
If South Carolina risks being left behind by the rest of the Southeast it is because those states have
truly invested in improving the quality of their colleges and universities and with it the commensurate
increase of their hi-tech industrial and business centers that are directly propelling them into
increased prosperity. Frankly, if South Carolina does not meet this challenge, it will inevitably and
certainly fall even further and further behind.
Nothing better illustrates the political reality of the old expression “cutting your nose off to spite your
face” than to have the state support for higher education cut by a third which was administered in
2008, with more cuts to come in 2009. Already South Carolina has the 8th highest in-state tuition in
the entire nation. For the 16 states of the southeastern region of the U.S., South Carolina has the
highest in-state in tuition and second lowest level of state support for secondary education. For a
state that is relatively less well off to have regionally the highest and nationally one of the highest
levels of in-state tuition is a prescription for disaster. With such high in-state tuition rates, those
students from lower income families for whom college would be a major breakthrough are likely paying
the price for not being able to afford a college education. In addition, the state scholarship funds for
college are awarded only on a merit basis, not on a need basis. The result is children from more
affluent families are able to use the money for other spending such as new automobiles since there
are no requirements on how the money is spent by recipients. And as the best performing schools are
directly related to schools with the best financial support the effect is an inherent skew of scholarships
toward those who can already best afford college. Those families from inadequate schools,
particularly in rural parts of South Carolina, therefore suffer, and yet they are the students most need
in a helping hand to attend college.
By under investing in our colleges and universities, it makes it more difficult to recruit the best of
teaching and researching professors and ultimately makes our institutions less attractive for out-of-
state students who might come to South Carolina first for an education and then ultimately to reside
as highly skilled citizens. South Carolina already has a broad based system of good colleges and
universities. It has the potential to be a great system. Achieving that goal is an indispensable and
irreducible factor necessary to engine a new prosperity for South Carolina.
To believe that education at all levels in South Carolina is inevitably what it is and what it will be is a
failure of imagination that contradicts the proud history of South Carolina. Nothing illustrates such
shortsightedness than the ideological cry of Governor Sanford and too many who dominate South
Carolina’s legislature. Their blind devotion to the idea of voucher funding for alternative non-public
schools is frankly wrong-headed both defying both history and common sense. America’s great
success in creating the world’s greatest middle class was a direct result of our commitment to public
education. To suffocate the public school system in the name of alternative education is defeatist at
best and outrageous at worst. It is nothing less than an unspoken acceptance of the false idea that all
will prosper if some are helped and the rest are abandoned. Unlike other states like California, who
education systems are strangled by immoveable educational bureaucracies and powerful teachers
unions, South Carolina education is still unshackled and capable of real reform and nothing could be
worse than that prescription for defeat which does not see that our public school system and our
higher education systems are the glue that will bind South Carolina into a single community of interest
and progress.
Governor Sanford and the Stimulus Funds
Nothing better illustrates the crisis of South Carolina’s condition and the pathology of SC politics than
the question of whether SC should accept the hundreds of millions of dollars from the Federal
Stimulus Package. The issue is not whether the Stimulus was a good bill or smart policy. That debate
will go on but what can not be disputed is that the Bill was enacted by the Congress and signed by the
President and is, for good or ill the law of the land.
South Carolinians will pay their share of the cost of that legislation no matter what. What is
indisputable is that this state is in a dire crisis financially and that crisis directly threatens SC’s already
crippled education system. Further there are thousands of our fellow citizens who are experiencing
traumatic and devastating impacts on their lives. These South Carolinians and their families need
immediate help and not political gamesmanship.
Governor Sanford’s refusal to take SC’s rightfully share of that stimulus is truly beyond the pale. I do
not question his sincerity nor do I believe that he acts for political self aggrandizement. Rather he is
showing that the political process of this state has yielded up the kind of person who has no business
being the leader of a state in such crisis. On the altar of ideological purity he is willing to sacrifice the
lives of many and the future of the states children. To say that he is insensitive, even callus, is an
understatement. The more subtle but critical point is that the SC political system is so out of joint that
blind adherence to ideological theory can become in SC a viable-and even acceptable- basis to
conduct the publics affairs over the rule of rationality and common sense.
Sanford’s actions has drawn the opposition and ignited the anger of much of SC. Even leaders of his
own party can not support either his actions or the illogical rational he has offered. Almost all of the
state’s major newspapers, including many who have endorsed him in the past have expressed
vehemence disagreement and utter dismay over his refusal. There has been incredible negative
reaction, according to polls, from SC’s citizenry.
B. The Crisis in the Political System
South Carolina’s political and governing system is dysfunctional and in need of real reform. Although
revised in part, nearly 40 years ago, the basis of constitutional government in South Carolina rests on
a state constitution, enacted in the late 19th century with the specific purpose of insuring white
supremacy. Furthermore, it is a constitution that dilutes responsibility and gives an abundance of
power to the legislature at the expense of a weak constitutional executive, a governor who is the
states chief executive more in name than in fact. Too many departments and agencies are the
creatures of the legislatures and beyond the effective power of the governor. The result has been
agencies which are characterized by cronyism and lack of accountability. Indeed South Carolina’s
government has been notorious for operating as a “good ol’ boys” system. The legislator’s
responsibility is for legislation and oversight and not the exercise of executive power. South Carolina
needs a governor who can be held strictly accountable for the operations and competence of state
departments and agencies.
Several examples:
• Perhaps the most serious is the state Budget and Control Board of which the governor is only
one of five members; two are independently elected statewide officials and two are legislators (the
latter surprisingly are not the two presiding officers but rather the chairman of the Senate and House
Appropriations/Ways and Means committee). The Board constituents the real power in South
Carolina with the unilateral authority to impose across the board cuts in spending. Its behavior is
perhaps best illustrated by the revelation that for 22 years it has given a no bid exclusive insurance
contract to the same well connected politically influential company.
• Recently it was revealed the chief investigator of the Department of Health and Environment
was ordered by his superiors to close down a significant fraud investigation in response to the private
demand of a single legislator. This one incident alone which became public only incidentally should
not be the cause for the greatest outrage. Rather what is more egregious is that the management of
this important agency is subject to the direct whims of the Legislature in the first place.
• The most note worthy recent controversy has involved the Employment Security Commission
which has been under attack by Governor Sanford and others over its administration of the states
unemployment compensation funds. In December, the Governor threatened not to accept an
emergency loan from the federal government to sustain the ESC which was nearly insolvent. While
the Governor’s holding hostage relief for tens of thousands of unemployed South Carolinians-until the
very eve of Christmas-was heartlessly cruel, he had a real point about the inefficient operations of the
ESC over which he has no direct authority. The Commissions members, whose salaries exceed over
$100,000.00 a year, are all former legislators who have been gifted this sinecure by their former
colleagues.
Dysfunctional Government
These controversies and scandals are not isolated. Almost any week one can read in the media new
allegations of blatant inefficiency or incompetence as well as outright corruption and fraud leveled
against a host of state departments and agencies many of which are under the direct control of the
Legislature and not the elected chief executive, SC’s Governor.
Whether judges should be elected by the people or appointed by a governor subject to legislative
confirmation has been for years a topic of debate around the nation. But a system where judges are
elected outright by the legislature is unusual, and frankly I find a little bizarre.
The real issue is whether SC government is enhanced by investing so much of the executive power as
well as the states judicial power upon the legislative branch. Such is doubtful on its face and certainly
questionable given history. Reading the temper of SC it would seem that a real system of clear cut
governmental authority and meaningful checks and balances would be preferable.
It could be argued that in the Capitol the one party system truly exists and that party is the “good ol’
boys” party.
The “good ol’ boy system” which has been the historic condition still exists to a great extent although
there has been a recent stirring of reform. The conflict could not be better glimpsed than in the
recent battles over “transparency” in legislative voting. Imagine my shock that the States Senate in
the past has rarely taken a recorded vote whether it is even on final passage of bills much less during
the amendment process. The House has hardly been more inspiring. When reforms were proposed
at the beginning of the 2009 legislative session, GOP House Speaker Bobby Harrell imposed his idea
of transparency reform: any member who had been recorded as present in the mornings quorum call
would be considered to have voted in the affirmative for any bill unless that legislator specifically
informed the Clerk of the House that he or she specifically opposed a bill. Harrell’s “reform” ignited a
political firestorm that resulted in the leadership’s having to accept the very real reforms that their
move was designed to head off.
Certainly this is encouraging but hardly enough. The public has an inherent right to know exactly how
their laws are created and government conducted; and not just when the “good ol’ boys” think it would
be adequate. Government behind closed doors is inherently corrupt and a government spirit of “good
ol’ boyism” is an invitation to cronyism and outright corruption. The people of South Carolina have a
right to a fair government based on the simple fact of being a citizen and not on who they know. The
public deserve to know every action taken by those solons who have been elected to represent them.
Otherwise, how can any of them be held accountable for their actions?
Government in the Sunshine should be a basic tenet of any platform of a broad citizen movement
seeking to reform South Carolina. However it will not be enough to merely challenge the process; it
must include as well proposals to address the need for fundamental structural change in the
governing of SC. The Palmetto State needs a 21st century government and not merely the patched
up relic from horse and buggy days.
Lack of Political Competition
The crisis in SC political system is not restricted to the conduct of government. Elections in SC are
equally dysfunctional. The most distinguishing feature of SC politics is the lack of real competition.
In this new century every general election has seen upwards of 70% of the seats in the SC legislature
go uncontested by one of the major parties. Just consider the last three general elections:
• In 2004 69% of the seats in the Senate (52%) and the House (75%) lacked either a candidate of
the Democratic or Republican parties.
• In 2006 only 27 of the 124 House seats saw both major parties represented by candidates on
the general election ballot. That is to say that 78% of the elections were uncontested by both major
parties.
(Unlike almost every other state SC elects all 46 of its states senators to a 4 year term at the same
time rather than half being elected each general election and those Senate elections occur only in
presidential election years. This means that in an “off year” election, where state elections
predominate due to the election of the Governor and other statewide officials occurring voters only
choose one house of the Legislature and thus all members of the Senate avoid facing election in non
presidential election years where focus is naturally greatest on state government.)
• In 2008 117 of the 170, or 69%, Senate (63%) and House (71%) were uncontested by one or
the other major parties. In the Senate 2/3 of the Republicans elected face no Democratic opposition
and slightly over half of the Democrats faced no Republican opposition. In the House 72% of the
Republicans elected and 67% of the Democrats elected had no major party opposition. Overall
respectively 70% of the 98 Republicans elected and 68% of the 71 Democrats elected faced no major
party opposition.
A healthy democracy depends on real competition. When better than two thirds of the elections for
government feature no competition real democracy becomes merely a façade. When South Carolinas
June primaries attract often less than 1/5 of the states voters the reality becomes inescapable that the
vast majority of the states legislator - by structure the preeminent ruling authority in the state - are
actually elected by at best 10% of the voters.
When the representatives of the people’s government rely on so few voters the result is predictable –
they cater only to those they need to be elected. In effect even when the general election turn out is
as large as it was in 2008 the reality becomes that the vast majority of voters do not exercise any real
power. At the root of all of SC problems and dissatisfaction is this fundamental truth and no real
change can be expected as long as this political condition exists.
Racial Gerrymandering
There is a simple reason for this condition – gerrymandering. Interestingly the state that I am most
recently familiar with, California, has a similar problem of non competitive elections. In CA however
the gerrymandering is a product of a bi-partisan agreement by Democratic and Republican leaders to
divvy the state up into almost all “safe” incumbent seats, in effect creating permanent Democratic
Party majorities. In SC the cause of gerrymandering is something else: race.
For several decades now the SC Republican incumbents have joined with Democratic black
incumbents in an agreement to create a maximum of all black districts and hence also creating a
majority all white districts. Initially the rational that super black majority districts were necessary, given
history, to insure African- American representation once might have had merit. But in a nation which
has elected a black president and in a region many black candidates for office are elected in multi
racial white plurality districts this rational no longer suffices. Beyond racial concerns this
gerrymandering reflects the instincts of incumbents for super self preservation. They seek not merely
districts they can win but in effect super safe districts in which they can not be even challenged.
The effect of such gerrymandering in SC is a two pronged polarization. First of all it continues and
furthers the ugly stain of racial polarization in SC. Since the electorate in almost every legislative
district is disproportionally white (i.e. Republican) or black (i.e. Democratic) most challengers of the
wrong race are discouraged from running. This only intensifies a racially under girded partisan divide.
As one keen student of SC politics has observed, this political racial polarization is even more
insidious. It is not merely the skin color of representatives that are determinative by such
disproportional racial districts; it’s also the political dialogue and political interests that are harmed. In
such a circumstance, legislators of one race, in effect elected by so few of their race in primaries,
have little incentive to work with legislators of the other race. Since the primary electorate is so small
it almost always reflects the dominance of the most ardent partisans and most intense ideologues of
that political persuasion, candidates feel they must cater to those extremes to be nominated and thus
automatically elected. They can do so with little regard to the less partisan less ideological and more
“common sense” voters; not only a majority of their own party but the entire citizenry as well.
If it seems in SC that small issues that are of higher emotional intensity dominate the political
discourse and process at the expense of the larger common interest and greater community concerns
it is a direct consequence of this gerrymandered inspired polarization. The sad result is to constantly
divide the people around issues of minor significance rather than unite the citizens in common cause.
There is no greater example of this truth than the several years spent emotionally debating the
Confederate flag issue when from the outset more than 60% of the people supported what became
the eventual compromise as the right solution. However legislators kept hammering the issue
because it was a political advantage for incumbents appealing to their narrow bases and deterring
potential primary opposition. The entire state of SC paid the price for this kind of divisive nonsense
and the people as a whole have suffered from the lack of attention to the serious issues which impact
their lives and the future of their children.
Another effect of such racial/partisan polarization is that it separates the concerns of some from
interests of everybody. Issues such as poverty, joblessness, and reform will never be a priority as
long as there are issues which a majority of those in government do not have to care about. This
polarized gerrymandered non-competitiveness will never produce the kind of broad reform program
necessary to advance SC unless it is challenged.
Thus a broad citizen’s effort for reform can not possibly succeed unless there is a willingness to
change this kind of inherently divisive and undemocratic process.
(A note: This problem of gerrymandering extends as well to SC Congressional seats. This is
particularly true in the shaping of the First and Sixth CD-Henry Brown’s and Jim Clyburn’s
respectively- and why in 2008 when Republican candidates in the state barely edged the Democrats
in aggregate total vote, 50.3% to 49.7%- that the GOP won 2/3 of the seats.)
Another result of the polarized gerrymandering as a foundation has been one party rule in SC. At
least for the Republicans it can be said even if it is not good for the state as a whole at least it is good
for the GOP. Unfortunately for the Democrats it is not only bad for everyone in the state it is
particularly bad for the Democratic Party which currently seems consigned to a permanent minority
party status.
As long as the structure of SC politics exists along the current racial/partisan polarization fault line
then two outcomes are virtually assured. First, it will be near impossible except in a moment of great
crisis as we now face to ever have the center of the political dialogue elevated to the central concerns
of the broad citizenry or to have a viable platform for the broad agenda of reform and change which
the state needs. Secondly, it means that the current partisan imbalance will continue to be frozen in
place. Democrats may pick up a victory here or there, they may even in fact win an occasional
Governorship but nothing else will change as long as the political discourse is defined over such a
fault line. It will be nearly impossible to see a truly healthy competition two party state develop.
For Democrats the choice is very simple: either they will continue to accept the racial/partisan
polarized gerrymandering and be content with wining whatever measure of benefits i.e. the crumbs off
the table or they will understand as must African American leaders, that in 21st century America there
is no limit to what can be achieved by a politics of mutual interests and the greater common good
being put before concerns of self and palpable fear.
Frankly the Democratic Party has little to lose by seeking the path of broader coalition and political
reform. Not only do the Republicans dominate in national politics, having carried SC in all but one
presidential election since 1964 but they also have a strangle hold on the power of state government.
The Republicans have held the governorship 20 of the last 24 years; for most of the last decade they
have held 8 of the 9 statewide elected offices and just barely under 60% of the Senate and House
seats in the Legislature.
To paraphrase an old idea-“Democrats of South Carolina unite around big ideas. You have nothing
to loose but your minority party shackles.”
Women and South Carolina Politics
In truth, the real sub title here should be “The Lack of Women in South Carolina Politics”. According
to the Southeastern Institute for Women in Politics, SC ranks 50th – dead last – in the nation in terms
of women in public office. Only 10% of the law makers in SC are women! Today after the 2008
election there were 16 women members of the House of Representatives and for the first time since
1979 there were NO WOMEN in the State Senate – making it the only all male state senate in the
country. Currently not one of the nine statewide elected officials is a woman. (By contrast in North
Carolina the governor and six of the ten statewide elected officers are women.)
In SC history only three women have been elected to statewide office: a Lt. Governor for a single term
in 1979 and two Superintendents of Education who together held that office from 1991 thru 2007.
Indeed only one woman has ever been elected to congress in her own right and she served only
three terms for six years.
The incredible paucity of women in elected office in SC, in its own way, speaks volumes to the
pervasive – indeed perverse – the “good ol’ boys” system which dominates SC politics.
This state of public affairs, particularly in the 21st century, at the very least embarrassing to all South
Carolinians and arguably constitutes an insult to the majority of its citizens who happen to be female.
More importantly this dearth of women in SC politics constitutes a colossal waste of SC most valuable
resource, its citizens. It is a proven fact that women are generally far more in favor of change and
reform than are men. Women also tend to be much more sensitive to issues of social injustice and to
those issues, like education, that impact children and their future. If SC is to have transforming
change and real political reform much of that impetus must come from mobilizing women and elevating
their participation in SC – particularly in positions of leadership. I would argue that any real citizens
movement in SC will rise or fall on the success of substantially raising the participation of women in
this states political life.
Money and South Carolina Politics
SC politics is drowning in special interest money. According to one study which found that during the
9 year period, 1996-2004, approximately $90 million was spent on SC state political contests. Of that
total less than 1% came from contributions of less than $200. In another study of election year 2006,
it was suggested that over 80% of SC contributions came from PACs or other sources of special
interest money. As sure as the sun rises, government spending and tax breaks our doubtlessly in
direct relationship to how SC politics is financed.
C. A Metaphor for the Crisis: Garbage & South Carolina
If the state of SC public schools should be a cause for shame, the issue of garbage and SC politics
should be a reason for deep embarrassment. For too long SC has served as the chief repository for
much of the nation’s nuclear waste. As though that were not enough in recent years there has been
a concerted effort to make SC America’s Garbage Dump as well.
Today almost a 1/3 of the waste disposed of in SC comes as a gift from other states. In 2001, the
state imported less than 600,000 tons of garbage. According to DHEC and the Congressional
Research Service, 6 years later in 2007, that figure had tripled to 1.7 million tons.
Our sistering state NC alone exported over 600,000 tons of its trash and garbage here. In addition
our sister Southern states using SC as a garbage dump included GA, FL, VA, as well as TN. However
it’s not just our Southern neighbors who utilize SC as a refuse bin. For example NY sent us over
400,000 tons of garbage, MA over 350,000 tons and, perhaps most perversely, NJ sends well over
150,000 tons to our state.
Where does it all go? The answer is we build for them mega dumps with railroads running directly to
those mega dumps to bring box cars upon box cars of trash and garbage into SC everyday to be
dumped and to return the empty trains back to load up even more. The garbage that fills these mega
dumps are not incinerated or even buried underground. In some cases covering dozens of acres the
garbage is piled above ground and then covered with fresh dirt, creating literally mountains of ugly,
smelly, unhealthy garbage and according to one member of the SC Senate there is no limit to just how
high these stacks may rise.
Currently there are hearings in the Legislature whose audiences have been filled with outraged
environmentalist and concerned citizens over two more proposed mega dumps, one in Williamsburg
and the other in Marlboro County. These new mega dumps would be 3 times the states need and
would permit more than 8 times the tonnage of solid waste produced in SC annually.
It is on this issue of garbage that one can smell the true odor of much of SC politics. In 2008 the
residence of Marlboro County voted 94% against this proposed mega dump. Nonetheless the mega
dump is close to becoming reality.
And Why?
Because, according to the fore mentioned SC Senator, the interest group, whose greed knows no
decent boundaries, has hired a virtual lobbying army to advance that greed including a former
governor, lieutenant governor, Revenue director and two of the largest and most powerful law firms in
this state-enlisting the best talent money can buy in the cause of transforming SC into America’s
Garbage Dump.
According to the states dysfunctional ruling elite, the wishes of 94% of the voters means nothing
against the money and influence of greedy special interests and their equally greedy retainers. It
seems that the Rule of Power is “the People be Damned!”
Therefore one of SC few overwhelming natural advantages-the beauty of our state-is threatened to
benefit the narrow self interest of the few while endangering the economic well being of everyone else.
South Carolina deserves better than to lay claim to the title America’s Garbage Dump.
This saga is nothing less than a sad metaphor for everything that is wrong with South Carolina’s
current condition and the health of its political democracy.
II. THE OPPORTUNITY- A NEW DAY IN SOUTH CAROLINA POLITICS
2010 may well present SC with the opportunity to reshape its politics and to rally a majority of the
states voters behind a new broad program of progress and reform. A confluence of factors may come
together to create the political environment necessary for such an outcome. Although it may seem
from the general political discourse that nothing much will change, I believe that idea is wrong.
As conditions worsen and if the dire consensus among SC economic experts proves correct then it will
be self evident that the state is in throes of a crisis. The pressures generated by double digit, broad
base unemployment, and the increased pressured on services like education will be undeniable.
Crisis creates many things but the most important is the instinct among people for political change.
So far though there are few indications that SC governing elite is propelled by any sense of
overwhelming urgency. While the states problems obviously reflect what is happening across
America, the reality can not help but unmask SC special problems.
What will be required is a special and unique effort to maximize the opportunity presented to move SC
forward.
A. South Carolina’s Changing Politics
There is evidence from recent years that suggest that the political environment in SC is already
changing. For the first time ever, in the last two presidential elections a majority of eligible voters cast
ballots. In 2008, according to the Palmetto Project the percentage of eligible voters that cast votes
reached 60% level and that increase from 2004 was the second highest increase in the nation. While
overall that still ranked SC 39th in eligible participation it was a substantial improvement from the
states historical position of ranking 50th for most of the 20th century. According to this study some of
the highest voter turnout occurred in some of the states more rural, less affluent communities.
The Gallup Poll reported that in its aggregated interviews throughout 2008 partisan self identification
in SC was exactly equal, 45% for both Democrats and Republicans. While this from one perspective
still made SC the 8th best Republican state, these equal preferences are a far cry from the standard
assumption that SC is an overwhelmingly Republican state. As cited earlier, of the total aggregate
congressional vote in 2008 the parties split the vote right down the middle in a result that echoed the
Gallup data. Indeed in the first and second Congressional Districts, where George W. Bush averaged
60% of the vote in his two elections, Linda Ketner, in the first CD won 48% of the vote against the
incumbent and in the second CD democratic challenger Rob Miller garnered 46% of the vote.
Since 1984 there has been a slow but steady decline in SC for the Republican presidential
candidate. In 2008 the Republican votes dropped in 43 of 46 counties on an average 3.6% and were
even greater, 4.4%, in the states 11 largest counties. Even more dramatic were the changes in
demographic categories. According to exit polls in 2004 George Bush carried every age group in SC,
including voters between 18-29 year olds. In 2008 John McCain managed only to win only those
voters 45 years and older. Further Barack Obama’s winning performance with younger voters was
even more important given their increased participation and of course as expected the Obama
candidacy drew probably the largest black turnout to the polls since the Voting Rights Act in the mid
1960s.
Obviously the off year election of 2010 is not likely to produce the same level of participation
witnessed in last year’s Presidential election. However this does not obviate the trend of increased
voter participation. Also it is reasonable argument that given the circumstances many more voters
could perceive that they and their families have a direct personal interest in the upcoming election
greater than is normally the case.
(No matter how logical the premises of my argument might be they naturally suffer from a dearth of
public opinion data on the attitudes and opinions of SC voters. SC unlike many states has no regular
non-partisan public opinion surveys to measure these trends. Much remains at best speculation, even
if informed.)
B. The Republican Party
If a broad movement for political reform and progress for SC is to be mounted the question becomes
from where? The Republican Party as the long established majority is unlikely to be a source for this
kind of change which inherently speaks unfavorably to their long time stewardship.
In my opinion not only does the Republican Party in SC suffer the natural entropy of a long ruling
majority-not dissimilar to what I saw of the Democratic Party in California-but it has certain
philosophical instincts which restrict its ability to be a vehicle of change. Instead it is more of an
intramural arena in which to gain the reins of power. For too long the Republicans have prospered by
the racially polarized partisanship that has characterized SC. Its message has been predominately a
message of what it is against rather than what it is for i.e. that is against government, taxes, abortion,
gay marriage, and immigration. As the governing party it claims the mantle of being against
government itself even though in its exercise of power it has none too shy in claiming the privileges,
perks, and political pork of government.
In the social arena the GOP presents itself as the party defending religious values. Yet what exactly
does that mean in a state which, according to Gallup numbers, is the 3rd most intensely religious
state in the country? Indeed the data merely confirms what is obvious to the naked eye, that almost
everyone in SC regardless of their party or ideology is strongly religious thus rendering the
Republican advocacy functionally irrelevant. Indeed, what lack of religious devotion possibly justifies
the clamor of some Republican leaders for putting a religious slogan on SC license plates?
Can there be anything beyond a slavish pursuit of political pandering to explain the mindless union
bashing by SC Republicans in a right-to-work state that has one of the nation’s lowest rate of union
membership? Unless of course, it serves to distract attention from the GOP’s failing stewardship of
SC’s economy.
The Republican Party has become comfortable playing to its white married and socially conservative
voters, a shrinking base at best. Of course that has been an easy if not entirely wholesome course
given the racial/partisan polarization of the states political structure which has rendered it
unnecessary to reach out to minority voters, the poor or younger people. However I suspect that part
of the reason for the apparent decline of SC GOP support that so many of our newcomers even if
they are Republicans find all of this a bit uncomfortable.
There is a certain disconnect that exists between the Republican mantra of cutting taxes and
promising smaller government while engineering a massive spending spree of government
expenditures particularly when those expenditures have little to do with investing in the education and
infrastructure necessary for economic and social growth in SC and instead seem to benefit their
supporters, campaign contributors, and themselves. The contradiction between its philosophical
claims and its performance might prove viable when things are going well but it runs smack into a wall
of reality in the face of the kind of downturn that has hit SC. The kind of forward looking government
necessary to propel a state like SC toward progress seems antithetical to their basic restrictive rigid
philosophy which frankly at another time might have a greater resonance on a national stage than at
this particular moment in SC life.
C. Howard Rich
Perhaps nothing better demonstrates the potential political vulnerability for this state’s dominate
Republican machine than the curious case of Howard Rich and the issue of school vouchers. For
those unfamiliar, Howard Rich is an extremely wealthy New Yorker whose political passion seems to be
school vouchers i.e. using public tax payer funds to help certain students attend private schools even
if it means the evisceration of the public school system. Personally, I believe the national Democratic
Parties refusal at the behest of teachers unions to consider any kind of meaningful reform program
for the public schools- particularly for minority and low income Americans- is both short sighted and
indefensible as is many Republican conservative’s penchant for destroying the American public
school system. Actually I think that some voucher ideas have real merit within the construct of the
public school system itself. Rather than instill competition within the public school system, Mr. Rich
and others of his ilk want to use tax payer’s dollars to create competition between private schools and
the public system which of course tax payer’s must still financially support.
Howard Rich has not been satisfied in intellectually promoting his ideas. Instead he has sought to
make SC a laboratory and the children of SC the lab rats for his extreme ideology. He has tried to
accomplish this by essentially buying the SC Republican Party and has succeeded with a number of
Republican political leaders. Rich has been a prominent financial supporter for, among others,
Governor Mark Sanford throughout his political career. He and his confederates have over recent
years pumped hundreds of thousands even millions of dollars into the coffers of the SC GOP and its
candidates. Some like South Carolina New Democrats have been vigilant in criticizing this. But
generally it has gone unnoticed by most of SC’s media and thus unknown by most SC voters. A few
Republican candidates have been embarrassed into returning his money, but others have not only
accepted his money but have willingly put themselves in his service. When the Republicans succeed
in attempting to enact Rich’s voucher ideas it was rejected decisively in a referendum by SC voters
and was opposed by much of the state’s business community.
Frankly when I discovered this story I was stunned that it had not risen to a level of scandal that would
have led to a severe electoral rebuke for Republicans. After all this is SC and I would think the
concept of carpetbagger and scalawags would find some resonance.
Governor Sanford in his recent State of the State address continues to advocate the policies of his
benefactor. It is exactly such thinking by so many Republicans is why they have no trouble brutally
slashing state support for education at all levels while continuing to oppose help for South Carolinians
in distress all the while advocating endless cuts in state revenues without regard to the reality of SC’s
circumstance. There are many enlightened Republicans that understand that the needs of a
relatively poor state like SC require a localized forward looking government that invests in building for
the future. Unfortunately these voices are marginalized by the dominant Republican political machine
with its rigid ideological cant, its inconsistent self serving performance, and the smugness of its
supposed political invulnerability.
D. The Democratic Party
Given the contours of SC politics the only viable vehicle for such a movement would be the
Democratic Party. But only if it is prepared to shake off its minority party-and bluntly- “losing”-mind
set.
Let me make a personal observation. I have been struck by the fact that the role of loyal opposition to
the incumbent Governor Mark Sanford is played by leaders of his own Republican Party. Perhaps it is
a function of a special media behavior, but when state issues become controversial the dissenting
views reflected in print are usually from other Republicans while often Democratic voices are not
mentioned. Assuming no insidious media plot it seems reasonable that this condition really reflects a
political party which has been a long time minority, wandering in the political wilderness. This is not to
say the Democratic elected and political officials are lacking strong views but only that the party as an
institution is so consistently out of power as to have effectively lost its voice as a perceived viable
alternative by the media.
On the other hand the condition of the Democratic Party makes it a potential vehicle that can be
organized to put forth the kind of reform/progress movement that SC needs and may be seeking now
more than ever. The key test will be whether the Democratic Party establishment is sufficiently open
to make the kinds of changes in itself that will allow it to become a credible vehicle of change by a
majority in the state.
If so then the Democratic Party can be the vehicle for a broad based citizen movement for
independent reform that could infuse it with new leaders and new resources.
E. Citizen Movement
The people of SC and America have their passions and fears aroused by the condition of the state
and the nation. These have created a new sense of outrage and urgency for real change. Anxiety
over real economic decline and a rising tide of anger over Wall Street fraud, corporate self dealing,
and government corruption-(witness the fire storm over AIG bonuses)-have awakened the American
people. People are mad and many are truly afraid. On the state level there has been a similar
negative reaction to Gov Sanford’s blind ideological posturing- be it on unemployment insurance or
stimulus funding - and his apparent total insensitivity to the plight of ordinary South Carolinians.
As previously indicated what South Carolina requires most of all is a broad based citizen movement
comprising a new coalition to bring needed change and political reform to SC at this moment of crisis.
Frankly it must call forth qualities not of strict partisanship and rigid ideology but rather of common
citizenship, common interest, and common purpose and characterized by a predominance of common
sense. Times of crisis like these calls for the broadest coalition of ordinary SC citizens, community
leaders, and the states forward looking business leaders. Such a movement can build upon the
increased participation and interests evidenced among SC voters. It must seek to energize and
involve ordinary citizens in an effort to take back their state government and take charge of reforming
the states politics and building a new South Carolina for the future.
No matter how great the potential exists for such a movement its success hinges on one
indispensable condition: that a group of civic minded and talented leaders create a “spearhead”, that
can launch such a movement and be willing to sustain it with their energy, commitment, and resources
until that movement can reach critical mass and can be carried forward on the shoulders of the
people themselves. Frankly with out such a “spearhead” the possibilities of achieving real political
change become almost beyond reach.
III. SOLUTIONS: WHAT NOW
Below are some ideas chronologically that might help outline the fashioning of such an effort.
A. 2009
1. A General Statement of Principals and an Agenda for the Future
A nucleus group needs to formulate an initial set of principals and an initial broad agenda which can
be communicated and advocated to an ever broadening circle of SC citizens. It would be
presumptuous on my part to suggest what those Principals and Agendas would be. There are many
individuals and groups, such as the New Democrats, who have given thought and made proposals to
consider for such a program. I would only suggest in light of the conditions of crisis that confront
South Carolina that the issues of economic growth and job creation as well as the role of new
technologies in achieving such, transforming the educational system and ensuring equal opportunity,
reforming SC’s governing and political structures with both vision and fiscal responsibility, healthcare,
and enhancing and protecting our natural splendor are all first order concerns.
2. Organizing a Dialogue
Constructing the means of communication utilizing the internet, town meetings, and community forums-
perhaps even in some cases broadcasting on cable television-that invite the ideas and participation of
SC citizens and to build the political movement and to begin the process of forming consensus on a
political platform upon which a movement can stand.
3. Conducting Important Research
There needs to be several research efforts that can support the development of the overall project:
• General Research- much information and data already exists on the issues and problems facing
SC both as a society and as a government. That information needs to be gathered and compiled and
if necessary enhanced to provide the required information resources necessary to support the overall
effort.
• Statistical and Survey Research-there needs to be a comprehensive program of statistical
analysis of SC elections and voting patterns that can assist in prioritizing political goals. There is an
urgent need for in depth survey research that provides a base line to understand the concerns,
interests, and attitude structures of SC’s political citizenry and thus allow a broad basis of input by the
people themselves in shaping the ultimate goals and agenda of such a movement. Such a data base
is indispensable and today is nonexistent. Once that base is established further research efforts to
follow up and extend it such work will be required.
Both research efforts, informational and statistical/survey will require an initial commitment of
significant resources by the spearheading leadership cadre.
4. Identifying and Recruiting Potential Candidates
Ultimately the process must culminate in the finding and recruiting a slate of candidates to run as
members of this Independent Reform movement within the structure of the Democratic Party; for
Governor, other statewide offices, and for the State House. The candidates for the top offices should
emerge out of the processes of deliberation and organization that take place within the movement
itself. It must be a coalition slate that representing the broad face of SC’s people and blend a rich
mosaic of backgrounds and experiences. The candidates need not and should not be only politicians
or traditional office seekers.
At the lower level, in the contests for the State House the emphasis should be on the recruitment of
many fresh new citizen-politicians willing to commit to a period of public service. The goal should be
to field candidates in the vast majority of State House races which typically go uncontested.
5. What Kind of Governor?
Obviously the most critical and visible person in this movement and by definition its ultimate leader,
will be the candidate for Governor. In many ways he will be the public face for the entire citizen effort.
A number of officials have already expressed an intention of running for Governor in 2010. I know not
a single one so I can at the moment speak honestly without any preexisting agenda.
It seems to me the qualities in a candidate for Governor to lead such a movement are to some extent
obvious. That person should not be intellectually or personally committed to the perpetuation of SC’s
current dysfunctional politics. That person must fervently embrace from conviction the need to reform
our politics and to advance a bold program of progress. Most of all, the person must see the primary
role to empower other leaders. The normal candidate mindset of that he or she is the “answer” is
insufficient. A successful candidate for Governor must understand that their primary responsibility is
to bring forth other new leaders in SC as part of a united team that draws its energy and success from
the efforts and contributions of thousands of ordinary citizens.
B. 2010
1. Organizing for Victory
In 2010 the goal must be to see the transformation of a movement into a practical political
organization that can sustain, support, and elect the slate of candidates chosen to run from Governor
to the State House. The success of such will be measured against a standard of unprecedented
participation by the largest number of citizens ever seen in a state election. To achieve such an
organization will be a daunting but necessary challenge.
2. 2010 Primary
If SC general elections feature many voters and few competitive contests, then SC primaries are
distinctive in the paucity of voter participation. Primaries for state wide office and the Legislature
normally attract as few as 6% or 7% of all eligible voters participating in the Democratic primary and
10% to 12% in the Republican primary. (One of the reasons why there are slightly more Republican
primary voters is that there are more intensely contested races for nomination in what is clearly the
majority and thus predominantly winning party.)
However for a broad citizen movement seeking to elect a slate of reform candidates the primaries
offer an unrivaled opportunity to expand the participation of voters and for communicating the political
purposes of such a reform effort. If the candidates of an Independent Reform slate can double
participation rate of voters in the primary then it will instantly establish the credibility and vitality of the
entire movement. Indeed it is probably not an overstatement to suggest that transforming the primary
turn out by a significant degree could so shake the foundations of SC politics to make victory in
November likelihood.
A last word:
South Carolina has one of the richest histories of any state in America; it is no accident that South
Carolinians take such pride in their state nor is it a coincidence that the Palmetto and Crescent is
second only to the Texas Lone Star as the most recognized ensign among American states.
South Carolina’s Civil War experience is certainly the best know chapter of its history. However that
period triggers many emotional responses some of pride and others of bitterness. In truth it is not a
unifying story but sadly a divisive one.
Although lesser known the South Carolina’s role in the American Revolution War is one of the
brightest epics in the annals of American history. From the storied repulse of the British fleet at Fort
Moultrie which inspired the Palmetto and Crescent flag to the swamps of the Francis Marion National
Park from which the Swamp Fox and his hearty band harassed the British occupiers to the field at
Cowpens where a hopeless tide of defeat was turned into an incredible victory, South Carolina can lay
claim to more battlefields than the rest of the American Colonies combined. Even after the loss of two
American armies within the space of months at Charleston and Camden, South Carolina’s patriots
never gave up. Time and again they were judged to be defeated and yet over and over again our
fore fathers rose from the ashes like a Phoenix of Freedom ultimately paving the way for the final
victory at Yorktown. Had South Carolina died it is likely the American Revolution would have failed.
It seems to me that this is the story around which today’s generation can draw inspiration and rally
together in the cause of a South Carolina future that would make our earlier patriots proud.