Sanford Impeachment talk grows louder among lawmakers

COLUMBIA - When Gov. Mark Sanford first admitted in June to having an extramarital affair, most state lawmakers agreed that it wasn't likely he would be impeached. The state constitution reserves impeachment for "serious crimes or serious misconduct in office" and the consensus was that, while cheating on his wife was wrong, it wasn't a serious crime or misconduct that related to his job.

But since then, and because of the attention on the affair, more and more information has been coming out about the governor's travel and possible violations of state regulations and ethics rules. Documents show the governor sometimes traveled first class, when state regulations prohibit the use of taxpayers' money for that. There are also allegations that he used the state airplane for personal and/or frivolous reasons.

And those revelations have changed the tone among lawmakers, many of whom are now saying they think an article of impeachment could make it out of the House Judiciary Committee and on to the House floor for a vote.

Rep. Todd Rutherford, D-Columbia, says, "I think most of us, including myself, were not concerned about the affair. But it has now turned into a misuse of state funds, him flying first class when the regulations clearly call for him to fly business class. It has now turned into misuse of the state airplane. So there currently appears to be... a groundswell of support at this point in the Judiciary Committee, at least, for impeachment."

Rutherford is on that committee, as is Rep. Greg Delleney. Delleney thinks Sanford should have resigned right after he admitted the affair and thinks that alone was worthy of impeachment. He says he will vote for impeachment if it does come to the committee.

"It's my belief that he involved himself in dereliction of duty when he left this state, which I think originally he had planned to leave for 10 days and it was like four, five or six days before he even called in. No one knew where he was. That was a dereliction of duty, coupled with the fact that he committed a premeditated lie, which he involved his staff in to try to cover up where he was. And that, to me, was a dereliction of duty and reaches serious misconduct," Delleney says.

It would take a two-thirds vote of the entire House to agree that the governor had committed serious crimes or misconduct and issue charges. If that happened, then it would be up to the state Senate to try the case and a two-thirds vote there would be needed to remove him from office.

House Speaker Bobby Harrell says talk of impeachment is premature. He supports the attorney general's call for the State Ethics Commission to investigate the governor's case first. "After an Ethics Commission investigation, the House can determine the appropriate course of action," Harrell said in a written release. "This action might include censuring the governor, accepting an impeachment resolution or determining that no further action is necessary."

WSPA, WBTW's sister station in Spartanburg, sent an e-mail to every House member, except the two who don't have e-mail accounts, asking where they stand on the possibility of impeaching the governor. Because the legislature is out of session until January, most members did not respond because they don't check their House e-mail accounts as often.

But here's what we heard from those who did respond:

When asked who would vote in favor of impeaching the governor, Rep. Bakari Sellers, D-Denmark, responded simply, "Count me."

But Rep. Gilda Cobb-Hunter, D-Orangeburg, responded, "I believe our time would be better spent on creating jobs and dealing with the $200 million budget shortfall."

Rep. Mike Forrester, R-Spartanburg, said, "An impeachment vote would have to be based on evidence/proof of wrong doing. To date I have not been privy to that so it would be premature at this point to say how I would vote were that to come before the House."

And Rep. Keith Kelly, R-Spartanburg, was similar. "I can't say at this point (how I would vote) because I haven't read the articles of impeachment (don't know any have been drafted) and I haven't seen any supporting documentation. Because we are out of Session, I haven't seen more than a few of my peers. I don't know what the feelings are."

Rep. Mike Sottile, R-Isle of Palms, responded, "I would need more discussion and debate to make a decision. Its a little early for me and I certainly can't speak for the other House Members. I suspect there will be discussion at the caucus meeting next week."

But Rep. Boyd Brown, D-Winnsboro, said, "The votes are there," to pass an impeachment bill out of the House Judiciary Committee.

Rep. Garry Smith, R-Simpsonville, said simply, "It is premature at this time."

On Friday, the Associated Press released the results of an investigation that shows Sanford took dozens of flights on private planes that he didn't report despite a state law requiring him to disclose who paid for the travel. The AP discovered 35 flights Sanford took on private planes that he did not disclose on ethics or campaign reports. The flights are noted on calendars obtained through a public records request.

Sanford's staff says he didn't report the flights because longtime friends or political groups paid for them. But state ethics officials say Sanford must report his use of private planes even if friends pay.

"We continue to believe that the AP is selective in their view of the Governor's travel," Sanford Communications Director Benjamin Fox said in a statement released to the media. "That has been the case, and based on this press account, it looks like this may continue to be the case. With the flights in question the office believed it was operating in full accord with all state laws. In many instances the governor was using private airplanes rather than the state plane as a way of saving taxpayer money. In other instances he simply, but emphatically, disagrees that flights should be classified as something other than what they were - with 'friends and family.' In still others arranged and paid for by an outside campaign committee or another political candidate, his campaign committee believed disclosure requirements would be met by the committee that had procured the flight," Fox said.

"The Governor continues to believe that as the full story gets out on airplane travel the public will come to see the ways in which his office has used the state plane one third or more less than any of his predecessors over the last twenty years. In the same vein, he used single engine airplane travel rather than expensive jet travel to save taxpayers hundreds of thousands of dollars, and did things like selling off a state-owned jet to save taxpayers more than $1 million," Fox said.