Sanford sues state attorney general over stimulus

COLUMBIA (AP) -- First, South Carolina's governor refused to accept federal stimulus money for his state's struggling schools. Then the Republican vetoed a state budget that required him to take it.

This week, Gov. Mark Sanford sued his own state's elected officials in federal court, arguing the government can't tell him what to do.

Observers and critics say prolonging the monthslong fight with the White House and his own GOP-controlled Legislature won't help his rumored 2012 presidential bid but will hurt programs that need money.

"It seems to me like the governor is sticking hard and fast to his principles and sees consensus-building as a sellout," said Blease Graham, a University of South Carolina political scientist. "I don't see much benefit for the state - or his political future in the state."

Only Sanford and his few political allies dispute the need for the cash. The current year's budget started at $7 billion but the recession forced cuts of more than $1 billion. Without the $700 million over two years from Washington that Sanford has rejected, educators predict hundreds of teacher layoffs, colleges forecast tuition hikes and lawmakers say prisons won't be able to operate.

"What we'd be doing is opening the prison doors and saying, 'Gentlemen and ladies, go,'" said state Sen. Hugh Leatherman, chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, as he pushed the overrides earlier in the week.

The court fight over the money was expected and allows Sanford to further object to President Barack Obama's $787 billion economic stimulus package, which he's contended devalues the dollar and will open spending gaps when the money runs out.

On Wednesday, minutes after lawmakers overrode his vetoes, Sanford sued his own attorney general and a day later explained the argument is now about who presides over a state - not about the stimulus money.

The lawsuit says the governor is the highest executive authority in the state and asks the federal court to declare the Legislature violated the South Carolina Constitution by requiring he request the money. It also asks the court to block the money from heading to the state until a ruling is made.

"It's going to set precedent for the next governor and the governor after that," he said. "This is about the balance of power."

South Carolina government programs would see up to $2.8 billion in federal stimulus cash in the next two years and Sanford has a say over only a slice of that. He's pushed to use the $700 million to offset state debt, an approach the White House twice rejected.

Sanford, also chairman of the Republican Governors Association, has raised his national political profile along the way. He's written editorials for national newspapers and appeared on political talk shows. At home, he's been assailed in newspaper editorials and targeted by teacher-driven rallies calling for his ouster.

His lawsuit, technically filed against Attorney General Henry McMaster because he represents the General Assembly, contends lawmakers cut into the governor's authority and violated the state and federal constitutions.

Making Sanford take the money "would require his agreement to these onerous federal educational mandates and unsustainable spending commitments, would further burden South Carolina's economy and substantially increase the state's debt in the future and therefore is contrary to the welfare of the people of South Carolina," the court document states.