Stimulus fight should be state issue, not federal

South Carolina lawmakers should be able to budget and spend federal stimulus money without Gov. Mark Sanford’s approval.
It’s all part of the legislative process and legitimate government business, we believe, but the legal maneuvering between the governor and legislature will go to court this week.
A U.S. District Court will decide Monday whether he’ll hear cases related to the stimulus money or kick it back to the South Carolina Supreme Court.
We hope he lets the Supreme Court decide the unprecedented matter. The decision affects the state profoundly and should not be determined by the federal judiciary. It’s a state issue.
A July 1 deadline for accepting more than $700 million in federal money makes the case a high priority for the state.
We find it ironic that Sanford, who’s refusing to accept federal bailout, would turn to a federal court to bail him out in a legal matter. The case originally was scheduled to be heard in the Supreme Court before Sanford’s legal team moved for a switch to federal court.
Stanford vetoed a state budget from the legislature that included the stimulus money. His action set the stage for litigation and opened a Pandora’s Box or legal issues.
The governor has maintained he will not ask for $350 million a year for the next two budget years unless state lawmakers pay off an equal amount in state debt.
One of the three lawsuits was brought by two South Carolina students. Chapin High School student Casey Edwards and University of South Carolina law student Justin Williams say the governor must accept the money to help public schools and universities create budgets and provide an adequate education.
Edwards filed a similar lawsuit in April, but the S.C. high court rejected it at the time, saying the General Assembly had to pass legislation requiring the money.
The lawyer for the students is looking for an expedited ruling in the case.
“This matter needs to be resolved quickly,” said Dick Harpootlian, a former chief prosecutor for Richland and Kershaw counties, “so the people, especially the children of this state, know whether they are going to get the resources they need to ensure our kids get educated.”
Sanford is risking his office’s standing by refusing to accept the money and testing the constitutionality of whether the legislature can force him to accept money.
“Our suit is fundamentally about the balance of power and separation of powers in our state, and whether or not the Legislature is going to be allowed to erode the executive branch even further in South Carolina,” Sanford said in a statement. “Legislative dominance costs our state’s citizens far too much for the way it breeds waste and duplication, and the last thing we need to be doing is exporting that dysfunctional system to other states, which is what will happen if our General Assembly is allowed to rewrite federal law in this way.”
The case has the potential to weaken the governor’s office if the Supreme Court sides with the legislature and the students.
“The circumstances in this case are extraordinary and unparalleled in state history,” state Attorney General Henry McMaster argued in a response to the lawsuit when he originally was scheduled to be heard by the Supreme Court. “The issues are novel and fundamental constitutional questions are at stake, as this court is asked to draw another constitutional line of demarcation between the exercise of legislative and executive power.”
The case seems more clear-cut to us. The legislature passes bills after figuring out how to pay for them. It did its job. The governor’s job is to either sign or veto the budget. He vetoed it and was overridden. The process has been regrettable from the beginning, as state Superintendent of Education Jim Rex said recently. The decision by the federal court or state high court will allow thousands directly impacted by the stimulus funds to move on with their lives.
We’re ready for the next step.

— Unsigned editorials represent the views of this newspaper. Editorial board members are Mark Laskowski (regional publisher), James Bennett (regional editor), Sam Bundy (sports editor), Kimberly Ginfrida (news editor), David Johnson (regional circulation director), Charles Tomlinson (Lake City News & Post editor) and Jackie Torok (metro editor).