EDITORIAL: S.C. deserves to see Sanford's ethics report

The citizens of South Carolina have come to expect transparency from government. The ethics report on Gov. Mark Sanford will be no exception after a state Supreme Court ruling last week.

Sanford and his lawyers claimed a criminal investigation by the State Ethics Commission would prejudice a possible impeachment case against him in the General Assembly. They argued unsuccessfully against providing the report to the House.

To the contrary, House leaders need the report to decide whether to proceed with impeachment against the governor next year. If the report reveals damaging information against Sanford, he will have a chance to respond.

We wonder what the Ethics Commission will find beyond media reports on his misuse of travel and state aircraft, if anything. But whatever it is, the taxpayers and citizens of the state deserve a full account.

Legislators need the information to decide whether to move ahead with impeachment in January. If the findings are negligible in the eyes of state leaders, and if they lack an outrage factor, the state might be better off to avoid the spectacle of impeachment.

Sanford will have served seven years as the state’s chief executive in January. He will be out of office after the 2010 election.

With his lack of credibility and influence after leaving the state unannounced for five days in June and after admitting an extramarital affair, Sanford is the ultimate lame duck in Columbia.

The Ethics Commission took on the investigation after reports of Sanford’s travel practices by The Associated Press and other state media.

The AP found Sanford used state airplanes for personal and political purposes, used pricey commercial travel despite a state low-cost travel requirement and didn’t report private plane trips given by friends and donors.

“We believe that once all of the facts and the complete story are on the table, people will see that this administration has consistently been a good steward for the taxpayer,” Sanford lawyer Butch Bowers said in a statement.

The prospect of impeachment was raised at a special session of the legislature two weeks ago and was tabled for discussion until January. That was a good decision, in our opinion, because the ethics report will be crucial to the state’s future.

Ethics Commission Director Herb Hayden said he expects the commission will meet Nov. 18. It will know then whether formal charges against the governor are necessary.

We disagree with the commission’s decision to delay any release of the report after Nov. 18, even pending any Sanford appeals. Any delay undermines transparency.

In an Aug. 28 letter to the legislature, Sanford pushed the envelope for transparency, waiving his confidentiality rights. The Republican tried to change his argument before the Supreme Court, saying he only meant to allow the scope of the investigation to be released.

“That (the letter) indicated ‘his intent was to waive confidentiality without limitation,’” the Supreme Court ruled.

Some in the legislature pushed for an earlier impeachment for Sanford, saying the results of the Ethics Commission report are irrelevant.

We do not think the decision to impeach will hinge completely on the report, because the House has other means of investigating. But the report provides a framework for House members and the public from which to start. It will be easier to move forward from there.

— 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).