Gov. Sanford Ordered To Take Stimulus Cash

South Carolina's Supreme Court ordered Gov. Mark Sanford on Thursday to take $700 million in federal stimulus money aimed primarily at struggling schools.

The decision brings a likely end to months of wrangling between the nation's most vocal anti-bailout governor and legislators who accused him of playing politics with people's lives.

The Republican governor had refused to take the money designated for the state over the next two years, even after legislators passed a budget requiring him to do so. He became the first governor to defend in court his desire to reject money from Washington.

Educators had predicted hundreds of teachers would lose jobs and colleges would see steep tuition increases without the money, though sharp budget cuts will still take a toll.

The state Supreme Court's ruling came a day after arguments in two lawsuits filed by students and school administrators. Sanford had tried to get those cases merged in federal court with his lawsuit, which he filed moments after legislators overrode his budget veto. But he lost that battle Monday when a federal judge refused to take those cases.

Sanford anticipated Thursday's ruling. On Monday, the governor said he would not appeal the Supreme Court's decision and, if he lost, would drop his federal case.

Sanford has refused to request the $700 million - the portion of the $2.8 billion bound for the state that he says he controls - unless legislators agreed to offset state debt by an equal amount. The White House twice rejected that idea, noting the money must be used to help education and avoid job losses.

South Carolina, which had the nation's third-highest jobless rate in April - hitting a state record high of 11.5 percent - cut more than $1 billion from its $7 billion spending plan for 2008-09 as tax revenues slumped in the recession.

The stimulus fight has raised the national profile of Sanford, the chairman of the Republican Governors Association, and prompted talk of a 2012 GOP presidential bid.

Sanford's refusal has raise the ire of U.S. Rep. Jim Clyburn, the No. 3 House Democrat, who accused the governor of being a foe of public education. Amid budget cuts and uncertainty over the federal money, districts had told hundreds of teachers they don't have a job in the upcoming school year.

State education officials estimated schools would eliminate 2,600 education jobs, including 1,500 teachers, without the stimulus money.

Clyburn, D-S.C., inserted an amendment in the federal law with Sanford's anti-bailout stance in mind, saying legislators could go around a governor's refusal. But the legality of that was later questioned.

But on Monday, U.S. District Judge Anderson cited Clyburn's amendment in saying it was clear Congress intended to allow legislators to get around governors who didn't want the money.

[ozilot]

Oh I hope that Sanford doesn't keep to his word and pursues his law suit in the Supreme Court!

One of the many irony's here is that he is wasting South Carolina's tax-payers money by going to court, ignoring the state legislature - which is controlled by the GOP, and suing the Republican AG of his state, not to mention that he is wasting more tax-payer money from all the states by going to the supreme court! while defending himself by saying that he is saving future generations from debt that he himself if helping to grow!

Truly, I hope Sanford pursues his presidential ambitions as he will only appeal to hard core republicans while alienating moderate GOP (if there are still any) and independents...

Way to go Grossly Out-of-touch Party!

[abbe91]

"They want children wearing little brown shirts spying on their friends households and tattling to the communist president's regime."
Posted by IThoughtItWasFunnyAgain at 5:18 AM : Jun 5, 2009

That's what the patriot act was intended for ...

[abbe91]

"The greatest irony is that "state's rights" Sanford wanted to have this issue adjudicated in federal courts rather than the courts of our state. That is clearly a form of hypocrisy for someone who doesn't want the feds meddling in state affairs. But in the tradition of SC which in the antebellum years wanted the federal government to squash abolitionists while letting southerners expand slavery everywhere.
Posted by freespeech101 at 6:37 AM : Jun 5, 2009"

The same irony as in the Minnesota race for US Senate. Wonder whether there will be a federal appeal after the MN SC declares Franken the winner.

[freespeech101]

Sanford got outmaneuvered by the Democrats. His presidential ambitions were well known and the Dems anticipated that he would refuse the funds to score points---so they inserted the special clause in the bill to circumvent it. The most brilliant move however, was reframing the issue by having a STUDENT challenge him in court on the grounds of "refusing to fund education"---which by the way is only one aspect of the bill. All of sudden, the narrative becomes "Stanford refuses to fund public education". Regardless of how the state supreme court ruled, that narrative sticks. And refusing to fund education is a lose/lose position for any politician of any party. Checkmate!

The Republicans continue to play "Checkers" while the Democrats are playing "Chess"

[freespeech101]

The greatest irony is that "state's rights" Sanford wanted to have this issue adjudicated in federal courts rather than the courts of our state. That is clearly a form of hypocrisy for someone who doesn't want the feds meddling in state affairs. But in the tradition of SC which in the antebellum years wanted the federal government to squash abolitionists while letting southerners expand slavery everywhere.

[ktgilb1]

It's funny, all i hear from the GOP is everything " President Obama" does is bad, well where are your ideas GOP? what do you have to offer as a counter plan? if your not part of the solution your part of the problem, stop being part of the problem. I wonder if Bush had done this would the GOP be so opposed? These are states that really needed the money. Gove Sanford what was your alternative to not taking that money, if your state was that well off it wouldn't have been offered to you in the 1st place, so its evident that you needed it, but you would rather put party loyalty oer the needed of your people, this is why the GOP is held in such low reguard.

[toldyouso29]

Sanford anticipated Thursday's ruling. On Monday, the governor said he would not appeal the Supreme Court's decision and, if he lost, would drop his federal case. "

Say goodbye to your reelection bid, Sanford. LOL

[freespeech101]

This ridiculous, arrogant twit is just one of the many faces of the Grand Obstructionist Party. He deserves to have his a$$ handed to him on this one.


GOP = EPIC FAIL !