Sunday, July 12, 2009

The End of the Mark Sanford Era

Oh what a difference a few months can make. Back in March, I wrote a piece for the Spartanburg Spark called “Introducing Presidential Candidate Mark Sanford”. Back then, if I’d been asked to choose one Republican leader who was best tapping into the anger of the conservative base I wouldn’t have hesitated to name our own esteemed Governor. Sanford’s seemingly principled stand in taking on President Obama on the stimulus plan was scoring him major points among the hard right nationally as well as in South Carolina. National media coverage abounded. Mark Sanford was a rising star in the GOP, and was positioning himself well to become a front runner for the 2012 Republican Presidential primary.

All that changed on June 24th.

After a little less than a week of playing “Where’s Waldo” with the people of South Carolina, Mark Sanford admitted that he’d been in Argentina visiting his mistress of more than a year María Belén Chapur. I’ll spare all the sordid details since they’ve been reported ad infinitum in practically every media outlet in America both large and small because for me, there’s really only one question that’s been burning in my mind lately. What does Sanford’s fall from conservative grace mean for the political landscape in South Carolina, and more specifically what does it mean for the Spartanburg legislative delegation which has several of Sanford’s allies on it.

Sanford championed a part of the SCGOP that likes to call itself the “reform” movement. As far as I can tell, what they mean by reform is extreme economic libertarianism, but I’ll yield that one point and use their terminology just for the sake of labeling. The “reform” politicians like to talk about doing away with the South Carolina “good old boy” system and replacing it with some sort of Howard Rich funded, anti-government capitalist utopia. To help place them on the ideological map, follow this little example on public education funding. Person “A” believes we should devote more funding to public education, and person “B” believes we should reduce funding or keep it at the same level. Person “C” disagrees with both “A” and “B” and believes we should privatize the public education system and let the poor eat cake. Up until last month Mark Sanford was the public face for person “C’s” views.

The affair and Sanford’s refusal so far to resign has thrown gas on a fire that’s been burning between the “reformers” and the more moderate members of the Republican Party. Calls for his resignation have come mostly from political opponents with few of the Governor’s allies coming out of the woodwork to say much of anything. Most people have speculated that Sanford’s refusal to resign and save his “reform ”faction the embarrassment of seeing his face in the paper every day next to some tawdry story about sexual infidelity stems from the fact that his replacement would be fellow Republican Lt. Governor Andre Bauer. Bauer, who more often than not has been a political opponent of Governor Sanford, is widely expected to run for Governor in 2010, and many speculate that the last thing Mark Sanford would want to do is give Bauer a leg up in the race by allowing him to become Governor once he resigns.

And so, the fire burns on.

In all likelihood, Sanford will be forced to resign based simply on the forces of political gravity. Over half his party’s elected leaders disliked him to begin with, and have no interest defending him now. Meanwhile, many of his allies are trying to duck for cover till the storm goes away, which of course can only happen if Governor Sanford steps down. Sanford for his part seems to be trying his best to ignore the denouncements of his enemies as well as the poll numbers that say 69% of South Carolinians believe he should resign. He seems convinced that if he just lays low for a little while, it’ll all blow over and he can go back to being the most ineffective state governor in the United States. To that I say: Good luck sir.

Once Sanford is out—whether it be from resigning or not—there’s still the question of his ideological followers. What happens to them and more importantly, their movement?

There’s no shortage of people looking to take up Sanford’s libertarian banner in the SC GOP but from the looks of things, none of them have a high-enough profile to legitimately lead the movement, and that makes the “reformers” a kind of rudderless ship. It’s pretty hard not to see the “reformers” of the South Carolina Republican landscape becoming more and more marginalized as the less reactionary elements of their party seize power. Before the scandal broke, it was possible that Sanford allies like Rep. Nikki Haley or Sen. Larry Grooms would’ve been able to make serious runs at the Governor’s seat in 2010 with Sanford’s endorsement and the backing of his political network. That scenario now seems much less likely.

For Spartanburg, it means our legislative delegation will likely be on the outside looking in. It’s hard to imagine the conservative extremists in our delegation like Rep. Joey Millwood, Sen. Shane Martin, and Sen. Lee Bright doing anything much in the future except opposing the more moderate elements of their own party. A freshman group that has already distinguished itself by its stunning ineffectiveness and inability to produce anything worthwhile for its constituents will only founder in obscurity once its ideological face is out of office and replaced by a more moderate Republican or—horror of horrors—maybe even a Democrat.

That’s the silver lining in all this from my point of view. Sanford’s inability to live up to those conservative “family values” principals has opened a huge door for the South Carolina Democratic Party. The state is in economic and fiscal turmoil right now and if they’re smart, the state and local Democratic Party will go out of its way to make itself the party of pragmatic solutions. They should emphasize that the GOP, under Governor Sanford, has been more interested in ideological grandstanding than in job creation and economic recovery. They should point out that while Governor Sanford and his allies in the General Assembly fought a dogmatic war over federal stimulus funds, South Carolina’s unemployment rate skyrocketed. Sanford’s followers are vulnerable, and there’s no reason our local Democratic Party couldn’t use this tactic on right-wing extremists like Rep. Millwood in 2010.

Governor Sanford’s indiscretion will invariably lead to a serious change in the political landscape here in South Carolina, but nobody can say for certain what kind of change we’ll have. Will the “reformers” be able to survive once their biggest champion is gone? Will the Democratic Party be able to use Sanford’s failures as an opportunity to win voters over in the name of practicality? 2010 was supposed to be the year when the “reformers” had their Armageddon with the mainstream conservatives for the soul of the South Carolina GOP. Now though, it looks like that script may have to be rewritten. Sanford has stirred the muddy water of the state’s political scene, and there’s no telling what it’ll all look like once that water settles again.

This post first appeared on the Spartanburg Spark.

3 comments:

Wakefield Tolbert said...

I was wondering when you'd get around to this. I was not disappointed.

Sanford’s inability to live up to those conservative “family values” principals has opened a huge door for the South Carolina Democratic Party.

Now, is this claim of yours really because of the oft-made (and easy) charge of hypocrisy, or because we simply have a political vacuum (and that old saw about how nature so abhors) and therefore we can fill in some slots due to the more likely prospect that among most Democrats few give a flip about "family values" or a trip to see a mistress in the first place?

Yes, it seems that things go in phases. This is apparently as true of politics as it is of cycles and metamorphoses in nature and even real estate.

It's true that many Republicans DO need some serious soul-searching right about now, else they can shut their mouths and just party on MTV and join the NEA's penchant for making sure little Johnny and Suzy are well-heeled in condoms and love creams, since--after all--we all "do it." Whether before, or after, or perhaps even during marriage.

And yes, it HAS come to my attention that more than one conservative Christian of one denomination or another has fallen down on the job.

Don't preach it if you can't live it. Fair enough. More than politicians can't seem to meet this challenge. Oh yeah. I'm well aware.

I myself have had a share of finger-wagging pointed at my own direction by moralistic people, only to find out some things later that brought a smirk; however, I keep my mouth shut due to societal protocals about such matters of flesh and heart, and the fact that rubbing it in is of little use, does not heal things, and is un-Christian.

I try not to delight in "iniquity", as the Bible says.

OK. So much for the more carnal side of human nature that religion and jabber can't quell.

But do you really think this literal screw-up and betryal of self, to self-proclaimed principles (more so than to most South Carolinians, who'd probably care less and of whom most are hiding some hanky panky in their own right) means that now is the moment for some "change" agents to get bolder than usual?

Or is it more the overall political climate here in South Kakalakka?

Christopher George said...

I'll make an admission here. I really don't personally care about Sanford's extramarital dalliances. I've never been a moralizer, and a person's sexual indiscretions are their's to deal with from my point of view.

Unfortunately for Mark Sanford though, most people in South Carolina do care. That's why--though he may be the last person in the world to face the fact--his relevance as a political leader in this state is over. The "opportunity" presented to the Democratic Party here in SC is one they can only take advantage of through pure Machiavellian calculation.

They have to exploit the chaos in the Republican party by tying individual Republicans to the failures of the party. Not having Sanford around to use the Governor's position as a bully pulpit will make things much easier than they may have been in 2010. That being said, if anyone can screw up this golden opportunity, the SC Democratic Party can.

As you've correctly pointed out, power abhors a vacuum. Whoever fills that vacuum will be the group who was most willing to do the dirty work. It's not pretty. In fact, it's the most disgusting part of the political process, but the dirty route is taken so often because it works. I won't become a demagogue, but I'm smart enough to know that ours is an age of demagogues.

I do think there's a legitimate argument to be made that Sanford should resign based on his abandoning his post without ensuring a proper succession or ensuring that he could be reached. Honestly though, I'm not all that worked up over that either.

The longer he sticks around, the more embarrassing he becomes for the SCGOP. You can't be the party of family values while standing beside a Governor who has been unfaithful to his wife--on Father's Day no less. That won't fly with the Christian Conservatives and so as long as he sticks around, Mark Sanford is a political pariah in SC.

From my point of view,the longer he tries to stick it out, the better. He might as well start running ads for SC Democrats for all the good he's doing the SCGOP right now.

As an aside, I bet he wishes he hadn't called for Clinton's resignation back when he was in Congress. Oh that hindsight; it'll get you every time.

Wakefield Tolbert said...

Yeah, I'd have to agree that he makes a mockery based on his own moral matrix by sticking this out.

I'm not sure what he plans to accomplish or why the steadfast approach.

There are (or were) more opportune times to be stubborn.

This is not one of them.

His prospects being all but over, he needs to find other avenues besides politics and see if those paths can bring healing to his family.

Personally, I care in the sense that I think what he did is certainly wrong, and an ugly rebuke to the whole notion of marriage at the very moment when people are arguing over its very definition and application, and of course it is painful to watch this kind of betrayal.