South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford is being mentioned as a possible running mate for John McCain in this year's election(www.dailypaul.com/node/40012) He seems to legitimately raise some enthusiasm among libertarians and conservatives and is regarded as a good running mate in bringing conservatie support to the Republican ticket. He is also regarded as a legitimate candidate for President in the future, if he can get more national exposure.
I have written about Governor Sanford before, during his successful stare-doesn with the Department of Homeland Security over Real I.D.([link edited for length]) and I am glad to see him getting this kind of attention. I voted for Sanford for governor three of the four times his name was on the ballot. I voted for him in the Republican primary in 2002, although I voted for the Libertarian candidate in the fall. In 2006, I voted for him in both the primary and the general election. I would like to have the opportunity to vote for him for a national office. So I am glad to see him getting some serious attention from the media.
This attention is not just coming from libertarians and small government conservatives. George Will mentioned Governor Sanford as a possible running mate for John McCain as early as February, but he said that Sanford's "Populism" might not appeal to everyone. This was an unfortunate remark, because mentioning "Populism" with reference to a South Carolina politician brings up images of racist demagogues, like "Pitchfork Ben" Tillman ([link edited for length]) or "Cotton Ed" Smith([link edited for length]), or even Strom Thurmond during the Dixiecrat campaign([link edited for length]). Mark Sanford is not a racist and not even an outstanding orator. The "populism" reputation came from his bringing a pair of pigs to the state legislature when he wanted to deliver a lecture to them about pork-barrel spending.([link edited for length]). There were complaints by the legislators and the press that he had insulted the dignity of the legislature by bringing in the pigs, but dignity has never been a strong point with the legislators, and they are almost impossible to insult. I regard the pig incident as evidence of a wry sense of humor rather thab populism.
Mark Sanford is a small government, low tax Republican. He was a member of the Liberty Caucus during his three terms in Congress, and has received praise from the National Taxpayers Union both for his work in Congress and his work as governor. His preference for economy in government has earned him enmity even within the Republican Party. Bobby Harrel, the Republican Speaker of the State House of Representatives, said "The governor has spent the last six years complaining about the budget and structure of state government and it would be nice if he'd spend the next two creating jobs so we can stop having the third highest unemployent rate in the country" But The State (Columbia) noted that the legislature, despite the governor's veto, had appropiated about $10 million Dollars to local governments and private groups around the state to use on essentially frivolous projects. In the meantime,([link edited for length]) The State continues to berate the Governor for holding the line against tax increases, which would simply give the legaislature more money to waste.
Of course, even supporters of the Governor can be irked by some of his vetos. The Sumter county delegation got a bill through the legislature to turn the University of South Carolina-Sumter into a four year institution. I have two grandsons in Sumter, one a student at USC-S and the other a senior in high school. I am sure they would both appreciate USC-S being a four year institution. But the governor pointed out that Sumter has two two-year public financed post secondary institutions (USC-S and Central Carolina Tech) and a private four year institution (Morris College) There is also a four year State University (Francis Marion Unirversity) about forty miles to the east and the main campus of the University of South Carolina about forty miles to the west. The governor believes, correctly, that South Carolina does not have the population to justify nor the funds to finance a four year post secondary institution for every forty miles of highway. (South Carolina does not even have a rest area for every forty miles of interstate highway.)
So Governor Sanford's nomination, while it would not make the neocons happy, would certainly increase the support for the Republican ticket among conservatives and libertarians. Would that be enough to make him attractive to John McCain? He would bring a youthful image to the ticket, and he is a southern governor, both of which would be pluses from McCain's point of view. On the other hand, he is from a small state (8 electoral votes) and, in spite of Obama's popularity in the state, which might make the race closer, McCain is almost certain to carry it whoever he chooses to run with him. If McCain were interested in winning the votes of Ron Paul supporters and libertarians, he might pick Sanford. But so far, McCain seems intent on driving the Paul supporters out of the Republican Party, whatever it costs him in the election, so a Sanford selection is not likely.
But suppose it happened? I would like to see Sanford get the nomination for Vice President because I think that he needs exposure to a national audience, which he would get as McCain's running mate. It a McCain-Sanford ticket were nominated, Sanford would have a good chance of being the Republican nominee for President in either four or eight years. A President Sanford would be great for the United States. If he is not selected as the nominee for vice president, I hope that Paul supporters and libertarians will keep an eye on him and think about supporting him in the future.
Which brings me to the final question. Would I vote for a McCain-Sanford ticket? I would rather cast a vote for Sanford than for Barr for any position. I feel more confident about Sanford's libertarian positions and I like him better. But I cannot see voting for him for Vice President when that would mean I was voting for John McCain for President. Sometimes loyalty asks too much.
©2008 rtbohan, all rights reserved. You must have written permission from the author in order to republish this work.
Published: Sunday, July 6, 2008
Last modified: Sunday, July 6, 2008
The views expressed in this article are those of rtbohan only and do not represent the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates. rtbohan is solely responsible for the contents of this article and is not an employee or otherwise affiliated with Nolan Chart, LLC in his/her role as a columnist.
Report violation by rtbohan of Nolan Chart LLC's terms of use policy.
| More Articles By rtbohan |
Reader Comments:
Posted By: Dave Nalle
Date: 2008-07-06 23:13:02
The question for Sanford would be whether running with McCain would be a plus or a minus for his presidential aspirations in 2012 or 2016.
IMO Sanford is the real future of the abortive 'Ron Paul' movement in the GOP. He's the right mix of libertarianism with pragmatic good sense and good political qualifications to represent the future of a reformed GOP.
But does that mean he should run for VP now or lay low until the democrats have had a chance to screw up for 4 years. I think Sarah Palin faces the same connundrum.
Dave
Posted By: George Dance
Date: 2008-07-07 09:52:47
As the former running mate, Sanford would have an advantage over both Romney and Huckabee in 2012. Without that, he'd start hopelessly behind both.
Someone in the McCain camp could get the idea that choosing Sanford is the best way to stop the bleeding of support to Barr. But Republicans have never been especially noted for creative thinking.
Posted By: Martina
Date: 2008-07-07 17:02:38
I've been saying for months the ONLY way McCain could win my vote is by choosing Sanford as his VP. I would love to see him in the #2 office - it would help pave the way for him in 2012 or 2016. A Mark Sanford Presidency would help get this country back on track. His leadership AGAINST a Republican legislature impresses me. It was Bush's lack of leadership against the same backdrop that kept me from voting for him in 2004.