“Shame, disgrace, ridicule and dishonor” and governor who was “AWOL” from his duties.
All of those are descriptions that were used as legislators struggled over whether to agree with a subcommittee rejection of a bill to impeach the governor. Instead, the panel opted for a formal rebuke for quote “bringing ridicule to the state.” This was the result of the governors six-day disappearance to Argentina and his public admission of infidelity.
“Make no mistake, a vote to support censure in no way endorses the governor’s behavior,” says Sanford critic Rep. James Smith. “This governor has been irrelevant for the past seven years…let us give no more time and attention to him,” he said with obvious disgust.
Today, members of the special impeachment subcommittee explained the rationales behind their vote to censure rather than impeach Sanford. Committee members of both parties vented their frustrations about the past six months of scandal for the state.
Other comments included Rep. Bakari Sellers on “slippery slope” of allowing Sanford’s behaviour to go without impeachment:
Georgetown’s Vida Miller says that a governor should follow the same accountability as expected in the legislature: