Haley still fighting the Lexington County battles of yesteryear — while hurting the Lexington of today

I found it interesting that Nikki Haley, whose former employment by Lexington Medical Center raised ethical questions from many, once again vetoed funding for the operation of the Certificate of Need program.

If you’ll recall, several years back, when Lexington Medical was fighting to get a certificate to do open-heart surgery, the CON process was the bête noire of Lexington County politicians. The state bureaucrats had let Palmetto Health start an open-heart program, so why were they picking on Lexington County?

That issue is now behind them, after a deal struck by Providence and Lexington that allowed Lexington one of the Catholic hospital’s certificates. So folks in her old district by no means benefit from her defunding the program.

In fact, they wouldn’t have back in the day, I suppose — since this action doesn’t obviate the legal requirement for a CON; it just prevents the state from having the means to process one.

And today, this veto — unfortunately sustained by the House — positively harms her former employer, since Lexington is awaiting a CON for a $7.9 million expansion of its radiation-treatment facility.

So no one can accuse the governor from playing hometown favorites with this veto. No, her sin in this case looks to be mere blind, foolish, destructive ideology.

16 thoughts on “Haley still fighting the Lexington County battles of yesteryear — while hurting the Lexington of today

  1. Mark Stewart

    Or maybe a little retribution for the way Lexington Medical distanced themselves from her employment application issues… There are lot’s of forms of pettiness, it ins’t usually about ideology – that’s just the rationale.

  2. Doug Ross

    “. No, her sin in this case looks to be mere blind, foolish, destructive ideology.”

    You buried the lede there, Brad. Her veto was sustained, right? So you should be spreading the blame around a little more, don’t you think?

    But then it’s always Nikki’s fault.

    By the way, have you asked Vincent Sheheen what parts of the budget HE would have vetoed? Might be nice for us to know what kind of Governor he would be – just a rubber stamp or someone willing to make tough decisions?

      1. Doug Ross

        If the veto was sustained by a majority of the House, they are equally accountable, right? I know, I know, the House isn’t people, it’s a concept. There’s nobody there responsible for their votes.

        Did you agree with ANY of her vetoes that were overturned?

        1. Brad Warthen Post author

          Doug, I don’t know enough to answer that. I can’t tell the merits of each and every one of her vetoes from the list I’ve seen. Not enough information.

          But, back in the day when I had Cindi Scoppe to explain them all to me, I used to agree with some of Mark Sanford’s vetoes. So I probably agree with some of these. I just haven’t seen coverage that gives me the information I need to be able to say so.

          There was enough coverage on this one for me to know I disagreed with her about this.

  3. Silence

    What makes me annoyed is that we are making a big deal about Haley’s vetos, which are a tiny, tiny, tiny fraction of the state’s overall spending plan. What were they, like 100M out of 22.7B? Four tenths of one percent of the budget?

    1. Doug Ross

      Right. And the majority of the big ticket items she vetoed were overturned.

      It’s so easy to spend other people’s money.

      1. Brad Warthen Post author

        Nobody is spending “other people’s money.”

        We, acting through our elected representatives, are spending the money that we, again acting through our elected representatives, have agreed to pool together for these public purposes.

        And one of the glories of our system is that we all argue vehemently over these decisions, and sometimes our elected representatives do what I want, and sometimes they do what you want, and sometimes they do what neither you nor I want. But it is through them that we make these decisions. That’s how it works.

        And anyone who doesn’t like this system is of course free to go live somewhere that employs a different governmental system. But I wouldn’t recommend it.

    2. Brad Warthen Post author

      I don’t know that anyone is particularly making a “big deal” about them. But that IS what is getting coverage this week, for the simple reason that those are the decisions before the Legislature this week. The entire budget was passed, and covered, earlier. This is veto week, so quite naturally, that’s what’s being covered now.

      That’s just how news works.

        1. Brad Warthen Post author

          Do you mean “What Would Vincent Do?”

          If so, I guess we’d have to look at how he votes today on the vetoes. That would go a long way toward answering that…

          1. Doug Ross

            So Sheheen is taking credit for Haley NOT vetoing the useless 4K Kindergarten program? That’s a pretty weak form of leadership. Did the Governor consult with Sheheen and get his guidance?

            Is the associated with the First Steps program that an audit showed was woefully mismanaged and didn’t demonstrate any real impact?

            How’d Vincent’s leadership skills work out on the ethics bill? That would have shown some ability to push that through.

            It just gets SOOO tiring reading every release from Sheheen talking about Haley.

          2. Doug Ross

            His votes on the vetoes would show that he’s a follower, not a leader.

            I’d like to see him tell us what HE would have vetoed. That’s would take some guts. Easier to hide on the sidelines and take potshots.

          3. Brad Warthen Post author

            Doug says, “It just gets SOOO tiring reading every release from Sheheen talking about Haley.”

            I guess he could talk about Mark Sanford, or Barack Obama (the way Nikki does), or Attila the Hun, or Alice B. Toklas. But it wouldn’t make a lot of sense, since he’s not running against them.

            You’re going to be really, really tired by the time this is over.

        2. Brad Warthen Post author

          To give an idea of his priorities, here’s a release from a couple of days ago:

          Sheheen Leadership on 4k Delivers Improvements for Children, Schools, and SC Economy
          Haley silence on public education, opposition to 4k through session is disturbing

          Columbia, SC – Today, Sen. Sheheen’s efforts to expand 4-year-old kindergarten paid off for South Carolina’s families, children and businesses as Governor Haley finally agreed not to veto this important funding in the 2013 budget. SCDP Chairman Jaime Harrison released this statement:

          “Sen. Sheheen’s leadership brought both sides of the aisle together to break through the political logjam and finally expand access to early-childhood education for 4-year-olds around the state. That’s the kind of leadership South Carolina needs to move away from the ideology that has made us fifth worst in the country for children’s wellbeing, stalled our economic mobility, and made South Carolina one of the hardest places to achieve the American Dream.

          “South Carolina’s families and businesses can breathe easier today because the seven-years of work that Sen. Sheheen has done to increase opportunities for 4-year-old kindergarten that will now be law. Early childhood education is key to improving the quality of education for our next generation of workers. We know that the earlier you invest in a child’s education, the more equipped that child is for success in higher education bang for the buck you get. The Governor’s silence on public education has been a disgrace, and her administration’s work to fight 4k expansion throughout the session is disturbing. It’s time for a change.”

          Governor Haley was silent on public education while her administration has staunchly opposed expanding 4k: “Twin bills in the state Senate and S.C. House – sponsored by state Sen. Vincent Sheheen, D-Kershaw, and state Rep. James Smith, D-Richland – would expand full-day kindergarten statewide to 4-year-olds who come from low-income families. But not everyone agrees the state needs more 4-year-old kindergarten programs. State Education Superintendent Mick Zais does not support any expansion, unconvinced the programs produce any lasting benefits, said spokesman Jay Ragley. [The State, 2/9/13]

          ###

Comments are closed.