All But 9 Ethics Charges Dropped as Possible Reasons for Impeachment of Sanford

**Thursday 5:55 p.m. Update**
The House subcommittee considering an impeachment resolution against Gov. Mark Sanford has decided that most of the ethics charges against him don't warrant impeachment. However, it's still considering nine other ethics charges and the original impeachment resolution.

The subcommittee met for the third time Thursday and voted to drop 28 of the 37 ethics charges against the governor from consideration. Dropped were charges that Sanford used campaign funds to reimburse himself and that he broke state law by buying more expensive first class or business airline tickets. State law requires state employees to fly in the least expensive seats. But House Judiciary Chairman Jim Harrison, R-Columbia, said the governor is not a state employee.

"The regulation refers to state employees and it's clear, when you look at the statutes and the regulations, there is a difference between a state employee and a public official," he said.

He also said the governor didn't appear to have any campaign reimbursements that would violate state law.

Even though the subcommittee won't consider the ethics charges as possible reasons for impeachment, the State Ethics Commission still has those charges pending and will hold a hearing on them next month. Rep. Harrison says, "We believe there still may be some violations for ethics and the Ethics Commission is the appropriate place to resolve those issues. But we don't believe we've seen anything that would lead us to believe that it should result in serious impeachment consideration."

The subcommittee is still considering nine ethics charges that deal with Sanford's use of state airplanes.

Rep. Greg Delleney, who filed the impeachment resolution, says dropping most of the ethics charges doesn't lessen the chance that Sanford will be impeached. "I was never concerned with those ethics violations. They were not a part of my resolution," he said after Thursday's meeting.

The resolution charges Sanford with serious misconduct for leaving the state for five days last June, without leaving anyone in charge or telling anyone, so he could meet with his lover in Argentina. The resolution says the governor's actions and his admitted affair brought shame and disgrace on the state and the office of governor.

Rep. Harrison said after the meeting, "I still haven't made a decision on the original resolution on whether the governor's leaving the state for five days constitutes serious misconduct."

Rep. Garry Smith, R-Simpsonville, says he's concerned with the governor's actions, but, "Whether it rises to the level of serious crimes or misconduct, I have a serious question about that."

The subcommittee will meet again Monday. Harrison says he expects it to be the final meeting of the subcommittee and it will vote on the impeachment resolution. If it passes, it will go to the full House Judiciary Committee. If it does not pass, Gov. Sanford will not be impeached.

**Thursday 12:04 p.m. Update**
You can read the state Ethics Commission's investigative report here.

**Thursday 11:46 a.m. Update**

All but 9 of the ethics violations have been dropped as possible reasons for impeachment. The main point of the impeachment resolution is still there, though—his leaving the state without telling anyone and without leaving anyone in charge. Subcommittee members say that seems to be the strongest charge against him. The representative who introduced the impeachment resolution says his resolution was never about the ethics charges to begin with.

**Thursday 11:32 a.m. Update**

COLUMBIA, S.C. (AP) - A South Carolina legislative panel considering whether to oust Gov. Mark Sanford will not consider state ethics charges that accuse the two-term Republican of improperly flying in expensive airline seats and reimbursing himself from campaign funds.

Members of a House Judiciary Committee panel on Thursday voted to remove 28 of 37 State Ethics Commission charges from its debate over whether the governor should be impeached.

Lawmakers are reviewing other civil charges, mostly involving his use of state aircraft. An ethics hearing is to consider all the charges early next year and could bring thousands in fines.

The Republican has faced scrutiny since he returned in June from a five-day absence and revealed a yearlong affair with a woman in Argentina.

(Copyright 2009 by The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.)

On Tuesday, the panel looked into allegations that Sanford used state aircraft for personal business. Sanford was not present at the hearing. His attorneys, Butch Bowers and Kevin Hall, pointed out that out of 663 flights examined by the state Ethics Commission, it found only 9 to be questionable.

In November 2006, Sanford flew with his family from a governors' conference in West Virginia to a family vacation in Brunswick, Georgia. The impeachment committee asked why the Governor did not land in Columbia and then drive to Georgia. Hall said that alternative would have cost taxpayers just as much if not more because it would have required a SLED security detail and at least two vehicles.

"You are talking about impeaching a governor over staying in the air for an extra 20 minutes versus landing in Columbia and incurring costs associated with driving," said Hall.

Not all of the committee members seemed to accept the explanation.

"Like the trip to Argentina, would you consider this seriously stupid or serious misconduct?" asked State Rep. Garry Smith, (R - Simpsonville).

Sanford has been under fire since June when he disappeared for five days then returned to explain he had been having an affair in Argentina. Rep. Greg Delleney (R-Chester) filed a resolution to have the Governor impeached for leaving the state without telling anyone and lying to his staff regarding his whereabouts. The impeachment subcommittee is also considering 37 possible ethics violations uncovered during an ethics commission investigation.

The commission alleges in March 2006 Sanford used the state airplane to fly from Myrtle Beach to Columbia so he could make it in time for a haircut appointment. Bowers says the allegation "is absurd". He says Sanford was in Myrtle Beach that day on official business and had to return to Columbia where he lives. After returning, the Governor decided to go to Great Clips on Rosewood Drive.

"You can't make an appointment there," said Bowers. "It's an $11 haircut. To suggest he summoned the plane to rush him back to get his haircut at a place that doesn't take appointments is absurd!"

Rep. James Harrison (R - Columbia), the subcommittee chairman, said he agrees with Bowers that this flight does not appear to constitute an ethics violation. He said he may make a motion to have "a few" of the flights removed from the list of questionable trips.

Earlier Tuesday, Bowers and subcommittee members haggled over a flight made by Sanford from Spartanburg to Anderson in September 2005. Sanford appeared in Anderson to be the keynote speaker at Anderson County's annual GOP dinner. The ethics commission found this to be a potential violation because a Republican party fundraiser is a political event and may not be official state business.

Bowers argued that the Governor was acting in an official capacity because he was advancing his public policy agenda. Bowers cited a 1988 Attorney General's opinion which states "any activity which a state official is invited or required to do that would not occur but for the public office or position he holds could thus be considered 'official business' for the purposes of using state aircraft".