Lawmakers override governor’s veto of port bill

June 19, 2009 by senatormcconnell

Lawmakers in the House and Senate overwhelmingly overrode Gov. Mark Sanford’s veto of the so-called port restructuring bill, nixing the state’s chief executive of his ability to remove members of the S.C. State Ports Authority board at will.

Lawmakers in the Senate voted 35-9 and House members voted 102-3 to override the governor’s veto. The new law, effective immediately, requires a number of governing changes to the SPA and its board. Sanford vetoed the measure particularly because it strips a governor’s ability to remove members.

Minutes after the House voted to turn the legislation into law, Sanford’s office issued the following statement:

“The ideas of more in the way of qualifications and long-term planning contained in this bill were nothing more than a smokescreen for taking away governors’ ability to hire and fire board members. Taking that authority away will make our State Ports Authority less accountable and less transparent, and will make our state less competitive as a result.”

SPA spokesman Byron Miller said the new law will be “embraced and implemented thoroughly and aggressively.”

The House passed the measure without discussion, but Senators, before voting, waged a lengthy debate about the appropriate separation of powers among government branches, with lawmakers invoking sentiments of the nation’s founding fathers to bolster their arguments.

Sen. George “Chip” Campsen, R-Isle of Palms, who voted to sustain the governor’s veto, quoted from the Federalist Papers authored by James Madison: “What is government but the greatest of all reflections on human nature,” he said. Because of that, Campsen said, the three branches of government are vested particular and separate powers to keep the others in check.

“What we are doing with this piece of legislation is we are going backward on that front,” he said. “We are taking more power away from the executive branch … and we will end up with more power vested in the Legislature.”

Sen. Glenn McConnell, R-Charleston, said to believe in the separation of powers doctrine does not require one to give the governor the ability to unilaterally set SPA policy, because a governor could, in theory, wipe out an entire board and appoint a single member to carry out his or her wishes.

“Do you think that separation of powers requires us to put a blindfold on our head and give everything to the governor?” McConnell asked his colleagues, before voting to override the governor.

Sen. Larry Grooms, R-Charleston, the bill’s main sponsor, said the importance of the legislation, including the provision taking away at-will removal powers of a governor, is meant to create stability so that international and domestic shippers and customers understand who and what they are dealing with. That’s more important than ever, Grooms said, as the SPA works to regain market share in a down economy and prepares to hire a new chief executive. Jim Newsome, the American president of German shipping line Hapag-Lloyd, is expected to be appointed to that role at the SPA’s June 23 board meeting.

Sen. Mike Rose, R-Dorchester, voting against the override, said it is a dangerous thing to give too much power to the Legislature, and he indicated that individual lawmakers in the past had abused their powers by calling board members and convincing them to encourage certain activities.

His list included certain lawmakers encouraging the SPA to sign off on a memorandum of understanding in 2002 with the city of North Charleston promising that any rail access would service the new terminal under construction in that city from the south end, now a source of contention in a railroad dispute. Additionally, he criticized lawmakers for supposedly providing direction about who should be able to utilize certain docks.

“Do you think the General Assembly should be able to treat the Ports Authority as its own plum orchard?” Rose said.

Others argued that the legislation hit the wrong target, noting that other states have succeeded well with a governor that can remove members of their port boards at will.

“How in the heck has the same business model propelled the Port of Savannah to No. 2?” said Tom Davis, R-Beaufort.

The Ports Authority and Legislature should be focusing on more important issues, Davis said, such as how to provide CSX and Norfolk Southern competitive rail access to the Port of Charleston’s customers, and how to grow employment in South Carolina by utilizing the state’s most powerful economic engine.

Grooms also argued this issue, but said stability of the board is important to achieving these goals. The law also sets resume requirements for board members, prescribes new oversights on agency spending and directs the sale of land owned by the SPA on Daniel Island and the Port of Port Royal, which is no longer operating.

Charleston Regional Business Journal
Molly Parker

Comments