SC lawmakers debate impeaching governor

COLUMBIA, S.C. (AP) — A cool-headed legal debate has replaced the once-passionate calls to oust Gov. Mark Sanford that began after his tearful summertime admission that he disappeared from the state to pursue an extramarital affair in Argentina.

A panel began debating Tuesday whether his failure to inform his staff of his whereabouts and put anyone in charge rise to the high standard of impeachment, usually reserved for officeholders who break the law.

Two proponents of a measure to remove Sanford likened his five-day absence to a soldier’s leaving his post. But others on a seven- member legislative panel questioned whether the two-term Republican’s actions rose to a high-enough level to warrant removal.

“To speak about dereliction of duty, absence without leave, abandoning one’s post are terms that ordinarily are reserved for those who are in uniform and who are not civilian citizens of our state and nation,” said Rep. Walt McLeod, D-Prosperity. “It may constitute something. But it doesn’t constitute dereliction of duty because those are military terms.”

Sanford returned in June to confess an affair that shattered his marriage and dimmed a once-bright political future. He told reporters in Charleston on Tuesday that it’s obvious he wanted to keep an affair secret.

“Yes, I had a moral failing. I was gone for five days. I failed my marriage on a number of fronts. I mean, we’ve been through all of that. I don’t know how many times one apologizes for that,” he said. “How many times do we want to say the obvious? The nature of having an affair is you want to hide it.”

Later investigations found the governor may have violated state ethics laws for travel and campaign finances, and he faces 37 civil charges that he used his office to benefit himself personally. Those charges weren’t discussed Tuesday, but they’ll be added to the panel’s debate at later hearings.

Sanford has brushed aside repeated calls to step down before his tenure ends in January 2011, and his lawyers say they’ll answer the ethics questions at separate hearings on them in January.