MG Experience Forums - Off Topic Forum

Quote: Reimbursement for his private use of public funds

After his affair was revealed in June 2009, Sanford first claimed, "There's been a lot of speculation and innuendo on whether or not public moneys were used to advance my admitted unfaithfulness. To be very clear: no public money was ever used in connection with this."[58] After a reporter used the Freedom of Information Act to seek records of what public funds were used to pay for Sanford's trip to Argentina,[59] Sanford eventually chose to reimburse taxpayers for expenses he had incurred one year earlier with his mistress in Argentina.[60] He said, "I made a mistake while I was there in meeting with the woman who I was unfaithful to my wife with. That has raised some very legitimate concerns and questions, and as such I am going to reimburse the state for the full cost of the Argentina leg of this trip.” On August 9, 2009, the AP reported that Sanford may have violated state law by other abusive use of state planes, including to fly to get a haircut.[61]
Impeachment proceedings

On August 25, state representatives Nathan Ballentine and Gary Simrill met with Sanford and warned him that the state legislature would impeach him if he did not resign. Ballentine, an ally of Sanford's, said afterward, "I told him the writing is on the wall. ...he could put an end to it all, but if he doesn't, members of the House will take things into their hands." Sanford still declined to resign.[62] On August 28, The Washington Times reported that Republican lawmakers in South Carolina were "laying plans" for a special legislative session on whether to impeach Sanford. Two bills of impeachment were being prepared, with bipartisan support in the state legislature.[63]

On October 23, 2009, two impeachment resolutions were introduced, but were blocked by Democrats in the South Carolina legislature.[64] A month later, the resolution was successfully introduced and it was announced that an ad hoc committee would begin drafting articles of impeachment starting on November 24.[65] Meanwhile, the Ethics Commission formally charged Sanford with 37 violations.[66] making his removal or resignation all that more likely.

On December 3, during its third public hearing on the matter, the ad hoc committee unanimously voted to remove the vast majority of charges from the investigation, stating that they didn't warrant "overturning an election." On December 9, the committee voted 6–1 against impeachment, stating that the legislature had better things to do. However, the committee voted unanimously to censure the governor.[67] On the 16th the full House Judiciary Committee voted 15–6 to formally end the process.[68]
Censure

On December 15, 2009, the House Judiciary Committee voted unanimously to censure Sanford. The full South Carolina House of Representatives voted 102–11 on the resolution in January 2010.[69][70]