An Internet hub for moderates, centrists, and independents, with domestic and international news, analysis, original reporting, and popular features from the left, center, and right

Is SC GOP Gov. Candidate Nikki Haley Image of Conservative Female Political Leaders?

On the heels of this post and very lengthy discussion about why there are far fewer conservative or Republican women in elected office than there are liberal or Democratic women comes yesterday’s announcement by South Carolina State Representative Nikki Haley – a 37 year old third-term Republican from Lexington County – that she is entering SC’s gubernatorial primary race (here is her campaign website).

From The State:

Haley, an accountant and mother of two, said she wants to make government more open and give residents a reason to feel more positive about it.

“I know what good government can look like,” Haley said. “I’m running for governor so the people of the state will know what it feels like.”

Haley is in her third term in the S.C. House, having unseated long-serving veteran Larry Koon in 2004. Haley has been a contrarian voice in the House, often standing against the GOP majority. She frequently has supported Sanford’s positions, but has also introduced her own issues.

The article strongly suggests that Haley could be someone current Governor, Mark Sanford, who is term-limited, might support:

The Republican governor has said he plans to get involved in his successor’s election and has $1.7 million remaining in his campaign fund, which could be used on issue ads.

“It’s too early to endorse anyone,” Sanford said Thursday. “But I would say Nikki Haley would make a terrific and inspiring choice as governor, and she’s a great addition to the field of candidates.”

However, the ghost of Lee Atwater has been resurrected by SC commentators already:

To become governor, Haley will have to overcome questions about her Indian heritage and whether S.C. voters will accept a woman chief executive.

During her first State House run, anonymous ads in Lexington County questioned Haley’s faith. Haley was raised a Sikh but is now a Methodist.

“It will be a factor because this is South Carolina, the land of the lingering fog of Lee Atwater,” agreed [Winthrop University political scientist Scott] Huffmon, referring to the late S.C. political consultant who raised issues of race and religion in campaigns.

And, directly on point about the discussion in my previous post that sought to elicit ideas as to why there’s a dearth of female GOP politicians:

Women also have not fared well in S.C. politics. The percentage of women in the S.C. Legislature is among the lowest in the nation.

But recent Republican politics, observers say, prove those issues may not be as important as they once were.

State Rep. Joan Brady, R-Richland, said GOP women sometimes lack the confidence to run and have more trouble raising money. She also said she has met women who say they will not vote for another woman. But Brady said Palin proved women will rally around the right candidate, one with a strong voice on women’s and family issues.

“They do bring something different” to a campaign, Brady said of female candidates.

If CStanley is reading, I hope we’ll get some commentary on what, if anything, Haley’s announcement means and how it might unfold.

My opinion? It’s great – the only thing that would be better is if she’d run for the SC state senate, since it currently does not have even one woman period.  Oh – and if there’s a good female SC Democratic woman (aw, I had to add that).  Would lurv to see two women gubernatorial candidates in South Carolina – now that would be change.

Hattip to a comment by Jenn Q Public.

  • jwest
    Tagging on to the general theme of getting good people into elected positions in government (even women), and being a contrarian who likes to swim against the popular class envy tide, here is what I believe we should provide our national elected officials.

    • Congressmen should receive a base pay of $500,000/year. Additionally, a housing allowance equal to 10% of base pay. Bonus equal to base pay if base goals are met. Bonus of 2 times base pay if target are met. NetJets travel card – minimum 20 hours/year. Additional hours based on distance to district. Light jet.
    • Senators should receive a base pay of $1,000,000/year. Same housing allowance plan and bonus plan. NetJets flat 200 hours/year. Medium jet.
    • Vice President should receive 2,000,000/year. Same bonus, housing provided, military jet provided.
    • President should receive 4,000,000/year. Same bonus, housing provided, jet provided.

    Why?

    To bring in new blood. These are the people who are making decisions on trillions of dollars of our money each year, along with other decisions of national security, etc. By making it affordable for people who already make more money to give up their jobs for an elected position, we will have a better choice come election time.

    Why bonuses? Because they work. Give someone a bonus for balancing the budget each year and you’ll have people making the tough choices we pay them to make. Double the bonus for reducing the national debt each year and a great deal of unnecessary programs will finally meet their end.

    Go too far? If someone goes too far in cuts to get a bonus, they risk getting voted out. You would miss your jet if that happened, so you’ll be very careful.

    Class envy people will burst a vein over this proposal, but if you think about it, you’ll see the logic.
  • CStanley
    Jill, I did read and I thank you for pointing this out. I don't know anything about Haley other than what you've provided, though, so I don't have much commentary to add. I'll try to follow the story as it develops.
  • jchem
    Jill, I just moved down to SC in August, so any post focusing on local aspects is welcomed. I'm with CStanley, in that I really don't know much about Haley, and I don't think many people here generally do either. There is quite a bit of infighting within the Repub party which basically boils down to whether you side with Lindsey Graham or with Jim DeMint and Governor Sanford. If Haley can get Sanford's endorsement, I think it would pretty well lock her in, as long as she can articulate a strong set of conservative principles. The big issue down here right now is Sanford's refusal of the stimulus money. The House is trying to force him into taking it, and by all accounts, it sounds as if there will be court battle. I don't know what Haley's position is with regard to the stimulus, but in order to get Sanford's endorsement, she'll have to come out in support of him. I'll have to follow this more closely, since I'll get to vote in the election, but as of now thats how I perceive things.

    As far as her being a national model? That's a hard one. South Carolina is very conservative and the brand of conservatism here isn't all that popular nationally. I would imagine that Haley would probably get the same rub that Palin did.
  • Working backwards, jchem - I hope hope hope you are wrong re: Haley getting the same rub that Palin did, or that Clinton did for that matter. I hope more information comes out about how she won that first time around, when she got into a run-off with an incumbent and then soundly won. I would think there are lessons in that for anyone who wants to get into politics.

    From the is she model perspective, for sure, it's too early to really know and I agree w/you about SC's uniqueness in some ways, or at least, distinctive atmosphere.

    Interestingly, Mark Sanford's wife was a classmate of mine at Georgetown. I really didn't know her well at all but by name. It appears that she was successful in NYC, met Sanford there and then has run his campaigns. She's of the Skil building tool family. She's giving a speech on the work-life balance at our 25th reunion in a couple of weeks. The reason I mention this is that she is, obviously since we both went to GU ;) a very bright accomplished woman (and mother of four sons) who appears to have great influence w/her husband. I'm curious to know if she is supportive of a candidate like Nikki Haley and how she might influence Sanford, if at all. Total shot in the dark on my part since I really do not know SC other than through hearsay, but curious to know nonetheless.

    Thanks for commenting on this.
  • Thanks, CStanley - interesting how those stories came out in Politico and USNWR just a few days before Nikki Haley announced...!
  • Jwest - other than wondering 1) who sets and defines the goals to be met for each legislator or politician? and 2) how does this solve the problem of expensive campaigns, which is another enormous barrier to getting in new and different blood, it's an interesting schema. Thanks for sharing.
  • UPDATE: Here's a CNN story about Haley entering the race and the headline calls her "top Sanford ally." Interesting! Doesn't specifically say her position on the stimulus fund rejection but it does say this:

    In the state house, she has been a loyal backer of Sanford's small-government initiatives, proposals which have often irked other Republican lawmakers. Haley also plans to hire Sanford's Washington-based political consultant, Jon Lerner, to run her campaign.

    Haley became the first Indian-American Republican state legislator in the country in 2004 after winning a nasty primary runoff that featured an anonymous mail attack calling attention to her non-white heritage.

    She would become South Carolina's first female governor — if she can survive a crowded Republican primary already loaded with South Carolina GOP heavyweights who are backed by some of the state's best political strategists.

    Although Haley is regarded as a rising star among South Carolina Republicans, several GOP operatives in the state not affiliated with rival campaigns told CNN they were surprised she is choosing to jump into a five-way primary now rather than wait for a clearer opportunity at a later date.


    Story link here:

    http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/05/14...

    As you might expect from me, I want to know who those SC operatives are and if any of them are women because usually, when we here that, "why is she running now rather than waiting for a clearer opportunity" - that's total code for "wait your turn." True - true - true - that's said to newcomers of both genders. But it's particularly suspect when a female candidate is involved, IMO.
  • jchem
    Jill: "Working backwards, jchem - I hope hope hope you are wrong re: Haley getting the same rub that Palin did, or that Clinton did for that matter."

    I really do hope I am wrong too, because from what I can tell she's a pretty intelligent and thoughtful person who isn't afraid of the folks in Columbia. But she's going to have to be a strong conservative, given who she will be up against. Gresham Barret pretty well sunk his campaign when he voted for the bailouts. He showed up at the Tea Party in Greenville and was basically booed off the stage. I hate to make it sound like a single issue sink or swim mentality, but seriously, if she comes out in any way in favor of bailouts, she'll lose the support of both Sanford and the majority of folks here. Her other top challenger is the Lt Governor (Bauer?), who has pretty favorable ratings, but he does have quite a bit of baggage that could haunt him.

    I know Sanford's wife does a great deal with his campaigns, if she doesn't actually manage them completely. And she has tremendous influence with him. I'm sure if she put in a word in favor of Haley, it would go a long way. As I said though, I'm under the impression that Haley will need to come out in support of Sanford, in the event this stimulus battle makes it to the courts.
  • jwest
    Jill,

    Concerning who sets the goals, they would be broad national goals – the same goal for all. For the initial bonus each year, the politicians would only need to balance the budget. To gain the additional bonus, they would need to reduce the national debt by 3%.

    The beauty is that they either all get the bonus or none of them do. Makes a “bipartisan” solution worth the effort.

    As far as campaign finance reform, my solution is aimed at having the legislators in-office using their time to find solutions for the country, not fundraising. To that end, I would allow any challengers to raise any amount of money from any sources they wish, as long as it is full disclosed and deposited in an escrow account. 90 days prior to the election, I would issue each candidate a debit card – one funded by the escrow account and another of equal value funded by the federal government. Every expenditure would be immediately available for review on-line. In the case there is more than one challenger, the matching funds would equal the highest challenger’s account.
  • I love the thought you've put into this, but as a left of center kinda gal, IMO, to say that balancing the budget would be the only goal and reduction of national debt would get the bonus is, I believe, taking too much for granted re: what would be the broad national goals. There are more left of center folks than right, and more independents than left of center, depending on when and where we're measuring. I think there'd be some pushback on those goals being The Broad National Goals. I think it's why we've had such vigorous presidential elections in 2000 and 2008 anyway.

    No data on this, just my speculation - could be wrong, always can be wrong!
blog comments powered by Disqus
© 2005-2009 The Moderate Voice | Site design by Elegant Themes | Site customization, hosting, and security by Enxit Group, LLC