On the subject of Republican Ted Pitts’ attempt to get rid of South Carolina’s antiquated “blue laws”, Eric (in the comments on my earlier post) had this to say
just add it to the list of sanford vetoes … and general assembly overides.
Have I got a surprise for you! Sanford vetoed the measure, but the legislature upheld the veto. So, we’re stuck with the blue laws.
Presumably, this veto and the support of it allows both the governor and members of the legislature to pick up some cheap fundie support at the expense of only the smaller counties in the state – since the richest counties can already ignore the blue laws. FromThe State:
“I don’t think it had to do with religion, but my mom raised me to go to church on Sunday,” said Rep. Nathan Ballentine, R-Richland. He said he voted against the Pitt’s proviso because, “There’s certain things we don’t need to be messing with.”
That’s an interesting statement from a legislator from a county whose stores can ignore the blue laws thanks to the accommodations tax exception. But I’m inclined to agree with what Bellentine is saying here. His vote probably had very little to do with his religion. It likely had more to do with his benefactors not wanting competition in neighboring counties opening up on Sunday morning!
..but you can’t hide.
If Ravenel is convicted of distribution of cocaine, he can serve as much as 20 years in prison. I would say that it is more likely that he will cut a “plea deal” to serve a short amount of time behind bars along with probation.
If Ravenel cuts a “plea deal”, in other words, “pleads guilty” then the Feds should insist that he roll over on a “Bigger Fish” If he does not roll over, then he should do some serious jail time with the rest of the “Cocaine Distributors”.