EDITORIAL

When South Carolina Democrats go to the polls Saturday they will be faced with an imperfect choice. Both Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders have appealing sides: She as an experienced statesperson and he as a maverick outsider. Both also carry significant baggage that could hinder a general election bid.

We recommend that Democrats cast their vote for Clinton. But regardless of their choice, we urge Democrats to get out and vote their conscience on Feb. 27.

On balance, Clinton stands above Sanders as someone who could step in and lead in a way that recognizes the need for compromise and cooperation in our federal government.

Although it’s true that many if not most Republicans in Congress would find it difficult to work with Clinton, they would have absolutely no common ground whatsoever with an administration headed by Sanders, who is a socialist and embraces higher taxes, universal health care and free college tuition.

Rather than both parties continuing to move to their ideological extremes, the United States needs Democratic and Republican candidates who represent the middle of the ideological spectrum.

Clinton supports a federal minimum wage increase to $12 an hour but recognizes that more than that could lead to job reductions. She also supports making college and community college more affordable, but again stops short of the dramatic plan put forth by Sanders – free college tuition.

On entitlements, Clinton has a plan for reform but would stop short of phasing out benefits for wealthier Americans. To contain Medicare costs, she would try to control rising prescription drug costs by encouraging administrators to negotiate with drug companies on pricing and letting Americans buy lower-cost drugs from other countries.

On social issues, Clinton takes predictably Democratic stances, favoring the Supreme Court’s same-sex marriage decision, supporting abortion rights and backing more gun control.

Finally, Clinton has a strong record of experience, having served as a U.S. senator and secretary of state. She’s familiar with the inner workings of the White House from her time at the State Department and her time as first lady to former President Bill Clinton. While no South Carolina conservative would likely call Clinton a moderate, she is decidedly more moderate than Sanders and would likely govern from slightly left of center.

Sanders’ proposals push the envelope for many Americans. He proposes a $1 trillion federal jobs program to put up to 13 million Americans to work building infrastructure. He backs a $15-an-hour federal minimum wage. His tax plans generally call for the rich to pay higher taxes, but he hasn’t been specific.

Sanders supports free tuition at all public colleges and universities funded by a new “Wall Street” tax. On healthcare, he supports universal care. On other social issues, he supports gay and lesbian rights, he would expand funding for Planned Parenthood, and he favors instant background checks for gun purchases.

By some estimates, Sanders’ proposals would increase the size of the federal government by more than 50 percent, according to a recent report in The New York Times. That translates to additional spending of $2 trillion to $3 trillion per year.

Sanders’ campaign disputes the math.

Although Sanders’ ideas may sound appealing to some Democrats, there is very little chance his proposals would encourage constructive dialogue in Washington. While a Republican-controlled Congress is unlikely to welcome Hillary Clinton to the White House with open arms, her proposals are far closer to the center and could foster a vigorous and constructive debate about policy.