Governor’s efforts to restructure state government deserve attention, support
By Bill Settlemyer
President and CEO, Setcom Media
Gov. Mark Sanford’s efforts to sell the restructuring of state government to the General Assembly and the general public could prove to be the longest-lasting and most significant legacy of his two terms as the state’s chief executive.
He is, of course, not the first South Carolina governor to tackle this challenge, nor will he be the last. But his proposals deserve a fair hearing in the Legislature. Of equal importance, the state’s business leadership should assess his proposals, participate in the debate and support initiatives that would improve the structure and management of state government.
Every one of our 50 states has a different history and each has its own “governance quirks.” There is no perfect structure for state government, and yet there certainly are best practices and norms that we can use as benchmarks to improve state government here.
Start with the ‘no-brainers’
There are arguably some “no-brainers” out there. Perhaps the most obvious is the role of the lieutenant governor, who is not on the same ticket as the governor and may be from another party. The occupant of this “neither fish nor fowl” office has a grab bag of duties. He doesn’t report to the governor. He is not a legislator, but he can break a tie vote while serving as president of the Senate. He succeeds the governor in office in the event of death or inability to serve.
If you compare the lieutenant governor’s role to that of the vice president of the United States, it’s similar except that it’s really awkward to have a No. 2 man in the executive branch who doesn’t report to the chief executive. Another area of organizational dysfunction is found in various statewide constitutional offices that should be filled by appointment of the governor instead of being elective offices. Legislation has been filed by House Speaker Bobby Harrell and Sen. Glenn McConnell to make this change to the offices of the secretary of state, state treasurer, comptroller general, state superintendent of education, adjutant general and agriculture commissioner.
The current debate over the status and performance of the state Department of Transportation presents a more serious issue. The DOT is the proverbial poster child representing South Carolina’s historical pattern of scattering responsibility and power among a network of boards and commissions that leave both the Legislature and the governor without power and accountability for decisions that have a huge financial impact on the state and its citizens.
Of course, there is also a price to pay for too much executive power. A structure with more concentrated executive control can be abused. Clear legislative mandates that set policy and spending goals can be thwarted and laws can be ignored by a powerful chief executive.
South Carolina has historically opted for executive weakness as the better choice, but is it a good choice? I wish the state had a permanent, independent, non-partisan agency charged with examining best practices around the country and providing analysis and recommendations to the governor and the General Assembly regarding the structure of state government.
Such an agency could also address the other “big issues” that continue to perplex and divide us politically. What is the best tax structure for the state? What’s the value of cutting taxes versus investing tax dollars in programs that support health, education and economic development? In the other 49 states, are there any approaches to public policy that are clearly superior and successful? Would those approaches work here?
We don’t care how they do it ANYWHERE!
We all get a chuckle out of the bumper sticker slogan, “We don’t care how you do it Up Nawth!” That parochial blend of Southern pride and prejudice goes together like beer and barbecue. But the reality is that we can learn a lot just by seeing how they do “it” elsewhere, whether “it” is the structure of government, tax policy or any of the other big questions we need to address to make South Carolina a better place to live and work.
For illustration, I can think of a few examples right here in the Charleston area. For years, there was resistance to pressure from the U.S. Department of Justice to change the governance structure of Charleston County from member-at-large to single member districts. It was patently obvious that the at-large voting system was resulting in gross under-representation of blacks on County Council relative to the percentage of the county’s population that is African-American.
A local daily newspaper warned repeatedly that changing to single member districts would be catastrophic because council members would no longer care about the overall needs of the county and would focus only on their districts.
I did a little research at the time and found there were only two other counties (Hampton and Jasper) in the entire state that didn’t have single member districts. Can you say, “bogus argument?” Well, we now have single member districts and a county council that is more representative of the county’s population. And no, the sky didn’t fall when we made the switch.
An even more glaring example of being out-of-step is the Charleston County School District’s constituent board system, under which the Superintendent of Schools doesn’t even have the authority to hire and fire teachers and administrators. No other school district in the entire country has this setup, and for good reason. State Rep. Ben Hagood has tried for several years to get legislation through the General Assembly to fix this. Let’s hope 2007 is the year.
Good government doesn’t happen by accident. Many of the flaws in the structure of South Carolina’s state and local governments are, in a very real sense, accidents of history. We can respect our past and still make changes to our form of government that will bring us a better future. If Gov. Sanford successfully leads the way in this quest, he will be doing us and those who follow a great service.
View as PDF
|
E-Mail This Article
Printer-Friendly Version