Caucus Reform: Not Enough

Just call it “Reform Lite.”

Or a “checked swing.”

Or perhaps “institutional half-measures” works better.

But whatever you call it, don’t say that the S.C. Senate Republican Caucus committed itself yesterday to the sort of fundamental change needed if South Carolina state government is to ever be truly efficient, accountable and transparent to the taxpayers.

They took a few baby steps that should be approved, don’t get us wrong, but after more than six years of comprehensive reform proposals being on the table, we expected a lot more from “Republicans” eager to reclaim their brand with the votes.

In fact, in unveiling its “Sunshine in South Carolina” agenda, the Caucus package steals a page from Democratic Education Superintendent Jim Rex’s playbook, which is to co-opt your opponents’ talking points while doing the bare minimum to change an entrenched system.

“Reining in government spending, restructuring antiquated agencies and putting government practices under the microscope of public scrutiny are necessary steps toward getting the state back on the right track,” the Caucus press release boldly proclaims, yet the boldness quickly evaporates once you get into the specifics of the plan.

First off, the Caucus clearly believes it has done all that it needs to do on the issue of “roll call” voting, despite the fact that its recent rules change was considerably weaker than a measure passed last week by the S.C. House.

Frankly, the issue of “roll call” voting will not have been truly dealt with until every non-ceremonial vote cast by either the House or Senate is incorporated into a new law – and that law is signed by the governor.

Until such time – no matter how well-intentioned the recent positive steps may be – we are basically still dealing with lawmakers deciding for themselves which votes they want the public to see.

Yet like President George W. Bush unveiling a big “Mission Accomplished” sign, the Caucus proudly proclaims that it has “championed a new rule requiring recorded votes that will give taxpayers a clear picture of how their elected officials are voting and how their money is being spent.” The Caucus also proposes legislative “spending caps,” although they do not specify the limit they would set or how they would hold themselves accountable.

Again, the proof is in the pudding, and in case anyone needed a refresher in how pointless some of these proposals can be, in 2004 South Carolina passed a “Fiscal Discipline Act” shortly before embarking on the biggest explosion of government growth in its history.

Spending caps don’t work, people. South Carolina needs a revenue cap that actually cuts government growth off at the spigot before these politicians can get their grubby hands on it.

The Caucus proposal also falls dramatically short on the issue of government restructuring, addressing the need for the creation of a Cabinet-level Department of Administration but ignoring the broader swath of government streamlining required in health, environmental, law enforcement, K-12 and higher education service delivery, to say nothing of the hundreds of duplicative boards and commissions that further splinter accountability.

Seriously, people. No health care agency streamlining? No board of regents? No school district consolidation?

Obviously, we agree that the Department of Administration proposal should be adopted, but failing to address the rest of our dysfunctional government structure.

Similarly, the Caucus restructuring proposal for Constitutional Officers fell well short of the mark, proposing only to address the issue of the Lt. Governor and the governor running on the same ticket via a constitutional amendment put to the voters.

Until voters have been given the opportunity to weigh a similar method of executive appointment for Treasurer, Comptroller General, Agriculture Commissioner, Adjutant General and Superintendent of Education, then we will continue to have an executive branch of government that’s working at cross-purposes.

You’ll notice we left Secretary of State off of our list … but that’s only because that office should be abolished and have its book-keeping functions folded into the Department of Administration.

Oh, we also left Attorney General off of the list, because that’s frankly the one statewide office we feel should remain independent of the other branches of government.

There is one issue where the Caucus plan deserves praise, though – the creation of an “online checkbook” for all state and local taxpayer expenditures of $100 or more.

Assuming they can get the proposal past GOP Sen. Larry Martin (who blocked it last year), this would be a significant step toward government transparency, as well as an effective check against wasteful spending.

As we said earlier, we urge passage of all of these items, but the Caucus basically walked a mile of a marathon and then hung it up.

Our state needs – and deserves – much better than that.