Dear Editor,

When you run for elected or appointed office in South Carolina, you are required to disclose the source of any contributions to the S.C. State Ethics Commission (SCSEC).  It seems a logical extension that once you are in office – you should continue to disclose the source of any income or contributions, especially when the power of the office to vote on millions of dollars in taxpayer funds is far greater than an election campaign.

I believe true ethics reform should require the disclosure of all income sources of an elected or appointed official.

I also support an independent oversight board not just to investigate alleged wrongdoing, but to audit the annual ethics reports required of all elected/ appointed officials – perhaps on a random basis.

The basis for this already exists in at least one area, the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board which was: “established by Congress to oversee the audits of public companies in order to protect the interests of investors and further the public interest.”

What could be more “public” than public office? Once you become an elected/ appointed official, your income sources are subject to public review, just like public corporations. The key is to protect the public interest and any elected or appointed official who does not like that concept should not be in office.


Sarah Nuckles
S.C. Transportation Commissioner 2008-12


sic speaking

Sarah … I seriously love you.  You’re awesome.  When it comes to the promotion of true fiscal responsibility and real accountability in state government, you are one of only a few I know who has consistently walked the walk.  We need a thousand like you … and then a thousand more.  Thank you for sharing your thoughts on ethics reform with us – hopefully your advice will be heeded.