Founding Fathers knew best

Government is necessary. Big government is not. Like our Founding Fathers, many of us believe that the proper role of government is to do only those things that people cannot do for themselves.

Today many have come to consider government as a foe, rather than a friend. America’s government rose out of a glorious vision of freedom, opportunity and individual liberty. But it has increasingly become too unwieldy, unresponsive and unaccountable. Even so, too many people consider more government the cure for all that ails us. Many good, well-intentioned people go to the state capitol in Columbia or the national capitol in Washington D.C. and get tangled in the web of special-interest money, lobbyists and bureaucracies. America has strayed far from its founding ideals of government. The Founding Fathers would be deeply concerned.

Our founders envisioned a form of government of limited powers. As Thomas Jefferson said, “that government is best which governs least.” We honored that ideal for many generations.

Those seeking evidence that we’ve abandoned that ideal need look only at Congress’ massive spending, bailout and “stimulus” bills, which will expand government, empty our wallets and permanently shift resources from the private sector to the public sector.

Americans soon will observe Presidents’ Day, a holiday celebrating presidents past. Officially named “Washington’s Birthday,” the holiday originally marked the birth date of George Washington, and was later expanded to honor Abraham Lincoln as well. But perhaps this Presidents’ Day, we could use the occasion to honor the wisdom of all our Founding Fathers and their bold and revolutionary vision for America. We’re at a pivotal time in our nation’s history -- a time of economic crisis and monumental challenge. As we ponder our nation’s future, where we stand, where we need to go and how we get there, perhaps we’ll find new wisdom in those words by Thomas Jefferson, who believed government should limit itself to doing only those things we cannot do individually.

“Government exists to protect us from each other,“ Ronald Reagan once said. “Where government has gone beyond its limits is in deciding to protect us from ourselves.” As a young Republican volunteer in the early 80s, I remember well how Reagan revived our national spirit and transformed our government from one that was consuming our prosperity to one that got out of the way of folks who produce prosperity and create jobs. Reagan knew as our Founding Fathers did -- that government should get out of the way and let the most industrious, ingenious and enterprising people in the world build an ever-improving nation rich in freedom, opportunity and success.

It is our responsibility as citizens to insist that our elected leaders rein in all levels of government so that future generations will be blessed with the same opportunities to succeed that so many of us were blessed with. Unless we return to the original principles on which our nation was founded, that opportunity might not be there for future generations including our own children and grandchildren.

The Year of Reform in S.C.

Someone once asked Winston Churchill why he was such an optimist. “Because,” he replied, “it doesn’t do much good to be anything else.”

Like Churchill, I’m optimistic about our future here in South Carolina. In particular, I’m optimistic about the chances for real, meaningful government reform – changing the way we do things in Columbia to make our system of government more accountable, more transparent, and much more fiscally responsible.

While state leaders search for ways to move South Carolina forward, there’s not likely to be any expanded spending plans in the S.C. General Assembly. There’s no money for that. But what would benefit the state handsomely and not cost any money is government reform – saving money by streamlining functions and cutting waste, and restoring confidence by letting all citizens see how government spends their money.

There are several meaningful reform measures up for consideration this year:

- Comprehensive tort reform legislation by Sen. Larry Martin of Pickens County aims to reduce the cost of healthcare by cutting back frivolous lawsuits. Senator Martin and others also hope to eliminate the five-member Budget & Control Board, the massive agency that oversees much state spending, and replace it with a more responsive department controlled by the governor.

- State leaders including Senators Kevin Bryant of Anderson County, Dick Elliott of Horry County and Larry Grooms of Berkeley County have introduced legislation requiring local governments to post their spending details on the Internet. (My office is currently working with local governments to encourage them to voluntarily post spending details online, and we expect the first governments to soon begin doing so.)

- Unbeknownst to most people, state agencies can spend taxpayer money to hire lobbyists…whose job is lobbying the legislature for more taxpayer money. Reps. Jim Merrill of Berkeley County, Herb Kirsh of York County and other genuine taxpayer heroes rightfully want to end that improper practice.

- Reps. Nikki Haley of Lexington County and Nathan Ballentine of Richland County have introduced transparency-related measures, including a successful effort to require more legislative votes to be recorded, and they have pending legislation for more stringent campaign contribution disclosure requirements.

- House Speaker Bobby Harrell of Charleston County and others are laying the groundwork for comprehensive tax reform.

- Senate President Pro-Tem Glenn McConnell of Charleston County and others want to cap state spending to ensure that the growth of state government doesn’t outpace our ability to pay for it. The recent budget shortfalls are a glaring example of why this legislation is needed; simply put, government tends to spend everything it collects during prosperous times, and then is forced to enact painful cuts whenever the economy slows down.

- Senator Shane Massey of Edgefield County wants lawmakers to accept full responsibility for their “pork barrel projects.” His proposed “earmark reform” bill would ban secret spending for these projects.

Whether or not you agree with all of these specific proposals, what’s clear is that most of them would greatly benefit our state. In the midst of tough economic times for many South Carolinians, now might be a perfect time to insist upon fundamental changes in the way government operates.

Increasing government

transparency at the local level

By Richard Eckstrom

A few months ago my office unveiled the state’s first spending transparency Web site for state government. Visitors to the Web site can find detailed spending information for more than 80 state agencies.

Think of this as a sort of online check register. Visitors can see, for example, that in December the Election Commission made seven purchases of office supplies that totaled $3,757, and in October the Department of Mental Health made 45 purchases of copying equipment supplies that totaled $30,183. The Web site, arranged by agency, shows the date and amount of each purchase, the vendor who was paid, and the source of money used for each purchase.

Initially, state agencies were reluctant to provide this information, arguing that gathering it would be too costly. So my staff and I compiled this information and posted it on the Web ourselves. We were surprised to discover that the process wasn’t difficult or expensive. We did this without hiring additional staff and at a relatively low cost.

We’ve also been pleasantly surprised at the level of public interest in our spending transparency Web site. Since its inception, the site has far exceeded 50,000 visits. (In the first month it was available, it had nearly 10,000 visits!)

This spending transparency site has put South Carolina at the forefront of a national transparency movement; several states have contacted us seeking advice, hoping to duplicate our efforts. (We’re one of just a few states to make state spending so easily available to the public.)

In recent months, we’ve expanded the scope of our transparency efforts. We’re now working with local governments -- counties, municipalities and school districts -- to encourage them to voluntarily post their spending details on the Internet. We’re offering to assist any local governments that need help, answer questions they might have and, if necessary, host the information on our own site.

In addition, we’re explaining to local governments the benefits of making this information easily available to anyone via the Internet. Not only is it good government -- increased transparency would ultimately help rebuild trust in government and provide better information to the public -- but there are tangible benefits as well. Providing spending detail on the Internet is likely to greatly reduce the number of written requests for this information, which in turn will greatly reduce staff time and copying costs associated with responding to written requests for information by the public and the media.

Of course, any effort to bring additional sunlight to government is going to meet with some resistance, and our efforts are certainly no exception. Arguments I’ve heard against putting spending details on the Internet include complaints ranging from the cost of gathering the information to what some perceive as a lack of public interest or understanding. In meeting with local governments, I’ve been working to dispel these notions.

But there’s an even more basic reason local governments should disclose the details of their spending on the Internet: It’s not their money they’re spending. It’s your money. You have an absolute right to know how government is spending your money, and you should be provided easy, no-cost access to the details. Period.

Governor sets positive tone for coming year

Regardless of your political philosophy, his message of looking forward is one we all need to hear.

By Richard Eckstrom

Governor Sanford set a positive tone for the coming year with his annual State of the State address.

In his Jan. 14 speech, the Governor sounded some familiar themes, emphasizing the need to reform government, rein in spending and impose greater accountability. He spoke of the need to restructure state government, saying, "It is my hope that these jolting economic times force us to move South Carolina state government into the 21st Century."

The governor renewed his call for fiscal restraint, once again urging spending limits to keep the growth of government from outpacing our ability to pay for it. He made the case for a tax policy he says would improve the business climate in the state and boost the economy.

I was particularly pleased to hear the governor emphasize increased government transparency, an issue near and dear to my own heart. Giving citizens greater access to how decisions are made and how their hard-earned tax dollars are spent is the key to sound governance and to renewing the faith that many people have lost in government.

But the most remarkable part of the address, perhaps, came not in the form of a policy proposal or a good-government reform – but in an appeal to state leaders to lay down their arms, set aside their differences and start fresh. He set "we must look forward" as his first principle for improving the fortunes of South Carolinians. He summoned his audience to move beyond their divisions and work to heal South Carolina.

"Our differences are in the past, and from my perspective, bygones are bygones. All that matters is what we do from this day forward," the governor said, signaling a new era of cooperation may be in store. The State of the State address closed with the story of an Alexandria, Va. High school football team, chronicled in the movie Remember the Titans, in which the merger of several schools into one resulted in a racially charged atmosphere: "Despite what critics had considered impossible, they so ably moved past their differences and found ways to work together that they went 13-0 for the season, and ultimately won the State Championship."

In other words: Yes, stand on principle. Fight for beliefs. But don’t let past disagreements hinder future efforts to make our state a better place. Our differences of opinion certainly pale in comparison to the common bond we share in our desire to move South Carolina forward.

Even in the best of times, the challenges facing South Carolina are great. Today, we also face an economic crisis and a gargantuan budget shortfall. Whether or not you agree with the governor’s specific policy proposals, his message of looking forward and healing divisions is needed more than ever.

Six ways we can ALL help weather this storm

By Richard Eckstrom

No history or economic textbook contains the solution to our current economic troubles. This crisis is complicated, unlike any we’ve ever seen, and perhaps the most far-reaching since the Great Depression.

Amid anxiety about the direction of our country and the quality of our daily lives, state and national leaders are struggling to get our economy back on track. Yet even as their national strategy unfolds, there are many ways we can all help weather this storm, improve our quality of life, and strengthen our communities and nation.

1. Above all, believe in the greatness of America. Wear a confident smile, and offer an encouraging word. Ronald Reagan’s buoyant optimism helped pull America up from the gloomy decline of the 70’s. He helped teach us that hope trumps pessimism. Hope is infectious. Think about our rich heritage as Americans and be thankful for it!

2. Think of your neighbors. Get to know others in the community. Make new friends. If there’s a silver lining to this crisis, perhaps it’s in rediscovering the great American ideal of pulling together during tough times. Those who survived the Great Depression will tell us they found strength in pulling together -- as families, as communitie s, as a nation -- during a dark time. Differences and disagreements can give way to unity and determination. Our differences shrink in comparison to the common bond we share in our love of America.

3. Buy American, and shop locally. Buying American goods reinvests in our country and keeps jobs here. And shopping locally shows support for your community and boosts your local economy. Local businesses sponsor community events and support Little League teams, civic clubs and schools. These, in turn, improve our local quality-of-life and strengthen your community.

4. Donate. Give to the Salvation Army, the Red Cross, or other charities that help the less fortunate. Tough times elevate the plight of those less fortunate. When those who already have what they need help out those who do not, both groups benefit. The entire community benefits when you help the less fortunate.

5. Volunteer. If you can’t contribute financially, contribute your time, effort, and energy to make a difference in your community. Even if your volunteer effort doesn’t seem related to the economy or quality-of-life, it probably is. Volunteerism helps solve local or national problems, and when problems are handled by volunteers instead of government, financial resources are free to be applied where they’re needed most.

6. Get involved in the community. Light a candle rather than curse the darkness. Become more active in your church, your school, or a civic club. Consider public service. Lead. Help guide the community’s future. Now more than ever, we need leaders to encourage and inspire their neighbors and restore confidence.

Sure, times might be tough. But America’s spirit is even tougher. Better days are coming. They always have.

Four common-sense ways to reduce the tax burden

You work hard for your money, and you deserve to keep as much of it as possible.

Too often, however, those with the authority to set budgets and levy taxes forget whose money it is they are spending. Rather than directing existing resources where they are most needed -- infrastructure, public safety, education, etc. -- elected officials spend on things that don’t meet the “necessity test.” They want to “bring home the bacon,” but, of course, the taxpayers pick up the tab for the bacon.

On top of this unlimited desire to spend, some in authority tend to hold a cavalier attitude toward the taxpayer who makes it all possible. From the president-elect’s plans to redistribute your income, to local officials’ pet projects, what’s clear to me is that the taxpayers who provide the tax money to operate government are not always treated with the respect they deserve.

Here are four common-sense steps I believe should be taken to ease the tax burden.

First, and most obviously, is the elimination of unnecessary spending. If you and I sat down together and looked over the state budget, we easily could identify common-sense ways to pare back costs. Some glaring examples are the many festivals, conferences, and other non-essential programs and services which receive state funds yet which certainly aren’t necessary functions of state government.

Secondly, we should be exploring ways to use private funds to offset the cost of government. A few years ago, an idea was floated to sell naming rights to offset construction and other costs. While this proposal met with some skepticism, I appreciated this novel idea for easing the burden on taxpayers. Whenever government officials seek sources of funding other than tax dollars, taxpayers are better off. Perhaps those who propose new spending should be required to first search for other sources of funds before turning to the taxpayers.

Thirdly, greater cooperation among federal, state, and local governments could reduce costs to the taxpayers. There are numerous examples of duplication of services, where similar programs are provided by two or more overlapping governmental sources. Towns operate parks and ball fields just down the road from similar parks and ball fields operated by local recreation districts, counties, or school districts. Citizen pressure for greater coordination among these governments would ensure a more efficient use of tax dollars.

Finally, I’d like to see a mandatory, comprehensive spending plan adopted each year, particularly at the state level. We should restructure our budget process -- agreeing on long-term spending needs and priorities, and then we should use those priorities to determine how to fund essential services and maintain public assets like highways and bridges. By setting priorities, we’ll be more likely to meet the basic needs of the citizens. Then and only then -- perhaps as part of a separate budget process -- should we decide on the funding of non-essential things like parades.

Public service is a noble calling, and should be treated as such. The power to spend other peoples’ money should not be taken lightly. The most important thing any elected official can do is fight to let you keep more of your own money.

In 2009, let's change South Carolina

We all know that the New Year is a time for new beginnings -- an opportunity for fresh starts. Typically we vow to exercise more, eat less, spend fewer hours at the office, acquire new skills or set some other lofty goal.

For those of us in positions of state leadership, perhaps the New Year is also a good time to evaluate the way we do things in Columbia.

The New Year brings huge challenges -- South Carolina’s current budget crisis chief among them. And, of course, we need to deal with our existing problems. Improving our schools, growing our economy, reducing the tax burden, and finding ways to make healthcare more affordable will continue to be top priorities. We’ve been at the bottom in too many areas for too long.

But if we are to truly move our state forward, toward a brighter future, we have to make some long overdue changes -- changes in the structure of state government, in the way we spend public money, and in our philosophy about public service. We’ve got to modernize our 19th Century system of government, bring greater transparency to our policy-making process, and show greater spending discipline.

On the issue of transparency, I’ve been privileged to work alongside a group of reform-minded legislators in the hopes of ushering in a new era of openness and accountability. My efforts have focused on finding new ways to make information on state government’s spending available on the Web, and in the coming months I’ll be working with local governments -- cities, counties and school districts -- to help them do the same. In the legislature, a bipartisan group of lawmakers is working to pull back the curtains of government so that more decisions are made in full view of the citizenry. Let’s hope their efforts meet with success. An open, accountable government is essential for building public trust.

On the issue of restructuring, Gov. Sanford has worked over the past several years to bring needed reforms that would streamline spending, cut back on waste, and strengthen accountability. The governor’s ideas deserve honest consideration and debate. Eliminating the five-member Budget & Control Board -- the central agency that oversees much of state government’s finances -- and replacing it with an agency under the control of the governor would be a good first step toward improving accountability.

Lessons from the immediate past teach us that state government must reform the way it spends. During prosperous economic times, there’s been the tendency to spend every bit of revenue that comes in. As a fiscal conservative, I’ve always cautioned against this practice. My father taught me to be more careful than that.

When the economy turns downward (as it does from time to time), state government takes in less revenue and can’t support itself at the expanded size it grows during better economic times. As a result, since state government’s current fiscal year started in July we’ve had to make three “mid-year budget cuts.” That’s no way to run any organization. We simply must show greater restraint so that the growth of government never again so seriously outpaces our ability to pay for it.

These aren’t radical changes. Many will recognize them as simple common sense. But in my opinion, they’re badly needed if we’re to truly move our state forward.

Let’s resolve to make 2009 the year we change South Carolina.

Civil, issue-oriented discourse needed on important issues

There’s a battle of sorts going on in Columbia between those trying to rein in spending, impose greater accountability, and pull back the curtains of government so that decisions are made in full public view… and those who don’t think these changes are needed.

Those who know me generally put me in the former category -- a fiscal conservative committed to the cause of better government, increased transparency, and more careful spending. But while remaining true to my conservative principles, I consciously try to show respect for those whose views and opinions are different from mine.

Unfortunately, in this environment what should be civil debate on important issues all too often descends into “attack politics” -- vilifying those with opposing views in order to win. Name-calling has become accepted practice for many.

One example on the national stage is the automobile bailout, where some in Congress are sniping and finger-pointing just because many others -- due to their deep-seated concerns about writing blank checks to Detroit -- opposed plans to bail out the Big 3 automakers. When everyone in Washington should be devoting their energy to moving the country past the current economic crisis, leaders of one party instead have been churning press releases blasting the other party, and a prominent leader in the majority party attempted to paint all those who voted against the bail out plan as “un-American.”

There’s no shortage of such behavior here in the Palmetto State, where for several years Governor Sanford and those aligned with him have tried to change the business-as-usual culture in Columbia. In the interest of openness, let me state that I wholeheartedly support the vast majority of Gov. Sanford’s proposed reforms. Like him, I strongly believe that changing the way we do things in Columbia is a key to truly moving our state forward. But Gov. Sanford and other reformers represent changes that many in Columbia neither seek nor wish to accept, and the debate hasn’t always been constructive.

The legislature will convene in January with South Carolina facing one of the biggest challenges of a generation – the current economic crisis. With state leaders grappling with new and more difficult problems, we’d do well to lay aside the “heroes-versus-villains” mentality, the attitude that it’s OK to tear down another for holding an opposing political philosophy.

At the local level, the men and women who engage in civic debate -- whether over a municipal tax increase, a zoning matter, or a school bond issue -- should be respected, even when they express views counter to our own. At a time when most folks go about their daily lives and simply read about developments in the newspaper, we should applaud any who take the time to become involved in the community to guide its future.

In South Carolina, an honest conversation about where we’re headed as a state, and how we get there, is a good thing. We should be able to have such a conversation without ever resorting to attacks. Those of us in positions of public trust have a particular obligation to set the right example by conducting our debates in a manner befitting those we serve. Let’s commit to finding success on high roads, not low ones, and let’s win hearts and minds with the power of our ideas, not the volume of our voices.

Time for a hard look at the way we spend

It’s hard to find a bright spot in the current national recession. But if there is a silver lining, perhaps it will be in a new approach to the way state government spends.

On Dec. 11, the state Budget & Control Board voted to reduce spending for the current fiscal year. The mandatory cuts came after the state’s economists calculated that the amount the state would collect in revenue would fall far short of the amount the state was set to spend. This most recent budget reduction – a 7 percent cut – was the third decrease since the fiscal year began in July.

Our budget crisis was not caused only by declining revenues, but by too much spending as well. When times are good, state government simply spends too much of what it take in. We seem to spend everything we take in, rather than just what we need to fund government.

It was as a result of this practice that, when the economy soured, we became unable to support state government at the size we had grown it. Thus, we were forced to cut – requiring employee furloughs and layoffs.

Our current fiscal straits underscore the need for more thoughtful spending practices. The current budget predicament should teach us the perils of spending every dime we take in, as if the good times will last forever. That’s no way to manage a state. We must set priorities, focus on the primary functions of government, direct resources where they are genuinely needed, and pare back frills.

Simply put, it’s time to reform the way we spend taxpayers' money.

Over the past several years, Gov. Sanford has worked to draw attention to state spending practices he accurately sees as unhealthy. His answer is to cap spending by indexing spending growth to inflation and population growth, which would keep government from growing at a faster pace than the underlying economy. Others would be wise to accept his advice.

A new year and a new legislative session are approaching, and with them comes an opportunity for new beginnings – for a new chapter in the history of state government. Common sense demands we use this golden opportunity to change the way we spend.

Government transparency gaining steam...

Those who know me know how increased government transparency is something I feel strongly about. That's why I have been working hard as Comptroller General to do my part to shine a light on state spending... so the taxpayers have access to as much information as possible about how their hard-earned tax dollars are spent.

Fortunately, the government transparency movement appears to be picking up steam. Every day, the drum beat grows louder. Increasingly, daily newspapers are using their opinion pages to advance the idea that the best government is the government conducted in the open -- in full view of the citizenry.

Below are two such editorials from the Charleston Post & Courier and the Myrtle Beach Sun News. It is certainly refreshing to witness newspaper editorial writers using their "bully pulpit" to advance the important cause of open government.

New chance for roll-call solution
From the Post & Courier (Saturday, December 13, 2008)

A reform plan for roll-call voting by the state Legislature gets another chance with a bill prefiled by Senate Majority Leader Harvey Peeler this week.
The Senate shouldn't settle for something substantially less, as did the House of Representatives.
The Gaffney Republican's bill reflects the changes sought in the House by Rep. Nikki Haley, R-Lexington. It would require South Carolina's important legislative business to be submitted to a roll-call vote — as it is in the large majority of states.
The need for greater accountability was revealed by the S.C. Policy Council, whose analysis found that only 8 percent of House votes and 2 percent of Senate votes were recorded.
The Policy Council also found that South Carolina had the weakest requirements
in the nation for roll-call voting by the Legislature.
The House response was to approve a rules change that includes some mprovements, but far less than envisioned in the bill by Rep. Haley. The public support of more accountability is reflected in the bipartisan support for her bill. So far, 30 representatives have signed on to the bill.
Rep. Haley's bill, incidentally, has also been pre-filed for introduction to the House when the session opens. So the House will have another opportunity to consider her reform plan.
Sen. Peeler's bill has garnered broad support in the Senate, with 20 co-sponsors.
Sen. Peeler contends that the lack of accountability has resulted in irresponsible
spending by the state, and is partly to blame for the state government's current
fiscal problems.
"Transparency is clearly needed in South Carolina," Sen. Peeler said in a statement. "More roll-call votes will shine a bright light on the General Assembly, holding us accountable for the tax dollars we spend."
Senate President Pro Tempore Glenn McConnell supports more roll-call voting, but says the plan needs to be crafted as a rule change to avoid Senate gridlock. "We're trying to make sure that everything that is substantive and controversial gets a recorded vote," he said.
Presumably, those parliamentary concerns can be addressed during the debate.
The primary objective should be to provide more roll-call voting by senators who clearly haven't been on the record. If that requires some adjustments in the way the
Senate does business, then senators should be willing to make the necessary changes. Roll-call voting is essential to legislative accountability. It provides a record showing citizens how their legislators voted. It informs the electorate as voters go the polls.
The shortcomings in accountability have been revealed, and a remedy should be applied by the Legislature. A cure, not a bandage, is needed.

Let Us See the Truth
From the Myrtle Beach Sun News (Friday, Dec. 12)

Good for S.C. Senate Majority Leader Harvey Peeler, R-Cherokee, and the doughty and of Senate Republicans who believe that the long era of secrecy in S.C. lawmaking ust end. Local Sens. Ray Cleary, R-Murrells Inlet, and Luke Rankin, R-Myrtle Beach, re among senators backing Peeler's bill to let ordinary South Carolinians in on how he General Assembly handles their tax money. Under present Senate rules and recently evised House rules, legislators too easily can obscure money-handling decisions and ositions with which their constituents may disagree.
The Senate Republicans' Spending Accountability Act would amend state law to equire roll-call recording of senators' and representatives' votes on: Each section of appropriations bills on second reading; Floor votes adopting House-Senate conference-committee and free conference-committee reports (most final budget decisions have their beginnings in these reports); Second reading of all bills and joint resolutions; Concurrence votes on Senate amendments to House bills, and on House amendments to Senate bills; Third (and final) readings of bills and joint resolutions amended after second readings. We can almost hear readers' eyes glazing over at all this legislative inside baseball. The S.C. representatives who last week approved House "reforms" that would allow many financial dealings to remain secret are counting on them to react that way. Too
many legislators like it when we see the inside stuff as boring.
The House rules changes require recorded member votes only on bills to raise or reduce taxes, to increase budgets by more than $10,000, to adopt the final version of the state budget, to reapportion the General Assembly or U.S. House districts,
to raise legislative pay and to amend ethics rules. That sounds like transparency but really isn't.
House rules, as amended, do not require roll-call votes on the measures itemized in the Peeler bill - even though the inspiration for his bill came from a House member, S.C. Rep. Nikki Haley, R-Lexington. The House refused to consider her accountability bill. And Speaker Bobby Harrell subsequently stripped Haley and another transparency reformer, S.C. Rep. Nathan Ballentine, R-Irmo, of their committee assignments. The two got punished, in short, for daring to suggest that House members should show their constituents how they handle public money.
Why should readers care that S.C. legislators, when stacked against their counterparts in other states, are among the least accountable legislators in the nation? For the answer, one need only look at how poorly the current-year state budget, which has imploded by more than a billion dollars, has worked out.
How did that happen when it was clear at the beginning of the year that the S.C. economy was headed for a bad place?
Who is to blame for this fiasco? There's no way to tell because the official record of the 2008 legislative session does not speak to the dozens upon dozens of procedural votes made during budget construction in the General Assembly.
Peeler says that if the House refuses to engage on his bill, he'll work to incorporate its provisions into Senate rules. The hope must be, however, that Harrell and his cohorts recognize the weakness of their rules "reforms" and unite with the Senate to make legislative transparency a matter of law.

My thoughts on the Budget & Control Board's 7 percent state budget cut on Dec. 11

A budget cut now is better than a budget cut next February... and February is the soonest legislative leaders say they would be able to deal with our current budget crisis. That's why I insisted that the Budget and Control Board needed to step forward to cut state spending.

Cutting today allows greater flexibility for each agency, while later cuts would require much more drastic action to keep government afloat.

State government is bleeding financially, and we needed to act immediately to stop the blood loss.

But let's honestly admit that our budget crisis is more a problem of our spending too much than collecting too little. Economic growth over the last few years has given us a false hope that good times will last forever. So state government has increased spending beyond levels we can keep up. Now that revenues are falling, we’re unable to support government at the size we’ve grown it.

A new year and a new legislative session are around the corner and with them comes an opportunity for needed change in state government budgeting. State leaders would do well to recognize this unique opportunity to rethink our approach to spending. We must exercise greater fiscal discipline by living within our means and resisting the urge to spend every dime that comes in as if good times will last forever.

If there’s a silver lining somewhere in this current economic crisis, it’s that these challenges will force us to use greater fiscal discipline as we move ahead.

Reduced tax revenue -- and what it means for S.C.

Year-to-date, corporate income tax revenues are down more than 57 percent from last year.

Net Corporate Income Tax collections for July - November of this year are $30.6 million compared to $71.4 million for the same period last year -- a difference of $40.8 million. Also down on a year-to-date basis are individual income tax collections (down nearly 3 percent) and sales tax collections (down nearly 11 percent). The Board of Economic Advisors is expected to discuss declining revenues at its meeting Wednesday.

These sobering numbers and the declining revenue projections already provided by the Board of Economic Advisors further illustrate the need for a complete top-to-bottom assessment of how we spend public dollars.

With the legislature set to return in a few short weeks, the economic crisis presents us an excellent opportunity to change how we spend public money. It no longer works to spend money as fast as it comes in, acting as if good times will last forever. Nor should the state continue to grow government faster than we can pay for it. The mess we’re in today proves that we need to change.

S.C. Budget Update

The state Budget and Control Board will meet Thursday, Dec. 11 to decide on a course of action for dealing with falling tax revenues.
That meeting will following Wednesday's meeting of the Board of Economic Advisors.

Urge local governments to put spending online

Increased transparency needed to restore faith in government

Providing increased government transparency -- giving people more and better information on how government spends our money and how elected officials make decisions that affect all of us -- is a cause dear to my heart.

Too many decisions are made behind closed doors, diluting accountability of our elected officials and eroding public confidence in government itself. When elected officials make decisions in secret and without a record of their votes, they sometimes pass things they never would approve in full view of the public.

Earlier this year, I worked with Governor Sanford to create an easy-to-use spending transparency Web site. It contains detailed spending information for more than 80 state agencies, giving the public more access than ever to information about how state government spends their hard-earned tax dollars.

This Web site, which is available through my office’s site (http://www.cg.sc.gov/), is serving as a national model for other states attempting their own transparency initiatives. Several states have contacted me hoping to duplicate our open-government ideas.

Today, the Comptroller General's Office is working to help bring increased transparency to local governments -- towns, cities, counties, special purpose districts, and school districts. We’re reaching out to work with local governments to put their spending data online, even offering to host the information on our own Web site.

Any transparency movement, however, is likely to meet resistance from those who prefer that the public not know exactly how their money is spent and who see increased transparency as an intrusion on their authority and into their exclusive domain. Excuses vary: Some say it’s too costly to put the information online. Others say there’s not enough public interest. Still others question the motives of any citizen interested in looking at spending by local governments. I disagree with all these weak arguments. They’re nonsense!

Government absolutely needs to provide this information with no excuses. Call it an on-line check register. People want and deserve to know how their hard-earned tax dollars are being spent, and people can be trusted with this information. In this information age, it’s easy and inexpensive to do.

It’s unbelievable that anyone could oppose this kind of initiative with a straight face or a clear conscience. But this has to be done. I hope that local governments all over South Carolina will do so voluntarily. If they refuse, I’ll try again this year to get support from the Legislature to compel local governments to make this useful information conveniently available to the public at no cost. What could be more convenient to the public than providing this information on the Internet?

But before asking the Legislature to pass another law, I’m turning to the public for help. I’m asking people to make their voices loudly heard and contact officials of their own town or city, their county, and their school district. People need to insist to them that local governments post their spending on-line. If local officials haven’t yet heard about my offer to put their spending detail in one centralized location on my office’s Web site, tell them about it.

I’ll soon be holding workshops around the state to help any local governments interested in working with me on this. Look up phone numbers. Call your mayor, your representatives on City and County Council, and your school board representatives. Tell them that, as a voter, you feel transparency is the best policy. While it won’t cure all that ails our state, equipping citizens with the knowledge gained by better access to how their money is spent would hold our elected officials more accountable and would better safeguard the public trust.

In other words, this is a common sense matter of good government.