The Legislature should recognize the absurdity of using state tax money to lobby legislative budget writers for more tax money, and generally adopt the governor's ban for all state agencies.

Mr. Sanford's order should result initially in a savings of about $100,000. That figure could increase to more than $400,000 for all contract lobbyists, if extended to all state agencies, according to a spokesman for the governor's office. And if the prohibition included all state employees who are engaged in hustling the Legislature for more money, the figure could be a not unsubstantial $2 million.

That's not to say that state agencies shouldn't be available to answer questions from lawmakers as they prepare the state budget. But they shouldn't operate as courtiers to the Legislature, as they attempt to influence the legislative process, particularly as it involves the budget.

The extent to which lobbyists are sometimes employed was cited in our report on Wednesday, which noted that Francis Marion University had five lobbyists under contract last month. The day before university President Fred Carter accepted the job as the governor's chief of staff, the college canceled its use of contract lobbyists.

The State Ports Authority had as many as eight lobbyists under contract when it was attempting to gain approval of its plan to expand on Daniel Island, for all the good it did the agency. The SPA has reduced its cadre of paid lobbyists in recent months.

Our report also noted that the Medical University of South Carolina hasn't used contract lobbyists in recent years, but did employ them when it was attempting to lease its facilities to Columbia/HCA.

A lobbyist for the College of Charleston described lobbyists as a necessity. No question, lobbyists for private organizations help get their view recognized by the Legislature, as they write laws that could affect the operations of their clients. Lobbyists serving state agencies, however, fall under a different category, since they are using tax money to push an agenda, usually involving the use of more tax money.

The Legislature should respond to the governor's call for the elimination of contract lobbying for state agencies with similar action of its own. It should further curtail the operations of state employees who serve as lobbyists. If legislators need information about a state agency as they ponder budget matters, they can command a response via letter or telephone. The state's budget accountability is not well served by having state-paid influence peddlers whispering in legislative ears.