No one knows that better than former state Sen. Eugene N. "Nick" Zeigler of Florence and James B. Ellisor, the first executive director of the S.C. Election Commission. It is thanks to the leadership of Nick Zeigler that the governor and Legislature agreed to major election reforms more than 35 years ago. And it is thanks to Jim Ellisor, who was in charge of elections for much of that time, that the commission got off to such a good nonpartisan start and has remained on that course.
Both men view the governor's proposal to put elections back under the supervision of the secretary of state with alarm. Mr. Zeigler tells us he was shocked by the proposal, equating it to "going back to the Dark Ages." Mr. Ellisor also told us he feels the proposal "would be a step backward. It would be undoing a good thing that has been so successful in South Carolina."
At the time of the reform, the Republican Party was re-emerging in the state and Mr. Zeigler, a Democrat, felt the Republicans were justifiably concerned that a Democratic elected official controlled the conduct of elections and resolution of challenges. Mr. Zeigler made it his business to try to change the system. At his urging, the House and Senate appointed a joint study commission that recommended a series of reforms, including the creation of the state Election Commission. "We had some of the worst election laws in the country," Mr. Zeigler recalled, "and now we have some of the best."
Mr. Zeigler said that he felt strongly about the need to guarantee that at least one member of the commission represented the largest minority party in the Legislature. At the time, that meant the governor would have to give one of the five commission appointments to a Republican. The provision almost resulted in a gubernatorial veto. But Mr. Zeigler reminded those who were opposed that the time might come when they would be happy to have the same guarantee for their party. The time has come. The minority party seat on the commission now goes to a Democrat.
The governor's restructuring proposal observes that South Carolina is one of only 13 states where the secretary of state isn't in charge of elections. He calls for giving the office that new duty while making the secretary appointive, rather than elected, and part of his Cabinet. But there is no need for the secretary to be elected or appointed, because there actually is no need for the office at all. Just ask the most recent incumbent, Jim Miles, who sought to have the office abolished.
Expanding the office's powers to include elections is heading in the wrong direction. This is one area in which South Carolina already is ahead of most other states in terms of reform.
Because the governor now appoints the commission, he can hold its members accountable. But he isn't directly involved in the operation of elections, and he shouldn't be. If elections were run by a member of his Cabinet, the secretary of state's decisions would invariably be perceived as coming from the governor. As the Election Commission is now constituted, the director is answerable to the five-member commission, making the connection with the chief executive at arms-length. This is one area in which we favor the diffusion of power.
While the governor's plan for the secretary of state is part of Charleston Sen. Glenn McConnell's restructuring legislation, the senator tells us he now is having second thoughts on that score and doesn't expect that part of his plan to emerge from a Senate Judiciary subcommittee. That's a good place to give it a speedy burial.
Click here to return to story:
http://www.charleston.net/stories/020804/edi_07edit1.shtml