This is a printer friendly version of an article from
www.goupstate.com
To print this article open the file menu and choose
Print.
Back
Article published Jan 16, 2004
Legislators to debate revamping leadership
ROBERT W. DALTON
Staff Writer
COLUMBIA -- A massive
restructuring plan introduced in the state Senate on Thursday would allow voters
to help decide the future shape of South Carolina's government.The legislation
would allow voters to determine whether the governor and lieutenant governor
should run on the same ticket, and to decide whether the secretary of state,
superintendent of education, adjutant general, comptroller general and
agriculture commissioner should continue to be elected positions. The attorney
general and state treasurer would remain elected offices.It also would combine
some agencies -- the Department of Corrections and the Department of Probation,
Pardon and Parole Services, for example, would be married into a Department of
Corrections and Probation; and several agencies would be brought together under
the Department of Health and Human Services."We've consolidated a lot of
agencies and streamlined a lot of services," said Sen. Jim Ritchie,
R-Spartanburg, the Senate majority whip. "We've also given the people the
opportunity to vote on which constitutional officers should be appointed and
which should be elected.""This is about smart government, about building a more
agile government and a better future," Ritchie said.Senate President Pro Tem
Glenn McConnell, R-Charleston, introduced the bipartisan proposal, which
consists of two bills and nearly 1,900 pages."This is a starting point,"
McConnell said. "It's an opportunity for everything to be placed on the table
and to hear from the people about how they'd like to see government run."The
proposals drew praise from Gov. Mark Sanford, and are consistent with
restructuring plans he's drawnup."We've outlined a vision for restructuring
throughout our campaign, our administration and in our budget, and this
legislation is a critical step forward in what's got to be a critical
reinvention of state government," Sanford said.The legislation drew criticism
from the outset, with Sen. John Hawkins, R-Spartanburg, being the most vocal.
Hawkins, a major in the National Guard, objected to the proposal of making the
adjutant general an appointed position."I believe it's wrong in a time of war,
when thousands of our National Guardsmen are serving abroad defending our
freedom, it's wrong to strip away their rights to elect their leader. And that's
what we're talking about doing," Hawkins said."Our soldiers that are serving in
Iraq can't be here for this debate. Their voices aren't going to be able to be
heard, and they're the ones that are going to be most affected by this. I think
it's a slap in the face to them to take up a bill of this magnitude that would
drastically change the way our National Guard is run in South Carolina at a time
of war."McConnell responded to Hawkins by saying the legislation doesn't strip
Guardsmen of their right to decide, but guarantees it.Secretary of State Mark
Hammond, a Spartanburg Republican, said he's fearful that the restructuring
could "place us in bureaucratic maze that would definitely hurt the people of
this state.""It looks to me like this bill is suggesting that we go to a federal
model of government, and I don't believe the people of South Carolina would want
that," Hammond said. "When it's all said and done, I think the people of South
Carolina will want to continue to elect their statewide constitutional
officers."Sen. Glenn Reese, D-Boiling Springs, said, given the amount of work to
be done, it's not realistic to think there will be a referendum this
fall."They've loaded down the wagon, and it's going to die like the Titanic,"
Reese said. "Look at the controversy it caused just in opening. Imagine what
it's going to be like in debate. There's no way it can get out by June."Sen.
Jake Knotts, R-Lexington, also had his doubts."We're going to be pressured for
time to get this to the House so it can be on the ballot in the fall," Knotts
said. "We need to study it thoroughly, and it needs to be cleaned up in the
Senate before it's sent to the House."McConnell, however, was more optimistic."I
think it's got a good chance, because what I didn't hear today is just as
important as what I did hear. I didn't hear people saying we shouldn't be doing
this."Robert W. Dalton can be reached at 562-7223 or bob.dalton@shj.com.