THE POWER OF an engaged citizenry was on display when a Greenville man successfully sued the General Assembly for packing too many unrelated items into a single piece of legislation. Although his goal was more broad, plaintiff Edward Sloan’s victory last week struck at the heart of problems with our state’s higher education system: It is allowed to expand at will, unchecked by any strong governing authority. Programs are added and missions expanded without adequate examination of how such actions will dilute resources in a small, relatively poor state with historically mediocre colleges and universities.

The decision blocks — for now — USC Sumter’s attempts to convert itself into a four-year college. The regional campus attempted that without support of the USC’s own administration or trustees. The Commission on Higher Education has not endorsed the expansion, and the General Assembly thwarted Gov. Mark Sanford’s efforts to veto it.

We suspect even this latest roadblock will only slow down USC Sumter, unless there is a serious revamping of higher education governance in our state. It is the latest example why a strong central governing authority, such as a board of regents, is needed to ensure that South Carolina’s overall higher education system makes sense for the state, its resources and its future.

The success that USC Sumter had (and may have again) in slipping its unwarranted expansion through the Legislature provides fresh proof that our fragmented governance system still allows for gross abuse and waste, in spite of encouraging trends we’ve seen recently from the state’s top three universities.

In 1991, when The State’s series of “Power Failure” reports examined the ways South Carolina's governmental structure holds its people back, USC and Clemson were known for going around the Commission on Higher Education for the General Assembly to approve purchases and programs to expand their missions. Other colleges did it too, and it didn’t matter if that new hardware or those new degrees were already available somewhere else. This is the way the state got more than one engineering school and more than one medical school, and more.

More recently, however, we have seen an encouraging trend in which Clemson, the Medical University of South Carolina and USC’s flagship campus in Columbia have determined to unite in reform. This move has been led by the schools’ presidents, James Barker, Ray Greenberg and Andrew Sorensen.

The big three united behind a call for funding for endowed chairs — state seed money to attract the brightest talents in higher education and the grant funding they bring. The schools are working to develop their own centers and programs of excellence. Such specialization can allow each to reach heights that were never possible under the old system.

Lawmakers must keep the commitment they have made to full funding of the endowed chairs system. This program is an investment in our state and one that will help build brainpower and economic vitality over time.

Meanwhile, President Sorensen has set the right tone at USC, attempting to make the school’s regional campuses into a more cohesive system. A student who enrolls at one USC campus should be able to see how its courses and credits relate to the system as a whole. That will help meet what should be an important goal for our higher education system — providing multiple and affordable access points to acquire the basics.

It has been good to see this progress. But it only works as long as the individual presidents agree on it. And beyond this one area of emphasis, the fragmentation of decision-making still holds the system back.

The USC Sumter episode provides the most recent and vivid example of how lack of central oversight can contribute to unnecessary duplication and unacceptable expansions in schools’ missions. USC Sumter and its boosters are not alone in their designs on a larger role, one that runs directly counter to crafting the most effective and affordable higher education system for our state. South Carolina must stop depending on the good will of a few individuals now and then (such as three presidents, or four Supreme Court justices) to achieve this end. Our lawmakers must reform the system so that our state can take a strategic approach to higher education, and stay that course.

Thursday: How the government structure encourages bad budget decisions. Read the whole series thus far, and related items, at www.thestate.com/mld/thestate/10646771.htm.