When I ran for governor two years ago, one of the things I tried to stress was the notion that politics indeed ought to be about ideas -- about specific proposals that we could talk about and debate based on their merits. Some ideas folks are going to like, others they wouldn't, but the process strengthens the good ideas and culls the poor ones.

Sadly, our current political system in South Carolina doesn't do this. In many cases it simply stops ideas and prevents them from even being discussed -- a process that's not only bad for the movement of ideas through a political body but also bad for democracy itself. Boiled down, I'd say we have a system in our state that's very adept at stopping ideas, but very poor at letting ideas move forward through the process. Last session, the ability of our State Senate to vote on legislation was frequently held up -- in some cases for two full years -- by the objection of a single senator.

In fact, on the last day of the 2003-04 legislative session, 39 bills were held up by a single senator's objections. Of those 39 bills, 13 of them were held up for more than one year.

Should we allow bills to effectively die because one senator doesn't like an idea or the person offering it? Imagine going to vote at your local precinct on Election Day only to find out no election was taking place because one person didn't want there to be a vote?

Can we afford to continue this way if we want to be competitive in the 21st century?

Simply put, I believe the answer is "No." I think after introducing, debating and amending bills (often multiple times) at the subcommittee, full committee and full floor level in each of our two legislative bodies, legislators ought to be able to vote either to advance or defeat an idea.

But for rules to change in the Senate, the change will have to come from the Senate. That's why when I raised this issue a few weeks ago I was encouraged to see standing with me Senate leaders like Glenn McConnell and John Courson, as well as new members like Larry Grooms and Chip Campsen, all of whom believe things need to change.

I'm writing now to ask that you help them, not just because they need reinforcements, but also because time is of the essence. For all practical purposes, changing the Senate rules is only possible during the first week of the legislative session in January. That's why it's awfully important for you and your friends and relatives to have conversations with individual senators between now and the end of the year if you too would like to see things change.

Here are a few points I think are worth mentioning if you'd like to help reform-minded senators in their push for change:

1.) Stop one senator from blocking debate -- The current rules of the Senate allow one senator to stop the body from even considering debate unless two-thirds of the body votes to debate it. This rule isn't even published, it's an old courtesy extended to senators who had an interest in a bill but were delayed from attending because their horse couldn't get them to Columbia on time. The horses are gone and frankly this tradition ought to go with it. Indirectly, it has created 46 stealth vetoes -- one for each senator -- rather than the one veto the founding fathers reserved for the executive branch.

2.) Reform the filibuster -- While they can certainly bring our Senate to a halt for weeks on end, we don't have a "true" filibuster here in South Carolina. Traditionally, filibusters gave time to the minority to express its point of view, but that time was limited based on a speaker's physical endurance. Unlike the marathon speaking sessions that mark the U.S. Senate filibuster, in our state there's plenty of time for lunch, breaks and a long evening's rest. No other state in the Southeast has our filibuster rules.

3.) Put an end to bobtailing -- Our State Constitution is very specific in saying that all bills should relate to "one subject." The entire Legislature has become generous in its interpretation of "subject" and this was the basis for my veto of the Life Sciences bill last session, but it highlights the Senate rules that often allow numerous unrelated amendments to get tacked onto a bill -- many of which are un-discussed, pork projects.

We're going to have honest disagreements on what decisions are best for our state, but I think most folks would agree that democracy is all about ultimately getting to make those decisions.

Currently, the rules in our State Senate too often keep us from doing just that.

Click here to return to story:
http://www.charleston.net/stories/111204/com_sanford3.shtml