|
Opinion
Speaker
tries once again to cut legislative session
February
8, 2005
Seldom
has the South Carolina Legislature finished its business
before its regulation five-month session is over. Lawmakers
very often have to extend the session to work on pending
legislation, including the budget. That, of course, means it
costs taxpayers more.
Once more, as he has done just about
every year, House Speaker David Wilkins, R-Greenville, has
introduced a bill to shorten the session. “I believe we ought
to get our work done quickly,” Wilkins says.
Chances are,
if asked, every taxpayer in the state would agree.
Wilkins
would cut the legislative session by three weeks at the
beginning and the end. That would save $300,000, he
says.
HE ALSO BELIEVES IT would make
running for office more attractive for more people. Now, from
January to June, lawmakers have to spend three days a week in
Columbia, away from their families and their jobs.
It says
something about state government in the Palmetto State when
the House approves Wilkins’ bill with speed, every year. When
it gets to the Senate, though, it gets nowhere. Anyone who has
ever been around the Statehouse can easily see that a lot of
time is wasted. Expenses still accumulate, though.
Could
lawmakers get more efficient if they shortened the session?
House members say yes. Senators, though, say it would leave
less time to “deliberate” the people’s business.
Again, ask
taxpayers, especially those who are familiar with how the
legislature works, and it’s a good bet the majority would
agree with the House.
ANYWAY, THE LONGER
lawmakers stay in session, it obviously costs
taxpayers more. Beyond that, though, the longer they stay in
session and “deliberate” the “people’s” business, the more
opportunity they have to pass more laws and dawdle. The way
things have been in recent years, we could do without
both.
There’s an old adage that states that work expands to
fit the time allotted. It must have been coined for state
legislatures and Congress.
Speaker Wilkins has the right
idea ….. and he has it every year. The House supports him.
Now, if voters could convince senators they could help the
state by taking up the challenge, South Carolina just might
prove that government can be efficient. History argues,
though, that it might not be such a good thing to hold our
collective breath until that happens. But, then, it’s all up
to us, the voters. Isn’t it!
Editorial expression in this feature represents
our own views.
Opinions are limited to this page.
| | |
|
|
| | |
|
|
