Toal’s lobbying points to flaws

THE JUDICIARY IS supposed to be a branch of government equal to the Legislature and the executive. But that hasn’t shielded it from budget cuts. Since 2000, state funding has dropped from $42 million to $32 million, even as the number of court cases has climbed.

Against this backdrop, Chief Justice Jean Toal has done what the political system demands of her: She has hired a lobbyist, to try to convince legislators to raise court fees and give the extra money to the judiciary.

This is wrong. No government official should spend public money to lobby the Legislature for more public money.

Wrong as it is, though, it’s hard to argue that Justice Toal is doing anything different from executive branch agencies that send lobbyists to the State House to press their case for more funding and more autonomy. Indeed, while Justice Toal might be especially effective at the more appropriate approach of making the case herself, her position as a judge limits how far it is ethical to go in seeking legislative indulgences.

While Justice Toal needs to get out of the lobbying business — and the Legislature should bar all public officials from hiring lobbyists to seek more funding — a larger wrong also needs to be righted: The Legislature must adequately fund our court system.

Baby steps have been taken on the first problem. Gov. Mark Sanford has prohibited his Cabinet agencies from contracting with private-sector lobbyists, and the House has passed legislation to extend that prohibition to all state agencies. But the Senate has not acted on the bill, which doesn’t go as far as it should, anyhow; it ignores the more frequent practice of hiring state employees whose main job is to lobby the Legislature.

We’re not talking about people who simply testify at public hearings and respond to legislators’ questions. We’re talking about people whose job it is to be present whenever the Legislature meets, to corner lawmakers and press the case for more money and autonomy. We’re talking about people who try to manipulate legislative decisions to the advantage of their agencies, without regard to the competing needs of government, and thus the greater good. We’re talking about a way of doing business that state agencies can’t afford not to participate in — and that our state can’t afford to tolerate.

Meanwhile, no progress has been made on the other problem: The Legislature needs to stop treating the judiciary like a subordinate, and take its budgetary needs more seriously, so that it can provide South Carolinians with the system of justice that is our right.