With important issues facing S.C., civil debate needed

By Richard Eckstrom, Comptroller General

There’s a battle of sorts going on in Columbia between those trying to reign in spending, impose greater accountability, and pull back the curtains of government so that decisions are made in full public view… and those who don’t think these changes are needed.

Those who know me generally put me in the former category -- a fiscal conservative committed to the cause of better government, increased transparency, and more careful spending. But while remaining true to my conservative principles, I consciously try to show respect for those whose views and opinions are different from mine.

Unfortunately, in this environment what should be civil debate on important issues all too often descends into “attack politics” -- vilifying those with opposing views in order to win. Name-calling has become accepted practice for many.

One example on the national stage is the automobile bailout, where some in Congress are sniping and finger-pointing just because many others -- due to their deep-seated concerns about writing blank checks to Detroit -- opposed plans to bail out the Big 3 automakers. When everyone in Washington should be devoting their energy to moving the country past the current economic crisis, leaders of one party instead have been churning press releases blasting the other party, and a prominent leader in the majority party attempted to paint all those who voted against the bail out plan as “un-American.” Sadly, some will take any advantage -- every advantage -- to advance a political agenda.

There’s no shortage of such behavior here in the Palmetto State, where for several years Governor Sanford and those aligned with him have tried to change the business-as-usual culture in Columbia. In the interest of openness, let me state that I wholeheartedly support the vast majority of Gov. Sanford’s proposed reforms. Like him, I strongly believe that changing the way we do things in Columbia is a key to truly moving our state forward. But Gov. Sanford and other reformers represent changes that many in Columbia neither seek nor wish to accept, and the debate hasn’t always been constructive.

The legislature will convene in January with South Carolina facing one of the biggest challenges of a generation – the current economic crisis. With state leaders grappling with new and more difficult problems, we’d do well to lay aside the “heroes-versus-villains” mentality, the attitude that it’s OK to tear down another for holding an opposing political philosophy.

At the local level, the men and women who engage in civic debate -- whether over a municipal tax increase, a zoning matter, or a school bond issue -- should be respected, even when they express views counter to our own. At a time when most folks go about their daily lives and simply read about developments in the newspaper, we should applaud any who take the time to become involved in the community to guide its future.

In South Carolina, an honest conversation about where we’re headed as a state, and how we get there, is a good thing. We should be able to have such a conversation without ever resorting to attacks. Those of us in positions of public trust have a particular obligation to set the right example by conducting our debates in a manner befitting those we serve. Let’s commit to finding success on high roads, not low ones, and let’s win hearts and minds with the power of our ideas, not the volume of our voices.

A watershed time for state government

An Opinion Piece By Richard Eckstrom, S.C. Comptroller General

When you're spending other people's hard-earned money, it's just common courtesy to let them know how it's spent.

That's not a principle always embraced by government. Too often, tax dollars are spent under a shroud of secrecy, and decisions which affect your family are made out of public view.

Fortunately, this is a watershed time for South Carolina government. There's a growing movement afoot to improve and reform government, and chief among the reforms is increased transparency.

Earlier this year, I implemented a transparency measure with Governor Sanford which allows anyone with Internet access to view spending data on state agencies. It’s linked to the Comptroller General’s Web site -- www.cg.sc.gov -- and contains detailed yearly and monthly spending information for 80-plus state agencies. The premise is that state agencies are far more accountable when their spending is done in the open, and the taxpayers should have as many tools as possible to find out how their money is spent.

Aside from allowing taxpayers to see how their hard-earned dollars are used, it should serve as a reminder to public officials that their spending will be seen, and therefore they should act responsibly with your tax dollars. Sunshine, as they say, is the best disinfectant.

Several weeks ago, a bipartisan group of lawmakers announced they’re renewing a push to have more legislative votes recorded for the public to see. There are too many “voice votes” on important issues, they rightly contend, and so they’re now leading a charge to have more votes cast on the record, in full view of the citizenry.

Like the spending-transparency Web site, this would be a tremendous step toward a more open, accountable government. Elected representatives who truly vote in their constituents' best interests should welcome this change.

Empowering ordinary citizens with the access to how money is spent and how their representatives vote will help safeguard the public trust, hold those in charge of our purse strings accountable and allow people to make better-informed decisions in the voting booth. At a time when many believe there is a real crisis of leadership and trust in our country, these common-sense reforms are more important than ever.

Ultimately, an informed citizenry is the watchdog that ensures sound governance.

In an election year, "change" and "accountability" become political buzz-words, so it is encouraging to know there's a serious challenge to the "business-as-usual" mindset which is pervasive in Columbia. Other good-government reforms which will likely see vigorous debate during the upcoming session include restructuring state government so that it operates more efficiently, and capping the growth in state spending so that overzealous government doesn’t outpace our ability to pay for it.

But if we are to truly change the ways of Columbia, we must first change the way we view the role of government: We serve the people, and they have a right to know how we spend public money and how we arrive at decisions that impact them.

Good government can flourish best in full view of the public.