The debacle that binds

The state Senate voted 37-0 to reject an ill-considered and precipitate decision by the board of the S.C. Department of Health and Environmental Control to support Georgia's plan to dredge the Savannah River.

The House voted 110-0.

That bipartisan legislative sentiment reflects the general view that the DHEC board made a terrible decision by taking Georgia's part on the dredging plan. So did Gov. Nikki Haley, who instigated the board's reconsideration of the Georgia plan, and has defended its decision.

The joint resolution affirms the position of this state's Savannah River Maritime Commission, which contends that DHEC legally must get the concurrence of the commission on any matter affecting the river.

The commission has challenged the DHEC board's action in court. House Speaker Bobby Harrell says that the legislative resolution should bolster that pending case.

It recognizes that the DHEC board, without consulting key state agencies, including the Maritime Commission and the Department of Natural Resources, made an appalling decision that could compromise the environmental health of the Savannah River and its wetlands in South Carolina.

There was no discussion with the State Ports Authority, even though the decision effectively kills plans for a Jasper port.

Environmentalists have decried the decision as baffling and destructive, and also have filed legal action to stop it.

The Senate conducted a limited inquiry into the DHEC board's procedure and found no evidence of inappropriate influence by the governor. But the inquiry convinced many that the board was poorly informed about the dredging and its likely impact on the environment.

DHEC's action would allow the Jasper port site to be used as a dumping ground for contaminated spoil for the dredging project. The dredging would so degrade the Savannah River as to endanger aquatic life and require special pumps to inject oxygen into the already oxygen-deprived waterway. It could threaten the aquifer that serves Hilton Head with drinking water.

Moreover, it would put the Port of Charleston at a competitive disadvantage with its counterpart in Savannah, assuming the river channel is dredged and the harbor isn't.

The resolution is expected to be ratified this week, and will go to the governor who will probably veto it. Her spokesman has described it as "an unfortunate over-step of the Legislature's authority." The Legislature will just as surely override her veto.

In this instance, the resolution represents a unanimous expression of legislative oversight. It should be instructive to the governor about the value of consultation, and the relative importance of conferring with leaders of this state -- not Georgia's.

And it demonstrates the ability of the Legislature -- Republicans and Democrats -- to act as one on a matter of critical importance to South Carolina's environment and its economy.