Take the long view on ethics oversight

  • Posted: Sunday, December 9, 2012 12:01 a.m.

Expanding the S.C. House Ethics Committee to 10-member, bipartisan panel will be an improvement over its current composition. But itís no substitute for getting the House out of the business of overseeing ethics issues, and instead turning it over to an independent board.

The same ought be done for the Senate Ethics Committee.

Ethics reform is certain to be a central issue in the next legislative session, and the General Assembly should look at the matter comprehensively. That has to include the role of the legislative ethics committees.

It should be clear to the Legislature that having in-house ethics committees is widely perceived as the fox guarding the henhouse. All other elected officials in the state ó including constitutional officers ó come under the jurisdiction of the State Ethics Commission.

The expansion of the House Ethics Committee was made during the House organizational session last week. Previously, the six-member committee included five Republicans and one Democrat.

The House chose former Majority Leader Kenny Bingham, R-Lexington, as its chairman. It was gratifying to hear Rep. Bingham acknowledge that the recent reform didnít go far enough.

ďThis is not a cure-all,Ē he said. ďWith a balanced committee, itís one step to set the stage for other reforms.Ē

Rep. Bingham said abolishing the committee should be considered, but that such a change would require a change in the state Constitution. And that would require voter approval in a statewide referendum, something that canít be done until the next general election in 2014.

Taken in that context, expanding the committee to provide bipartisan balance is a step forward.

The committee obtained its highest profile ever last session as it considered complaints against Gov. Nikki Haley, related to allegations of lobbying for her employers while a legislator representing Lexington County.

The committee ruled in the governorís favor, though its only Democratic member cast the sole dissenting vote on one of the four counts.

The committee is expected to get another high-profile issue next session, with a pending complaint from Common Cause about House Speaker Bobby Harrellís expenditure of campaign funds.

There is already some added measure of accountability in the public airing of House ethics complaints that began with the Haley case.

But having an independent review of House members ó and senators ó would provide further assurance of evenhanded treatment. It should be part of an overall reform proposal next session.

Legislators should face the same form of ethics scrutiny as other elected officials in South Carolina.

Comments { }

Postandcourier.com is pleased to offer readers the enhanced ability to comment on stories. We expect our readers to engage in lively, yet civil discourse. Postandcourier.com does not edit user submitted statements and we cannot promise that readers will not occasionally find offensive or inaccurate comments posted in the comments area. Responsibility for the statements posted lies with the person submitting the comment, not postandcourier.com. If you find a comment that is objectionable, please click "report abuse" and we will review it for possible removal. Please be reminded, however, that in accordance with our Terms of Use and federal law, we are under no obligation to remove any third party comments posted on our website. Read our full Terms and Conditions.