Follow Sanford fiscal fix

Last week's news for state government was even worse than expected, with a budget shortfall now estimated at $415 million. As the Legislature works on a solution in preparation for a special session, it should follow the governor's lead.

Even those legislators who have routinely opposed Gov. Mark Sanford's efforts for budget frugality would be hard pressed to deny that he has better credentials as a fiscal hawk than anyone in the General Assembly. Too bad the Legislature has generally ignored his efforts to curtail state spending during his years in office.

Over the past six years, the Legislature has regularly overridden Gov. Sanford's spending vetoes. Since he took office, fewer than 10 percent of his vetoes have been sustained. This year, the Legislature sustained budget vetoes for $369,000, while overriding vetoes for $72 million.

The Legislature also has failed to endorse the governor's recommendation to limit spending to a formula based on increases in the consumer price index. When the governor has complained about increases in government spending and the size of state government, the legislative response generally has been to challenge his assertions as bogus and keep on spending.

That's not to say that Gov. Sanford doesn't have allies in the Legislature, but the voices of fiscal responsibility haven't been heeded in the Statehouse. How many legislators, we wonder, have actually taken the opportunity to examine the governor's annual executive budget and seriously consider its cost-saving recommendations?

Now would be a good time to start. And in the process, the Legislature should look at some of the other cost-cutting proposals that have been gathering dust. Some may be a little dated, but each should have still usable ideas for limiting the expense of state government.

Besides the governor's executive budget, those include reports of the Legislative Audit Council and the Government Efficiency and Accountability Review (GEAR) Committee. Even if their suggestions don't yield easy solutions for an emergency situation, such as the state now faces, they can help put legislators in the proper frame of mind to address the problem more broadly for the future, beginning next session.

The GEAR Committee, mainly composed of business executives, cited potential savings of $500 million in its 2007 report. The panel, largely appointed by the governor, recommended systemic changes in state government to eliminate duplication caused by the lack of executive authority over many state agencies. In his column on today's Commentary page, the governor contends that "redundancy" results in our state government costing nearly 140 percent of the national average.

Gov. Sanford has repeatedly warned the Legislature about the hazards of continuing along its spending course, and estimates of the state Board of Economic Advisors have borne out his gloomy predictions in spades.

"Let's be clear," the governor said after the BEA estimates were released, "the situation we're in with these cuts was predictable, preventable and guaranteed, based on the run-up in spending over the past four years, because you can't grow government faster than the economy and not have it catch up with you."

The warning in his column is nothing short of dire: "What has happened in the credit markets will mean the size and duration of the budget cuts yet to come will grow."

The state's budget problems may be comparatively small next to the financial disaster that the congressional bailout seeks to address. But they will have direct and damaging effects on the state and its residents. The Legislature should be chastened by the recent fiscal events and accept the governor's offer to work collaboratively toward a solution.

As the state's chief executive, the governor has a broad view of where cuts can be made in the short term. He can also provide leadership for the long term. The Legislature should finally recognize that Mr. Sanford's fiscal ideas have merit, and that his recommendations are worth following.