Let S.C. voters decide

South Carolina's voters might be able to decide in November whether to give the next governor the authority to appoint the secretary of state, following recent House action. They deserve further options on the restructuring front, as well.

The House bill would allow voters to decide whether the secretary of state should be popularly elected or appointed by the governor.

So far the Legislature hasn't advanced similar proposals regarding other constitutional officers, including the superintendent of education, adjutant general and secretary of agriculture.

Many states give the state's chief executive the authority to fill those positions. Indeed, South Carolina is the sole state in the nation where the adjutant general is elected.

There is less sentiment to make the attorney general, comptroller general or treasurer appointive positions, although there has been some discussion about whether to combine the latter two financial offices.

Speaker Bobby Harrell says there also is a pending House bill to let the voters decide whether the superintendent of education should be elected or appointed. It has majority support, but so far not the necessary two-thirds vote to put the constitutional measure on the ballot. Too bad.

Last year, however, the House approved a bill that would allow the voters to decide if the lieutenant governor should run on a ticket with the governor, as the vice president does with the president at the national level. That bill deserves Senate approval.

The secretary of state's position is a comparatively negligible position. Maybe a better question is:

Should the office even exist?

But allowing the voters to decide whether it should be appointed or elected at least would serve as a test of public opinion on elect vs. appoint for the remaining constitutional offices.

The Senate should give voters the opportunity to express their viewpoint in November.