TheState.com: Opinion

What happens next with Sanford likely in his hands

Fri, 20 Nov 2009 18:41 EST

GOV. MARK SANFORD doesn't win any brownie points on transparency for agreeing to release an ethics report after he apparently learned that it doesn't contain any bombshells.

And we have a hard time understanding how the State Ethics Commission decided to give the report to the governor without also releasing it to the public, in light of the unanimous Supreme Court ruling that said the public was entitled to "all documentation to which he is entitled." It seems that if the commission was unsure how to read the court's ruling, it should have held off giving the report to the governor until it received the clarification that it sought.

Nonetheless, we're glad that, whatever his motives, Mr. Sanford finally has agreed to act in a way that is consistent with his long-standing opposition to government secrecy. That should eliminate the need to waste any more of the courts' time on this matter.

We're also glad that Mr. Sanford agreed to amend his annual economic interest reports to include free flights he received from people he characterizes as friends. There never was any suggestion that there was anything wrong with taking those trips - only that he should have reported them. That particular question would have been cleared up immediately had he simply amended his reports when questions first were raised about the free travel.

We hope his belated action demonstrates a willingness to stop digging in his heels and fighting even when there was no good reason (even from his perspective) to do so. That new approach to ethics laws - which is diametrically opposed to the way he handled such matters even as recently as this summer, when he voluntarily repaid the state for a perfectly legitimate business trip that included a rendezvous with his Argentine mistress - was more disturbing than the apparent misuse of state planes and campaign funds.

Irresponsible pay raises signal Swansea in trouble

Thu, 19 Nov 2009 20:13 EST

IT'S IRRESPONSIBLE for Swansea's elected leaders to give themselves raises even as the town struggles to pay a $500,000 debt to the state.

The pay hikes include an outrageous $8,000 raise for the mayor and much smaller - but equally ill-timed - $400 bumps for council members. Considering such poor stewardship, it's no surprise the town is in the predicament it is with the state.

The town needs every dollar it can muster to pay the six-figure bill it owes the state. The debt is a result of the failure to forward the state its share of fines from traffic tickets the town collected for 2004-07. There are consequences for not paying the bill; the state treasurer is withholding state aid until the town begins paying off the debt.

Town officials have discussed raising taxes and fees to pay off the debt, but have been made little progress. In addition to coming up with a way to pay the state, the town also must repay a $3 million loan for a waterline.

The last thing town leaders should be doing is lining their own pockets. The raises were approved on a 3-2 vote, with the mayor and members Linda Butler and Woodrow Davis, who were unopposed in the recent election and retained their seats, voting in favor.

Society, not just individuals, needs to give up habit

Wed, 18 Nov 2009 19:38 EST

TODAY IS A GREAT day to stop smoking, and we offer our encouragement to everyone who is using the occasion of the Great American Smokeout to try to break their addiction to nicotine.

There are programs and products and practices that can help, from nicotine gum and prescription drugs to the S.C. Tobacco Quitline, a free phone-based counseling service that the Department of Health and Environmental Control provides for all state residents at 1-800-QUIT-NOW. (For tips on simple steps that can help, from throwing away all your cigarettes to enrolling the encouragement of friends and family, go to www.scdhec.gov and select "News Releases" on the right-hand side of the page.)

But even with all the drugs and counseling and family support and determination in the world, it won't be easy. Seventy percent of adult smokers say they want to quit - but haven't been able to do so. Little wonder: Nicotine is one of the most addictive substances on the planet, and for years the cigarette companies have been deliberately manipulating nicotine levels in their products for the express purpose of cultivating and nurturing that addiction.

What makes this such a tragedy - and outrage - is that smoking is so very deadly to smokers, dangerous to anyone who spends time breathing other people's smoke, and costly to taxpayers.

That's why prevention is essential. And it's why our government needs to take what reasonable steps it can to help people avoid this addiction to begin with - and to protect the public against the threat of those who start anyway and then can't stop.

Revenue cuts demand smart, focused response

Tue, 17 Nov 2009 19:07 EST

IN ALL THE excitement over the big Boeing coup, it was easy - if you have a job - to forget for a moment about our state's dire fiscal and economic situation.

But while Boeing very likely will be a transformative force, that transformation will come over years and decades, as suppliers follow the aeronautics giant to our state in much the same way that automotive suppliers followed BMW, and then research programs spin off and a whole new impression is formed about our state both internally and externally. Even the 2,000 temporary construction jobs won't feel like 2,000 jobs, because some won't come open until others are finished.

And our economy needs help now, a fact that was underscored last week when the state Board of Economic Advisors slashed another $120 million off its revenue projections for the current fiscal year. This is the third time the board has cut its projections since the budget year started July 1, dropping the budget to $5.6 billion - down from $7.2 billion just two years ago.

The cut upon cut upon cut has become so predictable and so numbing that few people in the emaciated state agencies that will have to slim down even more have bothered protesting the next round of mid-year budget cuts that this latest forecast almost certainly will trigger, or the next round of cuts that the Legislature almost certainly will have to make in next year's budget.

But as devastating as more cuts will be for our state's ability to run a safe prison system and keep decent teachers in the classrooms and do all those other things that a state must do, and as difficult as they will be on all those additional state employees who will lose their jobs as a result, the state budget problem is merely a side effect of the even larger problem: an 11.7 percent jobless rate - a number that is artificially low because it doesn't count all those people who have given up on finding a job, or who can find only part-time work - that reasonable people believe will climb to at least 13 percent. An economy that even at its best relied too heavily on tourism and other low-paying jobs, resulting in one of the lowest per-capita incomes in the nation. Generations upon generations of poverty, in a society that never has sufficiently valued the education that is essential to ever rise above that poverty.

Use Sanford case to move toward openness in ethics

Mon, 16 Nov 2009 19:23 EST

IT WOULD BE A mistake to read the Supreme Court's refusal to hide the details of an ethics investigation of Gov. Mark Sanford as a sweeping victory for openness in government. But it also would be a mistake to overlook the potential it has to render ethics investigations just a little less secret than they always have been.

The utility of the court's ruling is limited because it merely addresses those investigations where the target has waived his right to confidentiality. Most people don't do that, and so the public never really can judge how well the State Ethics Commission does its job overall - or how well it does its job in most individual cases. In fact, the public still will never even know of the existence of those ethics complaints (by far the majority) where the commission decides no action is warranted. That won't change until the Legislature decides to change it - which it should do.

Moreover, the court pinned its decision to the governor's politically deceptive, self-congratulatory letter waiving his confidentiality. Mr. Sanford, the court said, used sweeping language that clearly meant he did not want any of the secrecy protections that the Ethics Commission had assured his attorneys he would get if he took that step. By his language alone, the court said, the governor authorized the public to see everything he is allowed to see - which by logical extension also should allow the public into any hearing in the matter.

But the court didn't stop there. The unanimous opinion essentially told the commission it couldn't continue to keep more secrets than state law authorizes.

At issue is the agency's long-standing practice of telling targets of investigations that if they waive their confidentiality, the commission will only acknowledge the existence of an investigation. That's what Mr. Sanford's lawyers were told before the governor wrote - and released to the public - a letter declaring that he wanted to "go the extra mile" and "take the unilateral step of waiving confidentiality" so the public could judge his actions based upon "the whole" of the record.

Now not right time for upgrades at beloved zoo

Fri, 13 Nov 2009 18:55 EST

RIVERBANKS Zoo is easily the top attraction in the Midlands - and one of the biggest draws in the Southeast - but its request of a tax increase to pay for upgrades couldn't come at a worse time.

Zoo officials are pitching a $40 million plan that, if approved by Lexington and Richland county councils, would add about $4 annually to the taxes paid on a $100,000 house. The plan calls for a new Asian complex, complete with new species; the return of a sea lion exhibit; a Children's Garden; and renovation of the entrance, which was built in 1987.

In better times, this would be an easy "yes." Not today.

That doesn't mean never, though. Instead of "no," the councils' response should be "not now."

The zoo has earned the support of local governments and taxpayers. For more than three decades, it has done us proud. It draws about a million people each year, is one of the nation's top 10 zoological parks and botanical gardens and has been voted the top travel attraction of the year multiple times by the Southeast Tourism Society. People from across the nation marvel at Riverbanks' collection of animals housed in natural habitat exhibits and its 70-acre botanical garden.

City of Columbia should reassess landfill contract

Thu, 12 Nov 2009 18:02 EST

AS COLUMBIA struggles to overcome a $9 million general fund deficit from last fiscal year and avoid another this year, city officials should explore every savings opportunity that makes sense, including bidding out service contracts as they expire.

This should begin with taking a new look at a contract City Council recently voted 3-1 to extend by five years to Waste Management, whose five-year deal to dispose of the city's waste is up for renewal.

Public Works Director Missy Gentry recommended extending the Waste Management contract because the company guaranteed a low rate. The price under the original contract started out at $11.46 per ton of garbage, but increased to $12.44 because of inflation.

Since the vote, though, a local company, Loveless & Loveless, has offered to save the city $400,000 over the life of the five-year contract if the city would let it bid on it. Five years ago, Loveless & Loveless offered to dispose of the city's waste for $14.50 per ton. Owner Bruce Loveless now says he'll go much lower to get the city's business in this struggling economy.

Ms. Gentry rightly suggests that reopening the bidding process is a gamble. Bids could come back higher. She said her department, cut by millions this year, wouldn't be able to afford the higher costs.

Opt-out provision for public option makes no sense

Wed, 11 Nov 2009 21:14 EST

THERE ARE A LOT of ideas being floated as supporters look for a way to get health care legislation through the Senate - some good, some not so good.

One is entirely unacceptable: Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's state opt-out provision for the so-called public option.

We would find such a plan objectionable even if our General Assembly were not likely to be among the first in line to try to opt out of the provision that has become one of the chief targets of Republican opposition.

That's not because we are convinced that the public option is essential to health reform. The idea behind the public option - an uneasy compromise between Democrats who wanted a Medicare-style single-payer system and those who wanted to maintain the private insurance system - was to help contain costs. That's something that pretty much everyone agrees is essential, whether the government gets more involved or not. Or at least they agree until the cost-containment measures start to affect them personally or (in the case of politicians) until they see it to their political advantage to say otherwise. Frankly, we'd be better off if the Congress would focus on more direct ways to contain costs, by actually reforming the delivery of health care; clearly this can be done, as the list is long of countries that spend less per capita and have much better health outcomes than the United States.

Rather, we object to a state opt-out because such a central component of such a significant piece of legislation needs to apply to the whole nation - or not at all. That's something we should have figured out by now.

Public must be able to review EMS performance

Mon, 09 Nov 2009 18:51 EST

EVEN THOUGH IT turned out that the delay in getting him to the hospital did not kill Jadan Myers-Pugh, the 3-year-old's death already has prompted officials to begin talks about ending what clearly seems a too-bureaucratic and potentially dangerous policy that prohibits Columbia firefighters from driving Richland County ambulances in emergencies.

We hope publicity surrounding his tragic death also can serve as a catalyst to fix a clearly bad state law.

When a reporter for The State asked to review the incident report and recordings from the EMS call, he ran head-first into an obscure five-year-old law and a two-month old attorney general's opinion that said that when it comes to emergency medical services, the public has no right to monitor how its government works.

Actually, the law is worse than that. Most secrecy laws merely allow governments to hide information from the public. This law requires it.

The law prohibits the release of the identities not only of patients but also of emergency services personnel. The attorney general's opinion says it also shields any information "that would ordinarily lead one to discover the identity of emergency medical personnel" as well as "all data, including response times, trip numbers, requests for helicopter transport by numbers and dates and other general raw data compiled from day to day operations" of emergency services agencies.

Cash-starved city must set priorities, fund top needs

Fri, 06 Nov 2009 18:48 EST

IT'S NO BIG surprise that budget cuts have severely weakened the ability of Columbia firefighters to respond to fires.

City leaders might not have known to what degree they would be hindering the Fire Department, but they were well aware the cuts would hurt service. Just as they knew that cutting garbage pick-up for apartments and other commercial entities and charging retirees for free health care promised to them long ago would hurt. The city's poor financial state demanded deep cuts that spared few, if any, departments. The question is whether the cuts made did the least harm possible.

The Columbia Firefighters Association doesn't think so. Its study said reducing staffing at two fire stations hurt the city's ability to meet national response time standards and placed a strain on the rest of the system. The City Council's decision to take one truck at Station 9 on Devine Street and one at Station 8 on Atlas Road out of service will save $1.2 million a year. But, the association said, the cost is that the city can reach only 73 percent of property in the city in less than eight minutes. The national standard is 90 percent.

Candidates for mayor already are using the fire reductions as an issue in the April election. While calls for restoring fire coverage are understandable - and even warranted - the city can't respond in a vacuum. The fact is that a case can be made for restoring any number of cuts the city has had to make.

As important as it is to have adequate fire service, this is deeper than the Fire Department cuts. The real problem here is that City Council's failure to exercise sound financial stewardship in recent years severely hampers its ability to meet Columbia citizens' service needs. Bad bookkeeping, faulty budgeting, unchecked spending and other mismanagement ate away at city reserves and created deficits the city still is trying to deal with.

It's hard to trust fiscally suspect city with TIFs

Thu, 05 Nov 2009 19:40 EST

NOT ONLY IS Columbia rushing headlong to create two ill-timed special tax districts that would siphon off money for needed services, including schools and fire and police personnel, but to make matters worse all three local elected bodies involved have inappropriately discussed the matter in secret.

Although taxpayers deserve better, it's evident city leaders, who managed Columbia into an inexcusable fiscal mess over the past several years, aren't operating in the real world. Why else would they attempt to divert tax dollars for special projects in the midst of a recession and at a time when services have been cut - and could be cut even more - due to dwindling revenue and poor stewardship? It's hard to imagine that Richland County and Richland District 1, which were forced to trim their budgets because of state cuts, would desire to participate in this unwise endeavor.

That's particularly true in the case of the school district. While it's not prudent for Richland County to forgo tax dollars, at least it would be acting in its natural capacity as a local government with the authority and responsibility to provide infrastructure and improvements to areas in its jurisdiction. But it's not the school district's job to build or fund parks, roads or other amenities to spur development. The school district, which has lost teachers and programs due to budget cuts, should concentrate on its mission of educating children.

The district needs its limited funding - present and future. But under the city's proposal, Richland 1 would provide 57 percent of revenues for the projects, while the city would pitch in 21 percent and the county, 17 percent. That's too big a burden for the district, which should keep the children out of this bad deal.

Frankly, it's too big a burden for city and county taxpayers as well. Capturing all new commercial taxes in the proposed districts until 2034 doesn't directly cause a general tax increase. But when these tax increment financing districts take money away from local governments, they shift a disproportionate burden for paying for city, county and school services to property owners outside the district.

Ethics secrecy undermines public trust

Wed, 04 Nov 2009 18:48 EST

IN DOCUMENTS FILED last week with the Supreme Court, Gov. Mark Sanford argued that the only way to maintain or restore (take your pick) public confidence in the governmental ethics process is by keeping the work of ethics investigators secret.

He argued that the Legislature drew a giant black-out curtain around the Ethics Commission "as a necessary means to assemble relevant witnesses, to obtain proper documents, to avoid outside pressures from the General Assembly and the media, and to preempt politically-motivated leaks."

And he crowned it off with this: "The State Ethics Code was designed to restore the citizenry's trust in South Carolina's government in the wake of Operation Lost Trust. Its procedural safeguard of confidentiality over the agency's internal papers is meant to ensure fairness for respondents and independence for the Commission."

We're not sure whether he is right with his ultimate argument that all these rhetorical flourishes are intended to bolster: that the Legislature didn't really allow the targets of investigations to waive their confidentiality when it passed a law that ... allows the targets of investigations to waive their confidentiality. It could be that the Legislature was just trying to quell complaints by good-government advocates who argued that sunlight is the best disinfectant. It certainly wouldn't be the first time legislators went to extremes to make it look like they were doing something they really weren't doing.

But this we do know: Mr. Sanford's assertions about the value of secret government are outlandish. (The fact that he would have been the first to castigate anyone else who had said such a thing is irresistible to point out - although completely irrelevant to our point.)

Thorough review needed following deaths at jail

Tue, 03 Nov 2009 18:50 EST

TWO RECENT DEATHS at the Alvin S. Glenn Detention Center demand a thorough review by Richland County of the circumstances that surrounded them as well its policies. But that's just the start: The county also has an obligation to give the public a clear explanation of how these deaths occurred and what if anything the county could or should have done to prevent them.

It's imperative to give families a full understanding of what happened to their deceased loved ones and to reassure the public that the jail is operating properly.

It's a tragedy when even one person dies in government custody. But last month, two inmates died just days apart in the Richland County detention center. Angela Meitzner, who had been booked on fraudulent checks and forgery charges, was found hanging by the neck in a cell. Days earlier, Olin Taylor, who had been arrested for driving under the influence and assault and battery with intent to kill, was found dead in his cell, hanging from a cord made with his shoelaces. Both deaths tentatively have been ruled as suicides.

Running a jail is difficult. There are unfortunate accidents, even deaths, at even the best-run ones. But once an inmate ends up in jail, for whatever reason, it becomes the obligation of the county to ensure his safety. Although they have been charged with crimes, most local jail inmates have not been convicted; they should expect to survive government's custody.

There needs to be a review anytime someone dies in custody, to ensure that the system didn't fail that person. That's doubly so in Richland County, which went through an unfortunate stretch - from 2000 to 2006 - when seven inmates died under questionable circumstances. During that period, one mentally ill inmate died of complications from hypothermia and two others hanged themselves; another, not known to have a history of mental illness, also hanged himself. The families of the three mentally ill inmates sued Prison Health Services, which at the time was providing medical services at the jail. The county fired Prison Health Services and hired Tennessee-based Correct Care Solutions to provide medical and mental health services at the jail.

Celebrate, build on Boeing coup

Fri, 30 Oct 2009 19:52 EDT

WE'LL ALL BE ANALYZING the whats and whos and hows of the Boeing deal for months, perhaps years, to come, because understanding how South Carolina landed its biggest industrial coup ever will help determine the policies we need to pursue in the months and years to come:

- Does this deal mean that Gov. Mark Sanford isn't the drag on our state that many believe he is? Or does it suggest that governors really aren't as important in economic recruitment as we've always been told?

- Does it vindicate the power that has been maintained by the Legislative State, as guest columnist Bob McAlister reluctantly argues on the facing page? Or does it simply mean that a bad system can on occasion work?

- Could lawmakers have given away less in tax breaks and direct aid or demanded better wages, given our attractive non-union workforce and low cost of living? Or is nearly $200,000 per promised job as hard a bargain as a state could reasonably be expected to drive?

- Does Boeing's decision mean that recent reforms to our workers compensation laws and our tort laws really are sufficient, and that we don't need to do more in those areas in order to attract jobs to our state?

Pesky doughnut holes result of poor annexation laws

Thu, 29 Oct 2009 18:36 EDT

THERE'S NO justification for two different governments providing duplicative services to residents living on the same street, but it happens all the time in communities across South Carolina.

In Richland County, there are places where all but one or two homes on a given street are inside the city of Columbia. County contractors send a garbage and recycling truck to that lone house in the county, while the city serves all of its surrounding neighbors. While Columbia police cars might patrol the street, Richland County sheriff's deputies must respond when there's an emergency at a house outside the city's limits.

That's wasteful and confusing. It simply makes more sense - practically and economically - for one government to serve all residents on that street.

Columbia is working aggressively to annex those areas - called doughnut holes - where city land surrounds parcels in unincorporated Richland County. But the state's archaic annexation laws make that a difficult task. In South Carolina, residents have to ask to be annexed; the city can't just do it.

There are 2,560 parcels across the city that officials want to bring into town. The hope is that the owners will come in willingly. But many won't. That would put the city in a position to determine whether to apply pressure some consider to be heavy-handed. If residents refuse to willingly be annexed, Columbia suggests it will stop supplying water and sewer services.

Lawmakers should decline expense pay for this week

Tue, 27 Oct 2009 23:07 EDT

WHEN SENATE President Pro Tempore Glenn McConnell and House Speaker Bobby Harrell announced that they were bringing the Legislature back to town this week to fix the law that was denying thousands of laid-off workers the federal unemployment benefits to which they were entitled, they said lawmakers would not receive a salary. That was true, but it wasn't exactly the truth.

It is true that legislators do not receive any extra salary when the regular legislative session goes into overtime. And it's true that they will not receive the $260 per day pay to which the state constitution entitles them if the governor has to call a special session. That's because Sen. McConnell and Rep. Harrell - with the blessing of the full Legislature - wisely made provisions to be able to call lawmakers back to work if needed as an extension of the regular session.

But while they won't get a paycheck for each extra day in town, legislators are eligible to be reimbursed for mileage for one round trip to and from Columbia and to receive $132 per day, which is supposed to offset the cost of hotel and meal costs.

Now, normally we don't begrudge legislators these reimbursements - though we've never entirely understood why those who live within easy driving distance of the State House need to be reimbursed for the costs of hotel rooms they don't rent - but these are not normal times.

In the first place, lawmakers have had to slash spending throughout state government, resulting in some cases in the elimination of travel altogether and in other cases even more critical expenses. Everybody is having to do more with less, which raises the question of why legislators should receive the same liberal reimbursements they always have.

Whose interests are being served in town of Lexington?

Tue, 27 Oct 2009 09:05 EDT

LEXINGTON MAYOR Randy Halfacre's decision to take the job of executive director of the Greater Lexington Chamber of Commerce while continuing to hold public office was an eyebrow-raising choice in and of itself.

With the town's recent hiring of Lexington County Councilman Johnny Jeffcoat as its economic director, we're running out of eyebrows. And we're at a loss as to how these two men can do the jobs they've been hired to do and represent citizens' best interests in the jobs they've been elected to do without being, in a word, conflicted.

While both men insist there is no conflict, the possibility is quite evident.

When the town's interests conflict with the agenda of members of the Chamber of Commerce, whether on zoning and planning or other issues, whose side will Mr. Halfacre represent? That certainly was hard to determine when the mayor pushed to water down the town's toughest-in-the-region smoking ban. Some businesses, specifically bars and restaurants, want the town to remove language that prohibits employees from serving customers on outside decks and patios. Was Mayor Halfacre representing the people who voted him into office or the people who pay his salary? Fortunately, the council hasn't yielded but continues to recognize that secondhand smoke is harmful regardless of where it's encountered - as other governments should.

For his part, Mr. Jeffcoat's new job entails trying to bring new restaurants, retailers and corporate offices to the town of Lexington. Who will he represent when the town's interest conflicts with that of the county? Mr. Jeffcoat says that doesn't happen often and when it does he would recuse himself. We aren't sure how often such conflicts might occur, but they do occur.

Richland council must reject idea for new market

Fri, 23 Oct 2009 18:05 EDT

RICHLAND COUNTY Council should resist any urge to fund a regional market that might rival the State Farmers Market being built in Lexington County.

That battle has been fought, and in a strange turn of events, Lexington won, although it remains to be seen if the new market going up along U.S. 321 will be the success the state and its private partners think it will be - and that the taxpayers helping foot the bill need it to be.

Richland County initially won the right to play host to a new state market that would have replaced the current Bluff Road facility when it pledged millions of dollars to support the effort. But the county ended up with egg on its face when the state backed out of the deal, which never should have been struck, considering neither the state nor the county could afford it. By then, of course, Richland had purchased a $4.55 million site on Pineview Road and deeded much of it to the state.

The state refused to return the land, saying the county first had to reimburse it for money spent "improving" the site. A legal fight that ensued has since been resolved. But now that the land might not be used for a market, the county is scrambling to find a way to pay for it. The county has been repaying the loan for the land using proceeds from a 2 percent restaurant tax, which must be used for tourism-related projects.

That outstanding expense alone should be reason enough for Richland to rule out any effort to build a county-funded farmers market. But there are other reasons as well. First of all, it would be an act of bad faith to finance a duplicative market that could undercut the taxpayer-supported facility that will replace the State Farmers Market. As much as some people act as if the river divides two distinct communities, Lexington and Richland counties make up one economic community. It doesn't matter which side of the river the market is on; it would be foolish to do anything that would hinder the success of the market, expected to open in April.

Test-score dip underscores need to end distractions

Thu, 22 Oct 2009 18:51 EDT

THE FIRST THING that ought to be said about South Carolina's most recent performance on the Nation's Report Card is that it was disappointing and that we must find a way to reclaim the momentum that until recently had produced some of the nation's fastest gains on this as well as a number of other measures.

But the political climate that has poisoned debate over education policy for the past seven years forces us to start somewhere else: The National Assessment of Educational Progress - the only test available that can be used to fairly and accurately compare educational progress among the states - finds South Carolina clustered with many states around the national average.

Our state was tied for 31st in eighth-grade math and 34th in fourth-grade math, the only results released this month. (Only fourth- and eighth-graders are tested, and reading scores will be released in the spring.) Our eight-graders scored an average of 56 percent on the 500-point test, compared with the national average of 56.4 percent; those figures were reversed when the test was last administered two years ago. Our fourth-graders scored an average of 47.2 percent (down from 47.4 percent), compared with the national average of 47.8 percent (unchanged from two years ago).

The scores demonstrate, yet again, that South Carolina is not "dead last in education." That we are not bad and getting worse, as some are determined to make us believe. That our public schools are not hopeless.

But being in the middle is nothing to celebrate, less still when our scores actually drop, even if by only a fraction of a point. We need to use this latest report card as a wake-up call, as a reminder that we cannot continue to let ourselves be distracted by those who want to start throwing money at the private schools whose (highly varied) quality we never will be able to control. Instead, we need to get back to the task of improving the schools that we do control - and that we have a responsibility to make work.

Graham's posture on climate bill fosters civil debate

Thu, 22 Oct 2009 01:21 EDT

TWO THINGS seem inevitable about health care legislation: The Congress almost certainly will pass something this year. And it almost certainly will fall short of what we need - in part because Republicans essentially took themselves out of the negotiations that could have brought about a better product, by making it clear that they wouldn't vote for any bill unless the majority party caved on central points.

We could spend all day talking about how the idea of the minority party serving as "loyal opposition" fell out of favor, or how much blame Democrats share for the partisan divide that has prevented the legislative process from working as it should in this and so many other cases. Instead, we'd like to celebrate the possibility that the other legislation that is consuming the Congress this year might not suffer the same fate - in large part because of Sen. Lindsey Graham.

Earlier this month, Mr. Graham joined with the Democrats' leading negotiator on climate legislation, Sen. John Kerry, to call for a bipartisan approach to the issue that seemed sure to compete with health legislation on vacuous partisanship. In a column in The New York Times, they described a package designed to "address legitimate concerns among Democrats and Republicans and the other constituencies with stakes in this legislation" and expressed confidence that "a legitimate bipartisan effort can put America back in the lead again."

Simply making the effort would be unexpectedly good news. But it's also a smart effort, backed by their aggressive argument that alternative energy sources and restrictions on carbon emissions are essential to protect not just the environment but also our national security, by reducing our dependence on energy from the very nations that want to do us harm.

Moreover, they laid out something close to the "all of the above" approach to energy that this editorial board has long considered essential to dealing with those dual threats. In a town hall meeting the next night where he was booed, yelled at and called a traitor for refusing to simply reject every proposal with a "D" next to it, Mr. Graham explained that he was more than happy to work across party lines if he can increase nuclear power and open up off-shore drilling - elements that almost certainly would not be in an energy package that lacked significant Republican input. (At that same town hall meeting, Sen. Graham declared that he was going to do everything in his power to keep the Republican Party from becoming "the party of angry white guys" - a most encouraging pledge, which only further inflamed the angry white guys who were booing him.)