Editorials from across South Carolina: ethics reform, solar power, roads

Ethics reform

A pair of ethics reform bills (finally) approved by the South Carolina Senate would be a step forward, but even if the House agrees to the Senate’s bills or a workable compromise is hammered out in conference, no one in the state should make the claim that ethics reform in South Carolina is complete.

The good news is that the Senate bills would turn over investigations of ethics complaints against legislators to a reconfigured State Ethics Commission. Right now, the fox guards the henhouse, with each house investigating complaints against its own members. Although the new bill lets the foxes appoint some of the guards, it is a step removed from the current law and represents a real step forward.

The Senate’s bills also would require public officials to disclose the sources of their private income. Once again, though, the Senate declined to take a full step forward by requiring lawmakers to disclose the amounts of those incomes. The bill also needs to be clear that all private income sources should be revealed.

Finally, the Senate bills failed to address regulation of what is known as “dark money,” or money from groups not run by candidates and that face no disclosure requirements.

Solar energy

South Carolina stands to benefit in several ways from a growing solar power industry: cleaner air, lower energy bills, government incentives and sustainable power.

So it is ironic that a state-owned power company has adopted policies that discourage state residents and businesses from producing solar power.

While SCE&G and Duke Power, privately owned utilities, are making it more attractive to lease solar panels, Santee Cooper is doing the opposite.

Pro-business Gov. Nikki Haley, who appoints the board of directors for Santee Cooper, should let them know that their policies are hurting customers and likely hurting the state’s image in the process.

Legislative priorities

We the taxpayers and voters elect people, send them to Columbia to conduct our state's business and, in doing so, have some expectations. We expect them to work hard and efficiently in solving and resolving problems, from fixing our roads and bridges to allocating funds for public education, from eradicating inane laws to passing sensible ones.

But then what happens? Quagmire is about as kind a word as we could have chosen. Lawmakers get caught up in odd little matches. They want to tie completely unrelated bills to those that would address a major problem. Again, we point to the issue of fixing our roads and how we have barely made it to the point where a solution will at least stand a chance of getting voted on. And all of this started the first week of January! Here we are in May, the session comes to a halt June 2 and barely — just barely — did a proposal make what is called the crossover deadline, meaning it remains alive and under consideration.

That bill would allow for $2.2 billion to be borrowed for road construction. Other legislation that made the deadline would allow the state to borrow $200 million annually to repair and replace deteriorating schools. Both are important issues, issues that have been bandied about for far too long before reaching this stage.

Our roads and bridges matter greatly to our residents and our state's businesses and industries. They matter to economic development. Our schools? Same answer.

Sure, the real issues are complex and require hard work and negotiation, but that's what we send lawmakers to Columbia for, and that is supposedly the job they sought in the first place. Far better they spend more time on the issues that matter most and less time — or no time — on such topics as 24-hour waiting periods for men who want ED prescriptions or gender-specific bathroom use. They already flush too much valuable time down the toilet each session.

This story was originally published May 9, 2016 at 5:20 PM with the headline "Editorials from across South Carolina: ethics reform, solar power, roads."