Strong on Policy

Sunday’s editorial celebrates that the governor’s race is beginning to feature real policy plans instead of political theater.

 

Right around the same time last week when we were criticizing Gov. Mark Sanford’s apparent lack of regard for public education as a “core government service,” his former protege and possible successor, state Rep. Nikki Haley, was releasing her own education plan.

The gubernatorial race between Haley and her Democratic opponent, state Sen. Vincent Sheheen, has been dominated by issues of what one might call “personal transparency” lately. Haley built her Republican primary campaign on her fight for on-the-record voting and on related good-government bills she’s filed, such as new requirements that lawmakers disclose all their income sources to taxpayers.

Sheheen, however, beat Haley to the punch by releasing his personal tax records for the length of his legislative career and the entire contents of his legislative e-mail account. When Haley finally released similar records, her taxes showed a pattern of egregiously late filing and payment, and she released only a limited period’s worth of e-mails, forcing reporters to review them at her headquarters without making copies.

This is strange behavior from a front-runner, and the state’s political press has been correct to focus on it. And yet, the discussion of how Haley is conducting her campaign can easily overshadow her policy initiatives, which she’s shown a commendable devotion to beginning to set forth on paper in recent weeks. First came her tax policy, then her plans for education, and most recently a restating of her governmental streamlining goals.

What is most immediately striking in Haley’s schools plan is its omission of private school vouchers, a startling departure from the course set by Sanford. In interviews, she has said she still supports the idea, just as she always has. In fact, in 2007, Superintendent Jim Rex authored an education reform plan that would have given students in failing schools the right to cross district lines for their education. The bill passed the legislature, but Sanford vetoed it in large part because it did not have a private-school voucher component – and Haley supported his veto.

It's unclear whether she agreed with Sanford’s hard-line opposition to any reforms to public schools that did not center on defunding them or if she had a different reason. On one hand, her apparent move away from promoting such a harsh approach today may be a welcome overture to the state’s less-radical conservatives who take pride in their public schools and want to see them improved rather than abandoned. Her education plan’s first priority is an examination of the state’s distribution of tax money to public schools, which could start an important debate that needs to take place. Her plan also has other ideas worth exploring – such as privatizing the state-owned bus system, expanding charter schools and improving vocational instruction. On the other hand, Haley’s de-emphasis of the school voucher issue may simply be a feint, and her reasonably centrist education platform a substitute for much more radical intentions.

We have long felt that one of Haley’s strengths as a candidate is her strong orientation toward policy discussions (and likewise for Sheheen). Advocates of good government will certainly be happy with the reforms she champions: on-the-record voting, lawmakers’ income disclosure, term limits and a streamlined Department of Administration (only annual spending caps give us pause, and if Haley will take into account the woefully shrunken size of state government now, they too merit discussion). We hope Haley will put her personal issues aside – match the openness Sheheen has shown with his legislative e-mails, and come up with a truthful explanation for the late taxes – so these policy discussions can come to the fore in the months remaining before the election.

 

Sheheen, however, beat Haley to the punch by releasing his personal tax records for the length of his legislative career and the entire contents of his legislative e-mail account. When Haley finally released similar records, her taxes showed a pattern of egregiously late filing and payment, and she released only a limited period’s worth of e-mails, forcing reporters to review them at her headquarters without making copies.

This is strange behavior from a front-runner, and the state’s political press has been correct to focus on it. And yet, the discussion of how Haley is conducting her campaign can easily overshadow her policy initiatives, which she’s shown a commendable devotion to beginning to set forth on paper in recent weeks. First came her tax policy, then her plans for education, and most recently a restating of her governmental streamlining goals.

What is most immediately striking in Haley’s schools plan is its omission of private school vouchers, a startling departure from the course set by Sanford. In interviews, she has said she still supports the idea, just as she always has. In fact, in 2007, Superintendent Jim Rex authored an education reform plan that would have given students in failing schools the right to cross district lines for their education. The bill passed the legislature, but Sanford vetoed it in large part because it did not have a private-school voucher component – and Haley supported his veto.

It's unclear whether she agreed with Sanford’s hard-line opposition to any reforms to public schools that did not center on defunding them or if she had a different reason. On one hand, her apparent move away from promoting such a harsh approach today may be a welcome overture to the state’s less-radical conservatives who take pride in their public schools and want to see them improved rather than abandoned. Her education plan’s first priority is an examination of the state’s distribution of tax money to public schools, which could start an important debate that needs to take place. Her plan also has other ideas worth exploring – such as privatizing the state-owned bus system, expanding charter schools and improving vocational instruction. On the other hand, Haley’s de-emphasis of the school voucher issue may simply be a feint, and her reasonably centrist education platform a substitute for much more radical intentions.

We have long felt that one of Haley’s strengths as a candidate is her strong orientation toward policy discussions (and likewise for Sheheen). Advocates of good government will certainly be happy with the reforms she champions: on-the-record voting, lawmakers’ income disclosure, term limits and a streamlined Department of Administration (only annual spending caps give us pause, and if Haley will take into account the woefully shrunken size of state government now, they too merit discussion). We hope Haley will put her personal issues aside – match the openness Sheheen has shown with his legislative e-mails, and come up with a truthful explanation for the late taxes – so these policy discussions can come to the fore in the months remaining before the election.