Is the Office of Lt. Governor relevant?
Recent news that Bill Connor, a GOP candidate for Lt. Governor, signed the S.C. Association for Taxpayers' "Taxpayer Protection Pledge", didn't really come as a surprise in the race. Generally Republican office-seekers put their names on these pledges to help boost their appeal to the fiscally-conservative voters who make up a large part of the GOP primary electorate.
It's certainly commendable that Connor would pledge loyalty to fiscally-conservative positions - an act that will probably be duplicated by the other two GOP candidates for the office - but considering the fairly limited powers of the Lieutenant Governor, how much real importance does signing such a pledge have?
In recent years, the power of this office has been reduced considerably. After former Lt. Governor Nick Theodore left office, the Senate removed a number of duties and powers, including the ability to appoint conference committee members. Recent restructuring proposals have sought to make this office co-elected with the Governor and some of those proposals even called for the Lt. Governor to be removed from serving in the Senate at all.
There are two schools of thought with regard to the future of this office:
It's certainly commendable that Connor would pledge loyalty to fiscally-conservative positions - an act that will probably be duplicated by the other two GOP candidates for the office - but considering the fairly limited powers of the Lieutenant Governor, how much real importance does signing such a pledge have?
In recent years, the power of this office has been reduced considerably. After former Lt. Governor Nick Theodore left office, the Senate removed a number of duties and powers, including the ability to appoint conference committee members. Recent restructuring proposals have sought to make this office co-elected with the Governor and some of those proposals even called for the Lt. Governor to be removed from serving in the Senate at all.
There are two schools of thought with regard to the future of this office:
- One school argues that the office should be removed from the ballot, possibly even from serving in the Senate entirely. This would reduce the office to a "spare tire" to fill a gubernatorial vacancy.
- The other school argues that in the Senate, where members represent single-member districts, thus serving localized interests, having a presiding officer who is elected statewide serves to help moderate those influences, further enhancing the chamber's intended mission as the more deliberative body. Many who hold this position would like to see the office retained on the ballot and given more legislative powers.
The Blogland endorses the latter point of view. As none of the three GOP candidates for the office have advocated it's removal from the ballot, as well as argued for the office to be more pro-active in a number of roles, it can be inferred the candidates would, to some degree, agree with this position.
Connor's signing of the SCAT pledge has raised an issue worth asking about the future of this office. It will be interesting to see how much those who want to win this office are willing to talk about it.
I is confused too...
Also, the office of Lt. Governor can be defined by its occupant. There is a bully pulpit factor.