By Gordon Garnos
AT ISSUE: Monday was the day Governor Rounds decided which bills the Legislature passed would become law. In a sense, he was putting a grade on them. They either passed or failed to get his signature. Then, legislators had to decide if they were going override any of his vetoes. Overriding vetoes has not usually been the norm. This hasn't been the only grades our Legislature and, for that matter, state government has received in recent weeks. Other report cards were given by a couple of our legislators and when it came to reviewing the activities of state government an outside organization didn't score it as high as South Dakota's neighbors.
WHEN THAT PAPER in that town near Harrisburg printed report cards of the legislative session from two of its legislators, one appeared to be really grading on the curve. Of course, both could be a little bias considering it was their baby they were talking about.
Senate Minority Leader Scott Heidepriem, D-Sioux Falls, was probably a hair more realistic than was his counterpart, House Education Committee Chairwoman Phyllis Heineman, R-Sioux Falls. The grade Heidepriem gave for the session was a C+ while Heineman rated it an overall B. From there, their scores smacked of being a wee bit partisan since most of the bills sent to the Governor were from Heineman's side of the aisle. In fact, there was quite a spread between them until they got to education. Both disappointingly gave an A for their efforts toward education.
WHEN IT COMES to grading state government I have seen another recent report card. It came from the Pew Center on States and its "2008 Grading the States" report card hits South Dakota with an overall C+ and noted South Dakota fell from a B- the previous year. The target of this report is to give states objective information about how they can improve their performance. It also measures how well states manage their money, staff, information and infrastructure. The report was published in the Governing magazine.
While Montana also got a C+, the neighboring states of Iowa and Nebraska received a B and North Dakota and Minnesota received a B-. South Dakota's C+ was largely due to the state's unwillingness to ensure government money is used effectively. A hem! Could that have anything to do with what the state gives to our teachers? There were no states getting an F on their report cards, but New Hampshire received an overall D+, which was the lowest grade given.
Our state got a D+ in the areas of budgeting and managing for performance and evaluating performance, "South Dakota has never shown much interest in long-term planning or performance management," the report noted. At the same time we got a B+ for a low debt load, broad revenue base, generally balanced budgets and large reserves. South Dakota also got a C+ for its ability to attract and train a high-quality public sector work force.
A STATE OFFICIAL said, "Pew was a pretty reputable group," but then countered the state's low grade, saying Pew's methodology "doesn't reflect the state's individual attributes." Translated this could mean South Dakota doesn't have a formal system to ensure spending is the wisest possible.
That was just one example of shown opposition to making some corrections.
But what is it that prohibits advancing our state government's grades? Is it politics? What needs to be done to change?
At least one legislator disagreed with the state official's diagnosis of the report and said if we paid more attention to such report cards South Dakota's grade could be better. Rep. Michael Buckingham, R-Rapid City, and vice-chairman of the House Government Operation and Auditing Committee, said he is very much in favor of performance auditing, noting South Dakota is the only state that does no performance auditing. He thinks it would be a good idea for our state to get into. Buckingham has been trying to stir up support for a summer study, but he says he isn't getting much attention.
"Most people look at you glassy eyed," he said.
DISAGREEING with the state official, Buckingham says there are effective models out there and there are states that have bought into the concept of performance audits. He pointed to Iowa and the Pews report agreed.
Iowa has a reputation for sound financial management and it has worked to maintain it, the Rapid City legislator said. Interesting here is in the category where South Dakota earned a D+, Iowa got a B+.
Needless to say, performance audits sound a little foreign to me as they obviously do to others. Still, if that is what it takes maybe some people should quit looking so glassy eyed at Buckingham. Perhaps this may be one of the areas that will help South Dakota get out of the bottom one-third of the states in the Pew report.
As my mother used to tell me, "Ya gotta get a better report card." And so does South Dakota....
Gordon Garnos was long-time editor of the Watertown Public Opinion and recently retired after 39 years with that newspaper. Garnos, a lifelong resident of South Dakota except for his military service in the U.S. Air Force, was born and raised in Presho.
Featured Article
Monday, March 17, 2008
Good gravy! What must we do to get South Dakota better grades?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
0 comments:
Post a Comment