logo
SC senators advance DOGE plan, with eye toward regulations

SC senators advance DOGE plan, with eye toward regulations

Yahoo14-02-2025
Sen. Stephen Goldfinch, R-Murrells Inlet, during a Finance Constitutional Subcommittee meeting Thursday, Feb. 13, 2025. (Screenshot of SCETV legislative livestream)
COLUMBIA — A panel of senators advanced a resolution Thursday creating a commission proponents say aims to reduce burdensome regulations and cut down on government spending.
After changing the commission's name to the Delivery of Government Efficiency — or DOGE, to mirror the federal Department of Government Efficiency — the six-member subcommittee advanced the resolution without objection. House Republicans, including members of leadership, have made a nearly identical proposal, which has not yet had a hearing.
Like the name, the idea for the commission came from the federal initiative that has begun to slash government spending, said Sen. Stephen Goldfinch, chief sponsor of the legislation.
If approved, it would create a 10-member commission tasked with combing through state spending and reporting its recommendations for potential savings by Oct. 1. The report would go to legislative leaders and Gov. Henry McMaster.
The commission would then spend the next year doing the same for the state's regulations, looking for those that are duplicative or overly burdensome, said Goldfinch, R-Murrells Inlet.
He doesn't expect commissioners to find a bunch of waste in agencies' spending. The commission's bigger impact, he said, will come from examining state regulations on businesses.
Red states create their own DOGE efforts to cut state government
No legislators would sit on the panel. Instead, the House speaker, Senate president and governor would each appoint three people, and a representative from the state Department of Administration would oversee the group.
The key will be to select people who know the state's processes and how they affect business owners, Goldfinch said.
'A lot of times, we hear from our constituents, but we're insulated, and we don't always know what the problems are out there,' said the attorney. 'This is a great way to find out what the actual problems are.'
McMaster called for similar reductions in regulations during his State of the State address last month.
He specifically wants to examine whether to eliminate any of the more than 40 professional licensing boards, 'run by 350 appointed board members, who license and regulate over 500,000 South Carolinians in the workplace,' he said.
'Each year, the licensing of these professions seems to become more complicated and burdensome,' McMaster said in his Jan. 29 speech. 'I agree with my colleagues that it's time we pause, review the laws that created these boards along with their statutory requirements and determine whether they are necessary, effective, and balanced.'
Churches, charities with little track record among nonprofits in line for $90M in SC budget
The commission's findings could also be a chance for legislators to reevaluate some of their own spending, Goldfinch said. For instance, legislators could rein in the hundreds of millions of dollars they have spent on local projects annually through the last few state budgets.
'A little self-reflection is not always a bad thing,' Goldfinch said.
The state already has safeguards against unnecessary spending, other senators pointed out.
The Legislative Audit Council audits agencies and programs at legislators' request. The Office of the State Inspector General examines agencies, colleges and school districts. And oversight committees in both the House and Senate investigate state agencies over a seven-year review schedule.
'I'm not seeing the necessity for it, if we can maybe expand the responsibilities of the oversight commission as it is,' said Sen. Margie Bright Matthews, D-Walterboro.
But she didn't vote against it.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Democrats can rebuild government by learning from how Trump has destroyed it
Democrats can rebuild government by learning from how Trump has destroyed it

The Hill

time2 minutes ago

  • The Hill

Democrats can rebuild government by learning from how Trump has destroyed it

We know the tragic effects of President Trump's dismantling of the federal government. Social Security service delivery are in crisis. Calls to the Federal Emergency Management Agency in the wake of disaster go unanswered. Rural hospitals brace for a loss of federal support. And now congressional Republicans are surrendering the power of the purse to further hobble core government services by choking off funding. But the truth is, Trump alone didn't break the federal government. He is putting the devastating capstone on a decades-long conservative project of undermining its capacity to function: underfunding agencies, outsourcing expertise, layering on procedural hurdles, stacking courts with partisan allies, and eroding public trust. Long before Trump took office, the result was a government that couldn't move quickly, deliver boldly or meet the needs of the people it was supposed to serve. And when the government is unable to visibly respond to people's discontent and aspirations within the timeframe of an electoral mandate, the legitimacy of democracy itself erodes. If Democrats truly believe in the power of government to improve people's lives, they should be cautious about reverting to pre-Trump institutions. Our time in the Biden-Harris administration taught us that the federal government wasn't meeting the needs of middle- or working-class people long before the 2024 election. What was left of it has now been intentionally sabotaged. If we want to implement a bold policy agenda in the future — one that truly creates agency, power and opportunity for people who don't have it — we have to start planning now to build the basic infrastructure for a government that's much more responsive to and resonant with ordinary Americans, not the monied few. For too long, Democrats have been stuck in a vicious cycle of playing catch-up in a game with existential stakes. Phase one: Republicans dismantle government programs and services and trigger economic crises through their laissez-faire approach to governance. Phase two: Democrats retake power, and then scramble to steer a hobbled system back to the status quo. Phase three: Democrats fail to deliver the visible change the electorate craves, Republicans retake power, and the cycle repeats. What has to change? We need to confront a hard truth: Despite good intentions and tireless efforts from appointees and civil servants alike, the old tools and norms have not worked. Administrative rulemaking has been too slow, fragile, and captured by well-resourced industries to meaningfully serve the public interest. Major policies passed with fanfare took four or more years to show results — long after voters were asked to judge them. Meanwhile, activist courts stacked by the right delayed or dismantled even modest reforms. Agencies were afraid to antagonize the powerful industries they were supposed to oversee, or to take an investment risk and face public failure. Enforcement against corporate lawbreaking was underfunded and slow. Outsourcing of core government functions made private contractors rich even when their performance was shoddy. And far too often, the government was a distant, impenetrable behemoth that piled paperwork on Americans, instead of proactively listening to them to understand their needs and deliver frictionless services in response. We can't win back faith in government with policies that are invisible, delayed or drowned in process. We need a new playbook — one that matches the urgency of the moment and the acuteness of people's needs. One that learns, paradoxically, from the relentlessness of Trump and his allies. What they've demonstrated is that the rules and norms constraining government action aren't fixed laws of nature. They're conventions — and they can be changed. If there's no political cost for ignoring them in the service of corporate power and oligarchic corruption, there should be even less fear about changing them to make government work better for ordinary people. Democrats should take the lesson: Flip the risk profile. Go big or go home. That means reorganizing policymaking around speed, visibility and political resonance. It means building teams around outcome-driven missions — not statutes, institutional bias or risk-averse compliance. It means treating economic, legal, outreach and communications strategy as one integrated campaign, and working much more collaboratively with our state and local government partners and community-based organizations. It means starting work long before Day One with the understanding that we will need to simultaneously build and deliver: pre-drafting policies, mapping authorities, recruiting top-flight talent and identifying the signature priorities for each agency that will show up in people's lives within a single term. These are unified campaign-style operations, not bureaucratic ones. And it means breaking free from the norms that keep the government mired in caution. Abolish or radically retool obsolete veto gates, such as the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs. Limit judicial meddling in economic policy choices made by political leaders accountable to the people, and refocus courts on protecting individual liberties. Make the government great to work for again, and repopulate it with technologists, statisticians, product managers, service designers, community organizers and movement lawyers. Clean out the procedural clutter that saps time and bandwidth. We've seen what gets in the way. Now it's time to start clearing it. Importantly, when we act, we must act boldly. During the last administration, the types of policies that resonated were the big, simple, universal ones: a cap on insulin prices, a ban on junk fees, an end to noncompetes, a free, easy way to file your taxes. These were policies designed to be tangible, memorable and swift — and they addressed economic frustrations that transcend partisan lines. That's not just good economics. It's good politics. It's good democracy. Policies must provide proof that the government can still work for ordinary people, not just large corporations or insiders. For too long, Democrats have tried to govern within a framework designed to thwart them and to protect entrenched interests. Trump simply ignored it. If we want to change that trajectory for government, we need to be just as fearless and bold in building a new framework as Republicans have been in destroying the old one. If Democrats want to lead, the party must demonstrate that the government can — and will — continue to change lives for the better. Let's stop trying to tinker with a broken machine. Let's start building one that actually works.

Exclusive: Sen. Hawley doesn't want to "experiment" with rural hospital funding
Exclusive: Sen. Hawley doesn't want to "experiment" with rural hospital funding

Axios

time2 minutes ago

  • Axios

Exclusive: Sen. Hawley doesn't want to "experiment" with rural hospital funding

Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) doesn't want to "experiment" with the "vitally important" funding hospitals receive, he said during an Axios News Shapers event Wednesday. Why it matters: Hawley is positioning himself as a key defender of the Medicaid program, even after voting to cut Medicaid through President Trump's "big, beautiful bill." The cuts to Medicaid include rolling back nearly $1 trillion in funding over the next 10 years, and make changes the provider tax. Driving the news:"My concern is, is what result would it really have?" Hawley asked about the long term affects of the provider tax on rural hospitals. "Would it force us to go out and find new funding in other places?" he asked. "Would it force us to raise taxes in some areas? I don't know the answer that, and I don't want to risk it. I don't want to take the experiment." Hawley commended Republicans for capturing the votes of working class, blue collar Americans, but pointed out that the party now needs to deliver policies that benefit them. "Does that mean that they're in the Republican Party to stay forever? I don't think so," he said. "It means they're giving the Republican Party a shot." Context: Hawley introduced the "Protect Medicaid and Rural Hospitals Act" earlier this month to block any future cuts to Medicaid. His bill would repeal the provider tax moratorium and the reduction of provider tax authority, which would restore part of the money that states rely on to fund their programs. The bill would also double the Rural Health Transformation Fund from $50 billion to $100 billion. By the numbers: About 1.2 million people are enrolled in Medicaid in Missouri, 50% of whom are children. The federal government funds 78% of total Medicaid spending in Missouri, according to a May report from KFF.

Huizenga skips Michigan Senate race
Huizenga skips Michigan Senate race

Axios

time2 minutes ago

  • Axios

Huizenga skips Michigan Senate race

Rep. Bill Huizenga won't run in the Michigan Senate race, he said in a statement on Wednesday. Why it matters: Huizenga's decision to pass on the Senate opens up a clearer path for former Rep. Mike Rogers, the National Republican Senatorial Committee's preferred candidate. Huizenga hasn't given a clear indication that he has decided to run for reelection to the House. "I look forward to announcing my future plans later this year," he said in a statement. Huizenga raised $747,000 in the second quarter, leaving him with $1.4 million in cash on hand. Zoom in: The White House has been putting pressure on House Republicans in swing districts to forgo senate or gubernatorial campaigns to help President Trump retain the House majority. Rep. Mike Lawler (R-N.Y.) became the latest House Republican to officially take a pass on a statewide bid when he announced his plans to run House on Wednesday morning. "I've decided the right thing to do for me, my family and my district is to run for re-election," Lawler said said on "Fox & Friends" after telling the New York Times that he wouldn't be running for governor. Rep. Zach Nunn (R-Iowa) decided to run for House reelection and forgo a governor's bid after pressure from the White House.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store