SHARE:
Oversight
Another Bright Idea?
It's questionable whether a proposed sunset law would shrink the ranks of agencies.
'Pet food for lobbyists'
The idea of "sunsetting" first arrived in Florida three decades ago as a way of attacking outdated regulation. Then-Rep. George Sheldon, a Democrat from Tampa who is now associate dean of students at St. Thomas University law school in Miami, seized an earlier "sunset" law to abolish regulation over in-state trucking. His Regulated Industries Committee also turned to regulated professions. A lot of anti-consumer rules were eliminated, but most professions were still regulated. "Only four watchmakers showed up, so we courageously eliminated the watch makers board," Sheldon recalls.
The technique was then applied to the huge number of state advisory boards and councils, but most of them endured. Since the early 1980s, we have had reviews every five years of exceptions to Florida's open-records and open-meetings laws and even passed a constitutional amendment to preserve open government, but we have more exceptions now than ever.
The sun rarely sets in Florida.
But the exercise is a big payday for well-connected lobbyists, who get hired by constituencies of agencies up for review, and generates campaign contributions for well-placed legislators.
Although we have never had a sunset law aimed at agencies themselves, it is not at all obvious that this variation will actually eliminate agencies any more than it eliminated professional regulation. In fact, the speaker and the two speakers-in-waiting more or less acknowledge that the law is really designed to focus bureaucrats' attention on a need for change and responsiveness. Sansom, for example, says it wouldn't mean the abolition of the Department of Education or the prison system or other "vital" agencies, but the commission would make recommendations for improvements.
But why not consider the abolition of the Department of Education? The only thing "vital" in education is a comfortable and nicely equipped classroom, a good teacher, a challenging curriculum and a grading system. That's simplistic, but if you start with a blank sheet and focus on what you need instead of starting with a gaudy office building full of people, you have an interesting way of thinking about education spending. But big agencies with big constituencies quickly become sacred cows in the sunset process and are "improved," not eliminated.
Why isn't this the governor's job, anyway? He's the one responsible for carrying out the laws efficiently. In fact, the very appointment of department heads under a new government is the first step in carrying out that responsibility. Sansom, however, argues that the Legislature should take on this kind of review because "the Legislature is responsible for all the agencies." And Bush press secretary Russell Schweiss says Bush feels "the Legislature creates and funds state agencies and should regularly review them to determine that they are still relevant."
You don't need a joint sunset committee to eliminate government functions, though. Jeb Bush had hardly warmed his chair in 1999 before he zapped the bullet train. It just takes the willingness to make a decision and take the heat.
Speaker Bense could tell every House committee to identify one function of government to get rid of. Any legislative committee could, without further legislation, summon a department head to justify this program or that. Bense could even direct them to do that. Maybe we could use tools we already have and avoid a new committee.
We'll see if that light bulb works.You can reach Neil Skene at tallytrend@floridatrend.com
