Not perfect but a start

Huber's attempt to trim bureaucracy deserves bipartisan support

A proposal by Democratic Assemblywoman Alyson Huber to trim some state bureaucratic fat by making agencies and commissions periodically justify their existence as a condition of continuing is far from a perfect solution.

As former U.S. Sen. Hank Brown of Colorado said of a "sunset" law of which he was a prime sponsor in that state, when crunch time arrives for an endangered commission, the lobbyists come out of the woodwork. But at least Huber is making an honest attempt to do one of the things Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger said he'd do once in office: go after the many questionable, costly boards and commissions that each year spend millions of dollars and have little to show for it save providing jobs for termed-out lawmakers. Schwarzenegger has been less than successful in fulfilling his vow, much of his time and energy diverted into efforts to harness the state budget and deal with deficits. And even if he had eliminated just half the boards and commissions deserving a quick death, it would not begin to address the state's multibillion-dollar budget hole.

Still, it is little more than cheap political carping for Huber's former Assembly seat opponent and the man presumed to be her opponent in the next election, former San Joaquin County Supervisor Jack Sieglock, to pooh-pooh her effort as so much eye wash. Lawmakers should already know what boards and commissions should go, Republican Sieglock said.

Yeah, they should. But lawmakers don't - neither Democrats or Republicans. They don't know which commissions are good and which are bad. Or what they cost. They don't even know how many boards and commissions there are.

Finding out those things may be the most important outcome of Huber's "sunset" proposal. And getting a handle on that is not a Republican thing or a Democratic thing. It's a good thing, and it should be a bipartisan thing.

Excerpted from www.recordnet.com