Editorial: Legislative quest for political meddling might start with a look in a mirror

The notion that “political meddling threatens the SBI,” as a recent opinion headline warned, could be a valid concern.

But the worry should be more for those raising the alarm – who appear perpetuate the problem – and whether the true roots of the meddling will be addressed.

A legislative committee claims to be in the midst of an examination of questions over the SBI’s current leadership. It remains to be seen to what degree that examination is more partisan meddling by legislators than true concerns over agency operations.

First, some facts and history.

In 2014 the state attorney general was Roy Cooper – a Democrat was elected governor in 2016 and re-elected in 2020. The governor in 2014 coincidentally, was a Republican like the legislative leaders - Pat McCrory.

Using a budget bill – with little opportunity for independent actual examination, discussion and debate over transferring an agency from where it had been for three-quarters of a century – Republicans moved the SBI from a department led by a Democrat into an agency led by a Republican. A Republican appointed the SBI director and the Republican-led legislature confirmed the appointment of that SBI director.

Now, the current SBI director Schurmeier – appointed by a Republican governor and confirmed by a Republican-dominated legislature with a term that ends in six weeks– works in an agency now led by a Democratic governor.

It is important to stress there was NO advance notice of the committee’s meeting. Committee Chairman Jake Johnson, R-Henderson, said he kept “a tight lid on” things because of what he said was the sensitive nature of the testimony. Schurmeier, speaking under oath, leveled serious accusations against the Cooper administration. No one from the administration or those who’d complained of alleged discrimination were given opportunities for rebuttal.

There was no airing of the very serious concerns that had been raised about racial discrimination and lack of advancement and training opportunities for minority SBI agents under Schurmeier leadership.

Rather than the “clear intimidation,” as Schurmeier contends, Jones said “current and former agents and others have contacted us to share a variety of information that left us increasingly concerned about the direction of the SBI” as well as “a lack of racial diversity among sworn SBI agents, promotion decisions and practices, and access to training, among others.”

Given the legislative manipulation of the SBI since 2014, it is hard to take seriously any real concerns of oversight rather than just another effort to fix a partisan power grab that didn’t seem to have worked as intended a decade ago.

Further, those who have complained of discrimination and lack of opportunity at the SBI should, of their own volition, come forward to detail their concerns and experiences.

What is most important is that ALL North Carolinians clearly see for themselves if there are problems at the SBI and what those problems REALLY are (in this case “intimidation” vs. racial discrimination).

This is needed so citizens are assured any actions taken by the legislature and/or the Cooper administration address real problems not simply act on partisan expediency.