THE GOVERNOR"S VARIED DUTIES
A great deal of the governor"s time is also taken up with duties devolving upon him as the official representative of the state on ceremonial occasions, as in the laying of corner-stones of public buildings, attending state fairs, and making speeches at public meetings of all kinds. By virtue of his office he is also a member of many boards and commissions whose meetings he must attend.
THE GOVERNOR"S PART IN LAWMAKING
The governor also has some part in lawmaking. In all states except North Carolina he has the power to VETO bills pa.s.sed by the legislature. This check upon the legislature is not absolute, for the legislature may overcome the governor"s veto by again pa.s.sing the bill, usually by a two-thirds vote. The governor may also influence legislation by means of his messages to the legislature in which he recommends measures which he believes should be enacted into law. In case of opposition by the legislature, the governor often carries his proposals directly to the people, who quickly make known whether or not they support him. The governor may call special sessions of the legislature to consider measures of especial importance.
GROWING INFLUENCE OF THE GOVERNOR
The governor is a more influential officer today than he was in the early part of our history. In colonial times he was the direct representative of the king, or of the colonial proprietor, and the people sought in every way to limit his powers. After the colonies became states this habitual fear of the governor continued, and he was placed under the control of the legislature. As time went on, however, the legislature fell under the suspicion of the people, while the governor was more and more looked to as their leader.
Thus, for example, the veto power was given to him, increasing his influence while it curbed that of the legislature.
WEAKNESS OF THE STATE EXECUTIVE
But the power and influence of the governor are by no means as great in relation to state government as are the powers of the President in relation to the national government. In fact, the executive branch of our state governments has been notoriously weak, and its weakness is of the same kind as that noted in county government: the lack of an effective, responsible head.
COMPARISON OF STATE WITH NATIONAL EXECUTIVE
In our national government the executive power is concentrated in the hands of one man. State const.i.tutions seem to confer the same powers upon the governor. The const.i.tution of Indiana says, "The executive powers of the State shall be vested in a Governor"; and that of Pennsylvania says, "The supreme executive power shall be vested in the Governor." But the Pennsylvania const.i.tution also says, "The executive department shall consist of a Governor, Lieutenant Governor, Secretary of the Commonwealth, Attorney General, Auditor General, State Treasurer, Secretary of Internal Affairs and a Superintendent of Public Instruction" (Art. IV, Sec.
I). Four of these officers besides the governor are elected by the people.
BEWILDERING COMPLEXITY OF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES
In all states the governor "shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed" (Pennsylvania const.i.tution). For the execution of the laws, however, he is dependent not only upon a number of princ.i.p.al executive officers such as those named above, but also upon a large number of less important administrative officers. Governor Lowden, of Illinois, a few years ago said:
Administrative agencies have been multiplied in bewildering confusion. They have been created without reference to their ability economically and effectively to administer the laws.
Separate boards govern the penitentiaries, the reformatories, and the educational inst.i.tutions. Several boards and commissions have charge of matters affecting the agricultural interests.
Administration of laws affecting labor is parceled out among numerous agencies, including several boards having jurisdiction of mining problems and several free employment agencies, each independent of the other. Our finance administration is chaotic, illogical and confused.
The administration of the health laws is divided between boards and commissions, with no effective means of coordination. Our educational agencies are not harmonious. Over one hundred officers, boards, agencies, commissions, inst.i.tutions and departments are charged with the administration of our laws. No systematic organization exists, and no adequate control can be exercised ... Under the present system the governor cannot exercise the supervision and control which the people have a right to demand. [Footnote: Charles E. Woodward, "The Illinois Civil Administrative Code," reprinted from Proceedings, Academy of Political Science, July, 1918.]
GOVERNOR LACKS POWER TO MEET HIS RESPONSIBILITY
This condition of affairs is characteristic of state governments generally. Some of the numerous officers are appointed by the governor, but many of them are elected by the people or appointed by the legislature. Their terms of office do not coincide with that of the governor, so that he finds in office many persons whom he did not appoint, and whom he cannot remove. Often they may be of an opposite political party. Thus the very organization of the state executive department is such as to make it impossible for the governor to perform the duty, imposed upon him by the const.i.tution, of seeing to it that the laws are faithfully executed. It must be remembered, moreover, that the execution of the laws is also dependent largely upon a mult.i.tude of local officers over whom the state exercises little control. It is apparent how imperfect must be the teamwork of the people through this organization.
UNSUCCESSFUL EFFORTS AT POPULAR CONTROL
Why have the people put up with this sort of thing? For one thing, they have not understood where the trouble lies. There is also seen the influence of the political "boss," who thrives under this confusion. But among the causes is the desire of the people to maintain control over government. They have attempted, in their const.i.tutions, not only to say just what services should be performed for them, but also to specify just what machinery should be used for their performance. For every new service, they have created a new and independent piece of machinery. Then, to make their control complete, as they thought, they have made most of their new officers elective. Experience has shown that control of this kind has been gained only at the sacrifice of efficient service, through failure to provide trained leadership and effective organization. Moreover, experience has also shown that control of this kind is largely a delusion; for the people cannot keep in touch with their mult.i.tude of officers, and in many cases yield their control, often unknowingly, to the political "boss."
EXPERIMENT NECESSARY TO PROGRESS
In noting these defects, it is not to be concluded that our state governments have been a failure in all respects. Far from it.
Notable progress has been made toward the ideals toward which we have been striving. We have tried one experiment after another, some of which have been highly successful, but others of which have not met the test of new conditions. It is important, however, that we should face our failures squarely and profit by them.
REORGANIZATION OF EXECUTIVE
At the present time there is a marked effort to overcome the defects that we have just noted, and a good deal of progress toward it has been made in some states. One of the most progressive states in this particular is Illinois, which has recently enacted a law for the reorganization of its executive branch of government.
Under the new "Civil Administrative Code" of Illinois, the executive branch of government is organized in nine departments: the departments of finance, of agriculture, of labor, of mines and minerals, of public works and buildings, of public welfare, of public health, of trade and commerce, and of registration and education.
At the head of each department is a director, who is appointed by the governor, is responsible to him, and whose term of office is the same as that of the governor.
Each department is organized into various bureaus, or other subdivisions, with officers in charge who are directly responsible to the director of the department. Thus, in the department of agriculture there is an a.s.sistant director, a general manager of the state fair, a superintendent of foods and dairies, a superintendent of animal industry, a superintendent of plant industry, a chief veterinarian, a chief game and fish warden, and a food standard commission of three members.
All subordinate employees in all departments are appointed under a civil service law which requires compet.i.tive examinations.
a.s.sociated with most of the departments are "advisory boards"
consisting of citizens who serve without pay. Thus, the department of agriculture has a board of agricultural advisers composed of fifteen persons, and a board of state fair advisers of nine persons, not more than three of whom shall be appointed from any one county.
The things aimed at in this reorganization are: (I) fixing responsibility for the entire service-organization in one place-- with the governor; (2) responsible, trained leadership in each department of service; (3) responsiveness of leadership to the people"s wants, as provided for by the advisory boards; (4) a system of accounting and records that will make for efficiency and economy, and that will inform the people as well as the officers of government.
Investigate and report on:
The name of the governor of your state, his political party, when elected, for how long a term.
Advantages and disadvantages of a long term for the governor.
The const.i.tutional powers of the governor of your state.
The influence of the governor of your state with the people.
The princ.i.p.al executive and administrative officers of your state.
Those that are elective and those that are appointive.
A complete list of the administrative bureaus, boards, commissions, and other state agencies, with their duties.
The application of Governor Lowden"s statement regarding Illinois to your state.
Any proposed reorganization of the executive branch of your state government.
THE LEGISLATIVE BRANCH
The legislative branch of government consists, in all states, of a legislature ("general a.s.sembly," "legislative a.s.sembly," or "general court") composed of two "houses" or "chambers," the house of representatives and the senate. The senate is the "upper house," and is usually from one-third to one-half the size of the "lower house"; in Ma.s.sachusetts only one-sixth the size.
THE TWO HOUSES
A bill to become a law must pa.s.s both houses separately, each house acting as a check upon the other, thus securing greater deliberation in lawmaking. The senate is supposed to be, and usually is, a more conservative, or cautious, body than the house of representatives, partly because of its smaller size which makes possible a more careful consideration of business. Its members are elected from larger districts, thus increasing the opportunity to select able men. A higher age qualification is required for membership in the senate than in the house of representatives; and only a part of the senate is elected at each election, so that it is a continuing body, always containing members of experience, while the lower house may be almost entirely changed at each election.
DEFECTS IN DISTRIBUTION OF REPRESENTATION
It is a theory of our representative government that representation should be proportional to population. To secure this result, each state is divided into election districts presumably of as nearly equal population as possible, the senatorial districts being the larger. In practice, however, these districts do not always have representation proportional to their population. The county is often the unit of representation, or in New England the town, and these districts vary greatly in population. An attempt is made to equalize the difference by providing that no district shall have less than one representative, and often that none shall have more than a certain number. Inequalities nevertheless exist. In Connecticut, thirty- four of the most populous towns and cities have sixty-eight members in the lower house, whereas if the distribution were made on the basis of population they would be ent.i.tled to 186 members.
Again, four of the smallest Connecticut towns, with a total population of 1567, have five members; four of the most populous cities, containing 309,982 inhabitants, have only eight members, whereas on the basis of population they would be ent.i.tled to eighty-seven. [Footnote: C.A., Beard, America Government and Politics, p. 521.]
Partisan influences often enter into the districting of states for representation, the party in power trying to fix boundaries so as to ensure keeping their majority in the legislature.
Investigate and report on the following:
Number of members in the lower and upper houses of your legislature.