|
Where We Stand
Government: Executive Branch
Goal:
An effective state government; a strong executive branch with lines of
authority and responsibility clearly defined. (1963)
The League supports:
• The power of the governor to reorganize the executive departments
• The right of the governor to appoint policy-making department heads whose terms
will be concurrent with the governor’s
• Abolition of the Governor’s Council
• A shortened ballot
League action
Governor’s Council (Executive Council)
This eight-member appendage to the governor’s office has the power to approve
judicial appointments and gubernatorial pardons and to authorize expenditures from the
treasury. The League was instrumental, in 1964, in the successful campaign to reduce the
powers of the council to those granted in the constitution and to permit the governor to
seek advisory opinions from the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court without consent of
the council. This curbing of powers was accomplished after an initiative petition
involving two signature drives, cooperative efforts with other civic groups, an attempt at
legislative enactment (which failed by a tie vote), a statewide political campaign, and
legal action before the Supreme Court.
A legislative amendment to the constitution abolishing the Governor’s Council was
part of the judicial reform package submitted to the governor in 1975. LWVM supported the
proposal and sponsored an unsuccessful bill that would have created a judicial nominating
commission. Later, a judicial nominating commission was appointed by the governor and
continues to function as an appointed body.
Measures to amend the constitution to remove the Governor’s Council’s most
important power, confirmation of judicial appointments, also failed. Senate confirmation
could supplant council approval if further ratification were deemed necessary. The
council’s other duties could be absorbed by the executive branch.
Proposals for a constitutional amendment to abolish the Governor’s Council or to
limit its powers were supported by the League. The League opposes legislation to restore
the Council’s former statutory powers.
Shortened ballot
The League would like the ballot to be shortened by making the offices of secretary of
state and treasurer appointed positions. League members agreed that the positions of
attorney general and auditor should remain independently elected. It was felt that the
attorney general serves more as a chief law enforcement officer in the Commonwealth than
as legal advisor to the governor and that the auditor is a necessary check on the
administration’s expenditure of money appropriated by the Legislature. The offices of
secretary of state and treasurer are administrative positions rather than policy-making
ones, although the treasurer does make policy by making decisions on investments. An
election for these positions results in office-holders who owe no allegiance to the
governor and who may act as political rivals, creating dissension within the executive
branch.
Cabinet
A 1966 amendment allowed the governor to submit plans for reorganizing state departments
and agencies to the Legislature. The reorganization plan, which established a cabinet form
of government in the Commonwealth’s executive branch, became effective in 1971. The
sprawling structure of some 300 executive agencies was streamlined by assigning each
agency, according to function, a particular secretariat. An amendment allows the governor
to reorganize state departments and agencies, subject to legislative approval. There are
10 cabinet offices: Administration and Finance, Communities and Development, Consumer
Affairs, Economic Affairs, Elder Affairs, Environmental Affairs, Human Services, Labor,
Public Safety, and Transportation and Construction. In 1980 the Office of Educational
Affairs was abolished; in 1990 the Office of Energy Resources was abolished and its
functions transferred as a division in the Office of Consumer Affairs.
Rules and regulations
To maintain clear lines of authority and responsibility in the executive branch, LWVM
opposes measures that would require legislative approval of rules and regulations
promulgated by public agencies. For several years legislation was filed to require such
legislative approval. To avoid a cumbersome and time-consuming process, the League
supports legislation that would require the filing of a "statement of intent"
with all legislation so that executive departments, when drafting rules and regulations,
would have a clear idea of the intent of the Legislature. The League would prefer to have
the Legislature and the agencies work together to develop the regulations. Local Leagues
have used this po-sition to encourage establishment of clear lines of executive authority.
Sunset laws
The League supports bills, called Sunset Laws, that would require periodic review by the
Legislature of the functions and services of state agencies. The Legislature would
determine whether an agency should be continued or abolished.
Impoundment of funds
The governor, in 1975, ordered that a portion of appropriated state funds for human
services and educational needs not be expended. The funds had been included in a budget
prepared by the executive branch and appropriated by action of the Legislature. The League
believes the issues of whether programs are unnecessary or ineffective and whether there
are insufficient funds are matters to be determined through the budget process after
review by both the agencies involved and the Legislature. The governor has the power to
veto appropriations before a budget is passed. The League supports legislation to control
the impoundment of funds.
Background
• 1961-63: The Constitutional Revision Committee focused on the League’s
efforts to strengthen the office of the governor. The Massachusetts constitution served as
a model for the federal constitution. However members felt that a constitution written
when the rule of royal governors created a distrust and fear of executive powers does not
reflect the current situation. The magnitude, variety and scope of governmental powers
requires an executive branch with clearly defined lines of responsibility and which is
responsive to the people served.
• 1963-65: Structure of Government study considered methods of amending the state
constitution. LWVM came to no definitive position on method preferred and continues to
consider all three methods—legislative amendment, initiative petition and
constitutional convention—whenever a change is needed. Political feasibility will
dictate the choice. The League successfully campaigned for the following structural
changes:
• 1964: The term of office for the governor and other constitutional officers was
lengthened by constitutional amendment from two to four years, the gubernatorial election
to take place in even off-presidential years.
• 1966: Joint election of the governor and lieutenant governor was approved in a
statewide referendum.
• 1967: The Legislature approved an act establishing terms concurrent with the
governor’s for the appointed heads of certain departments and agencies.
Previous Page: Elections
Back to Where We Stand: Government
Next Page: Fiscal Policy
|
