XXXVII appear on the floor of either house to explain and defend their CHAP. requests for appropriations or for other legislation. It must be admitted, however, that there is slight reason to expect that many legislatures will, in the near future, introduce these desirable changes. Jealousy of executive influence and prestige is more than likely to prompt instant declaration, when the change is suggested, that "the fathers" in their wisdom decreed that the two departments of government should be and should remain separate and independent, and that to adopt the proposed arrangement would mean to violate the spirit, if not the letter, of the constitution. The people in most states will therefore probably have to wait until a constitutional convention gives formal recognition in the fundamental law to the importance of more direct official relations between the administrative and legislative organs of government. Meanwhile, the effectiveness of state legislatures will continue to be seriously impaired by adherence to theories of the separation of governmental powers which, in the domain of state government, as in that of municipal government, have been proved by long experience to be injurious if rigidly applied.1 In conclusion, brief mention should be made of the lobby, which The lobby is perhaps the most powerful of all influences shaping state legislation. "The lobby" is a collective term applied to the people who undertake to persuade the members of the legislature to oppose or to support measures which are coming up for consideration; a man or woman who makes a practice of this sort of thing is called a "lobbyist," and the practice itself is known as "lobbying." The term must not be taken to imply the corrupt use of money, or indeed any improper motive or conduct. On the contrary, it often happens that where the lobby is most industrious, numerous, and successful, corruption is wholly absent; lobbying is often of great educative value to legislators who are personally unacquainted with the merits or defects of pending bills. There are, in fact, two well-defined classes of lobbyists. The first consists of perfectly honorable men E. M. Sait, "Participation of the Executive in Legislation," Acad. of Polit. Sci. Proceedings, V, 127-140 (1914); H. L. Stimson, "Responsible State Government,' Independent, LXXIX, 14-15 (July 6, 1914); W. D. Hines, "Our Irresponsible State Governments,' "Atlantic Monthly, CXV, 634-647 (May, 1915); C. L. Jones, "The Improvement of Legislative Methods and Procedure, "Amer. Polit. Sci. Rev., Supplement, VIII, 191-215 (Feb., 1914). See the plan of legislative reorganization advocated by Governor Hodges of Kansas in 1913, entitled "Distrust of State Legislatures: the Causes; the Remedy," reprinted in Young, The New American Government and its Work, 643-651; also the legislative organization outlined in the "Model Constitution," of the Nat. Mun. League, Nat. Mun. Rev., IX, 711-715 (Nov., 1920). 1 CHAP. and women who adopt open-and-above-board methods of influencing members of the legislature. The other is composed of the "harpies and vultures of politics," consisting usually of paid attorneys of corporations, and including many former members of the legislature, who understand the inner workings of the legislative machinery. It is this second class, very largely representing special interests and employing means more or less corrupt, that gives the lobby a bad name; it is perhaps the chief cause of undesirable legislation and of the defeat of measures framed to promote the public well-being. From the vantage point of one who has long been a student of government and has had much practical experience as a member of a state legislature, it is asserted that "the system of lobbying in legislative halls in America ought to be sharply scrutinized and modified. The lobbyist ought to be put under strict rules, and in the event of a clearly substantiated and deliberate misrepresentation made to a member of the legislature or any committee, or in the event of the use of deception and disingenuous methods, should be subject to the penalty of disbarment which a lawyer suffers when he misrepresents facts to a court. The modern lobbyist holds a more intimate relation to the course of legislation and to the ultimate effect of it than either the lawyer or the judge. The lobbyist is in a position to tamper effectively with law at its source. " Although some efforts have been made to regulate the lobbyist's activities by legislation in New York, Massachusetts, Wisconsin, and a few other states, little has been accomplished, and this continues to be one of the numerous unsolved problems of American state government. REFERENCES J. Bryce, The American Commonwealth (4th ed., New York, 1910), I, Chaps. XLIV-XLV. P. S. Reinsch, American Legislatures and Legislative Methods (New York, 1907), Chaps. V-VI, VIII-X. Readings on American State Government (Boston, 1911), 41-84. E. Kimball, State and Municipal Government in the United States (Boston, 1922), Chap. XI. A. C. McLaughlin and A. B. Hart, Cyclopedia of American Government (New C. L. Jones, "Changes in Legislative Procedure in 1913," Amer. Polit. Sci. 1 F. M. Davenport (member of the New York senate), "Impressions of a Modern Legislature," Outlook, CXXII, 286-292 (June 18, 1919). J. T. Young, The New American Government and Its Work (New York, 1913) CHAP. 643-651. A. E. Sheldon, "Reform of Legislative Procedure in Nebraska," Amer. Polit. J. O. Hammitt, "Watching Legislation for the Public," Nat. Mun. Rev., III, R. V. Harlow, History of Legislative Methods before 1825 (New Haven, 1917). (See also reference list on p. 605.) XXXVII Executive and admin istrative offices The gov ernor Election CHAPTER XXXVIII THE STATE EXECUTIVE To carry into effect public policy which has been enacted into law, and to perform other duties prescribed by the constitution and the statutes, two main groups of state offices are everywhere provided. The first consists chiefly of the offices of governor, lieutenant-governor, secretary of state, auditor or comptroller, treasurer, attorney-general, and superintendent of public instruction, which are regularly created by the constitution, and which are commonly called the state executive offices. The second consists of newer boards, commissions, and offices, established, as a rule, by statute, and usually known as the state administrative organs or agencies. Both groups exist for the same fundamental purpose, i.e., to carry into effect public policy which has been embodied in law; and the distinction between them is not hard and fast. It is not unusual, for example, to speak of all the activities carried on by the nonlegislative and non-judicial parts of the state government as "state administration." None the less, it will make for clearness if we take account first of those offices that are essentially executive, and reserve the administrative services proper for treatment in the succeeding chapter. No one needs to be told that the most important executive officer of a state is the governor. Every colony in the days before the Revolution had a governor, and, notwithstanding popular dislike of the power which that official wielded, every one of the new state constitutions provided for a continuance of the office, albeit with authority considerably reduced. The organized territories of later times had governors, and all carried the office over into their new state organization as a matter of course. In only two of the colonies, as we have seen, was the governor elected, even indirectly, by the people; and in a majority of the original thirteen states choice was made by the legislature. The plan of popular election, however, gradually won its way, and it nowadays prevails in every one of the forty-eight states.1 Candidates are nominated either in Election is by direct popular vote except in Mississippi, where a curious mixed system prevails. XXXVIII state-wide direct primaries in which every properly registered CHAP. voter of each party is entitled to participate or by state conventions made up of delegates selected by the members of each party in such subdivisions of the state as counties and congressional or legislative districts. Ordinarily a plurality elects, although in a few states a majority is required; in the latter case there is provision for choice by the legislature in the lack of a popular majority for any one of the candidates. tions, term All state constitutions require the governor to have certain qualificaqualifications. He must always be a citizen of the United States; salary, and and in all but a few states he must be at least thirty years of age. Usually he must have resided in the state for a period of five years. His compensation is either definitely fixed in the constitution or left to the discretion of the legislature. At the present time, salaries range from $3,000 up to $10,000 in four of the states and $12,000 in Illinois. In twenty-three states the governor's term is fixed in the constitution at four years; in twenty-four states, at two years; while New Jersey elects every three years. The newer constitutions show a tendency to change from the two-year to the four-year term. As a rule, the governor is eligible for immediate reëlection, and for reëlection any number of times; but in Indiana, Pennsylvania, and some other states he may not serve two consecutive terms. The governor and other principal state officers may be removed Removal by impeachment. But the power is seldom exercised, as is indicated by the fact that only nine governors have ever been impeached. Five of these impeachments occurred in the South during the Reconstruction period: one governor was removed from office, one resigned to avoid removal, and in the other cases the charges were dropped. In the North, two governors were impeached during the same period, one being acquitted, and the other removed from office. for embezzlement of state funds.1 The only later instances are the impeachments of Governor Sulzer of New York in 1913 and Gov- The recall ernor Ferguson of Texas in 1917, both of whom were removed from office. In eleven states a new and more expeditious mode of removing principal state officers has been adopted in recent years, known as the "recall." This takes the form of a special election held after a petition has been signed by a specified number of voters asking for such an election, and after rival candidates have been placed in nomination. If one of the latter receives more votes than the gov A. N. Holcombe, State Government in the United States, 342-343. 1Amer. Polit. Sci. Rev., XII, 111-115 (Feb., 1918). |