1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21

immediate past to the present have been highly responsible
people. They also argue that the Comptrollers of the past,
by virtue of having an elective office within the Executive
Branch, and having substantial voice in the fiscal affairs
of the State, have created no problems to the exercise of
effective executive control, and it would seem logical to
say that if they have not created any effective problems,
then they have not in fact been effective watchdogs; and
if they have not been effective watchdogs, q.e.d., why do
we need them?
The question thus seems to me to be presented,
tdtich is more likely for the future, that a corrupt governor
will escape detection by the legislature, the courts,
the president, the post-auditor which this body has created
or is it more likely that some future Comptroller will so
behave as to impede effective exercise of executive power?
We suggest that the question answers itself.
The second argument relates to the catch
phrase, checks and balances. This is a worthwhile phrase,
long ingrained in our political history, but like all catch
phrases unless it is used accurately, it can do more damage