|
the conclusion that an executive branch
headed by more than one man is not in
effect an effective department for the com-
ing years ahead.
I suggest to you that this Convention
has already reached the Rubicon in this
field, and has crossed it. We have elected
here over the last weeks to construct a
strong, virile judicial branch; perhaps the
strongest of any state in the country. We
have elected here to construct a strong,
virile legislative branch, perhaps as strong
as any in the country; we have increased
their powers substantially.
I say to you, if we now back away from
the construction of a strong executive, the
only thing we will have done, is we will
have constructed a three-legged stool, only
two legs of which are of the same length.
Those decisions are behind us. This de-
cision is in front of us.
If we believe what people who are stu-
dents of this field tell us, we must believe
that a strong executive is necessary.
Three chief arguments are advanced in
the Minority Report for the continuance of
the status quo. First, they talk about the
elected comptroller being a watchdog for
the governor. There is some apparent in-
herent belief that Maryland will for the
future have corrupt high public officials;
that it is necessary in order to protect
against this to provide somebody who can
look over his shoulder and see that he is
constantly kept up to the mark. They con-
cede that all of Maryland's governors of
the 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 ex-
ecutive branch, and having substantial
voice in the fiscal affairs of the State, have
created no problems to the exercise of ef-
fective executive control. 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 pre-
sented which is more likely for the future,
that a corrupt governor will escape detec-
tion by the legislature, the courts, the pres-
ident, the post-auditor, which this body has
created, or is it more likely that some fu-
ture comptroller will so behave as to im-
pede 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 than it can be helpful.
Somehow the minority feels that the pro-
tection of people rests with an executive
which must be constantly checked, and I
suppose if this argument is carried to its
logical extreme one could say that effective
government action can only be in an area
where there is a complete check, and a
complete balance, which can only lead to
stalemate.
The fact of the matter is that the most
casual reading to the political philosophy
underlying our tri-party system makes it
perfectly clear that the principle is in-
tended to apply between branches, and not
within branches of the government.
If we undertake to construct a tri-party
system, as this Convention is now com-
mitted to do, strong in two branches, di-
visive and weak in the third branch, the
only thing that we can expect from that is
trouble for the future.
The third and final argument which they
advance in the Minority Report is that
somehow, by eliminating an elective office,
and here I use their term, we are diminish-
ing democracy, to the extent that we elim-
inate an elective office.
Reference was made to this on the floor
of the Convention in its debates this after-
noon. The question, I think, was quite
properly posed, if we are here diminishing
it, would we augment democracy by adding
additional elective offices? Would it perhaps
be wise to have a director of the sales tax
division an elected official, thus providing
a check and balance within the comp-
troller's office, so that we would thus ac-
complish two things.
It seems to me that the making of the
argument answers itself.
The truth of the matter is, democracy is
in essence the control by the people of their
government. That structure which best per-
mits the people to exercise their will, is
that government which is most effective,
most democratic, and most what the people
of Maryland are waiting for.
If we construct a multi-headed executive,
a troika, we will in essence have defeated
the purpose for which we are here as-
sembled.
|
