|
the assurance that things are in proper
legal order between the governor and his
department head? Should he not have a
legal representative of his own choosing to
work with the department heads and to
work with counsel in the departments?
Why should this be an elected person
rather than a person appointed by the
governor?
DELEGATE MASON: The private
counsel for the governor certainly could
work with the department heads in this
unofficial and informal manner. He can
advise the governor as to how he thinks
he could translate his programs into legal
legislation; but when it comes to an of-
ficial act in the State, that is where the
attorney general steps in, because the at-
torney general not only represents the
governor, or the executive department, but
he represents the legislature. So would you
suggest the legislature have their own
lawyer and the judiciary have their own
lawyer?
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Hanson.
DELEGATE HANSON: If you are ask-
ing me the question, I would assume that
the judiciary is amply populated with
lawyers. As to the General Assembly, that
might be a good idea. But back to my ques-
tion, which revolves around the question
of a counsel in a department making a
ruling, or the attorney general making a
ruling regarding the intent of the legisla-
ture, or the manner in which regulations
must be issued — all the internal legal
housekeeping that has to go on in an ad-
ministration, in which legal opinions are
written. But they are more than legal
opinions, they are also public policy, de-
termining the manner in which the ad-
ministration will proceed, and therefore if
the governor is intending to implement a
program, should this kind of counsel not be
available to him, and not be of his own
choosing?
DELEGATE MASON: This kind of
counsel is available to him as the attorney
general. Now these programs to which you
address yourself are programs set up by
the legislature, and the attorney general is
the one who has to interpret what the law
means and translate it into these particular
programs for the governor.
Now, you are suggesting that the legis-
lature have their own lawyers so they can
determine what the law is, that the gov-
ernor have his lawyer so he can determine
what the law is, that we would fragment
the legal work of the State.
|
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Mason.
DELEGATE HANSON: I do not believe
that is what I was suggesting altogether.
What I was attempting to get you to an-
swer, I will try one more time, is why
should the governor in the making of the
legal regulations incident to the smooth
operation of the administration, not be en-
titled to a chief legal officer of his own
choosing?
What is there about election that makes
it better for an elected attorney general to
perform that policy legal function than for
an appointed attorney general to perform
it?
THE CHAIRMAN: Deegate Mason.
DELEGATE MASON: If the attorney
general is appointed by the governor, and
he makes those decisions for the governor,
there would be a possibility of a conflict
with the legislature in some areas. He cer-
tainly would go along with the governor
in all of his decisions, in cases of that type.
We have an elected attorney general to
represent not only the governor in the ex-
ecutive departments but also the legislative
departments too.
THE CHAIRMAN: Are there any fur-
ther questions?
Delegate Clagett.
DELEGATE CLAGETT: Delegate
Mason, when the governor has under con-
sideration the veto of a bill of the General
Assembly, who is his legal counsel?
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Mason.
DELEGATE MASON: Usually the at-
torney general. He determines whether the
law is constitutional or not, but if it is a
question of policy and the governor wants
to veto it as a matter of policy, he can
have other advisers. It would not be a legal
question.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Clagett.
DELEGATE CLAGETT: When the
General Assembly attempts to override the
veto of the governor, who is the legal
counsel?
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Mason.
DELEGATE MASON: Well, if legal
counsel is needed the attorney general is
the legal counsel.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Clagett.
DELEGATE CLAGETT: Is that not a
possible conflict of interest situation for
the attorney general?
|
