|
DELEGATE MORGAN: It seemed to
the Committee the governor will have to
delegate part of his power. For example,
the governor is ex officio a member of many
boards and certainly to enable the lieu-
tenant governor to sit on Board A and
perform the functions of the governor on
that board, he would have to be delegated
that function by the governor. It seemed
to the Committee that it was these kinds of
things that would make a lieutenant gov-
ernor of most use and help to the governor.
DELEGATE J. CLARK (presiding) :
Delegate Chabot.
DELEGATE CHABOT: I have my
qualms about the general delegation of
powers, but I am talking specifically about
this matter of the signing and vetoing of
bills.
DELEGATE J. CLARK (presiding) :
Delegate Morgan.
DELEGATE MORGAN: That was just
used as an example. I would not know how
to write language to distinguish between
one power and another power that the gov-
ernor would have.
DELEGATE J. CLARK (presiding) :
Delegate Chabot.
DELEGATE CHABOT: But if such lan-
guage were capable of being drafted, would
you feel that the purpose that you sought
to accomplish would be significantly limited
if the lieutenant governor could not be
given the power unless he assumed the role
of acting governor; that the lieutenant
governor could not be given the power to
sign the veto bill?
DELEGATE J. CLARK (presiding):
Chairman Morgan.
DELEGATE MORGAN: As a practical
matter that would never take place while
the governor was in the State and could do
it himself. This was given just as an ex-
ample.
In practice it would only take place un-
der the most unusual circumstances. For
example when the governor left the State
and he did not want to turn over all the
duties to the lieutenant governor, he might
want to delegate the power to veto bills
while he was out of the State but none of
the other powers.
DELEGATE J. CLARK (presiding) :
Delegate Chabot.
DELEGATE CHABOT: I would like to
go to section 4.13. The provision here is
|
that the governor may when meeting the
General Assembly state the purpose for
which he has convened it. Does this carry
the implication that the General Assembly
may not do any business other than that
stated purpose?
DELEGATE J. CLARK (presiding) :
Delegate Morgan.
DELEGATE MORGAN: It does not, be-
cause I specifically stated in my presenta-
tion that the General Assembly was not
limited to the purpose for which the gov-
ernor called it into session.
(Delegate Hamilton Fox assumed the
Chair.)
DELEGATE FOX (presiding) : Delegate
Chabot.
DELEGATE CHABOT: I would like to
refer to page 7. The language there not
only authorizes the governor to set up the
principal agency that the legislature has
enacted but also provides that the execu-
tive order shall have the force and law
without being subject to disapproval by the
General Assembly.
Does this mean that the General As-
sembly could not amend it or could not
have recognized that it was acting entirely
to do the job itself at a later date?
DELEGATE FOX (presiding) : Chair-
man Morgan.
DELEGATE MORGAN: This was put
in simply as a prod to the General Assem-
bly to make sure that the General Assembly
would perform the functions that the arti-
cle gives to it within two years.
DELEGATE FOX (presiding): Dele-
gate Chabot.
DELEGATE CHABOT: Yes, but I think
we are soon recognizing that prods can
have other consequences. Suppose the Gen-
eral Assembly does not do the job within
two years. What is it thereafter forbidden
to do? Is it forbidden forever after to
amend the executive order on the organiza-
tion that the governor has set up? \
DELEGATE FOX (presiding): Dele-
gate Morgan.
DELEGATE MORGAN: No, the Gen-
eral Assembly can pass any law it wants
to providing for any sort of organization
it wants to and if that legislation is signed
by the governor or becomes law over the
governor's veto, that is the law.
The only way it can be changed is if
the General Assembly changes it or if the
|
