Unnecessary Elective Offices
"Yes, we can do without the offices of state treasurer, secretary of state and lieutenant governor."
Milwaukee Journal Sentinel editorial, Sept. 2, 2010 (page 10A)
Wisconsin voters will be nominating Democratic and Republican candidates for these (plus other) state offices Tuesday, September 14. But should these three offices continue to be elective?
Lieutenant Governor
The only real role of this official is to succeed the governor in case he or she cannot complete the term of office. The governor may also assign duties to the LG. Our posting of August 29 recommended that each nominee for governor nominate a running-mate, instead of leaving the selection to a primary; the present system allows the selection of a nominee for LG that the governor can't stand, or one that would effectively sink the ticket. (1)
But if the office were eliminated, as suggested by the JS editorial, who would succeed the governor? The Constitution could be amended to designate some other official, such as the Attorney General or Speaker of the Assembly. The trouble is that the successor may be a member of a different political party, so that a change in the office of governor would also lead to massive changes in the entire executive branch. Moreover, if the legislature were led by the opposite party, there would be a perverse incentive to impeach and remove the governor from office.
The only way to guaranty a successor from the same party is to have the successor selected on the same ticket, as is the LG today.
State Treasurer and Secretary of State
These officials are responsible for distributing abandoned bank accounts, notarizing acts of the governor, appointing notaries, and other mundane tasks, none of which involve making policy. The JS is right that there is no need to elect them at all, especially on a partisan ballot.
All of these duties can be handled by the Department of Administration, which is controlled by the governor.
Incidentally, the Secretary of State (now Douglas J LaFollette) is second in line to become governor in case both top jobs are vacant at the same time. If this elective job were eliminated, the governor should be authorized to nominate a new LG if that office became vacant, subject to confirmation by both houses of the legislature. This would parallel the process used to fill the office of Vice President of the United States in case of a vacancy.
Let's demand the new legislature in 2011 begin the process of amending the state constitution to make these changes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) For example, if Republicans voted en masse for Spencer Coggs for LG in the Democratic primary, they would virtually assure the election of the Republican ticket. (Don't tell them!)
Milwaukee Journal Sentinel editorial, Sept. 2, 2010 (page 10A)
Wisconsin voters will be nominating Democratic and Republican candidates for these (plus other) state offices Tuesday, September 14. But should these three offices continue to be elective?
Lieutenant Governor
The only real role of this official is to succeed the governor in case he or she cannot complete the term of office. The governor may also assign duties to the LG. Our posting of August 29 recommended that each nominee for governor nominate a running-mate, instead of leaving the selection to a primary; the present system allows the selection of a nominee for LG that the governor can't stand, or one that would effectively sink the ticket. (1)
But if the office were eliminated, as suggested by the JS editorial, who would succeed the governor? The Constitution could be amended to designate some other official, such as the Attorney General or Speaker of the Assembly. The trouble is that the successor may be a member of a different political party, so that a change in the office of governor would also lead to massive changes in the entire executive branch. Moreover, if the legislature were led by the opposite party, there would be a perverse incentive to impeach and remove the governor from office.
The only way to guaranty a successor from the same party is to have the successor selected on the same ticket, as is the LG today.
State Treasurer and Secretary of State
These officials are responsible for distributing abandoned bank accounts, notarizing acts of the governor, appointing notaries, and other mundane tasks, none of which involve making policy. The JS is right that there is no need to elect them at all, especially on a partisan ballot.
All of these duties can be handled by the Department of Administration, which is controlled by the governor.
Incidentally, the Secretary of State (now Douglas J LaFollette) is second in line to become governor in case both top jobs are vacant at the same time. If this elective job were eliminated, the governor should be authorized to nominate a new LG if that office became vacant, subject to confirmation by both houses of the legislature. This would parallel the process used to fill the office of Vice President of the United States in case of a vacancy.
Let's demand the new legislature in 2011 begin the process of amending the state constitution to make these changes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) For example, if Republicans voted en masse for Spencer Coggs for LG in the Democratic primary, they would virtually assure the election of the Republican ticket. (Don't tell them!)
posted by Gerald S Glazer at 10:01 AM
1 Comments:
Yes, great idea. Indeed let's just get rid of all of them. All we really need are the police and firemen, the rest of government employess are useless.
All the other employess do is to take our money or to waste our money.
Let's start with the mayor and governor.
Post a Comment
<< Home