The Bismarck tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, N.D.) 1916-current, 1931-03-19

SMALL, & LEv1NGs
Incorporated
Formerly q. Logan Payne 60.
CHICAGO NEW YORK BOSTON
Seven Vetoes
Governor deorge F. shafer Monday vetoed three meas
ures passed by the state legislature and Tuesday swung
the axe on four more. He thereby contributes his bit,
In a direct manner, to the political Issues OF the next
state campaign.
The bills vetoed Monday were not Of tremendous I'M
portance, although two Of them, that reducing the pay
allowed to sheriffs for mileage, and the one placing Inc
state hail department on > budget, we're the suoJect ol
bitter controversy in the legislature.
The third bill would have enabled sheriffs TO nHe
deputies to collect delinquent personal property taxes
paying them . percentage Of the taxes collected IN lieu
Of salary or travel allowance.
The governor vetoed this enactment on the ground
that it was contrary to public policy, ana oououesS
MANY will agree with him. The state already proWoeS
sufficient machinery to collect these levies. II 1t Is nos
done it is because officials charged With the duty 1MA
to perform it. Another factor is the possibility tnas'
where the amount Of pay depended on tho amount :"
lected, serious evils would crop up.
No honest citizen approves Of tax dodgers or OF TAX
dodeine. for the man who fails to pay his just assess
ment merely increases the burden OF his ne1ghbor. Inc
fact that the legislature enacted the bill, however -
clear evidence that the legislature felt there was q neeu
for it. and that there were reasonable arguments for II.
The veto Of the bill budgeting the hail department IS
not likely to arouse much political protest, unless J"
comes from within the ranks OF the governors own parry.
The measure was enacted by the l. V. A. legHlatSe
majority and opposed by the almost solid Nonpartlsan
minority. BY his veto. therefore, the governor ahsne
himself with his political opponents on this one meas
ure. It was q surprising move in view OF the governors
marked party regularity on most issues.
The veto Of the sheriffs mileage enactment, however
is liable to develop political heat. although who Will get
burned remains q question.
With the fetish of economy held out before 1t, the
legislature started to economic and one OF the means
selected for this process was the reduction OF travel az
lowances to public, officials. Items coming under drect
fire were those for sheriffs and county super1n'enoen's
Of schools.
The school superintendents were getting 10 Genus q
mile and the sheriffs 20, so the legislature passed laws
cutting the allowance of the school superintendent to
1917 cents and the sheriffs to Is cents tor vehicle traVel
and eight cents for travel by rail.
Advocates of the measures claimed they would reouce
the tax burden by promoting economy and contenoeo
that the mileage p~erquisite was being overWoTkeo oy
the holders Of these offices.
All of the arguments which the governor advanced
were heard time and again during the discussion IN the
two legislative branches. Instead Of suggesting a new
idea, therefore. he merely threw himself on the s'oe Oh
the minority legislative group.
Since the matter was not a party issue in the legis-
lature, the governors party fealty was not al STAKE III
his veto. It may be expected, however, that his opposl-
ton at the next election, If the governor Is q Candidate
will use this veto to illustrate charges that the governor
is not really interested in governmental economy.
The further fact that he signed the bill reducing the
allowance to school superintendent and vetoed that
pertaining to sheriffs will hardly be overlooked.
Tuesdays grst saw the veto Of bills providing tor
the manufacture Of collins at the state prison: proVld-
ing for the judicial review of the findings and decisions
OF the state workmens compensation bureau; permit
ting increased taxes in unorganized townships and
authorizing county commissioners to make tax levies 1or
schools under certain circumstances.
OF these, the veto Of the bll. pertaining to the review
Of decisions Of the workmen,s compensation bureau also
seems destined to develop controversy. Here, again, the
governor sides largely with the Nonparhsan minority
which opposed the bill in the legislature.
It was the second time in four years that such a bill
has been vetoed, the late Governor A. G. sorlie having
rejected a similar enactment at the 1927 legislative SEES
sion. At that time the bill was labelled as an I. v. A.
party measure and was passed on that basis.
II the forces which made the measure a party issue
in 1927 and which forced its passage at the recent ses-
sion still are active-and It Is only fair to assume that
they are-the governor may have some explanations to
make to important members Of his own political faction.
The fact that the reasons given for the veto are
sound and that most persons will agree with the execu-
tive may make little difference to those who have fought
for the enactment Of such a measure. In view Of the
fact that It would have been much easier for the gov
ernor to have signed the bill and let the courts thresh
out the question Of its application, his stand probably
viii b given appreciation by students Of government.
The need Of introducing . new industry at the prison
to provide employment for the inmates is apparent to
everyone. That the manufacture Of coffirs is the proper
thing, however, seems doubtful.
It seems possible that the Legislature, in Its rush, failed
70 rive careful euough consideration to this matter and