Montana labor news., 1935-01-17
Arguments Pro and Con
on County Consolidation
BY Albert Blumenthal

The whole civilized world is gripped
by the idea OF conducting government
intelligently, in the interests of all OF
the people, and according to longtime
plans. The general focus of attention
has been upon attempts to improve the
national governments so that they will
be tier instruments to serve the peo-
.p' = n the United States we are now
a Q TO witness a similar wave of in
4 3 in improving statep county, and
3 governments. Our own state Of
: tana is in the forefront Of this
6 ement. In the name Of better
g eminent we are considering the
= ical proposition of greatly reducing
$ number of our counties. Let US
Tempt to make a brief and unpreju-
ced summary Of the situation.
Montana now has fifty-six counties.
S this the ideal number of counties
or Montana? If not, should the num-
Der be increased or decreased? No
one is proposing that the number
should be increased but many are con
WINGED that it should be decreased. If
So, to what extent should the number
of counties be decreased?
The government of Montana exists
to serve the people Of this state and it
is paid for by them. If the present and
probable future amount of state and
county governmental services can be
had for significantly less money by
consolidating counties, obviosuly
ties should be consolidated. 1t is
purely a matter Of dollars and cents.
But before we decide one way or the
other we must demand detailed and
convincing proof of eonsolidationists
that their plan actually will result in
a considerable saving. Estimates OF
savings have appeared in papers of the
state, but these figures and their sup
porting argument smack of superfici-
atty. The theory of consolidation
sounds very pretty but how will it
work in practice? Are the %consolida-
%tionists being carried off by their en-
thusiasm so that they exaggerate the
tax savings of their plan? Indeed, in
the long run might we not lose money
by wholesale combining of counties?
The county governmental structure
OF this state is now organized for
growth. Why break it up and place
ourselves in danger Of being forced
to break it up again later when the
state has grown in population? A
heavy part of the overhead of the pre-
sent system has already been made in
the building Of court houses. The
argument that these can be utilized as
school houses is nonsense i'll many in
stances of small county seats which
are not growing and already have good
school houses. Furthermore, a special
type of architecture is recognized to
be necessary to meet the requirements
OF school children. And with an ad-
ditional amount of county business to
be carried on in larger counties, their
courthouses would have to be enlarged
at no small expense.
There are many residents of smaller
counties who are dubious about the
supposed financial gains Of wholesale
consolidation. They are in favor of
consolidation when this is the desire
OF the voters OF the particular counties
concerned but they are opposed to
having consolidation forced upon coun-
ties by a vote of the state as a whole.
lust where to draw the line between
the rights of individual counties and
of the state as a whole is a mooted
question which probably will be settled
more by a series of political maneu-
vers than by rational consideration.
Happy and prosperous small counties
may find themselves strangely help
less in attempts to preserve their auto
nomy in the face of a state majority
vote for consolidation.
After only casual consideration Of
the implications OF forced %consolida-
ton, many voters assert that they are
in favor OF it. They are so accustom-
ed to assuming that government is in
herently poor that they are too ready
to believe that the present county plan
is unbearable and nonsensically in
efficient. But if we suppose that there
will be financial gains from the pro-
posed plan, how large will they be?
Will these gains be large enough to
warrant throwing out Of employment
countless persons whose livelihood de-
ponds upon continuation of the exist
ing system?
Opponents of forced consolidation
see it as political greed disguised as
an economic matter. They see it as
a grasping for political power on the
part Of political machines of the more
populous counties. In any case, con-
solidation will result in the substitu-
ton Of the advantages and evils Of
large-scale county politics for the adj
vantage and evils OF small-scale county
politics. The politics Of the state will
be placed in the hands of fewer boss
es. 1t has been argued that this will
maize If eaeier for nowarft,1 financial