The Sidney herald., 1955-05-19
MONTANA THIS E

legislature repeatedly had turned
him down.
Oddly, distrust of the people
regarding a constitutional conyen-
ton comes from both the right
and the left of political and eco
nomlc thinking in Montana. Each
appears to fear that the other
would have the advantage. Each
tears 1t would lose something it
now has in the fundamental laws.
C~oncelvably a constitutional con-
vention would be inadvisable, but
certainly not because the people
Of Montana are less capable of
passing on their basic laws than
they were in 1889 when Montana
was admitted to the Union.
Another argument is that a
constitutional convention should
be deferred "until times are nor
NAL" Times are never normal.
And SO far as the functioning of
our state government, in some re-
spectS, is concerned, that is not
normal either and, whatever the
answer may be, consideration
should be given to corrective mea-
sures.
For several years rather inten-
sive study has been given to i'm
proving the fiscal operations of
the state government. The system
could be streamlined, but that
probably would require a whole
series of constitutional amend
ments.
What disturbs me more than
anything else is the growing con-
fict between the So-caIled coordi-
nate branches of the government.
On one hand, the legislature is
1rylng to make continuing studies
its own - interim studies that
,an be translated into legislation.
the other hand, certain officers
n the executive department have
been resisting, generally with
.uccesS, delving by the legislature
nto the functioning of the execu-
department. In Montana. as
n washington, D. c., efforts are
'elng made to curb the scope of
legislative activity. The majority
I our state supreme court have
cen anything but sympathetic TO
ne legislatures point of view. bit
nee Horace Davis of Billings be-
anne a member of the tribunal
bout five months ago, there are
lggestions of a changed prevail Z
lg attitude on the court. !
Early in 1854 a majority of the :
0urt held the legislative council )
Of 1858 unconstitutional for :
sveral reasons. One was that the :
undertook to extend the terms
the legislators on the council n
4yond the term for which thew I
ere elected. Another was that {
aging their expenses while at
ndlng council meetings was
improvisation in addition to that :,
lowed by the constitution. T
Just why the 1855 legislature e
q not submit a constitutional n
aendment correcting these Il
'lnts | do not know. But the as
mbly passed a legislative inter D.
act which the lawmakers fl
emed to think met the supreme C.
urt'S objections. That is true as
the term of service of the six q
majors and six representatives h;
the commission, but I doubt dl
lether the objective was met as W
the payment of expenses. dl
In any event, Governor Aron- w
I was the only one of the three OF
'mbers of the state board of OF
who would approve the er
penseS claims. Hence the matter tn
. be back in the lap of the su- So
eme court. Meanwhile there is di
lie work the interim committee w
l do. On
This contention between the an
lslature and high executive de- w
'tment officers, with the su- er
9me court in the middle. is not
I'd for the state. If the consti- &c
ION is impotent to deal with be