USA > Massachusetts > Commonwealth history of Massachusetts, colony, province and state, volume 5 > Part 5
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33 | Part 34 | Part 35 | Part 36 | Part 37 | Part 38 | Part 39 | Part 40 | Part 41 | Part 42 | Part 43 | Part 44 | Part 45 | Part 46 | Part 47 | Part 48 | Part 49 | Part 50 | Part 51 | Part 52 | Part 53 | Part 54 | Part 55 | Part 56 | Part 57 | Part 58 | Part 59 | Part 60 | Part 61 | Part 62 | Part 63 | Part 64 | Part 65 | Part 66 | Part 67 | Part 68 | Part 69 | Part 70 | Part 71 | Part 72 | Part 73 | Part 74 | Part 75
COMMISSION ON ADMINISTRATION AND FINANCE (1921-1930)
The reorganized state departments had been in action scarcely two years before a special investigating commission on state administration and expenditures, established by the legislature of 1921, known as the Webster Commission, was recommending a further consolidation of departments. It urged that in place of the twenty administrative and ten executive departments, there be fifteen administrative and four executive departments. It also recommended that the heads of the nine large administrative departments should constitute, with the governor, an administrative cabinet in order to bring the governor into more intimate contact with administrative problems and to promote the adoption of com- mon administrative policies. None of these suggestions were adopted by the legislature, but the commission's recommenda- tion for the establishment of a commission on administration and finance was put into effect by the General Court in 1922 and the commission was appointed late in the same year. The
33
ADMINISTRATION AND FINANCE
supervisor of administration was abolished and his duties to prepare budget data for the governor, to classify and stand- ardize salaries and to supervise the state printing were trans- ferred to the new commission. In addition, the bookkeeping functions of the state treasurer and the accounting functions of the auditor were transferred to the comptroller's bureau of the new commission. The commission was to consist of four commissioners and was to be organized in three bureaus, -a comptroller's bureau, a budget commissioner and a pur- chasing agent. Serving under the commission was to be a division of personnel and standardization, under a director, to take charge of the classification of appointive offices and positions in the state service, except those in the judicial and legislative branches. The division was also to undertake de- partment research "tending to greater co-ordination and standardization of administration." Thus, the ten-year move- ment which began with the establishment of the Commission on Economy and Efficiency in 1912 had flowered to substan- tial achievement. A combination of forces looking toward a better administrative policy resulted from legislation between 1918 and 1922, which included the setting up of a budget sys- tem, the consolidation of state activities into twenty depart- ments, and the systematic control of personal service and the expansion of powers of former governmental agencies through the creation of the commission on administration and finance. These various factors are so interwoven that to none of them can be given entire credit for the record of the past decade in governmental efficiency; but their combination has produced a notable result. The commission on adminis- tration and finance, acting for a succession of chief execu- tives anxious for the best business administration possible, and using the new machinery provided by the legislature, has placed Massachusetts in the forefront of all American com- monwealths in the efficient handling of governmental prob- lems. One of the first policies adopted was the so-called 'pay-as-you-go policy" by which it was decided that the Com- monwealth, as such, would not issue bonds but would finance its needs from current income as these needs were demon- strated. In 1901, the net direct debt of the Commonwealth was, in round numbers, $11,700,000. This debt steadily rose
34
STATE GOVERNMENT
until it reached its peak in 1919, at $40,400,000. The appli- cation of business principles to government halted the in- crease in the net direct debt at that point and from 1919 to the present date there has been a steady decline, until at the beginning of the fiscal year 1930, the net direct debt was the extremely low figure of $11,181,000. The net state debt, therefore, at the beginning of 1930, was approximately 28% of that in 1919 and showed a reduction in ten years of 72%. The result of this debt reduction has been the reduction of the interest payments from a high peak of over $2,000,000 in 1919 to $890,000 in 1930, or a saving in the one item of interest on the direct debt of nearly $1,200,000.
In 1922, the last year under the old policy of partial con- trol of state printing, the total cost for paper and printing was $662,000. This was reduced so that in 1927 it reached a low figure of $328,000-or less than one-half the cost five years earlier. These are some of the outstanding results of the definite application of business principles to government ; and for these results the commission on administration and finance takes at least a partial credit.
DIRECT LEGISLATION-SUBMISSION OF QUESTIONS TO THE VOTERS (1881-1916)
In 1894 a majority of the justices of the Supreme Judicial Court advised the legislature that a general act could not be made to take effect throughout the Commonwealth upon its acceptance by the voters of the state. The measure which the legislature desired to submit was one granting women the right to vote in municipal elections. In 1881 they had been granted the right to vote for school committee. Since then, the question that raised the issue has been settled in favor of the women, but the General Court, after having en- joyed for a period of five years the right to submit a general bill to a state-wide referendum, was deprived of that privilege when Article XLII of the Amendments to the Constitution, adopted in 1913, was repealed in 1918 by the amendment establishing the initiative and a different kind of referendum. In short, the voters were then authorized to challenge by popu- lar vote an act of the legislature, but the legislature itself was
35
PUBLIC OPINION LAW
deprived of the right of submission which the people had conferred upon them at the election of 1913. No constitu- tional grant was ever deemed necessary to empower the legislature to submit to the voters of a city or town a local act for acceptance or rejection. The legislature has also fre- quently exercised the right to pass a general act to take effect in the cities and towns accepting it. But four acts were sub- mitted to a state-wide referendum under the forty-second amendment during the five years of its retention in the con- stitution. All were affirmed. One granted a Saturday half- holiday to the state-employed laborers, and another made New Year's day a legal holiday. In 1914, the voters ratified an act abolishing "party enrollment" of voters for primaries, only to approve its revival two years later. The results of the two votes on party enrollment show how important is the form of the question submitted. The legislature referring the question of reenacting party enrollment did not in terms present the converse of the question first submitted, but pre- sented the issue under the persuasive description: "Shall an act passed by the General Court in the year nineteen hundred and sixteen, entitled, 'An Act to prevent the voters of one political party from voting in the primaries of another politi- cal party' be approved and become law?"
447383 PUBLIC OPINION LAW (1913-1920)
In 1913, the legislature passed the celebrated "public opin- 1
ion law" providing for the submission to the voters of sena- torial and representative districts, on petition of a certain number of voters in each, of questions of "public policy." This advisory referendum is based on the provision of the Declaration of Rights, securing the right of the people "to give instructions to their representatives"-an echo of the town meeting of the revolutionary days. While an expression of opinion registered under this device, unlike the popular initiative, places nothing upon the statute book, a preponderant vote on a live issue is sure to exert great influence upon the attitude of the senator or representative whose constituents express their views. In 1928, the opponents of constitutional prohibition took advantage of the law to obtain an expression
36
STATE GOVERNMENT
of opinion as to whether the senators of certain districts should be instructed to memorialize Congress to take action for the repeal of the Eighteenth Amendment. The time- honored practice of the General Court in memorializing Con- gress on federal questions has had the effect of rendering the public opinion law applicable to questions of national interest. Thus, the intelligent Massachusetts electorate is converted by this law into a plebiscitary laboratory on all manner of political questions. In 1926, the voters in the Malden representative districts registered their disapproval of the entry of the United States into the League of Nations. But when the voters in certain districts were asked to express their views on non-contributory old-age pensions or on the question of tax-exempted property,-matters of state policy, -the interest was slight.
In 1920, the public opinion law of 1913 was supplemented by an act providing for the permissive submission to the voters of amendments to the federal constitution, pending their ratification or rejection by the legislature. This act has never been utilized, but the General Court in 1924, when confronted with the proposed "child labor" amendment to the federal constitution, referred the advisability of ratifica- tion to the voters in a manner slightly differing from that laid down in the 1920 act. The negative vote returned re- sulted in the rejection of the amendment at the 1925 session. Another "straw vote" was ordered for the election of 1924,- that on retaining "daylight saving," so called. The majority in favor of retention was substantial.
APPLICATION OF THE INITIATIVE AND REFERENDUM
(1919-1930)
In their effect on legislative procedure the Initiative and Referendum clauses have presented many perplexing prob- lems of statutory drafting. Whether a pending bill falls within their scope and may not, therefore, take immediate effect without an emergency preamble is a question frequently arising. The "I. & R." amendment has exerted a wider influence on Massachusetts legislation collaterally than di- rectly.
37
INITIATIVE AND REFERENDUM
Through the referendum, eight acts of the legislature have been submitted to the voters beginning in 1919, with an equal number accepted and rejected. A prohibitory liquor enforcement act has been rejected and another sustained; an act providing censorship of moving-picture films has been rejected and likewise an act imposing a tax on gasoline sales. Notwithstanding this popular verdict against such a tax, the legislature four years later, convinced that the question had been misunderstood, again enacted such a tax and the measure escaped a referendum. The voters have also vetoed under the referendum an act, aimed at labor organizations, render- ing voluntary associations suable. Acts authorizing savings banks to place deposits on interest monthly, requiring district attorneys to be members of the bar and regulating "immi- grant banks" have been upheld.
Initiative petitions on seven different measures have reached the General Court since 1919. More has been placed upon the statute books by the initiative than has been barred by the referendum. The first was a bill to authorize the licensing and sale of certain nonintoxicating beverages. The legisla- ture in 1920 had passed the bill on an ordinary petition, only to be vetoed by Governor Coolidge. Its supporters promptly availed themselves of the initiative. The legislature of 1920 failed to pass it over the veto, but the people promptly adopted it by a close vote. Because of Federal legislation under the Eighteenth Amendment, it has never been in effect. Another initiative bill dealt with legalized Sunday professional sports. An initiative measure seeking to substitute for the absolute civil-service preference given to veterans a mild percentage preference was defeated by the voters in 1926. The initiative measure making Armistice Day a holiday was enacted by the legislature, as submitted in 1928.
The initiative has also resulted in the enactment of two measures without submission to popular vote, due to passage by the General Court of "legislative substitutes" that proved acceptable to the petitioners,-in 1920, an act for the purchase of State forests and in 1924 one for the psychiatric examina- tion of certain prisoners.
In 1927 occurred a most ingenious attempt to secure, under an initiative law, an expression of popular opinion or "straw
38
STATE GOVERNMENT
vote" on the question of repealing the Eighteenth Amend- ment to the federal constitution. Two popular votes, in case. of legislative refusal to pass the initiative bill, were contem- plated. The people were to vote that they be directed to vote on the expediency of such repeal,-a popular vote to have a popular vote. The justices of the Supreme Judicial Court advised the General Court that such a proposal was not within the purview of the Initiative and Referendum Amend- ment. Those desiring to obtain a popular expression on the question of constitutional prohibition thereupon proceeded with greater success under the "public opinion law."
EFFECT OF INITIATIVE AND REFERENDUM (1919-1930)
The net result of the insertion of the I. & R. amendment through the year 1928 has been the enactment of five ini- tiative measures, one of which has never been effective and three of which were substantially enacted by the General Court without popular vote, and probably would have been passed in any event. The measure providing for professional Sunday sports is the outstanding achievement of the popular initiative. The referendum defeated motion-picture censor- ship and delayed the adoption of the gasoline tax. The referendum provisions of the amendment have seriously complicated ordinary law-making processes necessitating the specific adoption of emergency preambles and taxing the guess- ing powers of legislators and their advisors, as well as of the courts.
THE EXECUTIVE VETO
Students of state government in the United States have deplored the absence of a strong executive with general con- trol of the administration. This criticism has been less applic- able to the Massachusetts governorship than to that of most of the other states. In Massachusetts, as elsewhere, the supreme administrative authority has been the legislature. The fram- ers of our constitution were careful to establish a "govern- ment of laws and not of men," not only as affecting the making of laws but also their administration. The Massachusetts legislature has always been a great organ of administration,
39
THE EXECUTIVE VETO
-state, county, metropolitan district and municipal, and a large part of its annual output, though in the form of acts and resolves, consists of nothing more than administrative orders, directions and dispensations.
The governor, through his veto, has always been a powerful factor in all the activities of the general court, both legislative and administrative. In 1918, he was given by constitutional amendment the affirmative power to recommend amendments to measures submitted by the legislature and also the right to veto items in appropriation bills. In practice, these exten- sions of his constitutional powers have proved of slight im- portance, due to the governor's extra-constitutional relations with the general court. Although the measures are few which occasion division in the legislature on party lines, the position of the governor as a party chief inevitably makes him a leader in law-making, especially when, as is usually the case, his party is in control of the general court. While there is no provision in the original state constitution, correspond- ing to that in the federal constitution authorizing him "from time to time to give to the legislature information," such a power has developed in our unwritten state constitution and much important legislation has been enacted based upon the inaugural addresses and messages of the governor.
Another feature of our extraconstitutional growth anti- cipated the fifty-sixth amendment of 1918 and has resulted in its rarely being used. In recent years, the governor has exer- cised a powerful influence over legislation by requesting that bills be "recalled" by the Senate for the purpose of suggested amendment. This is a far more convenient process than that provided by the fifty-sixth amendment, for it commits the governor to no particular form of change, it relieves his ad- visors of the responsibility of formulating and drafting the suggested amendment and is sometimes resorted to for the purpose of defeating a measure without an executive veto. This process is also availed of for the purpose of giving the governor more time than the five days provided in the constitu- tion for the consideration of measures submitted for his ap- proval. This practice of "recalling" bills will doubtless be of less frequent occurrence whenever the governor and the legis- lative majority are of a different political faith. During the
40
STATE GOVERNMENT
dozen years that the fifty-sixth amendment has been a part of the constitution, the governorship and the general court have been in uninterrupted control of a single party. Under other political conditions, the amendment may prove more useful.
EFFECT OF APPOINTING POWER OF THE GOVERNOR
The governor also exercises a powerful influence by his constitutional and statutory power of appointment. But four State administrative officers, other than the lieutenant-gover- nor and executive council, are elective : the state secretary, the state treasurer, the attorney-general and the auditor. The governor's non-participation in their selection does not ma- terially reduce his administrative control. The powers of the auditor have nearly all been transferred to the comptroller, -appointed and removable by the governor and council; those of the state secretary are largely of a ministerial and routine character; the treasurer's most important duty may be per- formed only with the approval of the governor and council, while others have been transferred to the comptroller; and the marked decline in recent years in the caliber of lawyers elected to the office of attorney-general has necessitated the appointment of a competent force of assistant attorneys-gen- eral whose compensation is fixed by the governor and council. The vesting by statute in the governor and council of the right to remove as well as to appoint department heads and even many of their subordinates, authorizing the division of per- sonnel and standardization of the commission on administra- tion and finance, a department directly under the governor's control, to classify for salary and other purposes the great bulk of administrative officers and positions under rules and regulations approved by the governor and council, the greatly extended authority of the governor over appropriations and finances by the budget and borrowing amendments to the constitution, the growing tendency of the general court to extend the rule-making power of administrative boards and officials subject to the approval of the governor and council, -have made the governorship a dominating position in the conduct of the state's business. The official machinery pro- vided by the constitution and the legislature have made it pos-
41
THE GOVERNOR
sible for strong and efficient governors to achieve much for the welfare of the state. And by this same machinery the office has been made safe for mediocrity. One of the most irksome of the executive constitutional duties has been the granting of reprieves, pardons and paroles. The establish- ment of the board of parole, which also acts as an advisory board of pardons, and the recent enactment of legislation empowering the courts to grant reprieves, constitute important features in the recent history of the executive branch.
THE GENERAL COURT: GENERAL AND SPECIAL LAWS
Recent changes affecting procedure in the General Court have been set forth elsewhere in this work. The most serious criticism that can be brought against our General Court, pro- nounced by the late Professor Reinsch, in his "American Legislatures and Legislative Methods" as "in all respects nearest the people, and most responsive of any American legislature to intelligent public opinion" is its practice of pass- ing so many local and special laws. This weakness is tersely put by Dr. Hanford of Harvard University: "About half of the actual output of the legislature, and even a larger pro- portion of the bills introduced, consist of special and local measures authorizing cities and towns to borrow beyond their debt limits; granting pensions to specified local employees; changing the name of city officers; creating public utility, charitable, and educational corporations ; regulating the loca- tion of garages in a particular city; authorizing a specified charitable society to acquire property ; authorizing a particular city to sell or lease certain land held by it for playground purposes ; authorizing the registration of Mary Jones as a chiropodist without examination, etc. Then, too, there are numerous measures regulating the details of administration which should fall within the jurisdiction of some department or commission. In 1923, out of a total of 494 acts, there were 259 general acts and 235 special ones."
From 1915 to 1923, inclusive, 2819 general acts were passed, as against 2606 special acts. The criticism is not new. In 1872, Governor Washburn, and in 1882 Governor Long, in their inaugurals, called attention to the evil. But
42
STATE GOVERNMENT
much has been accomplished to correct it, and hardly a ses- sion passes without the enactment of a group of laws designed to lessen the volume of special legislation. The subject en- gaged the attention of the recent constitutional convention and the English system of "provisional orders" was con- sidered; but without result. President Gaspar G. Bacon of the Senate has recently given great impetus to the reform by introducing a group of bills, several of which have been enacted, which will avoid the necessity of much particular legislation. One of these directs the Senate and House counsel and department heads, as opportunity offers, to rec- ommend the passage of general laws in place of special.
CONTINUOUS CONSOLIDATION OF THE GENERAL LAWS (1882-1930)
With the exception of the adoption of the initiative and referendum and the introduction of the budget, the most far- reaching legislative reform in recent years has been "the continuous consolidation of the general laws." Governor Long in 1882, as a means of avoiding the periodic revision of the statutes that had come to occur about every twenty years, recommended the appointment of "a permanent officer -perhaps the assistant attorney-general-to edit the general laws of each session, and also to prepare from year to year, and keep on hand in manuscript, for the use of the Legislature, just such a consolidation of the general laws, with marginal notes and other details, as is now, at great cost and delay, made at long intervals. . . . When, fifteen or twenty years hence, it shall become desirable to print and publish a revision of the statutes, that work will be already done."
Not until the special session of 1920 was Governor Long's suggestion put into effect, by a measure signed by Governor Calvin Coolidge. The committee on rules of each branch was authorized to appoint "a skilled person," to act as counsel to the Senate and House of Representatives. These officials were to assist members and committees of the legislature in drafting bills, particularly the committees on bills in the third reading. They were to tabulate annually the changes in the laws, prepare the annual index, submit to the General
43
UNIFORM STATE LAWS
Court necessary changes and corrections in the laws and keep a master copy of all the laws as changed, for public inspection. They were to draft all bills proposed for legislation as general statutes in the form of specific amendments to the General Laws. Since 1920, their duties have been enlarged to include recommendations for the repeal of obsolete laws and the substitution of general for special laws. Department heads have been required to submit to the counsel drafts of legisla- tion proposed in their annual reports. From time to time, the General Laws and their amendments, together with a revised index, probably will be republished in lieu of the old style revision.
Writing of the new plan in the Massachusetts Law Quar- terly for February, 1922, Speaker Benjamin Loring Young, who was chiefly instrumental in putting the plan into effect, declared that "no general consolidation should ever be needed in the future. At convenient intervals of ten years or there- abouts, the official copy of the laws, corrected each year by the Counsel to the Senate and House of Representatives with a permanent index also corrected to date, can be issued at comparatively slight expense . . . and with little delay or inconvenience to members of the Bench or Bar." Thus was taken an "important step forward in the mechanics of law making."
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.