Keeping government accountable

This column originally appeared in the Williston Observer on March 13, 2008.

Keeping government accountable

Of the fifty states in the union, Vermont and New Hampshire are unique in the terms that each gives its governor. Every other state allows the governor to sit for four years. We and our neighbor allow only two years. Is this a good thing? Or should it change?

This is the question the Snelling Center for Government has been asking Vermonters for the past couple of years. The reason the Center is asking now has everything to do with the calendar -- which I'll explain shortly.

The poll the Center cites on its website was taken in 2006, and reveals tepid support for the idea of a four-year term for governor. Only 53 percent of those polled agreed it was a good idea; 39 percent were against it.

The effort, as they say, has some legs. Governor Jim Douglas has endorsed the idea, and in January, some of Vermont's most popular former governors came to the statehouse to discuss the issue. Madeleine Kunin spoke out in favor of the idea, while Howard Dean spoke out against it. The fact that both Kunin and Dean are dyed-in-the-wool Democrats illustrates that this issue is not a partisan one. It goes to the very heart of what one believes is more important: effective government or responsive government.

Personally, I prefer the shorter term for our executive branch. I understand and acknowledge the arguments for the four-year term. Chief among them is the one I find most convincing -- it would allow the governor to concentrate on governing and not on politicking.

Money, and the need to raise it, does have a corrupting influence on politics. Its influence at the state level, where laws that most affect our lives are made and enforced, is particularly worrisome. Any attempt to lessen its influence needs to be taken seriously.

Even given this, though, I think it is far more important that we have elected leaders who have to frequently return to the people to justify the retention of their office. Elections are the only way for the people to directly influence the governorship. Vermont has no recall provision; impeachment must be conducted by the legislature.

The question of term length is timely for a reason that most Vermonters probably do not know. The current two-year term is set in the Vermont constitution, and the only way to change it is through amendment. Amendment of the U.S. Constitution is simple in comparison to the cumbersome method devised for the Vermont constitution.

Specifically, amendments can only be proposed in every other biennial legislature, beginning with the one that convened in 1975. That means that this session of the legislature must propose an amendment, or it will have to wait until 2011. To move along, the amendment must pass by a two-thirds vote of the Senate, and then by a majority of the House.

The amendment then must lay over to the next session of the legislature, and it must pass the House and Senate again, though only by a majority of each. Finally, the amendment must be presented to the people for a vote, and must then be approved by a statewide majority.

According to the Snelling Center, named of course for the late, venerable Governor Richard Snelling, the process went all the way through to the statewide vote once in the early 1970's, but failed there. Though the Center's polling in 2006 indicated support for the idea, it seems the people may now, as then, be having second thoughts.

According to a WCAX poll conducted in February, only 33% of those polled thought the four-year term was a good idea; 48% thought it was not. The amendment, PR0004, is currently in the Senate Government Operations committee for hearings. My hope is that after reasoned debate, it dies there.

We Vermonters like being a little quirky, but those quirks are seldom random. We have our reasons for doing what we do. In this case, I think Vermonters have taken a look at the effectiveness versus responsiveness debate, and decided not to chance it. I think our best bet will be to have leaders, whether new or incumbent, who can be both responsive and effective. When you scrutinize the candidates for the upcoming gubernatorial election, keep that in mind.