OCR Text |
Show A SMe Problem: Govt Philosophy Controversy over the recent reorganization of the Utah Legislature may be just one facet of a larger problem concerning the state's basic philosophy on governmental operation. This point was brought out by Utah Foundation, Founda-tion, the private research organization or-ganization in an analysis of the legislative reorganization effected last year. ACCORDING TO the Foundation Foun-dation report, the real issue may be the on-going question of whether Utah should stick to its traditional pattern of limited legislative activity, conducted by cuizen-legisla-lors who represent a cross-section cross-section of the community. Some legislators have urged extended sessions and the development of "career" legislators who devote full working lime to this pursuit. To date, Utah voters have shown a preference for the historic pattern of citizen-legislators citizen-legislators and limited sessions, ses-sions, although the move to annual sessions in 1970 may be viewed as a step in the opposite op-posite direction. CONTROVERSY OVER the reorganization program gcxs into the larger question, the Foundation notes. Critics charge that expanded involvement invol-vement of legislators in interim activity is a move toward the full-time professional profes-sional legislator. Supporters of reorganization, however, assert that only by thus spreading the workload and by providing adequate professional staff assistance can the citizen-legislator be preserved, interim work requirements have become so heavy, it is argued, that it could not be carried by a few individuals without their having hav-ing to sacrifice their professional profes-sional and business interests. Extensive reorganization of legislative activity was effected ef-fected in 197!S, abolishing the former Legislative Council and Jomt Budget and Audit. Legal Services, and Legislative Legisla-tive Operations Committees, the Foundation noted in a research report released this week. UNDER THE reorganization reorganiza-tion plan, all legislators participate par-ticipate in interim activities previously conducted by the relatively few legislators assigned as-signed to the Council and the three joint committees. All members of the Legislature are also assigned to subcommittees subcom-mittees of the Joint Appropriations Committee in a program launched when Utah adopted annual legislative legisla-tive sessions in 1970. Sessions in even-numbered years are limited to 20 days and restricted primarily to consideration con-sideration of matters directly affecting the state budget. Broad-based participation has proved highly controversial, controver-sial, the Foundation reports. Critics charge that committees commit-tees are overloaded, that many members are neither technically qualified nor deeply interested in important impor-tant subject areas to which they are assigned, and that "hard" decisions are rarely reached in politically-sensitive areas. SUPPORTERS OF legislative legisla-tive reorganization, on the other hand, feel that the program provides better continuity con-tinuity between interim and in session activity and that it effectively answers the charges of "rule by clique" that were brought against the old system "Regardless of the merit, or lact of merit, ol the new program, many observers feel that existing patterns are unlikely to be changed," the Foundation reports. "The rank and file of legislator are believed unlikely to relinquish the positions they now hold, and return control of critical areas to a designated desig-nated few." AN IMPORTANT feature of the reorganization program was esiablishment o( (he office of-fice of Legislative Auditor, the Found ji ion points out. In establishing this office, by constitutional amendment and subsequent statutory provision. Utah did not abolish the office of elected State Auditor and now has two separate auditing authorities. The two offices have to date worked without serious conflict, but this appears to be due primarily to the ability of the two incumbents to work harmoniously. With the certainty cer-tainty of a new elected auditor next year (the State Auditor may not serve consecutive terms under the Utah Constitution) Consti-tution) the future appears somewhat uncertain. WHILE THERE are no legal definitions of how the workload should be divided between the two auditors. Utah Foundation suggests that duties could be divided by assigning the verification of past records primarily to the elected auditor and having hav-ing the legislative auditor emphasize performance audits to insure that legislative legisla-tive intent is followed in the expenditure of state funds. |