If you became Governor - what would you do?

A poll published online May 10, 2010 by The Providence Business News asks the question

What should be the new governor’s top priority upon taking office in January 2011?

Readers are asked to select from 5 options.

1. Balancing state and local budgets 12 votes (33%)

2. Economic development/job creation 15 votes (42%)

3. Improving elementary, secondary and post-secondary education 3 votes (8%)

4. Improving the state's tax environment 5 votes (14%)

5. Implementing a robust energy and environmental protection policy 1 vote (3%)


These are very early and preliminary votes but it does suggest what the mind of the public expect from a governor. and their ignorance of what a governor in Rhode Island can be expected to do.

1. Balancing the budget

Given the Rhode Island Constitution and despite the long overdue separations of powers act, balancing the state budget is a legislative function. The most the Governor can be expected to do is:

a. to recommend a balanced budget to the legislature,
b. to manage, after the fact, a budget that the legislature approves, and
c. to do so as effectively and efficiently as circumstances and the law allow.

As for the local budgets, these are up to the local legislative bodies (town councils, boards of education, etc.)to determine and beyond the Governor's control.

So while it might be desirable to have strong leadership in the Governor's office, institutionally there is little real power here to achieve this goal without a commitment of cooperation from the General Assembly.


2. Economic development/job creation

Rhode Island is a small state that tries to behave like a big state. Localities compete as aggressively with one another for new businesses and jobs as Rhode Island does with other states. The Governor can lead here by setting some clear priorities and goals for development and by promoting the state to out of state employers. But the governor can only sell what the state has to offer and what the General Assembly will fund. These two are not always in synch.

In "Meeting the Challenge of the New Economy", the 1997 Annual report from the Rhode Island Economic Development Council, the Council listed 8 myths about Rhode Island's economy. Myth # 5 is

"by creating jobs, state and local government employment helps the economy."

The report continues,

"The Reality: The right number of state and local employees allows government to accomplish the tasks it needs to ( e.g. maintain the roads, police protection). More than we need, however, eliminates even more jobs in the moderate term by removing purchasing power from consumers and raising taxes."

This is even truer today than back in 1997, yet little has changed in terms of the Governor's ability to change labor contracts and renegotiate the long term commitments to public employees. Management, the Governor's Office, requires the legal tools to enable it to make the management decisions that creates and maintains the right number of highly trained, skilled and experience government workers to do the tasks it needs to do.

The governor does not create jobs, nor should he/she. Instead, the Governor should help create a climate that fosters private sector employment opportunities. Here again, cooperation between the GA and the Governor will be required.

3. Improving elementary, secondary and post-post secondary education.

The Governor is the public's elected CEO. Here is where the Governor can have a real impact and where real change can be brought about. Education is the most critical step in an economic and social policy. Economic development does not occur overnight, anymore than educating a child to become a productive worker does. Both are long term processes. Changing the educational environment is a leadership and policy issue. Setting that policy, especially strategic policy, is the job of even a weak Governor.

a. The first step in building and supporting a viable and adaptable system to meet the needs of students, parents, communities and employers would be to set middle and long range goals and objectives for the state's educational system. These would be based on realistic assessments of the changing workforce needs, regional and global economic trends and local and state capacity to respond to these needs would be.

b. Next would be to create and carry through a realistic plan to achieve such goals. For the next Governor it would be follow through on the work done by Dr. Gist and those involved in planning and seeking federal support through the Race to the Top grant competition.

c. Next is to build on our strengths beginning with the best talent we have. The new Governor should avoid the temptation to replace the team now in place solely to reward friends and cronies. We have seen enough of this in recent years and even recent days in the state.

d. Support for individual teachers efforts to use and share their best practices even when these are contrary to arbitrary and/or out-modded contractual work rules or administrative policies is critical. By promoting and rewarding professionalism through public recognition and professional advancement for outstanding performance would demonstrate to all the state's commitment to quality education and a quality workforce.

e. Support for the state's post secondary institutions including the technical as well as professional post secondary education at a level competitive with the rest of the region and the world would put action behind the claim that we have the well trained workforce employers are seeking

f. The Governor should also push for full funding for the plan at all levels and through all available means and would re-enforce that commitment.

4. Improving the State's Tax environment.

I realize this may go against a lot of people's gut reaction but here goes. The State's tax environment is not, nor should it be, based simple on "pricing" considerations. By this I mean, it should be based on the true cost/benefit to me to live and work here, not on my tax bill. It should be based on the real or "true" value I receive for the taxes I pay.

For example, policies which focus on "lowering my tax bill" by not fixing the bridges and roads that support my business; or provide me with workers who can not read, write, do math or think critically; or impose inconsistent and onerous laws, regulations, processes that impede my ability to conduct my business competitively; or make it impossible for me respond to a new business opportunity in a timely and competitive manner, are the hidden taxes which really create a bad tax environment.

By the same token, the value of a reliable and efficient public works department, a dependable and accessible government permitting service, a clean and safe water supply, etc. should be considered when evaluating the value you receive from paying your tax bill. For example, what is the value of the state's response during the recent floods worth to you? Or, What is the value of the life that fireman saved? These are examples of the positive value we receive for the tax bills we pay. They would be sorely missed if they weren't there.

Here is where the Governor can have a impact. He should direct the administration's efforts to address the hidden taxes imposed by the General Assembly, especially when they fail to address these issues. One way to attack this problem is to change the dialogue from "government waste" to "government value." Former seeks only to cut costs without reference to quality. The latter exposes the "hidden taxes" of government uneffectiveness and inefficiency and shifts the focus to discovering the potential the value of government services deliver by those taxes.

A policy of greater transparency, i.e. "the good, the bad, and the ugly" should be the Governor's position. The new governor should use the bully pulpit of the office to expose the smoke and mirrors of backroom deals and magical thinking that we find in the GA.

The goal is to address Myth #4 from the 1997 report.

"If it is good for business (or labor) it has to be bad for labor (or business)."

The adversarial period of 20th century business/labor relations must end. If we are to improve the tax environment for everyone in the state and compete in a 21st century global economy, we need to change the way we think about who We and They are. Here the moral leadership of the Governor's Office must come into play.


5. Implementing a robust energy and environmental protection policy

In order to implement such policies, they must be sustainable and realistic in terms of overall needs and resources available to the State and localities. The Governor can provide guidance in balancing the state's economic, and social needs as reflected in the state's energy production and consumption practices weighed against the long term hidden tax of poor or inadequate environmental regulation and enforcement. Here the Governor can provide leadership to bring competing interests together for find solutions that serve the best interests of all and not the best interest of "favored" interests.

The job of the next Governor is to create a political climate where all parties feel that they have been dealt with in fairness. This will go a long way in creating a physical, economic, social and political environment that supports the public's and State's immediate and long terms interests.

Catching up -- The Separation of Powers

Although the colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations was formally established and recognized by the British crown in 1663, the year 2008 finally brought Rhode Island into the 19th Century -- politically. Rhode Island declared its independence from England on , May 4, 1776, two months before the other 12 American colonies. As an "independent" territory Rhode Island retained the 1663 Royal Charter as its foundational document.

Rhode Island was the last colony (13th of the original 13 states) to accept statehood when on May 29, 1790 the General Assembly ratified the Constitution. However, the foundational political document for Rhode Island remained the 127 year old colonial charter.

As a result of this "conservative" response to liberal opportunity, the Rhode Island General Assembly has been governing authority in the state for over 340 years. The charter was modified by the first State constitution ratified in 1842. But this did not result in a significant redistribution of political power.

What do I mean by governing authority? I mean that the political powers of legislation, administration and adjudication have essential rested in the State legislature. Supposedly in the hands of the people, this form of democratic tyranny places the full political power of government in the hands of the Speaker of the House and President of the State senate. That is, until 2004, when 78% of Rhode Island voter approved an amendment to the 1841 state constitution, specifically establishing the separation of powers.

It has taken 4 years of public effort to overcome the obstructionist Democrat dominated legislature to final rest the powers assigned to the executive and judicial branches from the legislature. In 2008, a banner year, the judiciary finally had the backbone to rule in its own interest and confirm the principle of separation of powers. Edward Acorn of the Providence Journal describes the importance of this event.


Edward Achorn: A toast to courageous Rhode Island leaders

Tuesday, December 30, 2008

EDWARD ACHORN

RHODE ISLAND ENDURED more than its share of horrible news in 2008, but just before Christmas something wonderful unfolded — a coda to an inspiring story, suggesting that the state can, indeed, move forward, in spite of the powerful forces invested in dragging it down. All it takes is tireless work and courage.

In a landmark ruling that will be remembered, perhaps, as the crowning achievement of Chief Justice Frank Williams, the Supreme Court unanimously stood up for separation of powers, the constitutional amendment passed by nearly 78 percent of the voters in 2004

Separation of powers ends the legacy of 340 years of the overweening dominance of the General Assembly in Rhode Island, an unbalanced system that has contributed mightily to political corruption over the years. The amendment means that here, at long last, as in the other states, the legislature will write the laws, the executive branch will implement and enforce them, and the judicial branch will interpret them.

This is the system America’s Founders enshrined in the federal constitution. They well understood the dangers of despotism and corruption when legislators are permitted to implement the laws they write (or an executive is empowered to dictate the laws).

“The accumulation of all powers . . . in the same hands . . . may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny,” James Madison wrote in No. 47 of the Federalist Papers.

And such an accumulation, to some degree, has afflicted the Ocean State for centuries now, with the results we now see in government dysfunction and resulting economic malaise.

In the four years since voters passed the amendment in a landslide, the General Assembly has worked hard to implement much of it. Legislators had to be removed from boards where they were exercising executive powers, and to shift to their proper role of providing oversight of the executive branch.

But lawmakers could not resist clinging to one glittering jewel: their appointments to the Coastal Resources Management Council. The council is a goldmine for politicians, because significant money and power is involved in coastal development in the Ocean State. So the legislature petitioned the Supreme Court for a ruling about whether it could retain that power, under a section of the constitution that stated “it shall be the duty of the General Assembly to provide for conservation of the air, land, water.”

The argument was as specious as it gets. The General Assembly could still exercise that “duty” in a legislative role — writing laws — without wielding executive powers unconstitutionally. But no one knew what the Supreme Court might decide.

After all, the court relies on legislators for the funding of its budget every year (and, thus, for patronage and other power), and it is never a good idea to buck the leaders of the General Assembly. And there was the new $88 million Blackstone Valley courthouse the chief justice was seeking. Would politics come before the law?

Politics did not come first. The court, in what must be regarded as a courageous act of devotion to the state constitution and the rule of law, backed the right of citizens to self-government through the ballot box and the amendment process. It ruled that the voters meant exactly what they said they meant about SOP.

Those who write the history of this state will remember that. And they will remember the courageous leaders who worked for years to get the separation of powers amendment onto the ballot — sometimes against their own party bosses, at the risk of losing their jobs and local grants, and seeing their legislation tossed in the trash.

Those men and women of courage included some stalwart fighters: Sheldon Whitehouse, Lincoln Almond, Nicholas Gorham, David Cicilline and Michael Lenihan (among many others). Citizens groups, notably Common Cause under Philip West, led the charge. And, lest we forget, both Governor Carcieri and House Speaker William Murphy contributed to the passage of bipartisan legislation that brought this issue before the voters.

Some powerful figures sneeringly told me the public could never comprehend or care about such a complex constitutional issue, and I was roundly and personally attacked in testimony before the legislature for the crime of writing about SOP. But in the end, people who love this state kept plugging away.

It all goes to show: Rhode Island can heal itself. If it really wanted to, it could remove the straight-ticket ballot, the legacy of corrupt machine politics. It could wrest public schools away from special interests and shift the focus back to students. It could start serving the general interest, and stop honoring felons who betray the public.

What it will take are people who willing to challenge mean-spirited politicians and special interests who are masters of the low blow. Fortunately, there are good people who have the courage to do that. Even if they are maligned now, they should know their character will shine in the light of history. Those who stood in their way are the ones who will end up on the ash heap.

I think the court’s decision, putting an end to this long and exhausting struggle, is cause to open a bottle of a champagne. Here’s to the good citizens who made SOP happen, and to a 2009 when Rhode Island begins to lift itself back on track.

Edward Achorn is The Journal’s deputy editorial-pages editor (eachorn@projo.com).