GOVT 2302

GOVT 2302

The Executive Constitutional Design

In the last section we discussed the development of the executive

branch from the Norman Invasion through the British Bill of Rights, and the problems of executive

power as explained in the Declaration of Independence.

One of the principle points made was that over the course of British

history executive departments (what we could refer to as “the

state”) were developed.

These made it easier for the monarch to implement the law.

It also allowed for abuse – which led to the opposition of the House

of Commons, the signing of the English Bill of Rights, and the

establishment of the constitutional monarchy.

The grievances listed in the Declaration of Independence

argued that the king was usurping colonial executive power. The

colonists would no longer be able to execute the law, it would be

done for them.

The lesson initially learned was to not have a national executive.

None existed under the Articles of Confederation. This made

governing the states difficult, so the decision was made to establish

an executive of some sort in the constitutional convention.

As we already know, the U.S. Constitution would establish a

singular executive on the national level. This was partly due to the

trust granted to George Washington since he seemed

capable of restraining his ambitions.

We also know that Texas established a plural executive

partly because governors during reconstructions did not seem

similarly capable.

In this section we look at the product of that evolution.

The executive branch as designed in the U.S. and Texas Constitutions.

We will read through the Constitutional design of the

executive branch on each level and will touch base on the various issues raised in each of these

sections.

We concluded the last section with a discussion of the problems the Federalists had with the lack of a

centralized executive. Policy implementation on the national

level was impossible.

But there were legitimate concerns that the establishment of a national executive branch,

especially a single headed office, would allow a tyranny to emerge.

The central question addressed on the national and state level was the basic design of the chief executive.

How can it both effective and restrained?

We want energy in the executive, but we also want to limit abuses of

executive authority.

How? What design decisions were necessary in order to determine

how best to accomplish this in the long term?

For good sources outlining these conflicts click here:

The Constitutional Convention: Day by Day Summary

LOC: Federalists Papers

http://teachingamericanhistory.org/convention/summary.html



http://thomas.loc.gov/home/histdox/fedpapers.html

The design of the executive was considered on the following days:

June 1June 2June 4July 17

http://teachingamericanhistory.org/convention/debates/0601.html




July 18July 19July 20July 26

August 20August 24








August 25August 27

September 4September 6September 7September 8









A sample of issues debated during the convention

1 - The idea of a singular executive was introduced immediately and was subject to great debate from

the start.


The virtues of the singular design:

Unity, Consistency, Effectiveness

But an elected executive could turn into a monarchy, and elected

monarchies are “the worst kind.”

2 - Should the president be elected by a direct vote by the general

population, or some other method?

A direct connection to the general population might allow the

president to gain the popular support that would allow for

increases in power.

Again, the principle lesson from history:

Julius Caesar

He gained power by stirring popular opposition to the Senate.

By doing so he undermined the vitality of the Roman Republic.

(is this a lesson?)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julius_Caesar

The general public has had a peculiar tendency over history to

support the establishment of strong executive authority.

Napoleon, Stalin, Hitler …

See the Wikipedia entry on Populares.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Populares

An indirect connection between the executive and the people

would moderate this tendency, but potentially allow executive power

to become intertwined with whatever institution selected the

office.

An electoral college – where individuals are selected to only

elect a president and nothing else – would be less likely than other

institutions to become intertwined with the executive.

3 - What control should the president have over the

bureaucracy?

Should the office have the sole power of appointment? Or should

some other institution?

Presidential control allows the institution greater control over the implementation of laws, but also

allows the bureaucracy to be used for the personal needs of the

president.

The bureaucracy needs to be both professional and independent.

4 - What relationship should the executive have with the other

branches?

Checks and Balances

Each branch is given the power to resist potential effort of the executive to control them.

The executive helps limit the power of the legislative and judicial

branches.

It is also limited by them.

Constitutional language

I’d advise that you open up the following links in order to get an idea of what the design of each

institution looks like.

The Constitutional Design of the Unites States Executive:

Article 2 of the U.S. Constitution

4 sections - 1,072 words

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/article02/

The Constitutional Design of the Texas Executive:

Article 4 of the Texas Constitution

26 sections - 4,243 words

http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/CN/htm/CN.4.htm

As with the legislative branches, the design of the United States

executive is vague and open ended while the Texas executive is precise

and limited.

Here’s a walk through the national Constitution.

The U.S. Constitution Article Two Section OneClause One

For further information about presidential power read The Power and the Scope of Presidential Power.

Background from the Founders’ Constitution.

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/article02/01.html#2

http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/tocs/a2_1_1.html

The Executive power shall be vested in a President of the United

States of America . . .

This is the vesting clause. It vests executive power in a single

individual. This, in very simple language, establishes the singular

executive.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vesting_Clause

Hamilton was a strong proponent of an energetic executive, a

singular form was one of the factors necessary to allow for

energy.

Federalist #70

http://www.constitution.org/fed/federa70.htm

“The ingredients which constitute energy in the Executive are, first, unity; secondly,

duration; thirdly, an adequate provision for its support; fourthly, competent powers.

The ingredients which constitute safety in the republican sense are, first, a due

dependence on the people, secondly, a due responsibility.”

“That unity is conducive to energy will not be disputed. Decision, activity, secrecy, and

dispatch will generally characterize the proceedings of one man in a much more eminent degree than the proceedings of any greater number; and in proportion as the number is increased, these qualities

will be diminished.”

Some proposals were made for an executive council.

Others argued this would be too weak and indecisive to effectively

implement the laws passed by Congress.

Note that there is no qualifier on his the extent of executive power (no phrase like “herein granted” which we saw in Article One) as

there is with the legislative power.

Is there significance to this?

Some argue yes, it means that the president possesses all executive

power.

The Unitary Executive Theory

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unitary_executive_theory

The strong version of this theory holds that the Congress has little power to interfere with how the president implements laws, but

others argue this violates the checks and balances and allows for tyrannical power to evolve in the

office.

There is debate regarding how extensive this power should be, especially when it comes to the

inherent powers of the commander-in-chief.

The Inherent Powers can include anything a commander in chief

thinks is necessary to successfully fight a war. Often these can involve

the suspensions of civil liberties and the allowance of unreasonable

searches and seizures and detention without due process.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inherent_Powers

The U.S. Constitution Article Two Section OneClause One

Continued . . .

. . . He shall hold office during the term of four years, and together

with the Vice President, chosen for the same term, be elected as

follows

This refers to the term of office as well as the means that the office is

elected.

The Four Year Term was considered to be too short for those who

wished an active government or too long for those who feared

tyranny.

From Cato number 4:

It is remarked by Montesquieu, in treating of republics, that in all

magistracies, the greatness of the power must be compensated by the brevity of the duration; and that a longer time than a year,

would be dangerous.

http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/a2_1_1s6.html

But annual terms can be ineffective.

How short is too short?

Hamilton argued in favor of life time service in order to ensure that

presidents have the strength to carry out congressional laws.

A favorite claim of the anti-federalists was that where annual

appointments end, tyranny begins.

Longer terms allowed presidents to establish relationships with private interests that would keep them in power for as long as they liked?

As we know George Washington established the tradition of

presidents stepping down after two terms.

This established the tradition of the peaceful transition of executive

power.

This was similar to his stepping down after the end of the

Revolutionary War.

No president served more than 2 terms until Franklin Roosevelt ran for a third and fourth term in 1940

and 1944.

Roosevelt argued that it was necessary to maintain stability

during times of crises.

Opponents thought it was a power grab.

The 22nd Amendment was added to the Constitution to limit presidents

to two terms.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twenty-second_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twenty-second_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/amendment22/

The U.S. Constitution Article Two Section One

Clause Two and Three

Read The Electoral College in Findlaw.com for further information.

Background in the Founders’ Constitution.

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/article02/02.html

http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/tocs/a2_1_2-3.html

Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a

Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to

which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or

Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States,

shall be appointed an Elector.

Aside from this section, nothing regarding the presidential election

is granted to the national government.

What follows is the design of the Electoral College, which was an unusual way of ensuring the office would not be

directly elected, thus likely to merge with the House of Representatives. It was felt

that an electoral college would be composed of people aware of who could best serve as a president, and who were

not in a position to engage in any intrigue about it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electoral_College_(United_States)

Here’s the original text

The Electors shall meet in their respective States, and vote by Ballot for two Persons, of whom one at least shall not be an Inhabitant of the same State with themselves.

And they shall make a List of all the Persons voted for, and of the Number of Votes for each; which List they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the Seat of the

Government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate. The President of the Senate shall, in the Presence of the Senate and House of

Representatives, open all the Certificates, and the Votes shall then be counted. The Person having the greatest Number of Votes shall be the President, if such Number be a Majority of the whole Number of Electors appointed; and if there be more than one

who have such Majority, and have an equal Number of Votes, then the House of Representatives shall immediately chuse by Ballot one of them for President; and if no

Person have a Majority, then from the five highest on the List the said House shall in like Manner chuse the President. But in chusing the President, the Votes shall be taken

by States, the Representation from each State having one Vote; a quorum for this Purpose shall consist of a Member or Members from two thirds of the States, and a

Majority of all the States shall be necessary to a Choice. In every Case, after the Choice of the President, the Person having the greatest Number of Votes of the Electors shall be the Vice President. But if there should remain two or more who have equal Votes,

the Senate shall chuse from them by Ballot the Vice President.

In brief, each state was assigned a number of electors equal to its

total representation in Congress. Each elector had two votes. The

majority winner became president while second place became vice-

president.

This gives the states additional power over the selection of the

president. Smaller states are more significant with the electoral

college than they would be with a direct election.

Circumstance surrounding the election of 1796 – where the leaders of each party became

president and vice-president – led to the 12th Amendment, which made them run on one ticket.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twelfth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution

Here’s the text of the 12th Amendment.

(I know the text is small)

The Electors shall meet in their respective states, and vote by ballot for President and Vice-President, one of whom, at least, shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves;

they shall name in their ballots the person voted for as President and in distinct ballots the person voted for as Vice-President, and they shall make distinct lists of all persons voted for as President, and of all persons voted for as Vice-President, and of the number of votes for each, which lists they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the seat of the government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate;--The President of the Senate shall, in the

presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted;--The person having the greatest number of votes for President, shall be the President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed; and if no person have such majority, then from the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three on the list of those voted for as President, the House of Representatives shall choose

immediately, by ballot, the President, the votes shall be taken by states, the representation from each state having one vote; a quorum for this purpose shall consist of a member or members

from two-thirds of the states, and a majority of all the states shall be necessary to a choice. And if the House of Representatives shall not choose a President whenever the right of choice shall

devolve upon them, before the fourth day of March next following, then the Vice-President shall act as President, as in the case of the death or other constitutional disability of the President.--

The person having the greatest number of votes as Vice-President, shall be the Vice-President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed, and if no person have a

majority, then from the two highest numbers on the list, the Senate shall choose the Vice-President; a quorum for the purpose shall consist of two-thirds of the whole number of Senators, and a majority of the whole number shall be necessary to a choice. But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States.

The principle change is that presidents run together with vice

presidents.

As we know from 2301, this change recognized the growth of

parties. President’s are commonly assumed to be the heads of their

parties.

Its worth discussing one of the consequences of the current state of

presidential elections.

Presidential Primaries

Coupled with the increased ability of candidates to connect directly with the

population through increasingly sophisticated media operations.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_primary

The development of primaries has weakened the ability of parties to

handpick candidates.

Presidential candidates that are able to connect effectively through

the media have advantages over those that cannot.

They can develop their own identity apart from the party.

This is argued to have changed the type of person likely to get elected

president.

It pays to look good on television.

Heights and good hair helps as well.

The U.S. Constitution Article Two Section OneClause Four

For further information about presidential power read Background from the Founders’ Constitution.


The Congress may determine the time of choosing the electors, and the day on which they shall give

their votes; which day shall be the same throughout the United

States.

This is a legislative check on the executive.

Congress sets election day.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Election_Day_(United_States)

The U.S. Constitution Article Two Section OneClause Five

Founders’ Constitution.Findlaw.



No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States,

at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty-five years, and been fourteen years a resident within the United

States.

This office has the highest age and residency requirement of any

office created in the Constitution.

The U.S. Constitution Article Two Section OneClause Six




In case of the removal of the President from office, or of his death, resignation, or inability to discharge the powers and duties of the said office, the same

shall devolve on the Vice President, and the Congress may by law provide for the case of

removal, death, resignation, or inability, both of the President and Vice President, declaring what officer shall then act as President, and such officer shall act

accordingly, until the disability be removed, or a President shall be elected

If you read carefully you note that this does not establish that the

Vice-President becomes President on the death, disability or removal

of the President. He simply assumes the powers of the office. Two amendments were added,

20th Amendment and 25th Amendment, to clarify that.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twentieth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twenty-fifth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution

The 25th Amendment also allows Congress to establish a line of

succession to the president.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_line_of_succession

The U.S. ConstitutionArticle TwoSection OneClause Seven




The President shall, at stated times, receive for his services, a

compensation, which shall neither be increased nor diminished during the period for which he shall have

been elected, and he shall not receive within that period any other emolument from the United States,

or any of them.

The President is to be paid, but the amount of pay cannot be increased nor decreased. Either would create

the opportunity for corruption, either bribery or blackmail.

The Current salary of the president is $400,000.

http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/thepresidentandcabinet/a/presidentialpay.htm

This is an executive check on the legislature. Or at least it provides the executive freedom

from the manipulation of the legislature.

The U.S. ConstitutionArticle TwoSection OneClause Eight


http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/a2_1_8s1.html


Before he enter on the execution of his office, he shall take the

following oath or affirmation: "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I

will faithfully execute the office of the President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the

Constitution of the United States."

Controversy: Did Washington add “so help me God” to the end of the

oath?

Click here for commentary.Some random

thoughts on the oath.

http://www.thegreenpapers.com/Vox/?20071023-0

http://www.usconstitution.net/consttop_inau.html

http://www.usconstitution.net/consttop_inau.html

The U.S. ConstitutionArticle TwoSection TwoClause One




The President shall be Commander-in-Chief of the Army and Navy of the

United States, and of the militia of the several States, when called into the actual service of the United States;

This means that the military is headed by a civilian.

This is to ensure that the civil power stays superior to the

military power.

One of the arguments offered to support the ratification of the

Constitution was that a stronger national government would make

armed conflict less likely.

Federalist #4

”. . . the safety of the People of America against dangers from foreign force, depends not only on

their forbearing to give just causes of war to other nations, but also on their placing and

continuing themselves in such a situation as not to invite hostility or insult; for it need not be

observed that there are pretended as well as just causes of war.”

http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Federalist_Papers/No._4

Inherent Powers

Torture?Warrantless Searches?

http://www.loc.gov/law/help/usconlaw/pres-powers.php

Commander-in-Chief Powers

These can be controversial powers during time of war since they can be taken to imply that presidents have surveillance powers that go

beyond limitations stated in the Bill of Rights.


Is There an Exclusive Commander-in-Chief Power?

http://www.yalelawjournal.org/the-yale-law-journal-pocket-part/executive-power/is-there-an-exclusive-commander%11in%11chief-power?/

http://www.yalelawjournal.org/the-yale-law-journal-pocket-part/executive-power/is-there-an-exclusive-commander%11in%11chief-power?/

Perhaps the most noteworthy use of commander in chief powers was

the Emancipation Proclamation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emancipation_Proclamation

Now that the U.S. has a seemingly permanent peacetime military, is there any need for declarations of

war? Can the president use the military as he sees fit? Does this

include proactive uses?

The U.S. ConstitutionArticle TwoSection TwoClause One (continued)




. . . he may require the opinion, in writing, of the principal officer in

each of the executive departments, upon any subject relating to the duties of their respective offices,

This alludes to the existence of executive departments, though it

does not establish what departments are to exist.

The executive agencies are established by acts of Congress passed over the course of time.

This is true for almost all executive positions.

It suggests that the heads of the executive departments, what

would become the Cabinet, would serve as an advisory body.

Some discussion existed in the Constitutional Convention over what departments ought to be established, but these were not added to the Constitution itself.

The First Congress would do so.

Controversy:

Executive Privilege

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_privilege

Are the conversations that a president has with advisors fully

private? Can an advisor be subpoenaed and forced to testify

about the advise given the president or does this undermine

tha ability of a president to get good council?

The U.S. ConstitutionArticle TwoSection TwoClause One (continued)




. . . and he shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for

offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment.

This is an historical check on judicial powers. Monarchs have traditionally been able to grant clemency to those they deem

worthy, or opportunistic.

These can be among the most controversial decisions a president

can make.

Ford’s pardon of NixonH.W. Bush’s pardon of Weinberger

Clinton’s pardon of Marc Rich

http://watergate.info/ford/pardon.shtml

http://www.findingdulcinea.com/news/on-this-day/On-this-Day-First-President-Bush-Grants-Contentious-Pardons.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Clinton_pardon_controversy

A further controversy: What impact does this have on judicial

responsibility for wrong convictions?

Does the Supreme Court care about innocence? For justice? Or

do they kick this responsibility over to the executive?

The U.S. ConstitutionArticle TwoSection TwoClause Two




He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the

Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present

concur; . . .

The President is Head of State, and is has authority over the country’s

diplomatic powers. The office is responsible for negotiating

treaties, but the Senate has a check over this power since they

get to ratify the treaties.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Head_of_state

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diplomacy

Presidents can by pass this check by negotiating

executive agreements, which are more limited in scope that treaties. These do not need to be ratified by

the Senate.

http://www.americanforeignrelations.com/A-D/The-Constitution-Executive-agreements.html

The U.S. ConstitutionArticle TwoSection TwoClause Two(continued)




. . . and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls,

Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States,

whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall

be established by Law:

High level executive and judicial officials who are appointed by the President must be confirmed by the Senate. This is a legislative

check on executive power.

The U.S. ConstitutionArticle TwoSection TwoClause Two(continued)




. . . but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think

proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads

of Departments.

Lower level officials can be appointed by the President, or

even lower levels officials, without Senate confirmation.

This includes the process for hiring people to the civil service.

The U.S. ConstitutionArticle TwoSection TwoClause Three


http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/tocs/a2_3.html

The President shall have Power to fill up all Vacancies that may

happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of

their next Session.

This power is used when the Senate refuses to confirm, or

consider the appointments of the president. These are called

recess appointments.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recess_appointment

The U.S. ConstitutionArticle Two

Section Three




He shall from time to time give to the Congress Information of the

State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge

necessary and expedient; . . .

This is a check on the legislature. The president can help set

Congress’ agenda. This is always a public event, which allows the

president to use the media to go public, take a message directly to

the general population.

. . . . he may, on extraordinary Occasions, convene both Houses, or either of them, and in Case of

Disagreement between them, with Respect to the Time of

Adjournment, he may adjourn them to such Time as he shall think

proper.”

He can call special sessions to address both chambers in order to highlight a special initiative or for

some other special occasion.

The power to adjourn Congress is very limited. It only occurs when a disagreement exists between the two chambers regarding when to

adjourn. He lacks the power to force an adjournment over their

objections.


Section Three




He shall receive Ambassadors and other public Ministers; . . .

The president has the unilateral power to recognize foreign

countries. The Senate does not have to approve the decision. This

is part of the president’s diplomatic powers as Chief of

State.


Section Three




. . . he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed . . .

The president does not have the prerogative power to suspend the

laws. He is Chief Executive and bound by the laws passed by the

legislature.


Section Three




. . . and shall Commission all the Officers of the United States.”

This is the last of the president’s constitutional military powers.


Section Three



The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from

Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or

other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

This was a check the parliament had on many executive officials

that advised the monarch.

The definition of “high crimes and misdemeanors” is up for debate.

The Constitutional Design of the Texas Executive

Article 4 of the Texas Constitution

The Texas Constitution is longer and more detailed. The powers of the governor are specified further. The powers of the plural executive

are also listed.

Texas’ plural executive is argued to have been a response to the

perceived abuses the state suffered under reconstruction as well as the

alleged corruption of the administration of E.J. Davis.

The Texas governor’s office is generally considered to be one of the weaker ones in the country.

Sec. 1. OFFICERS CONSTITUTING THE EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. The Executive

Department of the State shall consist of a Governor, who shall be the Chief Executive Officer of the State, a Lieutenant Governor,

Secretary of State, Comptroller of Public Accounts, Commissioner of the General

Land Office, and Attorney General.

Sec. 2. ELECTION OF OFFICERS OF EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. All the above

officers of the Executive Department (except Secretary of State) shall be elected by the qualified voters of the State at the

time and places of election for members of the Legislature.

The governor originally had a two year term and rapid

turnover was common.

Beginning in 1974, the term expanded to four years, and

executive commissions established since then are appointed by the

governor. This has led to an increase in the governor’s powers.

The ability to make appointments to key state agencies gives the

governor power that the office did not previously possess.

A quick look at parts of the Texas Constitution that differ from the

U.S. Constitution

Sec. 11. BOARD OF PARDONS AND PAROLES; PAROLE LAWS;

REPRIEVES, COMMUTATIONS, AND PARDONS; REMISSION OF FINES

AND FORFEITURES.

Sec. 11B. CRIMINAL JUSTICE AGENCIES.

Sec. 16. LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR. (a) There shall also be a Lieutenant Governor, who shall be chosen at every election for Governor by the same voters, in the same manner, continue in office for the same time, and possess the same qualifications. The voters shall distinguish for whom they vote as Governor and for whom as Lieutenant Governor.

(b) The Lieutenant Governor shall by virtue of his office be President of the Senate, and shall have, when in Committee of the Whole, a right to debate and vote on all questions; and when the Senate is equally divided to give the casting vote.

Sec. 21. SECRETARY OF STATE. There shall be a Secretary of State, who shall be appointed by the Governor, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, and who shall continue in office during the term of service of the Governor. He shall authenticate the publication of the laws, and keep a fair register of all official acts and proceedings of the Governor, and shall, when required, lay the same and all papers, minutes and vouchers relative thereto

Sec. 22. ATTORNEY GENERAL. The Attorney General shall represent the State in all suits and pleas in the Supreme Court of the State in which the State may be a party, and shall especially inquire into the charter rights of all private corporations, and from time to time, in the name of the State, take such action in the courts as may be proper and necessary to prevent any private corporation from exercising any power or demanding or collecting any species of taxes, tolls, freight or wharfage not authorized by law.

He shall, whenever sufficient cause exists, seek a judicial forfeiture of such charters, unless otherwise expressly directed by law, and give legal advice in writing to the Governor and other executive officers, when requested by them, and perform such other duties as may be required by law.

Local Executives

MayorCity ManagersCounty Judges

Documents

GOVT 2302