PARTISAN bickering is an accepted and expected practice in politics. Confrontation between branches of government can also occur but generally only when one party controls the chief executive office and the other party controls the legislature. Yet, conflict between the Illinois General Assembly and Gov. Dan Walker has continued at a high pitch and seems to have actually increased during the second half of Walker's term after the Democrats gained substantial majorities in both legislative chambers.
The confrontations in contemporary political life in Illinois are apparent to everyone, and it was obviously most clear in the defeat of Gov. Walker in the March primary. What may not have been quite as apparent was the endorsement of Secretary of State Mike Howlett by most of the Democratic leaders of the General Assembly and a number of prominent legislative independent Democrats who are not generally known for their loyalty to the Cook County organization headed by Chicago Mayor Richard J. Daley.
Confrontation, not compromise
One could point to many examples in
the past three years where the governor
and the legislature have locked horns,
but few are as poignant as the interim report issued in early March by the
Senate Committee on Fiscal Accountability. The committee presents data
and arguments critical of the Walker
administration and its reluctance to
cooperate with the legislative investigation of the "fiscal condition of the
state." The committee stated that it was
created by Senate Resolution 162 last
year because of "... conflicting and
confusing revenue estimates, budget
recommendations, vetoes, partial vetoes, overrides, and controversies which
have characterized the last two legislative sessions to a degree unparalleled
in the modern history of this state."
Their report continued: "A large part of
the problem, .is due to the fact that
governor's budgets in Illinois in recent
years have shown a definite trend
toward becoming more political — designed more as public relations
documents to gain votes than as honest
proposals for funding the various state
agencies and their programs." However, the Committee on Fiscal
Accountability leaves itself open to
allegations of presenting its own political document, rather than an objective
analysis, in its interim report. The Table
of Contents of the report includes the
following headings: "The State Has
Engaged in a Deliberate Policy of
Delaying the Payment of Bills," "The
Public Aid Mess," and "Refusal of the
Executive Branch to Cooperate." It was
not really necessary to read the report in
order to discover the findings of the
committee. The report was critical of the Walker
administration for a number of reasons
including past budget submittals (including revenue estimates); the scheduling of the payment of bills and its effect
on the state's cash balance; federal
government statements of levels of
ineligibility in public aid claims; and the level of cooperation received from the
Bureau of the Budget and state agencies
in the committee's effort to collect data
it felt was necessary to its investigation.
The purpose here is not to question the
accuracy of the committee's interim
report's findings and conclusions.
However, the same standards must be
applied to the committee's work that are
used in assessing the work of the
administration. It is extremely valuable to carry out
legislative investigations of the nature
called for in the committee's enabling
resolution. It is part of the oversight
function which is the responsibility of
virtually all American legislatures.
Rarely, at the state level, has the
function been well performed. But it is
also important that such activities be
placed in proper perspective.
The nature of the conflict between the
legislature and governor perhaps became
more noticeable in Illinois because this
is an election year. However, the
confrontation is in clear contrast to the
general conduct of politics at both the
state and national level. The American
system, with separation of powers and
built-in "checks and balances," has
normally been marked by the practice of
"compromise." Rarely does the nature
of conflict and confrontation reach the
heights seen in the current work of the
General Assembly.
Politics of the report
The question might be asked as to
whether such a committee as this one on
fiscal accountability would have been
created if someone other than Dan
Walker were governor. If the occupant
of the chief executive's office were
someone who sought cooperation rather than confrontation with the General
Assembly, would this investigation have
been undertaken? It is quite likely that the ultimate result of this interim report and the continued work of the Senate's Committee on Fiscal Accountability will be the improvement of some aspects of administrative operation; most probably in the Department of Public Aid which has
come under fire in recent months. In
that respect, there will be positive effects
from this exercise of the oversight function. If that is the case, one of the few
justifications for confrontation politics
will be displayed. / L.S.C.
Any assessment of the quality of work
carried out by this committee must be
viewed in the political context of
contemporary Illinois. The report itself
makes reference to the conflict which
has existed between Gov. Walker and
the General Assembly since the administration took office at the beginning of
1972. The report was issued less than
two weeks before the primary election in
which Walker failed to gain renomination from the voters of his own party. In
short, legislative documents must be
viewed as being just as political as
gubernatorial budget messages.
May 1976 / Illinois Issues / 27