Governor - William R. Rhodes
The bulk of the work propelling the revised tribal constitution is finished and the Tribal Constitution Reform Project (TCRP) task force currently sits in the balance making minor tweaks and awaiting approvals from various GRIC committees and departments.
However, in the final days leading up toward the approval of the revised constitution, GRIC Governor William R. Rhodes has brought forth the ideal that executive veto power needs to be addressed and included in the revised constitution.
Governor Rhodes believes that veto power is an essential measure of check and balance that will keep the branches of government functioning justly while giving a certain semblance of power back to the people. Governor Rhodes has expressed concern over why veto power hasn’t been considered thus far. He feels the Community should hear his justification behind the move to include veto power in the revised constitution before any final decisions are made.
He said, “I do understand that there are attempts at the committee level to derail this idea of legislative authority without really knowing the issues of the legislative chair’s veto power. They’ve never had it and have never known it.”
The Governor hopes that Community members will look further into the issue of veto power and not merely toward the administration that is recommending it’s inclusion as this measure will carry on unto all future administrations that will govern the Community.
The following is an interview with Governor Rhodes regarding how he sees the inclusion of veto power in the revised constitution ultimately putting the government back into hands of the people.
It seems like the recommendation to include veto power is coming on the heels of the TCRP finalizing the revised tribal constitution. What is the reasoning behind this?
Governor William R. Rhodes:
The recommendation is because I assumed that in a compete separation of powers that the TCRP committee would look at all the requirements they would need to consider in the constitution revision, which in my mind includes veto power. I’m working for the betterment of the government for the people and I suspect that they avoided the issue.
I’ve explained to the TCRP task force that veto power is not something that a governor, at least not me, would use as a club dictatorship type of thing. As they think, and as I would be thinking, I would do it for the benefit of the people.
I use Tohono O’Odham (TO) as an example of how the legislative committee last year, they considered and passed a raise for council people, the chair and vice chair. For whatever reasons, the chair vetoed it. When he vetoed it, it went back to the legislative council. They grabbed it back and twice they voted trying to get an override. Two thirds or more is an override on the veto and they couldn’t get it. So the next thing they did was to carry the issue to the districts, thinking that they could get the district people to order their council representatives to go back and vote for the override.Well it didn’t work.
That said, when it went to the districts the people said, “What raises?” “Who told you that you could make raises?” and “We didn’t know anything about it.” Until it came out in the paper the people were uninformed.
I said this in the TCRP meeting, “This will give the government back to the people.”
Another example I used is that I’ve spoken with friends in the state legislature and asked them, “What are the state legislators paid now?” Right now, they are paid approximately $24,000 each. In almost every election the legislators ask for a raise again. Well, that issue goes to the voters. I’ve seen it time and time again. It’s the voters that say yes or no. The same way it’s happening down in TO.
I’ve cited that example and explained it to the task force that this is as an example of giving the government back to the people.
There is an ordinance in place that says certain types of issues that concern the people and the welfare of the people in different areas need to go to the district for review and recommendation. They’re not doing that in every case. What’s happening right now, is that the standing committees will make a motion to waive the requirement of going to the districts. Then it’s carried to council and council will support it eliminating the people. Why have that ordinance in place if they’re not going to do it anyway? But the final thing is that they maintain among themselves that council decision is final. And that’s a killer to the people; it’s been there for years and years.
In essence, do you believe that veto power will reinforce the separation of powers and implement a system of checks and balances within each branch?
Governor William R. Rhodes:
The check and balance is that if I see something that I think will be bad for the people, I can veto that thing. If it’s going to be good for the people then I’m not going to veto it. But the other check is that council has override power. I believe that if I vetoed something that the people would become aware of it and have some input on it. Then when the council brings it back for a vote again, it would be different.
As it stands now, without veto power, how are you able to address those types of ordinances or decisions?
Governor William R. Rhodes:
I’m not. Council decision is final. I can’t protect the people as it is right now because council decision is final. Another example is the controlled spending. Council approved it. The next council meeting they made a motion to take it away from me. Included in that motion was to go ahead and draw $50M out of savings and if we need another one, the motion gave considerations to have a second drawing. I had no power to stop this. I looked down at the motioner and I said, “Well okay, you’ve taken it away from me. I hope it works,” in addressing the motion to draw the $50M and maybe a possible one. Included in that motion was some sort of replenishment and that’s really what I was addressing in saying that I hoped it would work. There has been no replenishment to date.
I believe some sort of veto power is the right and responsibility of the governor, who ever it might be. I don’t see any governor getting in here and manipulating the veto power to satisfy himself or a certain group because whatever they veto has to go back to the people for review. It’s a safeguard and I want to give that opportunity back to the people to make a decision or make a recommendation.
I’m not out to get anybody, I just hate to think that if veto power were not included then there is no reason to do a constitution revision. I’ve heard that all the districts have opposed it because of whatever has been said to them. They haven’t heard from me yet.
Do you feel that veto power will help give voice back to the people in seeking their approval regarding motions that come before council?
Governor William R. Rhodes:
Yes. In District Five, you hear their representatives and they say that their districts have told them to oppose certain issues. I don’t hear a lot of the other districts doing that but D5 has listened to their district people. I have no problem with that because the people are making the decision.
I want it to go back to the people. It would be up to the recommendation of the attorneys to determine what type of veto power I should have. I’m not looking to be a dictator. I’m here for the people. So, whatever limited veto power would be best for the people, that is what I believe should be put in there. It’s not just for the current administration it sets it up for future administrations.
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|