As a means of addressing certain legislative actions, a lawsuit leaves much to be desired.
For one thing, there's no telling when the courts will arrive at a final decision. Court cases, we all know, can drag on for months, or even years. Then there's also the fact that they tend to require a lot of attention and cost a lot of money. Certainly, taxpayers would prefer legislative issues to be resolved - well, in the Legislature.
This lesson in the roles and responsibilities of our country's three branches of government is currently being highlighted by the lawsuit brought by state Sen. John Cobb, R-Augusta, against the Montana Department of Administration. Cobb filed the lawsuit as a last resort to force state legislators to change the wording of House Bill 2, which gives a $140 tax credit to every homeowner in Montana.
Cobb, a Republican, first tried and failed to convince Republican leaders to convene a special session to address a problem that didn't come to light until after the tax credit had already been approved and authorized by Gov. Brian Schweitzer.
See, legislators wrote the law so that the tax credits would be issued depending on a so-called “trigger.” Basically, that meant the credits could only be authorized once state revenues reached a certain level. The Department of Administration reported that the trigger was exceeded by about $36 million, which translated into $140 for each of 259,000 taxpayers.
Unfortunately, the Montana Legislature's top revenue analyst later reported that the trigger was calculated incorrectly - that is, it was not calculated as it should have been, as written in the law.
The tax credits, of course, have been authorized already.
Cobb has said repeatedly that he has no desire to repeal the tax credit. He just wants to make sure that laws are followed as they are written - or else what are laws for? And it would be a relatively simple, if expensive, matter to fix the problem: The Legislature would have to meet in yet another special session and approve a small wording change in the bill. That's it.
Even so, Cobb's efforts to persuade Republican leaders to convene a special session have been unsuccessful, and Schweitzer, too, is reluctant to call a special session that would likely cost taxpayers hundreds of thousands of dollars when he is convinced that doing so isn't necessary. The administration, after all, was carrying out the intent of the law when it approved the tax credit.
And so Cobb filed a lawsuit. Cobb is an attorney as well as a rancher, and thus prepared to represent himself. And he has filed lawsuits against Gov. Brian Schweitzer before. In 2005, for instance, he was unsuccessful in an attempt to sue the governor for vetoing a number of legislative benchmarks Cobb had inserted. In fact, Schweitzer estimates Cobb has filed a total 33 lawsuits against him - and that 31 of these have gone down in defeat.
Some cynical souls might doubt such suits as a purely political move, but the truth is they're a legitimate and appropriate method of seeking redress for legislative actions when other options have failed. In fact, perhaps no other current Montana politician is more respected - on both sides of the aisle - than John Cobb. Remember, this is the senator who received a spontaneous standing ovation from both Republicans and Democrats at the end of the last special session in recognition of his 24 years and final term in the Legislature.
Cobb has devoted 16 years to the House and eight to the Senate. Term limits prevent him from running for a Senate seat again, and he has pledged not to run for another term in the House.
But apparently, he isn't willing to leave any unfinished business, either.
If Cobb's current lawsuit is successful, it will halt the $140-per-homeowner state tax credit that is supposed to go in the mail next year. That would be unfortunate because nobody wants to see that happen - not even Cobb. Rather, his lawsuit is intended to make sure the law is followed as it is written.
Perhaps no piece of legislation can ever be perfectly drafted, but legislators devote a significant amount of time and energy into making sure they're as clear as possible. That's why, when the wording is clear, it's of paramount importance for legislators and legislative staff to adhere to the particulars of the legislation they approve.
A special session would indeed be costly and time-consuming. The work of government is often inefficient. But we don't require our lawmakers to cut corners. We rely on our them to write good laws - and follow them.
And when the legislative and executive branches are in dispute, we must rely on the judicial branch to step in and settle the matter.
|
 |
 |
Add your comment now! Write your comment in the form below.
(Email address is for verification only. If you'd like to email a story, look for the link above)