A reality based independent journal of observation & analysis, serving the Flathead Valley & Montana since 2006. © James Conner.
Slightly revised on 6 December. When the office of lieutenant governor becomes vacant in Montana, the governor gets to appoint a new lieutenant governor. The new lieutenant governor must meet the constitutional requirements for governor, but the governor can appoint anyone he chooses and needs no one else’s permission to do so.
That almost wasn’t the case. At one point during the Montana Constitutional Convention of 1971–1972, the delegates considered language requiring that an appointment to fill a vacancy in the office of lieutenant governor be confirmed by the legislature:
When a vacancy occurs in the office of lieutenant governor, the Governor shall nominate a lieutenant governor whe shall take office upon confirmation by the affirmative vote of a majority of all members of the legislative assembly in joint session.
There were other versions of a confirmation requirement. Ultimately, however, the delegates adopted the constitutional language we now have:
Article VI, Section 6. Vacancy in office. (1) If the office of lieutenant governor becomes vacant by his succession to the office of governor, or by his death, resignation, or disability as determined by law, the governor shall appoint a qualified person to serve in that office for the remainder of the term. If both the elected governor and the elected lieutenant governor become unable to serve in the office of governor, succession to the respective offices shall be as provided by law for the period until the next general election. Then, a governor and lieutenant governor shall be elected to fill the remainder of the original term.
(2) If the office of secretary of state, attorney general, auditor, or superintendent of public instruction becomes vacant by death, resignation, or disability as determined by law, the governor shall appoint a qualified person to serve in that office until the next general election and until a successor is elected and qualified. The person elected to fill a vacancy shall hold the office until the expiration of the term for which his predecessor was elected.
After becoming lieutenant governor, a person cannot be fired by the governor. Lieutenant governors can be removed against their will only by impeachment, trial, and conviction by the legislature. That’s a mostly a good thing: elected officials should not be easy to remove from office.
But there can be times when a governor’s not being able to fire a lieutenant governor presents an enormous political problem.
Suppose, for the sake of argument, that in the Great State of West Sequoia, a sister-in-law of lieutenant governor Grant Lawson, a distinguished and experienced politician of impeccable rectitude and probity, is arrested for, and convicted of, running a ring of hookers operating out of a colonial house near both the state capitol and a holy roller church frequented by tea party legislators. Lawson is surprised and horrified by his sister-in-law’s predicament. He condemns her behavior, but says he will pray for her forgiveness and redemption.
Lawson is not guilty of his sister-in-law’s sins, but it quickly become apparent he’s in a heap of political trouble. The opposing political party begins asking “What did Grant know about his sister-in-law’s sins, and when did he know it?” Worse, his detractors began asking “What did Grant’s wife know her sister’s sins, and when did she know it?” Sisters, after all, talk to each other; don’t they?
West Sequoia’s governor, silver haired and tongued Presbyterian Rev. Roland Burntbusch, is dismayed and torn between his belief that Lawson should not be punished for the sins of his sister-in-law, and his determination to be re-elected next year. There had, of course, been rumors, but Burntbusch, a man who prides himself on being a fine judge of character, ignored them, having confidence in his judgment and his years long friendship with Lawson. Lawson got the job without undergoing an opposition research worthy vetting.
Burtbusch’s political aides are not torn. As mental images of the television ads they know are coming if Lawson stays on the job and/or on the ticket form, they lunge for the smelling salts. They know Lawson has to go. They convince Burntbusch that Lawson must sacrifice himself on the altar of Burntbusch’s political fortunes. Burntbursch asks Lawson to resign and to announce at a press conference that he’s stepping down to protect the governor, and the voters who want the governor re-elected.
(That kind of self-sacrifice is required by the unwritten political contract a lieutenant governor has with the governor, his party, and the voters.)
There’s just one problem. Lawson likes being lieutenant governor. He refuses to resign — and Burntbusch can’t fire him. Once in office, West Sequoia’s lieutenant governor can only be impeached — and having a sister-in-law who is a hoosegow dwelling madam, while a tabloid worthy scandal, is not an impeachable offense.
Lawson has to be forced out. There are ways his life as lieutenant governor can be made so unpleasant that he’ll agree to walk the plank, but he has leverage, knows it, and extracts a hard bargain. He agrees to go, but only if (a) he gets moved sideways, perhaps at the state university, to a job that pays a lot more than his salary as lieutenant governor, and (b) Burntbusch and his aides agree to concoct a cover story so that he doesn’t appear to be leaving because of his sister-in-law’s conviction and occupation. Burntbusch, seething, reluctantly says, “Deal.”
Lawson’s resignation and “promotion” are announced. But Burntbusch and his aides, improvising in a panic, are not convincing. Holes in the story incite reporters to investigate. Eventually the truth emerges, to the discredit of Burntbusch and Lawson, and the disgust of the voters.
Just a hypothetical, of course, meant to illustrate the importance of vetting candidates for high office.
But it could happen in Montana. Governors cannot always be trusted to satisfactorily vet replacement lieutenant governors. Legislative confirmation would provide the backstop vetting, but Montana’s constitution omits that insurance policy.
Legislative confirmation, a political process, can have its own problems. Seasoned politicians have made that clear to me, and their arguments should not be dismissed cavalierly. But I believe that a constitutional requirement for legislative confirmation can be written in a way that minimizes the opportunity for partisan mischief while protecting the right of the voters to have nominees for replacement lieutenant governors undergo rigorous public scrutiny before taking the oath of office.
The primary and general election campaigns, of course, vet the candidates nominated by their parties for public office. The process isn’t perfect. John Walsh escaped a thorough vetting in his campaign for lieutenant governor, but he did receive one in his campaign for the U.S. Senate.