Print |
E-mail to a friend
OPINIONS
Editorial: New gubernatorial succession plan is in order
Gov. Earl Ray Tomblin, shown here speaking at the Cabell County Democrat Headquarters in Huntington in this Aug. 12, 2011, file photo, became acting governor of West Virginia in November 2010 because he was Senate president at the time Joe Manchin left the governorÕs position. A proposed constitutional change would provide for a lieutenant governor to succeed a governor in the future.
Purchase this photoA proposed new succession plan for the position of West Virginia governor appears to eliminate the multiple issues that arose when the state's current rules were called into use in 2010.
A bipartisan proposal introduced this week in the state Senate calls for the state's voters to elect a lieutenant governor, a position that does not exist under current West Virginia law. Amending the state's Constitution to allow for a lieutenant governor to succeed the governor if the governor left office for any reason makes sense.
We're all aware of what transpired since the death of U.S. Sen. Robert C. Byrd in June 2010 touched off a chain reaction. Then-Gov. Joe Manchin ran successfully in a special election to replace Byrd in the Senate, thus vacating the governor's seat in November 2010. In accordance with the Constitution, Earl Ray Tomblin became acting governor because he was president of the state Senate. But also in line with the Constitution, Tomblin had to remain Senate president in order to be acting governor. That situation sparked a debate as to whether a special election should be called prior to the next scheduled election -- this year -- to elect a new governor. As it turned out, the courts ruled that a special election had to be held within a year of Manchin leaving the post as governor. That election was conducted, last October, and Tomblin is now an elected governor.
The confusion over the necessity of a special election was just one of the shortcomings of the current constitutional provisions regarding succession. Other questions arose, too. Among them was whether it's appropriate for someone to serve as both a legislative leader and the governor at the same time. We think not. That runs afoul of the division-of-powers provision of the Constitution, a basic foundation for providing checks and balances among the three major branches of government. Another deficiency is that the Senate president is elected to the Senate by voters in just a few counties. The state's full electorate had no say.
The proposed constitutional change addresses all of those issues. A candidate for lieutenant governor would run on the same ticket as a gubernatorial candidate, so voters would know before casting their ballots who the successor would be. The question of whether a special election is necessary would go away, and the change would mean that the person succeeding the governor would have no simultaneous legislative role. In addition, the state's entire electorate would have a say.
Another plus is that establishing the position of lieutenant governor as outlined in the legislation would not mean paying an additional administrative salary. Once elected, the governor would pick which department or agency the lieutenant governor would lead. The lieutenant governor would then receive that office's salary.
For this proposal to become reality, at least two-thirds of the Senate and House must each approve it. Then, a majority of general election voters must then agree to amend the constitution to create this new office.
We hope they all vote "yes" to this change.
