Keeping political power in check

My favorite father-in-law (yes, there have been more than one) once told me that if I ever went fishing make sure that I took two ministers with me. So, I took the bait, “Why is that, Dick?” And he reeled me in, “Because if you take only one, he’ll drink all the beer.” 

Besides being just a joke of dubious quality, the more I thought about it the more wisdom I saw in it. It’s easy to succumb to temptation if nobody’s watching, but if there is someone else there, well, people behave a little better. When the café closes at the end of the day, two employees count the till. When the ballots are counted after an election two (or more) do the counting. It’s not just because people are not always honest, they also make mistakes. As President Reagan put it, “Trust, but verify.”

So, if something is important enough to safeguard, it’s important to have a process to keep it honest, and that’s where what we call the “checks and balances” in the United States Constitution has an important role. Bankers deal in money, ranchers deal in cattle, but politicians deal in power, that is their stock in trade. And, if, as the saying goes, “power corrupts and absolute power corrupts completely,” it is important to prevent people with power from cornering the market on it.  

We see that in elderly politicians who basically doze their way through meetings but have power enough to get away with it. California’s Diane Feinstein and Chuck Grassley of Iowa come to mind, as well as a couple of guys running for president. From the standpoint of an old warrior, no one else is seen as having as much experience or knowledge as they do, and they may be right. But if they had, in addition to that power and experience, a wisdom to know when it is time to pass the torch to another, we would all be better off. When George Washington was done being president (he refused a third term) he went back to Mount Vernon and let others take a turn at running the country. 

Power is not just the tool of the individual lawmaker, it is just as jealously kept and coveted by political parties.  

We see that in Montana where one political party controls all the statewide elective offices and both houses of the Legislature. That is a lot of power, but apparently it isn’t enough, because they are trying their best to gain control over the one branch of Montana government that stands in the way of their achieving absolute power, and that is the Montana Supreme Court which has ruled against laws passed by the Legislature. 

But in order to make that ruling, somebody has to file a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the law and the courts have to rule in their favor. All laws passed by the Legislature and signed into law are assumed constitutional. It is only when the courts rule that a law is unconstitutional that it becomes voided. 

This is called “judicial review” which was established in 1803 in the case Marbury v. Madison. It is a well settled procedure. It allows the courts to rule on the validity of laws passed by Congress and state Legislatures. Republicans feel that the non-partisan Supreme Court is, in fact, partisan because it has ruled against laws passed by Republicans.  

Many Montana Republicans want judicial candidates to declare a party affiliation to list on the ballot. That would help voters make better decisions, they say. That’s selling Montanans short. We make good decisions electing judges and don’t need — or want — party labels to make it easier on our brains. 

If there are three branches of government and one does not agree with the policies of the other two, let’s count our blessings. Governing people is not meant to be accomplished easily, that’s for dictatorships. We have an independent, non-partisan Supreme Court in Montana. We need to keep it that way. 

And remember, when you go fishing, it’s safest to go alone.

Jim Elliott served 16 years in the Montana Legislature as a state representative and state senator. He lives on his ranch in Trout Creek.