SITY OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES 1 HE HISTORY OF APPROPRIATIONS IN THE LEGISLATIVE SESSION OF 1916 New York State CONTENTS PAGE PREFATORY NOTE iii Chapter I— GOVERNOR WHITMAN'S FINANCIAL PROGRAM .... 1 II— THE RECEPTION OF GOVERNOR WHITMAN'S FI- NANCIAL PROGRAM 7 III— A FINANCIAL CHRONICLE OF THE LEGISLATIVE SESSION OF 1916 19 IV— THE APPROPRIATION ACT PREPARED BY THE FINANCE AND WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEES 27 V— THE APPROPRIATION BILL BEFORE THE LEGISLA- TURE FOR CONSIDERATION 51 VI -APPROPRIATION BILLS PASSED BY THE LEGISLA- TURE NOT INCLUDED IN THE GENERAL AP- PROPRIATION BILL 76 VII -CONCLUSIONS 94 APPENDIX TEXT OF THE DEBATE ON THE APPROPRIATION BILL IN THE SENATE 99 ' '- ^.' • • • • « • • • • • » • • • • « . • * • • • • : •' •• •. ; : ; . . . , , . • • 4 • « • .*. , , • • • • , , • • . • • . • • • . • • • • • • • • »•• • • • 1 . •-• S3U PREFATORY NOTE The growing responsibilities and the inevitably increasing cost of modern government have, within recent times, given pause to the most optimistic champions of "the good old American way of doing things." When governments were working with surpluses and committees on ways and means were embarrassed with the number and variety of tax expedients open to them, it per- haps mattered little how estimates were made up, whether they were critically reviewed, or in what manner the appropriations once authorized were actually expended. The broad back of America, as a celebrated financier once remarked, could bear it all. Under such circumstances our men of state could, without much positive danger, be as casual and uninformed in finance as Pitt, who, as Macaulay declared, knew nothing accurately except Spenser's Faerie Queene, never applied himself steadily to any branch of knowledge, was a wretched financier, and never became famiUar with the rules of that House of which he was the brightest ornament. But those easy days are past. Deficits, not surpluses, confront our legislative bodies, and signs are everywhere on the horizon that citizens are alive to the necessity of introducing more order, economy and responsibility into our government. Numerous commissions on economy and efficiency, the debates in constitu- tional conventions, committees on legislative procedure, and recent budget legislation in some of our states, all bear witness to the coming of a new day in American financial administration. The "pork barrel," though large and still iron-bound, is becom- ing a by-word for something not much above larceny. We are really growing dissatisfied with our current fiscal practices and are casting about for some remedy for the evils which we no longer attempt to conceal. In this steadily advancing movement for a revolution in our discredited financial methods, it seems fair to say, the Bureau of Municipal Research has done its full share. During the past two years it has subjected to searching scrutiny the finances of several American states and foreign countries and has amassed a truly monumental collection of information on the whole subject. This material is being put to use in the preparation of a number ill APPROPRIATIONS IN LEGISLATURE, SESSION OF 1016 of descriptive, critical, and constructive handbooks on budgets, accounting, and reporting. Naturally, the Bureau has followed with even more than usual care the course of financial administra- tion in the state of New York, and in accordance with its fixed practice it has sought at first hand an accurate description of the current system as the basis of critical or constructive suggestions. Obviously one of the first necessities of such a survey is a study of the way in which the legislature of the state of New York formulates and passes bills carrying charges on the public treas- ury. The task of making this studj^ was assigned to Mr. Birl E. Shultz, who was equipped for the undertaking by two years of graduate work in politics and administration in Columbia Uni- versity^ and by numerous assignments in the Bureau of Municipal Research to problems involving legislative procedure and meth- ods. After preparing himself for the task by an examination of the available literature on the subject, Mr. Shultz went to Albany and day after day watched the proceedings of the legislature from the lobbies and galleries (and from the floor on some occa- sions), observing closely the actual process of appropriating public money so far as that was visible to anyone not a member of the legislature itself. In addition to his personal observations, he secured all of the records including a stenographic report of the debate in the senate on the general appropriation bill. The result of Mr. Shultz's labors is the following descriptive report. Its value for students of government, members of legis- latures, citizens, and public officers is so apparent that it calls for little comment by way of preface. It presents, for the first time, so far as I know, a full and rather detailed account of the appro- priation methods of an actual legislative session, written by a student whose fundamental interest is scientific in character — a desire to know wie es eigentlich gewesen ist. The report presents in a dispassionate manner the story of the controversy between the legislature and Governor Whitman which forms an illuminat- ing chapter in the history of American financial methods. All of the bills calling for the direct appropriation of money were sifted out and arranged in order, and, on pages 14-18, they are set forth so that the student may see just the nature of the grist which the legislature had to grind. The grand appropriation bill is traced step by step through the legislature, and on the basis of "stop-watch" observations, Mr. Shultz shows just how much "solemn deliberation" it received at the hands of the people's representatives. The conclusions speak for themselves. iv PREFATORY NOTE While it is hardly to be expected that Mr, Shultz has escaped the pitfalls and possibilities of error that He on every side of the most careful and faithful student and while his essay bears some of the marks of the necessary haste under which it was prepared, I feel safe in saying that it is a positive contribution to our con- crete knowledge of American government. Much that he relates has long been known "in a general way," but he has brought generality to earth. Those who in the future have occasion to speak of legislative methods can now speak by the book. It is to be hoped that the volume will meet at the hands of those citizens who desire to be informed about current practices that reception which it truly merits. CHARLES A. BEARD. Training School for Public Service, New York City, June 8, 1916. CHAPTER I GOVERNOR WHITMAN'S FINANCIAL PROGRAM At the opening of the annual session of the New York legisla- ture on January 5, 1916, Governor Whitman laid before that body an elaborate "tentative budget proposal" and a brief con- spectus of the previous year's appropriations and current depart- mental requests, supplemented by executive recommendations as to expenditures and a large volume of supporting data. In order that proper emphasis might be given to state finances, the governor gave special importance to his program by devoting a considerable portion of his regular message to a discussion of it. The Preparation of Governor Whitman's Budget Proposal By way of preparation for his action, Mr. Whitman had, as early as November 5, 1915, appointed two budget advisors, Mr. Charles S. Hervey and Mr. Winfred B. Holton, Jr., to collect estimates for appropriations from heads of departments, bureaus, institutions, offices, etc., under executive direction.^ These gentlemen proceeded to hold a series of open conferences with department heads and other officers having occasion to request appropriations from the treasury of the state. For example, on November 15 the proposed appropriations for the department of agriculture were taken up in conference, the governor, the budget advisors, two members of the legislature, and the commissioner being present.- To these conferences unusual publicity was given by the daily newspapers. After the series of public hearings on departmental require- ments, and the collection of additional information as to the actual needs of the several branches of the state government, the governor's budget advisors came to conclusions on the adequacy or inadequacy of the several requests and in- corporated their findings in the form of a "tentative budget 1 New York Sun, November 5, 1915. 2 Albany Knickerbocker Press, November 16, 1915. APPROPRIATIONS IN LEGISLATURE, SESSION OF 1916 proposal. "^ They re\aewed the departmental estimates and rec- ommended to the governor decreases in some of the requests and increases in others. They received from the comptroller of the state the estimates of the legislative and judicial branches of the government and, having arranged these items in the standard form decided upon, they included them in the consoHdated proposal without change in the sums called for. The General Form of Governor Whitmaji^s Budget Proposal The amounts immediately necessary to meet deficiencies, com- monly known as the "supply bill," were not set forth in a separate measure. Likewise the amounts to be appropriated for repairs, construction or permanent betterments were not embodied in an independent proposal. No bills of this character were pre- pared, but all charges on the treasurj-, special and general, were included in the schedules of the respective departments, bureaus, institutions, etc., and brought together in one general appropria- tion bill. This was done in order that the entire financial record of each institution's needs might be exhibited at one place in the bill for consideration at one time.^ 1 Speaking of this operation the governor said in his message: "I asked the representatives of the finance committees of the legislature in October last to join with me in a budget conference. This conference has held almost con- tinuous public hearings for two months, and representatives of nearly all the departments of the state government except the legislature, judiciary and elected officers have been called before it. In addition to working out a budget form for recommendation to the legislature, the conference has arrived at tenta- tive appropriation figures for the departments which have been examined." ^In a speech delivered before The Real Estate Board of New York, on Febru- ary 5, 1916, Governor Whitman made the following appraisal of his own budget proposal: "All the sound principles which should underlie appropria- tions I feel sure can be enforced under this plan. These principles are: First, That in the process of making appropriations full information should be avail- able as to the needs for the allowances to be made and that the allowances themselves should be acts performed in public; that there should be no star chamber proceedings nor secret log rollings as a condition precedent to appro- priations. Second, That all appropriations of public money should be made in such terms that the public may clearly understand the exact uses to be made of the moneys allowed and that those terms .shall automatically enforce their use for those purposes. Third, That all the appropriations for all activities of the state should be made at one time and in one document, so that on the one hand the appropriation allowances for all departments as a total may be regulated within the power of the State to pay, and on the other hand that no activity should be granted allowances out of proportion to its im- portance at the expense of other activities of the State. Fourth, That once the appropriations are made they should be so restricted that the annual rate of government expense cannot at any time during the year be increased above the level fi.xed at the time of the appropriation. Fifth, That the form in which the appropriations are made shall be so clear and definite that the financial officer of the State shall be able to control the expenditures of those ap- propriations in exact accordance with the intention of the Legislature which made the appropriations, and the Executive who approved them." WHIT^IA^•S FINANCIAL PROGRAM While thus consohdating proposed expenditures, the governor's tentative budget classified the estimates for each grand division of the state work in schedules under the following titles: 1. Personal service 2. Maintenance and operation other than personal service 3. Repairs and construction or permanent betterments. The combined amounts proposed under these titles made up the total appropriation for the grand divison of state work in question.^ A "work program" was also included in each division of the tentative budget. This program was an analytical, itemized statement setting forth in most minute detail how the money was to be spent, and such items were to become fixed appropriations unless the governor by an executive order honored requests for transfers from one item to another under the schedule in question. The executive order authorizing such transfer was subject to certain limitations.- The exact departures made by Governor's Whitman's tentative budget proposal are seen best in the form of a contrast with an appropriation bill for the previous year. This contrast is pre- sented below,^ but it may be said here that the plan offered five distinct features which were deemed advances over former practices: 1 — It brought all appropriations for each institution or de- partment together in one bill, at the same place in that bill, and under one heading in that bill 2 — It provided for a separate "lump sum" personal-service appropriation, instead of including it as formerly in the appropriation for maintenance 3 — It provided a detailed itemization of each of the ap- propriations under the schedules for personal service, maintenance other than personal service, repairs and con- struction 4 — It provided for executive supervision and control of administration by making it incumbent upon the institu- tion or department, before transferring any of the amounts in the detailed itemization under a schedule, to obtain the authorization to do so from the governor 5 — It abolished the supply bill by including a statement of 1 See below, p. 31, for an illustrative section from Governor Whitman's bill. 2 Set forth below, p. 29. ^ See pages 30-36. APPROPRIATIONS IN LEGISLATURE, SESSION OF 1916 amounts to be immediately available, if necessary, in the statement of the total amount appropriated under each schedule.^ Governor Whitman's Additional Recommendation In addition to supporting vigorously his "tentative budget proposal," Mr. Whitman also included in his message a recom- mendation that a constitutional amendment should be adopted conferring upon the governor the right to reduce, as well as to veto items in appropriation bills. He did this on the ground that the existing constitutional provisions seriously interfered with the preparation by the legislature of a state budget in proper form for subsequent consideration by the executive.- The constitutional amendment recommended by Governor Whitman was introduced in the Senate on January 28 by Mr. Argetsinger and referred to the finance committee. The pur- pose of the resolution, as stated in the title, was to change the constitution by **an amendment to Section 9 of Article 4 of the constitution, in relation to the power of the governor to reduce the appro- priations in legislative bills before him for consideration." Under the present constitution, the governor has the power to veto separate items of an appropriation bill. Mr. Whitman's proposed amendment sought to confer on the chief executive of the state an additional right or alternative, namely, the right to reduce one or more of the several items of an appropria- tion bill. It also provided that the governor might reduce 1 The advantages which, in his opinion, were offered by his proposals were explained at length by the governor in his message to the legislature. Chief among these were six: first, that all appropriations or reappropriations for a fiscal year were embraced within one appropriation bill, excepting, of course, jn cases of emergency : second, that by making a complete and informative pres- entation of all fiscal needs of the state in one document, a proper proportion or balance among the various state activities could be maintained; third, that by presenting the appropriations for each activity in one item or group of items they could readily be the subject of one legislative consideration; fourth, that by separating maintenance from personal-service costs a basis was laid for a more mtelligent comparison of expenditures: and fifth, that the system of transfers within schedules on executive order, subject to the limitations above noted, would make workable a highly itemized program of expenditure; and Bixth, that this form of ajjpropriation enabled the legislature to express its administrative policy in the terms of exact appropriations. ^ Among the other financial recommendations were the change of the fiscal year from October 1 to July 1 and the placing of future borrowing "upon a modern and sound financial basis, either through the issue of serial bonds or through the application of actuarial methods to the regulation of sinking fund contributions." WHITMAN'S FINANCIAL PROGRAM the amount of an appropriation if a bill were so presented as to contain but one item of appropriation. It further stipulated that if the legislature was in session at the time of the exercise of the veto or reducing power, the governor should trans- mit to that body a statement of the items objected to or reduced, and that the legislature could reconsider such items separately. If on such reconsideration the legislature should repass by a two- thirds vote any item vetoed or reduced by the governor, the same should become a law notwithstanding his objection. Objections to the Proposed Constitutional Amendment This amendment was not reported to the senate by the finance committee. It was contended by some opponents that the pro- posal was not in any particular a necessary part of proper budget procedure. It was also maintained by some that it opened the way for executive usurpation of legitimate legislative prerogatives. Giving the governor the power to revise the decisions of the legis- lature by reducing such items as he deemed proper was obviously quite a different thing from conferring on him the power to submit a plan of an appropriation bill at the beginning of the legislative session. If the governor could reduce items he could determine the appropriations of the state in detail. He could reduce the amounts appropriated for the legislative and judicial branches of the government to such an extent as to hamper very seriously the legitimate activities of the co-ordinate branches of the state government. It is true that the suggested amendment did provide that the legislature might reconsider items reduced or eliminated by the governor and restore them to their original amounts by a two- thirds vote in each house. But as a matter of common knowledge, most appropriations are included in the bills passed either on the last day of the session or at least a few days before adjournment. Under such circumstances, the legislature would be given no opportunity to review the governor's action. Of course, it might be said that the legislature could readily abandon its present practices and pass all appropriation measures more than ten days before adjournment. The proposed amendment did not provide for any such rule of action, and if it had done so it would have been open to grave objections on that score. It was not difficult to foresee that the actual practice under the contemplated amend- ment would amount to an abandonment of all legislative review of the governor's final decisions on appropriations and to the 5 APPROPRIATIONS IN LEGISLATURE, SESSION OF 1916 adoption of executive discretion as the rule of authority in a large portion of the measures carrying charges on the public treasury. Very emphatic objections to Governor Whitman's proposal were entertained by those who stressed the importance of public- ity and citizen interest as features of a sound budgetary practice. Such opponents pointed out that there was no provision in the amendment for public hearings on reductions by the governor; that the measure would add one more "dark room" procedure to the present secret sessions of the finance and ways and means committees; that it was in flat contradiction to the idea of re- sponsibility in matters of finance; that while permitting the governor to cut and carve the appropriation bills at will, it im- posed no duties upon him in the preparation of a budget; and that it called for no open public consideration of finance bills in the committee of the whole with the governor or his representa- tives present to explain and answer questions. It is not surprising, therefore, that Mr, Whitman's proposal to confer upon the governor the power to reduce as well as to veto items did not come out of the committee to which it was referred. Attacked on the one hand by those jealous of legislative preroga- tives and on the other by those advocates of the executive budget v.ho demand executive responsibility commensurate with the executive power, the death of the measure called forth few, if any, regrets. CHAPTER II THE RECEPTION OF GOVERNOR WHITMAN'S FINANCIAL PROGRAM The preparation of Governor Whitman's "tentative budget proposal" was hardly under way in November before signs of an impending controversy with the legislature appeared. The Albany Knickerbocker Press, on November 6, stated that the Republican members of the senate and assembly looked for a clash between the governor and the legislative leaders on the introduction of his "unofficial budget." It was objected that the governor had not consulted the experts of the state comp- troller's office, nor the leading members of the finance committee of the senate and the ways and means committee of the assembly, that he was usurping the rights of legislative committees in at- tempting to make up a budget, and that the submission of a separate program of appropriations in addition to that prepared by the committees would only introduce confusion. Some mem- bers of the legislature were reported as opposed to the plan on the ground that it was "unfair for the executive to assume the initiative in the making of a budget as long as he must, under the law, exercise the veto of items in that budget." The newspaper headlines on January 3 confirmed the earlier impression that some members of the legislature were readj^ for a battle with the governor.^ The New York City Press and the Governor's Tentative Budget The reception accorded to Governor Whitman's financial program by the New York City press was on the whole favorable. The Sun on January 8 remarked editorially: "The legislature should adopt the budget system which ordinary prudence, com- mon intelligence, and Governor Whitman — may he ever be in such admirable society — urge upon it. The present practice, under which nobody knows what has been appropriated, will then 1 The headlines of the New York Tribune on January 3 ran: "Rival Budgets Ready to Clash; Whitman and Sage Plans Will Fight It Out in the Legislature." APPROPRIATIONS IN LEGISLATURE, SESSION OF 1916 become a memory. . . . We trust that the budget system may be adopted by the state, whose mediaeval methods cost hundreds of thousands of dollars a year." The Evening Post was even more generous in its commentary. It said: "The whole matter is presented by the governor with great directness and force. It is a delight to see an executive grapple so resolutely with so difficult a problem. The solution, however, will not be got without a hard fight. Mr. Whitman will have to go against not merely indifference and inertia, but prejudice and strong political opposition. All the more is it to his credit, say we, that the governor of the greatest business state is girding himself to put the conduct of the public affairs on a business basis. "^ The objection urged in some quarters to the effect that the executive budget amounted to an usurpation of legislative powers was dwelt upon with special emphasis by the New York Times.^ It said editorially that good and sufficient answer was to be found in the fact that the legislature would still have plenary power over the governor's plan. It also warned the legislature that any budget prepared by itself would have to present positive merits and could not secure approval merely as a scheme to baffle the governor. Its criticism of legislative methods and its approval of the governor's position were positive: "The legisla- ture appropriates as blindly as it, the state, spends. The system is indefensible and intolerable. It is a growth, having become by imperceptible degrees what it would be impossible to propose anew outside of a lunatic asylum. The governor is fortunate in being first in the field with his reforms and he will be doubly fortunate if they become associated with his name." The news columns of the papers in their reports from Albany indicated that, from a political point of view, the governor's 'budget proposal was regarded as a challenge to the legislature and that the governor was prepared to assume leadership in bringing order out of the chaos in state finances. The headline in the New York Tribune for January 6, ran as follows: "Whit- man Opens Fight for State Finance Reform." The headlines in the other New York City papers were in the same tone. It seemed clear that the governor had decided to force the issue. Indeed a very firm note ran through the publicity materials sent out by his secretary to the newspapers in support of his message > New York Evening Post, January 5, 1916. 2 January 6, 1916. See also the Brooklyn Standard Union and the Brooklyn Times of January 5, 1916. 8 RECEPTION OF GOVERNOR'S PROGRAM and budget proposal. Whether the newspapers gathered their impressions from these materials or placed their own interpreta- tion on the impending contest between the governor and the legislature, is, of course, a matter of conjecture.^ Legislative Leaders and the Budget Proposal The general approval by the press of Governor Whitman's tentative budget did not find a positive echo in the legislature. The first opinions of legislative leaders were guarded. Senator Elon R. Brown was reported on January 5, as saying: "On the whole, I think the governor's message is admirable and I believe it will meet with widespread approbation. Some details of his financial plan, however, may not meet with favor. They will have to be discussed very thoroughly."- The newspaper report from which this statement is taken went on to indicate that the executive budget plan would undoubtedly meet with the most vigorous opposition from the "Brown-Sage-Walters Group," which wielded such great power in the senate. According to this report also, it was very clear in the minds of the legislators that a positive issue over an executive or legislative budget had been raised and would have to be considered. From this guarded and tentative approval of the governor's plan, members of the legislature moved steadily in the direction of open and avowed hostility. Indeed, the New York World of January 6, headed its report from Albany with the lines "Senate Prepares to Fight Whitman on Budget Reform ; Machine Repub- lican Leaders resent Message Recommendation as Taking from the Legislature Power of Originating Financial Bills; Assembly behind the Governor." Four days later it became evident that if there had been any confusion in the minds of the members of the legislature as to the proper treatment to be meted out to Governor Whitman's budget it was all cleared away. The staff correspondent of the New York Tribune in a despatch of January 9 presented the opinions of the Republican leaders in the follow- ing language: "We are obliged to Governor Whitman for his budget suggestions, and we may avail ourselves of some of them, but the constitution gives the legislature the right to fix appro- priations, and we do not intend to give up that right to the 1 The Evening Mail, January 5: "Whitman Urges Fiscal Reforms in His Message." The Sun, January 6: "Whitman Asks Legislature for a New Budget System." Brooklyn Citizen, January 5: "Whitman Urges Central Control of State Finances." 2 New York Evening Post, January 6, 1916. 9 APPROPRIATIONS IX LEGISLATURE, SESSION OF 1916 governor."^ This was represented as tantamount to saying that while the Republican leaders did not openly reject the gover- nor's recommendation they would prepare their own bill, adopting such of the governor's suggestions in detail as were acceptable. In a few days the staff correspondent of the Tribune stated in authoritative language that "Governor Whitman's plan for a state budget has been rejected by the Republican leaders of the senate; instead the senate leaders plan to pass the appropriation bills in the same old way, but with unanimity of action that will allow the governor to have all of the bills before him at one and the same time." ^ Mr. Whitman's Attitude Toward His Own Budget Bill The attitude of the governor was somewhat uncertain. Ac- cording to some accounts he seemed prepared to fight for his budget bill. On January 9, he was represented as saying that he would not tolerate any trifling with it; that while he did not object to reductions, he would under no circumstances agree to increases, and that he was determined to pass his bill at any cost.^ A week later newspaper reports stated that men on intimate terms with the executive declared that he was going to fight for the budget bill to the limit, and that he had no objections to reductions being made, but ''under no circumstances would he consent to increases."^ In these reports it appeared that the governor had come to a clear decision in his own mind that a principle was at stake and that it was his bounden duty to make a fight for the system of economy which was offered by an executive budget as contrasted with the chaos and wastefulness which resulted from the present legislative action. ^ But there were at the same time other re- ports to the effect that his views were not so decided; in fact, on January 5, he was reported as saying, "My budget is just a ten- tative one; the legislature may do with it what it sees fit."^ That this really represented the most mature view of the governor seems to be demonstrated conclusively by his letter written to Dr. Frederick A. Cleveland of the Bureau of Municipal 1 New York Tribune, January 10, 1916. 2 Ibid., January 17, 191G. 3 Ibid., January 10, 1916. ^ Ibid., January 17, 1916. 'See Mr. Henry L. Stimson's endorsement of the governor's budget plan, New York EvcninJ -^ 00 00 c^ ■o 00 OOCfl »H cn>Olt5COffl«001>• <<■ <<<;<;<< *i,^i'i,'S,<<«<.<<<«<<<<<<««<«< >ooooooocooooooooooooo-«»*oooooooooo^ JOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOSOOOOOOOOOOC OOOOOOOOOOOiOOOOOOOOOOOOOCCOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOQOOOOOOOOOOOO^OOOOOOOOOO ooooooooSSocBooooo 0_>0_0_0_0_0_-"_0 0_0 0_0_0 0_t^0_0 >o ■* o o o"o o"o">o -"">o"-* """o" o"c^"o'>rf'o'c^">oo"f--"o'o'>«--o'o o "5 o t-- o o e© ^ c^ cc ^ 03 ^ o o oa> ooooo ^-ic^.— it-H^i— (.— "CO— ioo^^cO'— »cD»-«eo ■^ " ?„ a> "= 6 ^.■" ^-S ^O' .S -^ a a-gc .2 § 5^i^-S: ozz o 2 a 2SSSSiir~ooS»o~«-*'>"racoxi — McoaiC!OOoiM'MCnM'0>raocoi3>o>o«> MMCQaJoQracQMoiaaMmwaJMaicQMaJMcdwcQMWcQM mioioioirt00a>a>a>oo-*-*'rau?'nco:oooco — «iMC^««t~t— t^t^QOooa>»o>aio>^ a a a a a a a a a a a a BflHB — — — — — ii;p^Pz,p^pKpClp:,ELiP^pC4Ci<[x<[z, l-> CO OM OJ QJ 'V tc a > S'S efi a 03 UtiJ pqQfeO Nt* COCO o CD(M t^c- CO •— < OiCi V ^O , fc- iM M CD boo "^^ — ' B^SvB--M "S «^ S'E'H S S S -^ « « ca « rt^a Muo) gSrt£S« :h ,, !« « ei ^■f^ ee ;i: -^ • ^ J: ^ ^e2 3^ t^ cc »c CO oo -^ 1^ . o t^ OS M oo t^ ci o c^ •* o r^ t^ t^ lo ■»}< . (M lo . oo os <OOOOOOOO OOOOr^OOOI^«DOOOOOOOOOOOOOCDOOCDOOOOCDOC0O»^OOO^OOOOC2O^O 0_t^ O lOC^O O^iCI^I^O O O OOOOtOOOOOOOOO^OOCOOO^^U^OC^^OOOOOOOOOOOtO 00 lOC^iOOW 00 ^w"o ^O O M i^C^To t£3 O O O CC if^O O *0 cT-^O O "f -^'cT O O O O O »C O »C O O Cfl" ■> >> >> b= g b i=b cJ ||aa^§^«„o| S^:a=.g^:s^^-^g;2|5 S:E.H.2 S^'S.S'i S E-g § S S te.H 5 1^-5 | | S S I J'g^ J'g.S I £ fe|'§^ J'§S £ -"§ " S 2 « EH3rtZOi;MZ!^SSartSSKtii&:(S^KHHKa3ZSpaSiSfflWHHmfe:m£SmSmZoSz£&: Sp. a o lOOcDco^*^*^*^*t^^^I>-oooooot»c»(Moooi050JOsOiC505csoso50000»---H-H1-Hl^^cK^c^c^^c<^c^c^c^c^coM XSXi^XiXlJD^^ U (_ lU. 1-1 15 APPROPRIATIONS IN LEGISLATURE, SESSION OF 1916 .5 4 o I— t CO CO CO Q fH O O o 5z; PS f CO < H PS E-i O pa c p; «: W o > PS pj ■< o CO iJ >^ f^ O E-i CQ 9< Z C o a a pa o o o « u » V OJ 0) PS PS PS oa> o o p4 psps t^ ^H d CO ■* CO CO »c oo t^ »o ^- o o o — • -^ — coco oo..»^ .^^.. CDOO'^OOOOO OOioO ;c^«*c5ocicid djdd Pips pSpSpSpSpS PS PSPS BENil Slater Horton »4 03 1 Boylan Spring Marshall Walton Jones NO l-H 00 O00«0>t0 v-^ 00 CO 05 t— OS << <« < < -^. -< -« -< -t; <:-< cc m p^moQcococo CO n u iOCOOt>.00»OOOOOOOOOOOCv1000000000000000000000 C0^0'^00-»1*OOOC500000CJ'«J'_000000000000000000000 CO^-Ot^OO-'J'OOOOOOOOOC-I^OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOiOOOOOO OCOtC-^OOOOOOOOOOOOOOSOOOOOOOCSOOOCDOOOkCOOOOO ■^Ji_»-H_^_OS_0 O OiC lO iO O O O O ^O O -^ '^"^^^1® O O o O O O O O O O O »^0 O lOO^O u^»-H- o S a ..2 6-^^.-2-| i-gO 3 >;. a 5 '■-3'^-S '^ S " ° ">2— =« s .r ■ > 3 2 - ^ " ^ ace o" ^-i J.- . a; J 5i o . - a-s ""s-s is , a; 0) '3 " i >> a -^ S 2 " oJ e8 g a .2 tZ3 'a a o Of a .2 .° O) •S 7.-e ?^ .*; X S ^3 -o 25 -g=.TS a .2 a I* ca a ^ 'i^'a ^ ^ a.2 a =i s 3§^^i.s fe > a 73 a c5 a^^ 2 A-- co-«;; - =3 J: .is? ^ 5-° cj Qj r ■s a^ o o-a ' « CO o "O**- -a — rf " =: tl ^ a; b£ S a es d « M a ■a a 3 a - S M S -° a s_ g.-2-s »-s gi = - ^ 0) . a ca'^-^.kj.2 t- i^^ > o oj '^ sg.tS-S^-gafc i >. . o^ a « '^■s>-S'*.a §■ a 3 . _- >>,9 ■= ga sQ-a J? !3 >• . <" v2 «5 §" « oz >.t:=^ ^;-= g S.S O £"S>? «.2 3 « « 3 QOCE-PSm^cOQa^coQ a M I 3 2 o- S r a (a o ■ Sao oj _r o a o bo :^ 2 a * u a a a". * fe I* « o IS » a et ^>> tS 03 Ph ^ Tzaa bD o • - s 0:5s o 0) .■!; « "S " . = 0= o 6 a o > ^ > . jai Qmmoaa O ^_.2 ^ "1 s JKZ Sic a 2 §'-5.s a 2 o rtit; .a M a 3 OJ g a fe E o » 3 ^-Zp; ^0 0) ca-i*s e4 fl S; ^c^Z o O CO o 3 a-5 11^ a -Ml a o H n .-/-I r/-i .. : o - > S 3 a a o o m OQ o. a. a a o o O .^ . OJ C >-j3 r^ Z kJ :£ S ; c; „ _ cj a; *^ - -a 0) a &E a a 5 ." Q - >. a a p o.o.o.Q.2.a.o.a.J3 «E-| a a a o o m tn O. O. So s — . o bo a o >.'S:^ c3 S "s >>;?' c« 2 . a S a3r? .= b S^r.^ « S m aj £ - - - cag ex &D C9 05 com Horton Whitney Sage Towner Newton Wagner Wagner Norton Horton Halliday Argetsing coed CT> .OOMOSCOOOO in CO S CO CO coco' coco' Saj S. 717 S. 715 S. 812 Rec. No. 181 Rec. No. 194 C050t^Ot^?Ot^OOOiOCC'-^cr GOO t-^ o »o iO'«j^(r4"od iOl'-r »-* Tt< M ^^ eOi-Hi-H lO iO --* r-l f-^ t^ ■<1' ^ CO ^N rt M i-H 8o^ o o^-o oooo OO wi"o" iC OI>. (M 1-1 CS 00 CO ic C^ »0 '-" O eO o « -♦^ ^^ CJ o M M ca 3 O a a M?i§a3 (D V u^ a iD Zi .d ^ O c4 o^ o - s a -a Mi3 *e u o) *= t^ !^ ^- ja = -^ ODhOO o — -3 2 03 rt >i — ai *a ~^ w ^ I' n" 9 3— r o o o o-s a 'Sg.a g: V SCO ^ O iS ^ fe O " 3 ' ■ l-a-cQ fc- bjD a ^. £ 3 a H !; aj - .55 aa o co^f^ --^ts* C3 fl c3 b « t." s a "a g §•§"£ oo" fe .S .a := o S3 iS-Q a o X eg I aj M O OT -S'3 3 2 " S '"^ «^ a-- (2 -^ " « |m >> m 3 a - it Or^^v m.SZ. 03 £.2 a'a.tJ O > d g -*J • s> . oT S 5 CO fc- Sa 3 tn ^ ao o CO a r a rt p ..Tja »o bO coSoS •-=5"S a ^ 0-" 2 gKv^ =3^ 9 M-- --"i.sS o > o ca - '^_§ ^^.s Sdn a fc-^-Q & - j=— g -g a o j3 H M ja S S b J3 M > OJ _ o ca ca ■T3-a o C e d dS §gi^g§j5go|.-a||a.o 5 2 S vaU ate §.3 s a P ta:= 3 ^^ cat dO,^ fe .2 O p OO J9 ^■^ ta "■r- g-^J=-!i a g s £'§ ?^ ?,>^>'S-'=z ^M^><>'' ?i ? 3. o a;g"aSa)a;"oaa!ng-5gacs2 a^ S"^ 3S='S'a3SC_S-sS!*i*?ic — •E g"C a a o caja ca >>aj3P ca:= 3 go catria £-C;Si,-g ca g g"« 3 £ 3^3 Sou g §« WcoWeQOOhjpqOhJMOoM worn paw i-)^o<;wWhJccmcccBZZmfem<:Q-5zZm!iHK ;e & s^-s o O e n O P §c8 ca ^ a^rt'«ococ*l■^ocDGOoooiO^H'^^cocDOOoo c^wc^lcccocococoMcoco■^T}1■TJ^■<(J4»o^»c«^lOlOOlO»o»o»ocDocDcD'OcD'00t^^*^-^-GOC»ooola>OlC>oso»os OOO■»**"^•^'^'<*^"*^OO-^■^1-l1-HC*«C^C0C0■^^*^»^^^^00Q00i010S0>0SOO'-^|»-^^^lClC»/^000000' ^ oS cS ^ APPROPRIATIONS IN LEGISLATURE, SESSION OF 1916 O o to K H Q O t> Q O Pi H Z OS CO < fa Pi H D3 H Z O M O CJ PS PS o PQ O H CO g a z e o S ^ OS c^ & t- a 2 o " < 5 » S P £i ^ (C M J a to o. a o H ►-4 ^ "^H 00 c; — ^ CC ^ t^ t^ 00 t^ OC 00 oQcocoaicoco s o Christman Christman Wilson Towner Towner Horton Sage Halliday Horton Halliday Wellington Wellington 00 en MCSOOOOOCCSO 00 in 6 Z »o »oic »o o. a o M S o . o b'^ t. c . CC a; a; c/2 CG CC a: CC Sa:cz:cc;» r^ ^ _< CO r- 00 Cl CO o t^ C^ lO »— CM c^ fccjS -1^ p. B fiJ tl .Zi -^ o > * . il t tt 2, C * C fO - cj^ o =; c3 3 >>r^ 0) 'O S-^ a . _ hJO,SZE- C3 p, ►J 3 O t£ Ml2 ^ 3 - -"Off ^ o fe ii G .s a.s g-2 o J3 « U _ >, >> *J C O .t;-i'!^ o ° c " D. o .^2-- ■" o-o (Z3 C8 ff u _ Is Zromc/:KPa a. B 6 n1 6U 6 6 -3 a g s a a >> c 33 o o c cQ jo c g 1-5 s 22 -O n w-j: Oi o cimm CJ <^ o o oo a a -C-C g (U o O ir £j o O O >> -a w O O «3 3 3 r- H-^ O" -rilt: — .— fc,^ q r-^ O O "2 h C O 0.2 C3 5 qj3 y X a Q H K CO rZ B. :^ E- H O O « ca =5 33 Z K « :^ < 2 q^ Oj; o a> C8 S JO £ 2 ■«■■£ o «0 3 , O " § ff 0) o o t^ ■■?: e B .«-> 00 cn !, CJ CJ 5 h-= ca CJ 3 ?' o r^cC'ir^r^CJC^os"^oc^o-H^^ rtrtc8eO^e8e8^gtCc6c8c8rtc8c9rtcflaic8t0eOrtc3cBc8rtc3<0cOc3cflo3tOf~(-^ 18 CHAPTER III A FINANCIAL CHRONICLE OF THE LEGISLATIVE SESSION OF 1916 In order that the student of the legislative session of 1916 may the more readily trace the various stages in the history of the governor's "tentative budget proposal," the several plans for fiscal reform, and the methods adopted in making appropriations, it seems proper to set forth the following financial chronicle even at the possible cost of some repetition: November 4, 1915 — Governor Whitman appointed two budget advisors to conduct hearings and assist him in drafting a tentative budget and formulating his views on the needs of the ad- ministrative departments, before the appropriation bills reached him in final form from the legislature. January 5, 1916 — In his annual message to the legislature on the "condition of the state" Governor Whitman included an explanation with respect to the form and amount of the annual appro- priations, and submitted, as a model, a "tentative" appro- priation bill appropriating $57,161,517.44. All estimates were included in one consolidated bill. With the exception of the administrative departments under the governor, no changes in the amounts requested by the various branches of the state government were made. Permission to transfer items within certain limitations was made contingent upon "executive order." In the message, the governor recom- mended the enactment of an amendment to the constitution giving the executive the power to reduce the amount of items of appropriation. The message, including the "tenta- tive budget proposal" was referred to the ways and means committee in the assembly and to the finance committee in the senate. 19 APPROPRIATIONS IN LEGISLATURE, SESSION OF 1916 January 11 — Dr. Frederick A. Cleveland, Director of the Bureau of Municipal Research, wrote Governor Whitman commending him for the "advanced step" he had taken "in submitting a proposed appropriation bill to the legislature during the first week of its session. "^ In addition, Dr. Cleveland raised with the governor two questions: 1 — Whether he should not also "at a date somewhat later than the time when the estimates and requests for ap- propriations are sent in" submit his views on the meth- ods of raising revenue to finance the expenditures. 2 — Whether he should not make public announcement to the effect that, since the estimates had been laid before the legislature the first day of its session in the form of a draft of a bill, no "emergency message" would be forth- coming this year to assist the legislature in waving aside the constitutional requirement that every bill must be "printed and upon the desks of the members in its final form at least three calendar legislative days prior to its final passage, unless the governor . . . shall have certified to the necessity of its immediate passage." ^ January 20 — The Bureau of Municipal Research submitted a memorial to the legislature in which it asked three things:^ 1 — That the senate and assembly change their rules of procedure in such manner as to permit the initial con- sideration of the governor's proposal in committee of the whole house, with the governor or his representatives present to answer questions concerning the recommenda- tions in the "proposed tentative budget." 2 — That the "Legislative Law" of the state be amended in such manner as to provide for committee of the whole procedure on all finance measures.^ 3 — That the "Executive Law" of the state be amended in such manner as to make it the duty of the Governor to present annually to the legislature a complete plan of proposed expenditures and estimated revenues together with the measures of taxation, if any, which may be necessary to finance the expenditures. 1 Municipal Research, No. 69, p. 75. 2 Constitution of the State of New York, Art. Ill, Section 15. ' Municipal Research, No. 69, pp. 69, 75. See also N. Y. Times, N. Y. Sun, N. Y. World, of Jan. 20. * Section 23 of the "Legislative Law" requires that "all bills that involve any appropriations . . . when introduced in the senate shall be referred to the committee on finance, and when introduced in the assembly shall be referred to the committee on ways and means." 20 FINANCIAL CHRONICLE, 1916 LEGISLATURE January 21 — Governor Whitman's reply to Dr. Cleveland was received at the Bureau of Municipal Research. ^ The governor took the following position: 1 — That he was in favor of the executive doing what he had done this year, viz.: submitting to the legislature "a tentative appropriation budget" to serve as a proper model for a state appropriation bill and to show the opin- ion of the governor with respect to the estimates for all departments under executive control, together with the estimates of other departments, as submitted to the comptroller, subject only to executive revision as to clas- sification of expenditures. 2 — That his suggestion to the legislature for an amendment of the present constitution granting to the executive the right to reduce an item in an appropriation bill, does not disturb the balance, which exists under the present constitution, between the executive and the legislature, but simply allows the executive a slightly wider latitude in the exercise of his constitutional right to check legislative action. 3 — That if the legislature followed his wishes in the matter, there would he no 'private sessions of a legislative committee for the consideration of an appropriation bill. 4 — That the revenue side of the state's finance should not be taken up at the same time as the expenditure side because the expenditures of the state should not be based upon the possible revenues which may be gouged out of the taxpayers. 5 — That he had already, in conference with the leaders of the senate and assembly, informed them that he would insist upon the passage of the appropriation act without recourse to an emergency message. 6 — That he was not prepared to support any plan which would make the executive a leader in fiscal matters, or that would make the executive other than what he had been in the past, viz.: an adviser to and a check upon the legislature. January 25 — The Bureau of Municipal Research replied to Governor Whitman's letter of the 19th.2 The Bureau called atten- tion to the following: 1 — That anyone who assumes responsibility for leadership on an expenditure program should give some thought to the question of how the money is to be raised. 1 Municipal Research, No. 69, p. 79. Also N. Y. Sun, Times and Herald of Jan. 21. ^Ibid., p. 86. See also TV. Y. Herald, Times and Sun of Jan. 27. 21 APPROPRIATIONS IN LEGISLATURE, SESSION OF 1916 2 — That gross extravagance has been due to lack of fore- thought and consideration of the necessary relation of money-raising to money-spending. 3— That the clause of the constitution ' ' the governor . . . . shall communicate by message to the legislature at every session the condition of the state,'' among other things means financial ''condition,''' and consequently "ways and means" of raising revenue. 4 — That the executive could not be held responsible for results on any "tentative" or other proposal under a procedure which permits individual members to in- crease items without consulting the wishes of the exec- utive or giving to him an opportunity to be heard before the measure is passed. 5 — That the committee of the whole procedure essentially in the form suggested in the draft accompanying the memorial of the Bureau to the legislature was the pro- cedure best adapted to give publicity to financial pro- posals; that it afforded opportunities to members on the floor to ask questions of officers who are charged with the direction and management of the state's business; that it enabled executive officers to submit, explain and defend plans which they had conceived to be for the best interests of the state; and that it gave the people, through the press, a chance to know what had been going on and to have the benefit of discussion and criti- cism of plans. 6 — That such a procedure had always resulted in increasing the power and control of the legislative body by cutting out the monopolies exercised by a few men on standing committees, and forcing executive officers to convince a majority of the representatives of the people that their proposals are sound and in the interest of the general welfare, before they are approved. 7 — That the standing committee system in this country had been the very thing that had subverted the principle of the separation of powers — put matters of administra- tion into the hands of irresponsible groups of legisla- tors and made the irresponsibility, inefficiency and wastefulness of our government a subject of constant reproach. 8 — That public hearings by the governor, after bills had been passed, could not take the place of hearings on a definite executive plan prepared, submitted and dis- cussed on the floor of the legislature before the appro- priation bill came up for passage; that such pubhc hear- ings could not take the place of leadership and open- handed dealing. 22 FINANCIAL CHRONICLE, 1916 LEGISLATURE 9 — That if the governor were given the right to reduce as well as to veto items in the appropriation bill, the exer- cise of this unusual right, not granted specifically by the constitution of any other state, would operate in practice to take away from the legislature its proper function, enable the governor to override the legislative will without opportunity being given to members to be heard and would create simply another one of the many forms of "invisible" government. January 26 — Senator Mills introduced his executive budget bill, provid- ing— 1— For review of departmental estimates by the governor, and the submission to the legislature, not later than the first day of February annually, of consolidated estimates of expenditures together with a plan of financing. 2 — For the report to the legislature by the committees of a single appropriation bill at least ten days before the day fixed for final adjournment, and for consideration of this bill in committee of the whole on "at least six full legislative days" as the special order of the day, with the governor and heads of departments present to an- swer questions of members. 3 — For separate vote in committee of the whole on the appropriation for each department, office, bureau and institution, etc. January 28 — Senator Argetsinger introduced the Whitman constitu- tional amendment conferring on the governor the power to reduce items of an appropriation bill. The resolution was referred to the finance committee and was not reported to the senate. January 28 — Mr. Adler, the "majority leader" of the assembly in- troduced his bill making the fiscal year of the state end June 30, instead of September 30. This bill passed the assembly March 7, the senate March 28, and was approved by the governor, April 3. February 5 — Governor Whitman speaking before the Real Estate board of New York said: "Your first question no doubt will be what the new state finance plan means on the side of state economy. My 23 APPROPRIATIONS IN LEGISLATURE, SESSION OF 1916 answer is that on a comparison of like appropriations of last year with the governor's conference recommenda- tions of this year, a reduction in the cost of government of over $5,000,000 is shown. I stated in my message that / expected the legislature to make a very large de- crease below these figures in the appropriations as finally approved. I feel sure that the Legislature can reduce these figures from one to two million dollars more."^ February 8 — Senator Bennett introduced his resolution inviting the governor to address the legislature, at a joint session of the senate and assembly to be held in the assembly chamber February 23, 1916, and to answer questions by members with respect to his "tentative budget," the probable revenues of the state for the fiscal period, and "ways and means" as to new sources of revenue to the amount of $2,351,806.87 — the excess of his "tentative budget proposal" over the comptroller's estimates of probable revenues. The resolu- tion was referred. March 6 — Senator Sage introduced his budget bill providing for a legislative budget. This bill weakened the responsibility of the governor for leadership in administration by con- ferring power on two clerks, chosen by the chairmen of two legislative committees, to travel over the state at will, and to prepare the annual appropriation bill. The Sage bill con- tinued the present "standing committee" procedure on 1 The figures of his "tentative budget proposal" referred to by Governor Whitman were $57,161,517.44. Instead of the "one to two milhon dollars" reduction by the legislature, the following table shows that the total appro- priations by the legislature of 1916 were $61,150,778.37: Bills Approved by Governor Miscellaneous, special bills $178,276 .40 Highway (2), and barge canal towing fa- cilities bills 3,960,071 .20 Total $4,138,347 .60 Thirty-Day Bills Pending before Governor on the adjournment of the legislature Miscellaneous, special and local bills .... 4,231,299 .64 General appropriation, supply, reappro- priation, and construction bill items . . 52,781,131 . 13 Total 57,012,430.77 Total amount of the Forty-six Appropriation Bills $61,150,778.37 24 FINANCIAL CHRONICLE, 1916 LEGISLATURE finance measures. It passed the legislature March 23, and was approved by the governor April 5.^ March 6— Senator Brown introduced his constitutional amendment designed to strengthen, still further, legislative budget pro- cedure by authorizing either house to "designate one of its members to serve in the preparation of a budget as a member of a commission, committee or otherwise, when the legislature is not in session, with such compensation as vaixy be provided by law." The amendment also provided that all appro- priations "must be in the annual appropriation or supply bill unless passed by a two-thirds vote of the members elected to each branch of the legislature, or requested in a message from the governor." The resolution states that "neither the appropriation or supply bill shall be passed under a certificate of necessity," and that after the appropriation or supply bill has been under consideration, in printed form as finally reported by a standing committee, for three sepa- rate legislative days it may be passed "as amended on one of such days." Amended on the next to the last day of the session, after having been under consideration for the two previous days, the appropriation or supply bill could be passed on the closing day of the session, as amended the day previous, without a certificate of necessity from the governor. Instead of correcting the abuse this resolution provides for its continuation. It abolishes the emergency message evil, but permits the appropriation bill to be amended and passed during the closing hours of the session.^ The amendment passed the Senate, April 15, but was held in the ways and means committee of the assembly, and not submitted to that body for consideration. 1 See Municipal Research, No. 70. 2 The text of the Brown legislative budget amendment (S. Int. 821, Pr. 1784) is as follows: "Except as provided by section twenty of article three, an ap- propriation at a regular session of the legislature must be in the annual appro- priation or supply bill unless passed by a two-thirds vote of the members elected to each branch of the legislature, or requested in a message from the governor. Neither the annual appropriation or supply bill shall be passed under a certificate of necessity or passed by either house, or become a law unless before it is deemed to be in final form, it shall have been under consideration on at least three separate legislative days in printed form as finally reported by a standing com- mittee or as amended on one of such days. Either house may designate one of its members to serve in the preparation of a budget as a member of a com- mission, committee or otherwise, when the legislature is not in session, with such compensation as may be provided by law. " 25 APPROPRIATIONS IN LEGISLATURE, SESSION OF 1916 April 5 — The finance and ways and means committees acting jointly, for the first time, reported the annual appropriation bill to the legislature. Under the rules, however, the bill could not be considered, and on April 12, it was referred back to the committees for amendment.^ April 17— The annual appropriation bill was considered in the As- sembly for two and one-half hours and passed under a "short roll call", i.e., a five-second proceeding under which four names are called — the first and last names on the roll, and the names of the majority and minority leaders — 'and a party vote of 90 ayes and 40 noes recorded on the bill. April 19— The senate passed the annual appropriation bill after a five-hour debate, participated in by Senators Bennett, Brown, Sage and Wagner. April 20— The legislature adjourned. Of the 1,477 bills introduced in the senate. 111 involved the appropriation of money from the state treasury, and of the 1,596 introduced in the assembly, 99 placed a charge upon the taxpayers of the state.^ The general appropriation bill and 45 additional appropriation bills passed the legislature. The amount of money appropriated by the 45 bills was $8,369,647.24. Adding this amount to the annual appropri- ation bill of $52,781,131.13 brings the grand total passed by the legislature to $61,150,778.37. Thirty-six of the 45 bills, involving appropriations of $4,231,299.64 are now (May 8, 1916) pending before the governor as thirty-day bills, along with the appropriation bill. While the $4,231,299.64 in- cludes the $1,956,275.98 "town aid" highway appropria- tion, no less than $1,618,142.09 of the remaining $2,275,- 023.66 was rushed through the legislature during the last day and a half of the session immediately after the passage of the appropriation bill at 1.00 p.m. Wednesday, April 19.^ ^ See below, p. 51. * Of the 1,477 bills introduced in the senate and the 1,596 introduced in the assembly many were identical. The number of bills passed l)y the legislature was 80.3, of which 260 were approved and 5 vetoed before the legislature ad- journed. See above, pages 13-19 for additional details. 'See below, p. 80 for action of Governor on these bills. 26 CHAPTER IV THE APPROPRIATION ACT PREPARED BY THE FINANCE AND WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEES The "tentative budget proposal," accompanied by the executive tabulation of the departmental requests submitted by Governor Whitman, was referred, immediately after the reading of the annual message of the governor, to the finance committee of the senate and the ways and means committee of the assembly. January 20, Mr. Maier, Chairman of the ways and means committee introduced the governor's tentative proposal in the assembly as the annual appropriation bill. The bill received its first reading, consisting of the following remarks by the clerk, " the people of the state of New York represented in senate and assembly do enact as follows" and was referred to the ways and means committee. The bill was given introductory number 281, printed number 295, The introduction served the purpose of supplying the members of the legislature and others with addi- tional copies of the governor's proposal and was evidently calcu- lated to have a political effect, — to show that the assembly leaders were "with the governor." In the meantime, the standing committees sent the governor's bill, informally, to the comptroller's office with instructions to rearrange the items in accordance with the usual practice, retain- ing the itemized schedules. The comptroller's edition of the budget appeared suh rosa in limited numbers about the middle of February. Apparently the editors received instructions to tear apart the appropriations for each particular institution and di\ision of the government so that amounts to become imme- diately available could be brought together in a separate supply bill, and amounts to be appropriated for construction, repairs and permanent betterments compiled into a construction and repairs bill, etc. The bills as thus compiled from the disin- tegrated "tentative proposal" were named "Parts," and the whole bound under one cover. At the same time, the words 3 27 APPROPRIATIONS IN LEGISLATURE, SESSION OF 1916 "Schedule A," "Schedule B," etc., and the short statement with respect to the total amount appropriated under each schedule were omitted from the text of the new bill. Inadvertently, however, the sections at the end of the governor's bill were reprinted in the comptroller's edition, so that the conditions under which trans- fers of items within a schedule could be made were set forth with- out any possibility of a transfer ever taking place, because the word "Schedule," to which the conditions specifically appHed, had been omitted from the text of the bill. It thus appeared as early as the first of March that it was the intention of the standing committees to adopt the policy of itemization for each institution, department, etc., and definitely to appropriate such detailed segregated items as fixed sums without permitting any transfer whatsoever. So far the bill remained the same as the Whitman bill with the two very important exceptions noted above as to transfers and the setting up of separate supply bill, construction bill items, etc. The Whitman plan brought the entire story with respect to an institution together at one place in the bill; the committee plan broke this story into some three or four parts. The amounts remained the same except that items of the Whitman "work program" now became "fixed items" of appropriation. The finance and ways and means committees did not hold public hearings on the bill. Through their knowledge of past experience, through secret investigations, and calls made by department heads, and members of the legislature, etc., the chairmen and their associates came to decisions as to amounts to be appropriated. It should be recorded to the credit of Senator Sage and Assemblyman Maier that the committees of both branches of the legislature worked jointly. The bill as presented on April 5, contained, therefore, the views of the two committees. This effectively obviated the usual conference ses- sions and amendm.ent during the closing hours of the session. April 12 the bill was again amended. The changes made, how- ever, were only minor ones. The System of Transfer of Items Provided for in the Whitman Bill Before the specific differences between the 1915 appropriation bill, the Whitman bill and the 1916 bill are pointed out, it is important to set forth in detail the scheme included in the Whit- man bill by which the executive was empowered, on application 28 THE COMMITTEES' APPROPRIATION BILL from the department or institution head, to authorize a transfer from one item to another under a "personal service" or other schedule of an institution, etc. A statement preceded each schedule. In the case of the Hud- son River State Hospital, for example, the statement v/as as follows: HUDSON RIVER STATE HOSPITAL For payment for services of employees at Hudson River State Hos- pital, the sum of three hundred fourteen thousand nine hundred eighty- six dollars ($314,986). SCHEDULE A PERSONAL SERVICE The above statement was followed by a "work program" or itemization of the personal service schedule for the institution. The $314,986 was a fixed appropriation. The items under the "personal service" schedule also became fixed appropriations unless the governor by an executive order honored requests for transfers from one item to another under the schedule in question. The entire text of the procedure under which this was to take place, subject to limitations on the executive in honoring such transfers, is printed verbatim from the Whitman bill: The several amounts enumerated in a list of proposed payments for serv- ices and expenses entitled "schedule," in this act and following an item of appropriation, indicate the initial plan of distribution of such appropria- tion and not additional moneys appropriated. A sum appropriated, with schedule, for personal service or for maintenance other than personal service shall be paid out onh' in accordance with the schedule therefor, unless it be modified as hereinafter provided. A plan for the revision of a schedule to provide for the distribution and apportionment, in a manner different from that set forth in the original schedule, of a sum so appro- priated or the unexpended balance thereof, may be from time to time submitted in writing to the Governor. Where the appropriations relate to State institutions, any such plan may be submitted by the following authorities: For State prisons, by the Warden or Superintendent of a State's prison, or a hospital for the criminal insane, subject to the approval of the Superintendent of State Prisons; for a State charitable institution, by the Superintendent or head of such institution, subject to the approval of the board of managers or trustees of the institution; for institutions subject to the provisions of the Insanity Law, by the Superintendent or head of such institution, subject to the approval of the State Hospital Commission. In all other cases, the plan may be submitted by the commission, board or officer for whose department, office or functions the appropriation is made. If the Governor shall approve the plan, he shall transmit the same with his certificate of approval to the Comptroller, and the Comptroller thereafter, in the expenditure of such appropriation, shall be governed thereby. A plan may be withdrawTi and amended to meet the Governor's objections, if any, and resubmitted. A position established, or substituted by any such revision, within the competitive class of the classified civil service shall be filled in accordance with the Civil Service Law and Rules. Modifications of personal service schedules as provided in this act, shall be restricted as follows: (a) From salaries regular to salaries regular; 29 APPROPRIATIONS IN LEGISLATURE, SESSION OF 1916 (b) from salaries temporary to salaries temporary; (c) from wages regular to wages regular; (d) from wages temporary to wages temporary; (e) the amount expendable in any month for salaries of regular employees shall not exceed one-twelfth of the total amount available by the original schedule for salaries of regular employees; (f) the amount expendable in any week for wages of regular employees shall not be more than the pro rata of the number of working days in such week to the total number of working days provided by the original schedule line for the whole year; (g) the salary or compensation of a member of a board or commission, or other officer, at the head of a State department or office, or of any deputy of such department, board, commission or office, as specified in an original schedule of this act, shall be the salary or compensation of such member, oflficer or deputy for one year, notwithstanding the existing provisions of any other statute fixing the annual salary, or the compensation, at a different amount, except that such salary or compensation may be re- duced but not increased by a revision of the schedule under this act. Differences between the Appropriation Bills of 1915, the Whitman Bill and the 1916 Bills The appropriation bills of 1915, the Whitman bill, and the 1916 bills, in addition to variations in amounts, present fundamental differences 1 — As to transfers, as described above 2 — As to the manner in which appropriations were made available to spending officers, i.e., either segregated or lump sum appropriations 3 — As to grouping in one place or distributing the appro- priations for particular purposes 4 — As to the method of handling the supply or deficiency appropriations, the amounts of which are made '^ imme- diately available" With respect to the first point, it should be noted that the 1915 and 1916 bills contained nothing resembling the transfer scheme of the Whitman bill. With respect to the second and third, it is believed that the best way to show these differences is by an actual comparison of the items for one institution as contained in each one of the three bills. The text of each bill relating to the State Hospital for the Insane at Kings Park has been taken for this compar- ison. Appropriation Bills of 1915 In the general appropriation bill of 1915, the appropriation for this institution reads as follows: KINGS PARK STATE HOSPITAL For maintenance, eight hundred fourteen thousand seven hundred tweoty-five dollars (S8 14,725. 00). 30 THE COMMITTEES' APPROPRIATION BILL "Maintenance" as used in the 1915 bill included "personal service." In the "repairs and construction" appropriation bill, $116,000 was appropriated in three appropriations for this hos- pital. There were also three appropriations totalling SI ,216.95 in the "supply bill, " and three appropriations in the reappropriation bill of $98,470.34. Thus after an examination of the general ap- propriation bill, the construction bill, the supply bill, and the re- appropriation bill, the student would find that ten appropriations totalling $1,030,412.29 were made for this hospital in 1915, and that the largest item, $814,725 was carried in the general appro- priation bill as a single lump sum appropriation as shown above. Whitman Bill The limited information in the 1915 bill as to the manner in which these appropriations were to be expended should be com- pared with the appropriation statements for the same institution reprinted below verbatim from the Whitman bill. The total amount recommended by the governor was $976,640.32. The statement embraced absolutely every item of expenditure deemed necessary for this institution, including repairs and construction items, so that the total to be appropriated for Kings Park State Hospital appears in the one bill, and not three or four separate bills, or separate "parts" of a collective bill. The Whitman bill ran as follows: KINGS PARK STATE HOSPITAL For payment for services of employees at Kings Park State Hos- pital, the sum of four hundred twelve thousand seven hundred forty-one dollars and 32 cents ($412,741.32). SCHEDULE A PERSONAL SERVICE Administration General Salaries, regular Medical superintendent. . . $5,000 . 00 First assistant physician . . 3,000.00 First assistant physician. . . 2,681 .67 Senior assistant physician, 4 at $2,200 8,800.00 Senior physician 2,033 . 33 Assistant physician, 6 at $1,600 9,600.00 Assistant physician 1,525.00 Assistant physician 1,541 .66 Assistant physician 1,441 .66 Assistant physician 1,383 .33 Assistant physician 1,375.00 Assistant physician, 2 at $1,200 2,400.00 Assistant physician 1,200 .00 31 APPROPRIATIONS IN LEGISLATURE, SESSION OF 1916 Woman physician, 2 at $1,800 $3,600.00 Medical interne, 2 at $1,000 2,000 .00 Pharmacist 1,200.00 Accountant 1,080 .00 Dentist 900.00 Stenographer 816 .00 Stenographer 788 .00 Stenographer 760 . 00 Stenographer 728 .00 Stenographer 684 . 00 Chief transportation agent . 720 . 00 Chief transportation agent . 600 . 00 Research assistant 600 . 00 Watchman, 3 at $600 1 ,800 . 00 Coachman 720.00 Barber 660.00 Special attendant, mail clerk 516.00 Special attendant, 9 at $600 5,400 . 00 Special attendant, stenogra- pher 460.00 Special attendant, operat- ing room 516 .00 Special attendant,drug room 484 . 00 Driver, 7 at $396 2,772 .00 Attendant, drug room 356 .00 Attendant, 2 at $408 816 .00 Night attendant, 2 at $432 864.00 Attendant stenographer . . . 408 . 00 Attendant stenographer, 2 at $300 600.00 Pageboy 258.00 Pageboy 276.00 Pageboy..... 272.00 Attendant, dining room, 15 at 300 4,500.00 Cook, 10 at $420 4,200.00 Special attendant, transfer of patients 600.00 Special attendant, transfer of patients 516 .00 Housekeeper 480 . 00 Fireman (fire marshal) .... 780.00 Special attendant, sewage disposal plant 600 .00 $85,311.65 Accounting and stores Salaries, regular Steward $2,491.67 As.sistant steward 1,500.00 Bookkeeper 1,260.00 Accountant 1,080.00 Storekeeper 1,020 .00 Stenographer 936 00 Stenographer 908 .00 Stenographer 876 . 00 Voucher clerk 748 .00 Voucher — treasurer's clerk . 720 . 00 Special attendant, steward's office 600.00 Special attendant, store- house 556 . 00 32 THE COMMITTEES' APPROPRIATION BILL Attendant, 2 at S408 $816 .00 $13,511.67 $98,823.32 Ward service Salaries, regular Supervisors $8,992 .00 Charge nurses and charge attendants 35,052 .00 Nurses and attendants .... 156,297 .00 Special attendants 2,220 .00 202,561.00 Nurses' training Salaries, regular Principal of Training School $ 1 ,200 . 00 1,200.00 Industrial Salaries, regular Chief supervisor $744 . 00 Shoemaker 768.00 Tailor 768.00 Shop foreman 768 . 00 Supervisor 660 . 00 Special attendant, shoe- maker 600.00 Special attendant, linen room, 2 at $600 1,200 .00 Special attendant, dress- maker 516.00 Special attendant, seam- stress, 2 at $516 1,032 .00 Special attendant, tailor shop 600.00 Special attendant, mat shop 600 . 00 Special attend't, fancy class 516.00 Special attendant, art class 460.00 Special attendant, basket work 480.00 Special attendant, basket work 600.00 Special attendant, reed work 516.00 Attendant, 3 at $300 900.00 Attendant, linen room .... 408.00 12,136.00 Kitchen and dining room Salaries, regular Chef $1,140.00 Head cook, 5 at $660 3,300 .00 Cook, 8 at $420 3,360 .00 Cook, 9 months 315 .00 Kitchen helper, 11 at $360 3,960.00 Kitchen help'r, 9 m'ths, 2 at $360 540.00 Charge attend't,dining room 420 . 00 Attendant, dining room, 26 at $300 7,800.00 Attendant, dining room, 9 months, 6 at $300 1,350 .00 Attendant, dining room . . . 408 . 00 Special attendant, 3 at $516 1,548 .00 Attendant, kitchen, 2 at $408 816.00 24,957.00 33 APPROPRIATIONS IN LEGISLATURE, SESSION OF 1916 Baker Salaries, regular Baker $816.00 Assistant baker, 2 at $540 1,080.00 $1,896.00 Meat stores Salaries, regular Meat cutter $816 .00 Special attendant, meat cutter 600.00 1,416.00 Laundry Wages, regular Supervisor of laundry $900 . 00 Driver 396.00 Special attendant 600 . 00 Launderer, 7 at $420 2,940 .00 Special attendant, soap- maker and launderer. . . . 568 .00 Head laundress, 2 at $420 840.00 Laundress, 18 at $264 4,752 .00 10,996.00 Mechanical Engineering Wages, regular Chief engineer $1,560 .00 First assistant engineer, 3 at $984 2,952.00 Second asst. engineer, 2 at $816 1,632.00 Electrical engineer 1,200.00 Fu-eman, 15 at $780 11,700 .00 Special attendant, engineer's department 600 . 00 $19,644.00 Repairs Wages, regular Master mechanic $1,560 .00 Electrician 750 .00 Plumber, 3 at $936 2,808 .00 Steamfitter and mach'st . . . 936.00 Steamfitter 936.00 Special att'd't, plumber 3 at $600 1,800.00 Special attd. steamfitter. . . 600.00 Special attendant, electrical dept., 2 at $600 1,200.00 Carpenter, 8 at $816 0,528 .00 Carpenter and locksmith. . 816.00 Painter, 4 at $816 3,264 .00 Mason 900.00 Mason 750.00 Tinsmith 816.00 Special attndt. tinsmith ... 600 .00 Special attndt. mason 600.00 Painter 816.00 Blacksmith, 2 at $816 1,632.00 $27,312.00 46,956.00 34 THE COMMITTEES' APPROPRIATION BILL Field service, farm, garden and grounds Wages, regular Supervisor, 2 at $744 $1,4S8 .00 Head farmer 792 .00 Farmer, 2 at $516 1,032 .00 Florist 768.00 Gardener 660 .00 Driver, 5 at $396 1,980 .00 Special attdt., gardener. . . . 600.00 Laborer, 4 at $360 1,440 .00 Attdt., farm, 5 at $408 2,040 .00 $10,800.00 Salaries, temporary Temporary services $1,000 .00 1,000.00 Total of Schedule A $412,741 .32 For the expenses of maintenance and operation of Kings Park State Hospital, the sum of five hundred nineteen thousand eight hundred and ninety-nine dollans ($519,899). SCHEDULE B MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION (Other than Personal Service) Food " $306,384.00 Fuel, Hght, power and water 72,270 .00* Printing 1,661 .00 Advertising 25 . 00 Equipment Office $556.00 Household 25,883 .00 Medical and surgical 1,000 .00 Wearing apparel 6,700 .00 Farm and garden 1,000 . 00 Live stock 3,000 .00 General plant 5,711 .00 $43,950.00 Supplies Office $900.00 Household 1,800 .00 Laundry, cleaning and disinfect- ing 1,900.00 Medical and surgical 2,700 .00 Motor vehicle 780.00 Botanical and agricultural 4,100.00 Forage and veterinary 8,000 .00 Refrigerating 280 .00 General plant 7,759 .00 28,219.00 Materials Highway $500 .00 Industrial 24,000 .00 General plant 8,562 .00 33,062.00 Traveling expenses 6,426 .00 Communication Postage, including parcel post.. $1,850.00 Telephone and telegraph 1,250.00 Express and freight 1,746 .00 4,846.00 35 APPROPRIATIONS IN LEGISLATURE, SESSION OF 1916 Fixed charges and contributions Allowance for commutation to various employees in lieu of maintenance $13,225 .00 General plant service 8,831 .00 Rent 1,000 .00 Total of Schedule B $519,899 .00 REPAIRS For work done by contract or upon estimate or for the pur- chase of materials or the employment of labor in addition to that appropriated elsewhere for repairs to buildings and to equipment $10,000 . 00 CONSTRUCTION OR PERMANENT BETTERMENTS For furniture and equipment for new buildings $15,000.00 For storage tank for water supply 12,000 .00 For reconstruction of elevators 7,000 .00 Total for institution $976,640.32 The Committee Appropriation Bill of 1916 The finance and ways and means committees submitted their joint bill to the legislature practically in its final form on April 5. While the Whitman bill brought together all the items relating to the expenditures of an institution, department, etc., at one place in the bill, the committee bill did just the opposite. The com- mittees, as has been explained above, adopted the itemized "work program" form of bill but without the possibility of transfer. In the case of the Kings Park State Hospital there were six "fixed'' appropriations in the Whitman bill, viz., one for "personal serv- ice," one for "maintenance and operation," and four for "repairs" and "construction or permanent betterments," etc. The committees of the legislature, instead of appropriating one item for personal service and one item for maintenance and operation in the same hospital, etc., set up 357 separate items of appropriation. In other words, the committees went back to the old form except that they set up the positions and salaries in very much greater detail than they have been accustomed to do in the past. By failing to include a clause through which transfers might be made they wholly disregarded the method of appropriations recommended by the governor. They tied this and every other institution to a hard and fast, detailed, segre- gated appropriation bill. In the debate on the appropriation bill in the senate, which is printed in the appendix, the effect of this itemization on the departments is described by Senator Bennett.^ The 357 items of appropriation for the "personal service" and » Below, pp. 103^. 36 THE COMMITTEES' APPROPRIATION BILL "maintenance and operation" etc., of the Kings Park State Hospital are reprinted below as in the bill passed by the legisla- ture on April 19. The 357 items constitute 357 separate and distinct appropriations. No one of these can be used or expended for any other purpose. The comptroller, who draws the war- rants of payment for all the expenditures, has no discretion, and he must insist that the vouchers conform in every detail to the language of the appropriation. So that it is plain, there is no elasticity and no possibility of modification left to the executive in charge of the institution. KINGS PARK STATE HOSPITAL Curative {Continued) For payment for services of employees at Kings Park State Hospital: Administration General Salaries, regular Medical superintendent $5,000 .00 First assistant physician 3,000 .00 First assistant physician 2,681 .67 Senior assistant physician, 4 at $2,200 8,800 .00 Senior physician 2,033 .33 Assistant physician, 6 at $1,600 9,600 .00 Assistant physician 1,525 .00 Assistant physician 1,541 .66 Assistant physician 1,441 .66 Assistant physician 1,383 .33 Assistant physician 1,375 .00 Assistant physician, 2 at $1,200 2,400 .00 Assistant physician 1,200 .00 Woman physician, 2 at $1,800 3,600 .00 Medical interne, 2 at $1,000 2,000 .00 Pharmacist 1,200 .00 Accountant 1,080 .00 Dentist 900 .00 Stenographer 816 .00 Stenographer 788 .00 Stenographer 760 . 00 Stenographer 728 .00 Stenographer 684 .00 Chief transportation agent 720 . 00 Chief transportation agent 600 .00 Research assistant 600 . 00 Watchman, 3 at $600 1,800 .00 Coachman 720.00 Barber 660 .00 Special attendant, mail clerk 516 .00 Special attendant, 9 at $600 5,400 .00 Special attendant, stenographer 460 .00 Stenographer, city office, 4 months at $61 244.00 Special attendant, operating room 516 .00 Special attendant, drug room 484 .00 Driver, 7 at $396 2,772 .00 Attendant, drug room 356 .00 Attendant, 2 at $408 816 .00 Night attendant, 2 at $432 864 .00 37 45 outside of salaries. Mr. Reusswig — Yes, eight or nine more lapse, are not available, and the two million is a reserve in the treasury to pay obligations. Senator Wagner — But there is no particular time when you need buy a sup- 132 MINUTES OF THE SENATE DEBATE ply, and if I have got money to purchase supplies and timber, and service and other matters of that kind which are not regular as salaries are, even though ordinarily I would expend it between June 30 and October 1, I can use that money before June 30? You are giving two millions of money which under an ordinary estimate would be spent after June 30, and this permits it tp be spent before June 30, and you are keeping a reserve of two millions to meet it? Mr. Reusswig — No; I think you have not come to the point yet. Senator Wagner — Every department has knowledge of the fact that they may, in addition to their regular appropriation, they may spend two miUions out of the four millions which would ordinarily lapse, figuring on an average expenditure equal to the expenditure for salaries, so that if between now and June 30th they incur these obhgations, they will come out of the two millions? Mr. Reusswig — We are not assuming that any such condition is going to arise. Senator Sage — I would like to ask one question of Mr. Reusswig: I made the statement that they always include an item of this kind — (Some nodding and shaking of heads and inaudible conversation between Senator Sage and the two representatives of the Comptroller's Office.) Senator Simpson — Mr. President, may I ask, on behalf of all of us that the gentlemen speak so that we may hear them over here, and so that the press may hear? Senator Sage — There is no appropriation bill contained in this statement — it is the first time — I say it is the custom of the Comptroller's Office always to reserve an amount necessary for contract or expenditures which have been incurred and for which bills have not been rendered; and this is what this is for. Mr. Reusswig— That is what this particular item is for; I cannot speak of past experiences. Senator Wagner — It has never been so in the past. President Schoeneck — When the Deputy Comptroller addresses himself, will he please speak a little louder? Senator Wagner — I took the pains to go over some appropriation bills of the past and never could find any such reservation made. Senator Bennett — May I ask — I called attention to the fact that the reap- propriations in this bill, in the Canal Sinking Fund, amounted to $ — -. Now you state you include this in the reserve. Now, there is a reappropriation for the Panama Pacific Exposition: Have you included that in the million dollar reserve? Mr. Reusswig — I stated that was included in the two million dollar reserve — (the rest of reply inaudible.) Senator Bennett — How about the Plattsburg Commission? Is that an ob- ligation? Mr. Reusswig — The two millions is estimated as obligation outstanding on June 30th. Senator Bennett — You have included the obhgation expended? There is a difference between obligations outstanding and the balance itself. Mr. Reusswig — The obhgations may be such — this is to take care of obli- gations which — included in these items — intended to cover obhgations out- standing. Mr. Bennett — Well, here is the Plattsburg Centenary — Mr. Reusswig — I don't believe there is any obligation outstanding against that. If there is any obhgation outstanding, it is not included in that. Senator Bennett — Wherever there is any obligation outstanding, you have not included it in your two millions? Mr. Reusswig — No. Senator Sage— That Plattsburg Centenary is for a monument, and I sup- pose they have contracted. They have been getting land. Senator Foley — That obhgation has been incurred; the government a certain amount, and the State contributes the rest. It is an absolute obhgation against the State. Senator Wagner — Just one other question: There is an excess in every one of our sinking funds? Mr. Reusswig — Yes. Senator Wagner — And in many of them a great deal more than is necessary 133 APPROPRIATIONS IN LEGISLATURE, SESSION OF 1916 to contribute, for instance, this year, for the payment of the contribution to amortize? Mr. Reusswig — That is true as to a number — as to most of them. Senator Brown — Provision has been made for contribution for all the sinking funds, according to the Constitution, on the bills here? The Second Deputy Comptroller — Except numbers 1 and 2. No. 2 (?) has an amount equal to the debt. No contribution necessary — and Nos. 3 and 4 have a large excess over the actual — in the last two or three years no contribu- tion made to them. We paying the interest out of that and reducing the ex- cess. No. 3, the Canal — (conversation inaudible to the stenographer). Senator Bennett — Mr. President, what further remarks I have to make I will make on the rollcall. The President — The Clerk will read the last section. Senator Brown — An open call of the Senate, Mr. President. President Schoeneck — It is moved that we have an open call of the Senate. Those in favor will say Aye. Opposed, No. The motion is carried. The doorkeepers will close the doors except for admission of Senators, and the Sergeant-at-Arms will enforce the rule. RoUcaU for absentees. During Rollcall: Senator Bennett — Mr. President, I desire to call attention to the fact — I desire to state that in my opinion the present form of this bill is an improvement over the amendments we have adopted in past biUs heretofore. In the first place, the Governor presented to us a budget (remarks inaudible). (Inter- ruption by gavel to quiet the noise in the Chamber.) Senator Bennett — What was lacking in the Governor's suggestion has been provided by the Committees on Ways and Means and Finance — a statement of the revenue accompanying it. We have been able to discuss the bill to a greater extent than we have been able to discuss it before. Another good feature is that there has been included in the bill what hereto- fore has been put in three or four different biUs, namely, the appropriation bill, the supply bill, reappropriation and a number of the other separate bills, and these bills are conveniently separated, all of which still further enables this body to see what we are voting for, what the income in the Treasury is, before we vote. I therefore take pleasure in stating that this is an improvement on anything that has been done since I have become connected with it. Nevertheless, I desire to reiterate that I think it is a mistake to appropriate more than our revenue. It is admitted that we are appropriating a great many more million than our revenue. It is suggested that part of this excess be made up by in- crease in indirect taxation. Of course, when an increase is made in indirect taxation, in order to cover a deficit, it usually indicates we have made an ap- propriation that we are afraid — (inaudible; much confusion). If we have got to have an increase, the issue should be met squarely and a direct tax imposed. I do not believe, however, that the operations of govern- ment have increased so as to make this necessary. Nevertheless, we have to appropriate for the expenses of government, and I therefore vote Aye. 134 VITA The writer of this dissertation was born at Harrisville, Indiana, June 8, 1884. He attended the De Pauw Acad- emy at Greencastle, Indiana, in 1903-4, and later De Pauw University, taking the A.B. degree in 1909. In 1910-11 and 1911-12, he attended Columbia University, in the former year as the Indiana scholar and in the latter year as a University scholar. He received the M.A. degree in 1911, and in the same year shared with Mr. Lewis Mayers the Toppan prize in Constitutional Law. In January 1912 he was co-author, with Prof. Charles A. Beard of Columbia University, of the "State- Wide Documents on the Initiative, Referendum, and Recall," published by the Macmillan Co. From 1912-15, he was a teacher of history in the Morris High School, New York City, and in 1915-16 a student in the Training School for Public Service connected with the Bureau of Municipal Research, New York City, being appointed Assistant Supervisor of Instruction in the Training School for Public Service on June 15, 1916. THE LIBRARY UNIVERSITY 07 CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES THE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY This book is DUE on the last date stamped below Form L-& 605 Shultz- ■ Tl-ie hictory of . apprcprietions session of 1916, N.Y, UC SOUTHERN REGIONAL UBRARY FACILITY AA 000 548 194 HJ 605 S56h