THE SENATE                           S.R. NO.              65
TWENTIETH LEGISLATURE, 1999                                
STATE OF HAWAII                                            
                                                             
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________


                    SENATE  RESOLUTION

  REQUESTING THE AUDITOR TO REVIEW AND IDENTIFY FISCALLY-RELATED
    POWERS CONFERRED UPON OR ASSUMED BY THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH
    SINCE 1987 THAT MAY BE RECLAIMED BY THE LEGISLATURE.


 1        WHEREAS, in the American system of government, a
 2   fundamental tenet of democracy is the separation of powers
 3   between the legislative, executive, and judicial branches of
 4   government; and
 5   
 6        WHEREAS, in the United States' as well as in Hawaii's
 7   model of democracy, the power to make appropriations is a power
 8   which is vested exclusively in the legislative branch; and
 9   
10        WHEREAS, the Constitution of the State of Hawaii states
11   that "No public money shall be expended except pursuant to
12   appropriations made by law"; and
13   
14        WHEREAS, this is the Legislature's "power of the purse,"
15   and perhaps more than any other power, it is this power of the
16   purse that is the hallmark of the Legislature's authority and
17   independence; and
18   
19        WHEREAS, Hawaii's constitutional provision is based on
20   similarly decisive language in the U.S. Constitution which
21   declares "No money shall be drawn from the treasury, but in
22   consequence of appropriations made by law"; and
23   
24        WHEREAS, the Constitution of the State of Hawaii conveys
25   to the Legislature a dominant role in fiscal affairs, but over
26   time, that dominant role has apparently shifted to the
27   executive branch; and
28   
29        WHEREAS, the basic and constant issue debated upon between
30   the legislative and executive branches is the safeguarding and
31   assertion of legislative authority and independence versus the
32   need or desire for flexibility and freedom from legislative
33   controls on the part of the executive branch; and
34   
35        WHEREAS, under the rationale of the need for flexibility,
36   the executive branch has assumed increasingly more
37   discretionary authority on spending matters; and
38   
39        WHEREAS, the executive branch has exercised substantial
40   discretionary authority as to how much can be spent on the

 
Page 2                                                     
                                  S.R. NO.              65
                                                        
                                                        


 1   various programs of state government and how those programs and
 2   projects are to be financed; and
 3   
 4        WHEREAS, for example, although there is a large pool of
 5   CIP projects which will go through the life cycle of being
 6   proposed, authorized, and lapsed, only a fraction of the
 7   projects in the CIP pool will ever be constructed; and
 8   
 9        WHEREAS, because the CIP pool is much larger than the
10   State's implementation capacity, the executive branch has the
11   ability to pick and choose its projects, thereby usurping the
12   Legislature's authority to designate which CIP projects are
13   appropriated for and actually implemented; and
14   
15        WHEREAS, examples of flexibility in capital improvements
16   financing include utilizing special fund cash, instead of
17   revenue bonds, for harbors capital improvements; special fund
18   cash, instead of revenue bonds, for Hawaiian Home Lands
19   projects; and special fund cash, instead of general obligation
20   reimbursable bonds, for highways, harbors, boating, land
21   development, or economic development projects; and
22   
23        WHEREAS, this means that in spite of the method of funding
24   specified by the Legislature for capital improvements in the
25   appropriations acts, the administration has considerable
26   latitude to utilize cash from the general funds as well as cash
27   from the various special funds; and
28   
29        WHEREAS, another example of increased discretionary
30   authority is the Governor's authority to transfer
31   appropriations from one program to another, one of the most
32   enduring of the flexibility provisions in the General
33   Appropriations Act; and
34   
35        WHEREAS, the General Appropriations Act also customarily
36   provides discretionary authority to allow the Governor to
37   transfer positions; and
38   
39        WHEREAS, it follows that if our form of government is to
40   work properly, the Legislature's power to make appropriations
41   should not be diminished or frustrated by the executive
42   branch's power to execute those appropriations; and
43   
44        WHEREAS, the Legislature believes that there is a serious
45   imbalance in executive-legislative fiscal relations, one not
46   intended by the Constitution of the State of Hawaii; and

 
Page 3                                                     
                                  S.R. NO.              65
                                                        
                                                        


 1   
 2        WHEREAS, a dominant role in fiscal affairs by the
 3   Legislature is absolutely necessary for representative
 4   government and the system of checks-and-balances to work
 5   properly: and
 6   
 7        WHEREAS, in order for the Legislature to reassert its
 8   dominant role in fiscal matters, the trend in favor of
 9   executive flexibility and discretionary authority must be
10   reviewed; now, therefore,
11   
12        BE IT RESOLVED by the Senate of the Twentieth Legislature
13   of the State of Hawaii, Regular Session of 1999, that the
14   Auditor is requested to review and identify fiscally-related
15   powers conferred upon or assumed by the executive branch since
16   1987 that may be reclaimed or reasserted by the Legislature;
17   and
18   
19        BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Auditor report its
20   findings to the Legislature not later than twenty days prior to
21   the 2000 regular session; and
22   
23        BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a certified copy of this
24   Resolution be transmitted to the Auditor.
25 
26 
27 
28                         OFFERED BY:  ____________________________