Separation of Powers Between the Governor of Nevada And the Nevada State Legislature
There have been power-related problems between the governor of Nevada and the Nevada state legislature that was evident in 2008 after the governor tried to cut the budget without consulting the legislature unilaterally. According to Nevada’s constitution, the government power is divided into three independent departments: judicial, executive and legislative, and no person is allowed to undertake the function of another department except in cases where it is permitted or directed (Bowers 2018, p. 198). Under the separation of powers in Nevada, no other government department is allowed to delegate legislative power (Bowers 2018, p. 246). This paper, therefore, evaluates the separation of power between the governor of Nevada and the legislature of the state of Nevada concerning the oversight and execution of budgetary law.
According to Nevada’s constitution, government spending should not be more than the balanced budget, creating a need for adjustments when the revenue generated is less than the budget spending. The legislature does this function. However, in 2008, the governor of Nevada attempted to balance the budget as the legislature was out of session and ordered that all departments have a 4.5% reduced spending. The action was criticized as it was a violation of the state’s separation of powers. The state controller refused to approve the changes, which lead to the governor submitting the budgetary cuts to the interim finance committee (IFC) that approved the budget.
According to the constitution of Nevada, the governor’s actions significantly violates presentment, bicameralism, and separation of powers in the state. It is because these actions of budget adjustment, as well as the spending of stimulus funds, are to be executed by the legislature. The supreme court indicated that only the legislature is allowed to regulate the budget and not the executive. The appropriation of bills is enacted as law in Nevada’s state, leading to the Nevada supreme court indicating that the governor’s actions were against the separation of powers regulations.
Several solutions can be provided to help settle the problem of separation of powers in the state of Nevada. The answer is with the IFC, which is considered as an alternative to the legislature when it comes to the passing of the budget 9Myers, 2009, p. 243). The IFC can hence be used to modify legislative budgets that were previously enacted. The state of the Nevada constitution does not allow for deficit spending hence a need to provide for a rapid response whenever there is revenue shortage. Another solution is to enable the legislature to hold special sessions whenever there is an emergency, and the legislature is out of session (Bowers 2018, p. 332). The state of Nevada should follow the example set by other states that provides a certain degree of authority to the executive to the control of an enacted budget.
In conclusion, the state of Nevada should resolve the separation of powers problem between the governor and the legislature to prevent it from escalating. Several loopholes in the State of Nevada constitution should be addressed to ensure each department of the government follows what is required of them. The biannual nature of the legislature in the state of Nevada makes it difficult to follow the constitution strictly. There should, therefore, be a provision that states what should be done in case there is an emergency, and the legislature is out of session. The governor should be given some power to meet fiscal crises without violating the constitution.