Half-steps to reform

Even most people who closely follow Indiana state politics rarely think about the state's Constitution. When the subject does come up, the reaction is most often a resigned shrug. Nobody really likes it, but what can you do?\nThe document, adopted in 1851 to replace the state's first Constitution following the state's bankruptcy in the 1840s, has few fans. In particular, many critics point to Indiana's cumbersome and inefficient county and township governments. Designed for an age when crossing Monroe County might take a full day's travel, Indiana's local governments -- particularly its hundreds of townships -- are harder to justify in the age of the automobile and Internet.\nSome reformers, including some state representatives and senators, are eager to call a new constitutional convention to replace the 1851 document. Around the State House, the idea is attractive: changing local governments, possibly even consolidating counties (some of which have populations smaller than the Bloomington student body) and eliminating townships, could make government both cheaper and more efficient by getting rid of duplication and waste.\nBut Indiana Supreme Court Chief Justice Randall Shepard doubts those efforts will succeed. "The constitution itself is unlikely to be subjected to a major remedy ... the political energy required is simply too great," Shepard said.\nHistory supports Shepard's view. In 1933, the height of the Great Depression, Gov. Paul V. McNutt tried to save money on county government by making the county auditor the county's chief executive. McNutt was popular, powerful and had huge majorities in the legislature. His plans still failed. Other proposed major revisions to the constitution have met the same fate.\nYet all is not lost for those who want local government reform. Many of the problems critics have identified can be handled without scrapping the 1851 constitution. "A great deal can be done by statute," Shepard said.\nFor example, Shepard said, township governments used to have law enforcement and judicial responsibilities carried out by constables and justices of the peace, respectively. The legislature abolished those offices in the 1970s.\nCounties will be harder to change. Consolidating counties is probably not the best answer in a state with an increasing population, Shepard said. \n"One would be better off deciding whether the structure of county government is the best it could be. Ultimately, the most serious issue in local government structure is how many layers there are," Shepard said. \nHe pointed to Indiana's lesser-known government structures, like solid waste districts and library boards, all of which are "legally deemed to be governments." \nMany of those boards are run by appointed officials. Thus, the people who run the Monroe County Library can tax county residents who have never voted for the library's board members. \n"That seems to me, from a citizen point-of-view, confusing -- who's in charge?" Shepard said. "I think it weakens democratic accountability."\nWhy are there so many local governments in Indiana? Shepard explained a constitutional prohibition on local governments' incurring even mild levels of debt that has forced the legislature to set up new governments each time localities have needed to make substantial capital outlays, like building a library. That prohibition could be changed by a simple constitutional amendment. Ardent reformers will be somewhat disappointed by Shepard's views. I admit it would be exciting to call a constitutional convention and open up the big questions of state government again. Yet if improving state and local government, not having fun, is the goal, then following Shepard's advice and tweaking the constitution is the right path to follow.