ABSTRACT
In 1921, the Governor's veto power under the Oregon Constitution was amended to include, besides single items in appropriation bills, "any provision in new bills declaring an emergency, without thereby affecting any other provision of such bill." The defendant officials make several arguments addressed to the court's role in the present dispute. They contend that the constitution places in the Legislative Assembly the power to correct any abuse of the Governor's veto power by overriding the veto, and that the court should defer to the Governor's understanding of his constitutional powers as long as that understanding is arguably correct. When a constitutional amendment sets out to change the allocation of power between the political departments of government, it is necessary to understand the political background that motivated the amendment. The Governor's veto power is not the kind of provision that must find new application in changing technological, economic, or social conditions.
