,
Honorable Robert S, Calvert Opinion No, ~-280
Comptroller of Public Accounts
State of Texas Re: Validity of a certain
Austin, Texas expenditure restriction
contained in the general
appropriations bill,
which restrictions were
Dear Mr. Calvert: vetoed by the Governor.
Your request for an opinion reads in part as follows:
"The Comptroller of Public Accounts respect-
fully requests your official opinion in regard to
the va,lid.ityof certain restrictions contained in
H.Be 5, the General Appropriations Bill, passed by
th:e 60th Legislature, First Called Session 1968 s
In oprnrons No, V-1254 (Auqus.t 25, 19511 and M-219
(April,18, 19683 you expressed the opin,ion that
certarn restrictions placed upon expenditures of
money ,in the appropriations-billsmight conflict with
general Law and would be invalid, In your Opini,on
NO. V-1196 (June 28, 1951) you expressed the
opinion that the Governor's veto of a restriction
without a concurrent veto of a specific item
of appropriations under certain circumstances would
not be an effective veto, The General Appropriations
Bill contained the following restrictions upon
expenditures, al1. of which restrictions were vetoed
by the Governor:
al 141 Tke Department of Public Safety,
"'The Department of Public Safety is authorized
to own and operate three (3) airplanes and two ,(2)
- 1353-
.
Hon. Robert S. Calvert, page 2 (M-280)
helicopters only, all of which are to be
based in Austin except for rescue operations.
'None of,:,thefunds appropriated above shall
be expended for the purchase of airplanes
or helicopters without the specific approval
of the Governor.'
"Attached is a copy of the Governor's Proc-
lamation issued on July 20, 1968, in vetoing the
above restrictions to the Appropriations Act.
"The Comptroller hereby requests your of-
ficial opinion as to'whether the Comptroller may
issue warrants for payme~nts out of the funds in-
volved without regard to the restrictions listed
above."
In a subsequent separate opinion, this off,ice
will issue its op'nion on the other restrictions con-
~.f
tained in your op nion request. In Attorney,,General
Opinion Number M-219 %196811 this office held invalid a
rider which provides priorities as to certain historical
sites contained in the General Appropriations Bill fox
the Parks and Wi~ldlife Department to follow, on the ground
that such rider was in conflict with the general statute,
Article 6081~~ Vernon's Civil Statutes. The rule con-
cerning validity of riders in the Appropriations BiLl is
set out in Attorney General Opinion Numbers C-119 619631,
V-1254 (1951) and V-1196 (1951), as well as numerous other
Attorney. General Opinions. The rule may be stated as follows:
General legislation cannot be embodied in the General App&-o-
priations Bill., This does not mean that a General Appro-'
priations Bill may not contain general provis,ions and de,tails
limiting and restricting the use of funds therein appropriated
if they do not conflict-with or amount to general 1eqis:etion.
Moore v. Shepoa.cd, 144 Tex. 537, 192 S.W.2d 559 (l9461;
Conley v. Daucrhters of the Republic, 106 Tex, 80, 156 S.W1 197
61913) * Thus, it may be stated that in addition to
appropriati~ng money and stipul,atinq the amount, manner and
- 1354-
,
,
Hon. Robert S. Calvert, page 3 (M-280)
purpose of the various items of expenditure, a General
Appropriations 8ill may contain any provisions or riders
which detail, limit or restrict the use of funds or
otherwise insure tkat the money is spent for the required
+: activity for which it is therein appropriated, if the
provisions or riders are necessarily connected with and
incidental to the appropriation and use of funds, and
provided they do not conflict with general legislation.
Attorney General Opinion No. 1254 (19511, supra, and
authorities cited therein.
With regard,to~the authority of the Governor
to veto separate riders in the General Appropriations
Bill, it was held in Fulmore v. Lane, 104 Tex. 449,~ 140
S.W. 405 (19111, that,the Governor has only such power
as the Constitution confers upon him, and in the absence
of expressed authorization, he may not disapprove certain
paragraphs or portions of a bill and approve the.remainder,
The authority of the Governor to approve or disapprove
legislation is contained in Section 14 of~Article IV of
the Constitution of Texas, which provides, in part, as
follows:
II
” e a If any bill presented to the Governor
contains several items of appropriation he may
object to one or more of such items, and approve
the other portion of the bill, In suck case he
shall append to tke 'bill, at the time of signing
it, a statement of the items to whieh ke objects,
and no item so objected to skall take effect.
,I
Fulmore v. Lane, supra, is the leading ca.se on
the authority of the Governor to veto riders in an Appso-
priations Bill and it was stated in that case:
3,e i " Tke executive veto power is to be
found alone in section 14, :art. 4. of the Consti-
tution of this state. By that section he is
authorized to disapprove any bill in wkole, or,
if a bill contains several items of appropriation,
- 1355-
Hon. Robert S. Calvert. page 4 (M-280)
he is authorized to object to one or more of suck
items. Nowhere in the Constitution is the authority
given tke Governor to approve in part and disapprove
in part a bill. Tke only additional authority to dis-
approving a bill in whole is that given to object to
an item or items, where a bill contains several items
of appropriafion. It follows conclusively that
where the veto power is attempted to be exercised
to object to a paraqraoh or portion of a bill other
than ar item or Items, or to language qualifying an
appropriation or directing the method of its uses,
he exceeds tke constitutional authority vested in
him, and his objection to such paragrapk, or portion
of a bill, or language qualifying an appropriation,
or directing the method of its use, becomes non-
effective, So that we are constrained to hold that
that portion of ,theveto message contained in sub-
division 3 of the statement of objections appended
to the appropri,ation 'bill and filed in tke office
of the Secretary of State (dealing with the rider)
was unauthorized, and therefore noneffective, and
the paragraph so attempted to be stricken out
will remain as a part of the appropriation bill ~ =
* "II
mus it was held in A~ttorney General Opinion
Number V-1196 (1951). relying on Fulmore v, Lane, supra,
as weli as numerous other out-of-s,tate cases, that the
Governor, has tke power to veto only items of an Appropriation
Bill and does not ksve authority to veto ? rider in the
Appropriation Bill unless the rider itself constitutes an
item of appropriation. A veto by the Governor of any pro-
vision of an Appropriation Bill which is incidental to the
appropriati,on and is an inseparable part of an item of
appropriation is 'beyond the constitutional autkority dele-
gated to tke Governor by the provisions of Section 14 of
Article IV of the Constitution of Texas,
Applying the foregoing principles to tke pro-
vision of tke General Appropriations Bill set out above in
your request, you are advised tkat the Comptroller may issue
warrants for pa:yments out of the funds involved without
- 1356-
I
,
Hon. Robert S. Calvert, page ,5 (M-280)
c
regard to that
restriction listed in your request, for
the reason that such restriction constitutes general
legislation and is therefore invalid, as outlined in
Attorney General Opinions M-219 (1968), C-119 (1963)
and V-1254 (1951).
Sn view of this conclusion, it is unnecessary
for this office to determine whether the veto of such
provision constituted a lawful exercise of the powers
granted the governor by the provisions of Section 14
of Article IV of the Constitution of Texas.
SUMMARY
The Comptroller may issue warrants for
payments out of appropriated funds without
regard to the quoted invalid restriction
involving the Department of Public Safety
contained in the Appropriations Bill.
Co MARTIN
rney ,General of Texas
Prepared by John Reeves
Assistant Attorney General
APPROVED:
OPINION COMMITTEE '
Hawthorne Phillips* Chairman
Kerns Taylor. Co-Chairman
Bill Ailen
Roger 'Brler
Alfred Walker
Richard Chote
John Banks
A> J. Casu~bbi,,Jr-
Executive Assistant
- 1357 _