01:00 AM EST on Tuesday, January 11, 2005

THERE ARE TIMES in life when a man is faced with the choice of doing the right thing or the wrong thing. He may have reason to sell out, to tell himself it's not all that bad. He may manage to preserve his power and money by doing things that badly hurt people who depend on him.

But power, acclaim and life are short. The end comes quickly enough, whatever a man chooses to do with his life. He can go away having made the world a better place, or not.

House Speaker William Murphy faces such a choice, possibly in the next few days.

Mr. Murphy holds the most powerful political post in Rhode Island. He managed to cling to that power last week after a bitter challenge by Republicans and dissident Democrats.

No one knows what promises Mr. Murphy had to make to secure the 45 votes he obtained in that fight, to his unimpressive challenger's 30. But, during the fight, he did something shocking, even by the standards of Rhode Island politics. He signaled his intention to essentially nullify a constitutional reform known as separation of powers, which had been duly passed on Nov. 2, after years of debate and struggle, by more than 78 percent of the state's voters.

These voters trusted in the power of the ballot to redress their grievances. Mr. Murphy betrayed that trust. He announced that the Rhode Island Constitution -- no matter what the voters say -- still gives the General Assembly the power to operate state-sanctioned gambling, through control of the Lottery Commission, and exert other executive functions.

Such a contention seems, to me, to stretch law, common sense, and the English language into unrecognizable shapes. The voters, after all, officially amended the state constitution to read: "No senator or representative shall, during the time for which he or she was elected, be appointed to any state office, board, commission or other state or quasi-public entity exercising executive power under the laws of this state. . . ." That would seem to offer no wiggle room for legislators to run the executive functions of the Lottery Commission or other boards. (In no other state is there even one legislator allowed to run the lottery that way.)

Mr. Murphy, and like-minded lawyers, point to Article VI, Section 15, of the constitution, which states that all lotteries shall be "subject to the prescription and regulation of the general assembly." Those words -- prescription and regulation -- sound like things that can and should be done through legislation, the proper role of lawmakers. But some lawyers claim that phrasing could possibly be stretched, with the approval of a court, to include executive functions. At the very least, it is said, reformers made a serious error in leaving such dangerous language in the constitution.

I don't see it. But I'm not a lawyer, and I'm not accustomed to counting the number of angels on the head of a pin.

All I know is that 78 percent of Rhode Islanders explicitly said, "No, you have to get out of executive functions."

All I know is that Mr. Murphy stood at a press conference and touted his role in the historic passage of separation of powers, never once mentioning before the election that he intended to exempt the Lottery Commission.

All I know is that 45 members of the House, including the speaker, ran on a platform of promising to consider "smooth and effective implementation" of separation of powers.

All I know is that politicians are talking seriously about cheating Rhode Islanders out of their sacred right to amend the constitution. Just because there is an outside chance to defraud the public is no reason that politicians, even in the Ocean State, have to seize it.

There is a stark choice here of right or wrong.

Word is that Speaker Murphy may try this week to seek an advisory opinion about the Lottery Commission from the state Supreme Court, instead of implementing separation of powers. That could prove disastrous for his leadership, exposing grave weakness, if he cannot muster enough support from his fellow Democrats to do that.

Ask yourself: What Democrats want to go on record, in one of their first acts after getting elected, as spitting in the face of four-fifths of the voters in their districts? And does Speaker Murphy really want to give Republicans and dissident Democrats a club with which to bludgeon him and his majority for the next two years? Already, Senate President Joseph Montalbano is showing signs of seeking a more responsible and less politically suicidal course.

I cannot see the speaker or his supporters gaining strength through duping and cheating the voters. Mr. Murphy strikes me as a skillful, intelligent and good-natured man. He must sense the folly of opposing the goodwill of so many Rhode Islanders.

Whatever sales skills he possesses, whatever strengths as a leader he has at his disposal, he must turn them now, in the next few days, to doing the right thing, backing off this challenge, and committing himself to implementing separation of powers, as he and his colleagues promised.

The voters will respect him for it. And he will find, as great leaders often do, that self-respect and moral authority can be powerful forces in themselves.

Edward Achorn is The Journal's deputy editorial-pages editor. His e-mail address is eachorn [at] projo.com.