What Advantages Are There To Increasing Gubanatorial Power In Comarisson To State Legislature

NCSL Country Legislatures magazine, July/August 1999: The Skillful Legislature

Beyond the intuition that says "I know one when I see 1," how do you get well-nigh measuring the effectiveness of any given legislature?

Past Alan Rosenthal

What do we want our state legislatures of the 21st century to be? Of grade nosotros want them to be effective, to be expert. Merely nosotros too know that state legislatures volition be heavily influenced by forces over which they have little command-technology in item. The challenge is to remain truthful to the fundamental purposes of representative democracy and the legislative organization.

And then what is an constructive, a good legislature in a time of dramatic modify?

It's a question, for the most office, that has gone unanswered, and even unattended. And the reply as to what a good legislature is must come from legislators, legislative staff and concerned citizens.

For legislatures to exist good, they must carry out the functions we look of them in our arrangement of representative democracy. The principal ones are balancing power, representing constituencies and making laws. In because whether legislatures are doing their job (and hence are good), we have to examine how well they are performing these 3 functions.

Balancing Ability

Constitutionally, legislatures are separate, co-equal branches (indeed, the legislature is the outset branch of government and the executive the second) that share governmental power. Then it follows that legislatures must balance the power of governors and the executive branch. A expert legislature, appropriately, has to exist relatively contained of the governor. It must insist on participating in the initiation of policy and refuse to rubber-postage executive proposals.

Independence was a watchword of the legislative reform movement of the 1960s and '70s. At that time it appeared that legislatures, except in about a dozen states, were dominated past governors. The development of legislative capacity and the legislative institution nourished a growing sense of legislative independence.

Legislative power may be requisite, but that does not mean that the greater the power imbalance in favor of the legislature, the better that legislature is. More power for the legislature is not necessarily improve once an appropriate balance is achieved. In other words, an imbalance in favor of the legislature is no better than an imbalance in favor of the governor. The legislature must truly be a co-equal branch of government.

Although nosotros can measure the constitutional powers of governors and legislatures, their existent power hinges equally much on political factors and traditions every bit on constitutional and statutory ones. If we examine who initiates and enacts legislation and budgets, we should see in a general style how well the legislature is fulfilling its ability balancing function.

Representing Constituencies

One of the major roles of a legislature is representation-representing various constituencies, mainly people in each lawmaker's electoral district, but also organized groups and individuals elsewhere in the land. The question is, how well does the legislature perform its representational tasks?

First, the constitutional system and the legislature ought to provide for substantial political equality, that is, "one person, ane vote." This standard, enforced by country and federal courts, is generally met, although the political gerrymandering that accompanies redistricting is often used to benefit ane political party and incumbents in their re-ballot efforts.

2nd, a diversity of groups who previously lacked membership should exist nowadays in the ranks of legislators today. Women, African Americans and Hispanics most notably need opportunities to serve likewise as to be represented. The problem with such descriptive representation, as it is called, is that it can be applied to all types of groups (and not but those specified above). It is not like shooting fish in a barrel to know just where to depict the line; nor is it easy to know just how close the percentages of minorities in the legislature should come up to the percentages of minorities in the state.

3rd, every bit part of its representational function, the legislature must provide service to constituencies and constituents. Constituent service is normally the chore of private members who appreciate the importance of doing a good job in this expanse if they hope to be re-elected. Service includes responding to constituents' requests for information, help and instance work, as well every bit taking intendance of the district's interests with respect to country-aid formulas, local projects and public expenditures.

Fourth, the legislature has to ensure that citizens, besides as groups, have access-admission to members, to committees, and to the general procedure. The legislature must be open up and provide information on agendas and proceedings. Legislatures' outreach efforts, including C-Span, help.

Fifth, the legislature also has responsibility for civic education, peculiarly on representative republic, the legislative establishment and the legislative process. In lodge to provide civic education, legislatures accept to tell the public it is their chore to represent diverse constituencies, diverse interests and differing values, and it is their function to engage in conflict, build consensus and achieve settlements. Citizens must have a sense of what representative commonwealth entails if they are to participate and advocate responsibly. It is upwards to the legislature to provide them with that sense.

6th, the legislature has to be responsive, at to the lowest degree to some degree, to what citizens want, besides as to what the legislature determines they need. Assuming that responsiveness is part of the representational function, we have to figure out how legislative enactments-at least on major problems-square with public demands and with public needs.

Making Law

Although representing others deals with the relations betwixt the legislature and the public, code is internally focused. It relates to the processes by which laws (and policies) are fashioned.

Code includes several related legislative activities. The legislative role in formulating, reviewing and adopting a land upkeep has special significance. The budget is probably the most of import bill that a legislature passes. A legislature that performs poorly on the budget is likely to be an ineffective legislature overall.

The legislature's oversight role is too worth because; that is, how and to what extent does the legislature monitor the application and effect of the laws it has enacted. Finally, nosotros should pay some attention to legislative foresight; that is, how and to what extent the legislature looks ahead in society to develop policies to meet the hereafter needs of the state.

What should we wait of the lawmaking process?

First, it is important that individuals and groups accept an opportunity to participate in the lawmaking enterprise equally it takes place within the legislature. Diverse perspectives and positions on issues from both organized groups and unorganized individuals should be welcome. Lobbyists, appropriately, are an integral part of the process. (The importance of participation, however, is not meant to suggest that direct republic, by means of the initiative and referendum, is a desirable feature of the lawmaking procedure.)

2d, the participation that counts nearly is that past legislators themselves. If a legislature is to perform its lawmaking function well, members must be able to play a role. Non every member, however, will choose to be active on every upshot; some are amend equipped and ameliorate positioned than others. Internal republic requires that within the senate and house ability be relatively dispersed.

Notwithstanding, standing committees are key agencies and some legislators play larger legislative roles by virtue of their commission assignments (or considering of their interests or abilities). Not only do chairmen practise leadership, but the rank and file of both the majority and minority parties also may take influence at the commission stage of the procedure. In a number of states the party caucus is another locus of member influence. In that location issues are hashed out and party positions on legislation are developed. Internal commonwealth also requires that members have basic parliamentary rights.

Third, although legislatures are essentially democratic bodies, with members essentially equal to one some other, some members are "more equal than others." These are normally the elected and appointed leaders. Strong leadership, particularly at the level of the presiding officer, is essential if the legislative process is to piece of work well. This requires individuals with strategic, trouble-solving and consensus-building abilities-people who exercise primary responsibility for the functioning of the legislative process and the maintenance of the institution.

Quaternary, the processes of legislative conclusion making may be more or less partisan in nature. If the legislative parties are cohesive, the majority probably will play the decisive function on of import bug, such every bit the budget. The majority political party caucus will be a principal forum for deciding fundamental issues. But the minority must as well be accorded parliamentary rights. If the bulk lacks cohesion, or has tended to boss, as information technology does in essentially one-party states, decisions on fundamental bug probably volition be made on a more bipartisan basis. Either system can piece of work, depending on the political culture of the state.

A major danger is that if partisanship is besides heavily weighted in the procedure, minority members may find themselves nearly completely close out, the only role remaining to them that of mischief maker. Unrestrained partisanship can damage civility and undermine the legislature as a working institution, further eroding the trust and confidence the public has in information technology. The acquit of the legislative parties, therefore, merits close scrutiny.

Fifth, deliberation is an important characteristic of the legislative process. It necessitates a word and an exchange of data and ideas. Deliberation provides the possibility that a number of legislators will be influenced by the give-and-take. The deliberative process is not restricted to the contend (or lack thereof) that goes on at the second reading phase on the senate and house floor.

It is also a vital element of committee activity and continues in the frequent and unstructured exchanges in members' offices, leadership conferences, at lunch, and in the corridors of the state house or legislative role building. Deliberation as a standard is fundamental to the very thought of a legislature.

Sixth, while deliberation involves the exchange of ideas, edifice consensus involves a more material substitution. Information technology depends on the willingness of opposing sides to sit down down at a tabular array together and negotiate their differences. Generally, that ways dealing, trading and compromise, so that equally many participants as possible buy into a settlement. The overwhelming bulk of laws enacted past a legislature are settled past some process of consensus building.

On relatively few problems are lines so firmly drawn that negotiating is fruitless and battling it out is the only way to arrive at a conclusion. There is little incertitude that one of the about important tasks of the legislature is to build consensus; a legislature that is effective in this regard is likely to exist an effective legislature.

Seventh, these processes not just work to make laws, they are too intended to address bug facing the state. If legislative processes are not related to country needs, they cannot entirely fulfill the expected code office. Ideally, we expect legislatures to solve problems and improve weather condition in the state. At the very to the lowest degree, legislatures have to accost problems.

Facilitating Factors

Two sets of factors contribute substantially to the ability of a legislature to perform well. One can be chosen chapters, the other institutionalism.

Capacity in the broadest sense is the resources, the wherewithal for the legislature to do its job. In the parlance of legislative reform, the amount of time in session and in the interim period, the size of the professional staff, the capability of facilities and technology add upwardly to legislative capacity. How much staff is needed? How should it exist organized? Is a full-time legislature amend than a part-time 1?

Questions like these deserve attention, although I doubt that the answers are the aforementioned in every place. Whether the legislature is more than professional or more than amateur may non exist critical either. Simply what combination of resources or how much of each type is optimum or sufficient probably varies from country to land.

A vital function of a legislature's chapters is the quality of the legislators themselves. In considering quality, we have to deal with the issue of professional person versus citizen legislators-that is, those who are relatively full-time careerists on the one paw and those who are essentially part- and short-timers on the other. In just about every legislature, some of each type be.

Only in some legislatures (for example, California, Illinois, Massachusetts, Michigan and Pennsylvania) professionals predominate, while in others (for case, Montana, New Hampshire, Vermont and Wyoming) citizens predominate. It is not possible to say that 1 blazon of fellow member is more desirable than some other for a legislature, or just what mix works best.

Quality also applies to the personal characteristics of legislators, and especially of legislative leaders. The reputations of legislatures in California (during the tardily 1960s and early on 1970s) and Florida and Minnesota (during the 1970s and 1980s) were based in big office on the substantial number of able, intelligent, energetic, dedicated and politically skilful individuals who served at the time. These members made a marked difference in the performance of the legislature. Legislators with such characteristics clearly contribute to legislative performance everywhere.

The integrity, or the ideals, of the legislature is an integral part of capacity. Although we do non define legislative goodness strictly in terms of the upstanding behavior of members, the ethics of the capitol customs and the blazon and enforcement of ethics laws are amidst the factors that bear on how legislators role. Legislatures characterized by integrity are likely to do amend than those where the ethical behave of members is over the line or besides near the line. Legislative integrity in deed and in spirit matters not only to the public, just too to the overall ability of the legislature to fulfill its representational responsibilities.

Institutionalism is related to a combination of factors that pertain to a legislator's identification with the senate or the business firm and with the legislature as a political institution. Three of the well-nigh important ones are concern, community and continuity.

Concern has to do with a sense of, identification with, or dedication to the legislature, all of which are probable to promote the performance of balancing power and making law. For a legislature to be good, it needs members who care about its well-beingness and who appoint in establishment-building activities (or at least exercise not appoint in activities that are institutionally harmful or destructive). Members who are institutionally inclined will defend the legislature against criticism they believe unjust and will discourage colleagues from running against the institution in guild to win office.

Community encompasses the culture and norms of the legislature. It requires some level of agreement on the demand for civility and some manifestation of collegiality. Informal socializing amongst legislators helps to build customs. In most places such interaction has been in decline in recent years; nevertheless, it remains an element of institutionalism, and i that seems to facilitate the performance of legislative functions.

Continuity is probably as important to institutionalism as annihilation else. Some continuity of membership and staff non only provides for greater cognition and skill on the parts of lawmakers, but it promotes institutional values. It takes a while for most new members to place with and develop concern for the legislature as an institution that merits their support.

Continuity does non require extremely low turnover of membership, just only that some members serve for a decent period of time. By requiring that everyone plow over with relatively brief regularity and by discouraging legislators from identifying with an institution they are passing through, term limits run counter to institutional continuity. The 18 states that currently limit terms are at a disadvantage when it comes to having a skilful legislature.

Assessing Legislatures

This model of the good legislature is based on three principal legislative functions-balancing power, representing constituencies and lawmaking. The factors that facilitate functioning of these functions are capacity and institutionalism.

Some might advise a different model, but on the basis of what I have read and observed of legislatures, I think this is as skilful as any identify to offset thinking nearly what makes a legislature proficient. Information technology will not exist easy to bring to life the categories discussed hither; information technology is virtually impossible to mensurate the several dimensions of the good legislature and to rank the legislatures of the fifty states on goodness. (What is most measurable is probably least pregnant and what is probably most meaning is least measurable.) Uprooting a legislature from the political civilisation of its state cannot be washed. What serves well in Vermont might not serve well in California, and vice versa; and what serves well in Iowa might non serve well in Florida, and vice versa. Comparing legislatures across states is catchy business; giving legislatures numerical scores is impossible business.

But even if measurement is beyond our ability, information technology is almost time that we effigy out roughly what a adept legislature is and roughly how well our own legislature is measuring up.

Alan Rosenthal is a professor of political science at the Eagleton Institute of Politics at Rutgers.

How Good is Your Legislature?

Alan Rosenthal comments that most of his criteria for a practiced legislature cannot be easily measured, and they are certainly subjective. Just that shouldn't finish you from trying to evaluate how good your legislature is. Give your legislature a grade on each of the following questions.

Balancing Ability

one. Does your legislature finer share power with the governor?

2. Does your legislature initiate and enact its own legislation and make contained decisions nigh the state budget?

Representing Constituents

3. Are the legislative districts within your bedroom of nearly equal population?

4. Are the numbers of women, African Americans and Hispanics in your legislature reasonably reflective of the population of your state?

5. Do the members of your legislature provide effective elective service including responses to requests for data, casework, local projects and public expenditures?

6. Do citizens and groups in your state have set access to information on agendas and proceedings of the legislature?

7. Does your legislature provide effective borough education for the public (of all age levels) most representative democracy, the legislative institution and the lawmaking process?

8. Is your legislature responsive to public demands and needs?

Making Police

9. Does your legislature allow effective participation and input from citizens and organized groups in code decisions?

10. Is there a reasonable level of internal democracy within your chamber? Is power relatively dispersed and are the parliamentary rights of private members protected and respected?

11. Practise you have effective legislative leaders who have strategic, trouble-solving and consensus-building abilities?

12. Is the degree of partisanship in your legislature reasonable? Does the majority political party accept plenty clout to get things done? Are the rights of the minority party protected? Are there reasonable restraints on partisanship and then that civility is maintained?

xiii. Is your legislature deliberative? Does it let for give and take and the open exchange of ideas at all stages of the formal and informal legislative process?

xiv. Does your legislature engage in consensus building? Are opposing sides willing to negotiate differences and detect compromises to hard problems?

xv. Does your legislature address and solve the most important problems in your land?

Facilitating Factors

16. Does your legislature take the resource (staff, fourth dimension, facilities, technology) to do its job effectively?

17. Does your legislature have integrity? Exercise the members of the legislature and the Capitol customs in general behave in upstanding ways?

18. Do the members of your legislature care virtually and protect the well-being of the institution?

19. Is there a sense of customs within your legislature? Is in that location civility and collegiality?

20. Is there adequate continuity in the membership of your legislature to promote institutional values and laissez passer on knowledge and skills?

-Karl T. Kurtz, NCSL