Legislatures past and present NCSL and LRL Professional Development Seminar 2013 Boise, Idaho Gary Moncrief University Distinguished Professor of Political Science Boise State University 2013
Melvil Dewey In 1890 New York State Library under Dewey established a legislative reference unit, the first of its kind in the nation. Slide source: Peverill Squire
Charles McCarthy A recent University of Wisconsin Ph.D. in history, McCarthy was hired as a document cataloger to run a small library in the capitol. Once he took over the library on his own initiative he began providing research assistance to legislators. In 1903 appreciative lawmakers appropriated funds to support his efforts. McCarthy s unit quickly evolved into the Legislative Reference Bureau Slide source: Peverill Squire
Legislatures are impressive political institutions, but they are not at all popular ones.they are probably the most unappreciated institutions in the country. --Alan Rosenthal, The Engines of Democracy
Legislatures are not appreciated because, unlike other branches of government 1. they are large 2. they are diverse 3. they are relatively open 4. they are messy 5. they suffer from the collective action problem
STATE LEGISLATIVE CHANGES OVER THE DECADES The Fifties : Legislatures as backwater institutions The Sixties : The reapportionment revolution The Seventies : The modernization movement The Eighties : Increased autonomy and growing careerism The Nineties : Use of the initiative to define legislatures The New Millenium : Heightened Partisanship, Fiscal Stress and New Technology
The 1950s: The American state legislature is in trouble.. It is very possibly true that no American political institution has ever had so many detractors, so few defenders, or such a wide array of charges leveled against it. Today s legislatures are located on the outskirts of public esteem and affection. --William Keefe
LRL State Government is the tawdriest, most incompetent, and most stultifying unit of the nation s political structure. low grade and corrupt legislatures. Without exception, legislatures, as a whole, are a shambles of mediocrity, incompetence, hooliganism and venality.state legislatures are the most sordid, obstructive, and anti-democratic law-making agencies in the country. --Robert S. Allen, Our Sovereign State (New York: Vanguard Press, 1949), pp.xxxi
The 60 s: Reapportionment Revolution After the revolution, it took 48-50% of the population to elect a majority. Prior to the reapportionment cases 1962-1965, a majority of the house seats could be elected by one-third or less of the population in at least one chamber in IL, IA, KS, MI, MN, ND and OH. (it was actually even worse elsewhere in 11 states a majority of seats were controlled by less than 1/5 of the population)
House District Disparity in 1960 source: Ansolabahere and Snyder, The End of Inequality, pp. 26-7 state Smallest Largest Average CALIFORNIA 72,105 443,892 195,478 COLORADO 7,867 63,760 26,982 HAWAI I 5,030 23,780 12,407 IDAHO 915 23,453 11,308 IOWA 7,468 133,158 25,533 MONTANA 894 12,537 7,178 NEW MEXICO 1,874 29,133 14,394 TEXAS 23,062 155,393 63,956 UTAH 1,164 32,380 13,900 WASHINGTON 12,399 57,648 28,527 WISCONSIN 19,651 87,486 39,518
Senate District Disparity, 1960 source: Ansolabehere and Snyder, ibid. State Smallest Largest average CALIFORNIA 14,294 6,038,771 392,928 COLORADO 17,481 127,520 50,113 HAWAI I 8,518 63,602 25,306 IDAHO 915 93,460 15,163 IOWA 17,756 266,315 55,149 MONTANA 894 79,016 12,049 NEW MEXICO 1,874 262,199 29,719 TEXAS 131,970 1,243,158 309,015 UTAH 9,408 64,760 35,629 WASHINGTON 20,023 145,180 57,636 WISCONSIN 74,293 208,343 119,690
Minimum Percent of Population to elect a legislative majority in 1960 SOURCE: Ansolabehere and Snyder, pp. 50-51 State House/Assembly Senate CALIFORNIA 35% 10% COLORADO 32 29 HAWAI I 37 18 IDAHO 27 17 IOWA 27 31 MONTANA 34 16 NEW MEXICO 29 15 TEXAS 33 30 UTAH 33 21 WASHINGTON 37 34 WISCONSIN 40 42 US CONGRESS 38 17
What was the impact of the reapportionment revolution? A shift toward urban and suburban representation Opened the door for more women and minorities Increased the perceived legitimacy of the legislative institution for a broader segment of the public
The 70 s: Making Legislatures More Capable and More Attractive Increased staffing Better working facilities Higher Pay Move to annual sessions These reforms were largely effective in making legislatures co-equal branches of
Jesse Unruh California Assembly Speaker, 1961-1970 If legislators are not equipped with staff to scrutinize material provided by the executive, it is extremely unlikely that they can determine what is fact and what is fancy if the material involves anything but the simplest and most obvious kind of issue Slide Source: Peverill Squire
Growth of Research Staff Early 1970s, post-reforms: A Washington lawmaker, If someone from the governor s office walked into a committee hearing, he no longer knew more about the subject at hand than anyone else in the room. A Florida representative, Today, when a lobbyist testifies, I can look at him and say, That s very interesting, but it s not what my staff tells me. --Peverill Squire
Rosenthal on the improvement of state legislatures Years ago state legislatures merited much of the criticism that is aimed at them today. Lately, however, they have proved to be more deserving; now they merit commendation rather than blame.. No longer a relic of the past, the legislature has built up capacity and become heavily involved in the governance of the state. --Alan Rosenthal, Legislative Life (1981)
Population growth and the effect on legislative district size US Population grew from 203 million in 1970 to 308 million in 20010 (105 million in 40 years; a 52% increase) The median state legislative house district grew from about 25,000 to over 40,000 The median state senate district grew from 72,000 to 110,000 The total number of state legislators DECLINED slightly (there are 180 fewer seats than in 1973).
The 70 s: and beyond: Growth in House District Population in the West State 1970 census 2010 census % change Alaska 7,550 17,756 135 % Arizona 59,100 213,067 260 California 249,637 465,674 86 Colorado 33,985 77,372 126 Hawaii 15,098 26,672 76 Idaho 20,371 44,784 120 Montana 6,677 9,894 48 Nevada 12,218 64,299 426 N. Mexico 14,529 29,417 102 Oregon 34,850 63,851 83 Utah 15,347 36,851 140 Washingtn 68,894 137,235 100 Wyoming 5,449 9,393 72
Through the 80s: Perceived Changes Over Time 330 Veteran Legislators Perceptions of Changes Source: Moncrief, Thompson and Kurtz, Legislative Studies Quarterly (1996) Conducted in 1993, the survey was sent only to those members who had served at least 15 years since at least 1978 Increased Same Decreased Pressures of Job 91.5 6.1% 2.4 % Constituent Service 87.2 10.6 2.1 Committee staff 58.6 38.7 2.5 Personal staff 46.4 50.3 2.6 Partisan staff 43.0 45.0 10.6 Executive Oversight 56.5 30.1 13.4 Ideological Conflict 52.0 36.2 11.8 Media Influence 64.5 25.7 9.8 Lobby Influence 50.9 36.6 12.5 Governor s Influence 25.0 39.9 35.1
BUT, THERE ARE CLOUDS IN THE COFFEE Summary of Perceived Changes in Behavior of Legislators source: Thompson, Kurtz and Moncrief, We ve Lost That Family Feeling: The Changing Norms of the New Breed of State Legislators, Social Science Quarterly (1996) and Carly Simon, You re So Vain (1972) Increase in ideological conflict Higher priority to re-election Likely to campaign against the institution More time and effort spent raising campaign funds
The Decline of Representative Democracy --Alan Rosenthal, 1998
The 90 s: Limits on Legislatures through Direct Democracy The increased use of the initiative, referendum and recall The reaction against legislative institutions through Term Limits
Source: National Conference of State Legislatures Initiative and Referendum States
Initiatives on the ballot, by decade Source: Initiative and Referendum Institute 450 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 initiatives 1900s 1910s 1920s 1930s 1940s 1950s 1960s 1970s 1980s 1990s 2000s 2010-12
And legislation was overturned via referendum in 2012: Ohio, South Dakota, Idaho
The Recall 1908-1999, there were 12 legislators recalled (averages 1 every 7 1/2 years) Since 2000, there have been 8 recalled (averages 1 every 1 ½ years)
TERM LIMITS IN THE STATES STATE Terms YR of House YR of Senate (year adopted) H S Impact Impact Maine ( 93) 8 H 8 S 1996 1996 California ( 90) 6 H 8 S 1996 1998 Colorado ( 90) 8 H 8 S 1998 1998 Arkansas (92) 6 H 8 S 1998 2000 Michigan ( 92) 6 H 8 S 1998 2002 Florida ( 92) 8 H 8 S 2000 2000 Ohio ( 92) 8 H 8 S 2000 2000 S. Dakota ( 92) 8 H 8 S 2000 2000 Montana ( 92) 8 H 8 S 2000 2000 Arizona ( 92) 8 H 8 S 2000 2000 Missouri ( 92) 8 H 8 S 2002 2002 Oklahoma (90 12 H 12 S 2004 2004 Nebraska ( 00) 8 S 2006 2006 Louisiana (95) 12 H 12 S 2007 2007 Nevada ( 96) 12H 12 S 2010 2010
Percent Decennial Turnover Averages Decennial averages of turnover, all states combined 70 60 50 40 30 Senate House 20 10 0 1930s 1940s 1950s 1960s 1970s 1980s 1990s
percent Figure 1: Turnover in State Legislatures, 1968-2010 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 H S 0 68 70 72 74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 2000 2 4 6 8 10
percent 45 Figure 2: House Turnover in TL and non-tl states 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 TL NTL 5 0 1968 70 72 74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 2000 2 4 6 8 10
Legislative web-sites E-mail Blogs Social network instruments: Facebook Twitter YouTube The New Century: Technology and the job of representation
The new media: blogging the legislature Types of blogs: Media stringers Interest group/association reps. Individual legislators Caucus/partisan ideological
The Sum is Greater Than the Parts Today s legislatures are located on the outskirts of public esteem Does this statement still apply? YES! When the CSG held its annual meeting in Alaska in 2004, this was the statement in the local newspaper on the day the conference began.
NAIL DOWN or hide your valuables, folks. More than 1,500 politicians from around the country are in Anchorage for a national gathering of state leaders.the group is composed largely of legislators from the 50 states. --Anchorage Daily News, page B7
RECENT PUBLIC OPINON SURVEYS PERCENT WHO Approve of the job the state legislature is doing. Kansas 29% July 2011 Michigan 27% July 2012 Minnesota 28% April 2013 (up from 17% in February 2012) Ohio 33% May 2012 Other recent figures: 17% in New York; 16% in California, 19% Washington state
State legislative capacity indicators 1979-2009 source: MONCRIEF AND SQUIRE, WHY STATES MATTER, TABLE 4.2 1979 2009 Percent change AVERAGE SALARY $27,949 * $28,230 1% MEDIAN SALARY $23,098* $ 20,806-10% Average days in session 62.4 70.9 14% Median days in session 58.5 59.5 1% Average staff per member 3.7 4.8 30% Median staff per member 2.7 3.9 44% *ADJUSTED TO 2009 DOLLARS
PERSPECTIVES Short-term perspectives Geographic perspectives Partisan perspectives
TIME: short-term versus long-term Legislators operate in a system based on sequential events: bill introduction deadlines, 3 reading rules, committee action, floor action, other chamber action; candidate filing dates, primary election dates, general election dates. Quite understandably, this creates a can t see the forest because of the trees syndrome We lose sight of the need to protect the legislative institution.
GEOGRAPHIC PERCEPTIONS The nature of the American system of representation is geographically-based: everyone is elected from a specific geographic district. Consequence: It s hard to see the forest because everyone is defending his/her particular tree
Partisan Perspectives We are in a period in which the two parties are very competitive nationally and this is true in some states as well. And most observers feel the two parties are further apart from one another, ideologically, than we have been for a long time. Consequence: Don t want to see the forest because my party s trees are the only true trees
Unified government and chambers with extraordinary majorities 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 1960 1962 1964 1966 1968 1970 1972 1974 1976 1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 chambers states
Alan Rosenthal s thoughts on How to judge legislative performance Representing the constituency Open legislative process Balancing the executive Oversight of the agencies Legislative maintenance
Rosenthal again Anyone elected, or even appointed to high public office has a responsibility to the office he or she holds. Those elected to serve in legislative office have a comparable responsibility to the legislature.the genius of representative democracy in America lies mainly in its legislative bodies. Legislators themselves have to work at maintaining the well-being of these bodies as political institutions. Engines of Democracy, p. 418
Summary American state legislatures, as institutions, have undergone dramatic change in the past 50 years There are forces partisan, ideological, individual legislators goals, the nature of district representation, media focus on conflict that are naturally centrifugal But we must seek ways to protect indeed, enhance respect for the institution of the legislature. LEADERSHIP IS KEY