The Thicket at State Legislatures

Widow Succession in Legislatures

by Nicole Moore

A recent NCSL survey of legislative communications staff, clerks and secretaries identified 30 women state legislators currently in office who were elected to fill vacancies left by the deaths of their husbands.

Spousal succession used to be a common way women were elected to any office 50 years ago, says Leah Oliver, with the Women's Legislative Network of NCSL. In fact, 45 percent of the women who served in Congress before 1962 were widows filling their spouses' seats. Of the 203 women who have ever served in the U.S. House of Representatives, 36 succeeded their late husbands, according to a 2006 report by the Congressional Research Service.

As Women's History Month comes to a close, it's an appropriate time to recognize the strength of these women who embraced public service at a time of great grief. It's also a time to celebrate that there are myriad other ways women come to office these days, which means more and more elective bodies look more like the electorate, in terms of gender balance.

Legislatures certainly don't mirror the electorate, however. At 15 percent today, a record number of members of Congress are women. And women constitute about 23 percent of America's state legislators, up from just four percent a quarter century ago. More women are leaders in their chambers, caucuses and committees. And while they continue to champion what are often dubbed “women’s issues”--healthcare, education, and domestic violence, for example--they’ve proven their acumen in other policy areas too.

50% Cut in Representation

by Tim Storey

Michigan voters may have to decide that they only need half of the current legislature and want to reduce it by one chamber. Most readers of the Thicket probably know that Nebraska takes great pride in being the only state with a unicameral (one chamber) legislative structure, and they seem to be getting along pretty well.

These proposals come down the road on occasion as some look for ways to save state money or clip the wings of the legislature. Unicameral proposals have been tossed around in many states in the past few decades, but no state has actually joined Nebraska and gone to a one chamber system.

A Michigan group called Fire the Senate is circulating an initiative petition in Michigan to put a measure before voters this fall that would eliminate the Senate. Upon hearing about the group, one quick-witted NCSL staffer quipped that the measure was obviously being backed by the Michigan House, and the Senate would soon be circulating a measure to Fire the House. Not so. It appears to be a legitimate group. The group's website seizes every possible negative, simple, and inaccurate stereotype about legislators, but it does appear to have a clear goal--unicameralism.

Cameras on the Legislatures

by Pam Greenberg

Citizens in forty-five states this year had the opportunity to see or listen to their legislatures in action, either through cable TV, public broadcasting stations, or webcasts.  Forty states offer audio or video coverage of floor proceedings, 22 states cover at least some committee hearings on the Web, and 28 states and the District of Columbia provide television broadcasts. 

States continue to enhance and expand on this coverage--this year, New York began to broadcast Assembly and Senate sessions on cable television (in addition to webcasts of sessions); and Indiana recently added video webcasts, along with Ways and Means Committee coverage.  New Mexico this year approved legislation and appropriations to begin offering webcasts of the legislature for the first time next year. 

Line-Item Veto for the U.S President?

by Ron Snell

In today's Washington Post (March 16) George Will argues against a presidential line-item veto, partly on constitutional grounds but mostly on political.  It might, according to Will, increase federal spending rather than reduce it, by giving members of Congress an incentive to pack every conceivable spending proposal into legislation, expecting the president to veto some of it; and it would give the president more bargaining power with Congress--sparing items from the veto in exchange for support on other items. 

He could be right, but he overlooks a political gain for us all from a line-item veto.  It could make the president and Congress talk to each other. 

Some years ago, I went with several legislative fiscal staff in Washington to brief Congressional Budget Office staff on the way governors' line-item vetos affect state budgets.  They made the point that vetos are used rather sparingly (in most states, most of the time) because the existence of the line-item veto encourages legislators and governors to work out differences before budgets are enacted.  The CBO staff were aghast:  they thought that violated the separation of powers.  It does nothing of the kind.  Line item vetos encourage legislative-executive political discussion of a sort that is all too lacking in Washington.

Changing media habits challenge state legislatures

by Gene Rose

Faster speeds to the Internet, through broadband connections, are changing America's access to news, according to a new report by the Pew Internet & American Life Project.

The report, "Online News," generated several headlines highlighting the study's less-than-startling findings that more people under the age of 36 use the Internet for a primary source of news. Some 44 million Americans turn to the Internet for news on a typical day, the report says. 74 million Americans now have broadband access, around 37 percent of the population.

The good news for state legislatures is that "politics/public affairs" tops a six-category list of news consumers want. 54 percent claim they sought news of this nature. And, this being America, entertainment news came right behind at 52 percent. Science, health, local and finance news all come in below politics/public affairs.

The Alpha and Omega of Democracy Education

by Karl Kurtz

The weekend editions of two of the most prestigious newspapers bring us some effective cheerleading about the need for improved civic learning contrasted with a depressing reality about the place of democracy education--indeed any education other than reading and math--in the schools today. 

In Not by Math Alone in Saturday's Washington Post, former Justice Sandra Day O'Connor and former Colorado governor, now Los Angeles Unified School District Superintendent, Roy Romer write eloquently about the need to prepare young people for their role as citizens.  These two national leaders, who co-chair the national advisory committee for the Campaign for the Civic Mission of Schools, make the point that strengthening democracy education is not a zero-sum game with improving math and science.  "We need more students proficient in math, science and engineering. We also need them to be prepared for their role as citizens. Only then can self-government work."

But the Sunday New York Times reports the sad fact that "Schools Cut Back Subjects to Push Reading and Math."   The story, which is a preview of a national survey to be released later this week by the Center on Education Policy, leads with, "Thousands of schools across the nation are responding to the reading and math testing requirements laid out in No Child Left Behind, President Bush's signature education law, by reducing class time spent on other subjects and, for some low-proficiency students, eliminating it."

Solving this problem of reading, math and science driving out all other subjects is the greatest challenge for advocates of improved civic learning--or of other important subjects for that matter.  O'Connor and Romer argue in effect that growing the pie is the solution, but no one has figured out exactly how to do it.

A British Eye on Term Limits

by Karl Kurtz

In the March 16 issue of The Economist, Brian Barry writes, "Are term limits the answer?" (subscription required).  Basing his article on the Nebraska Unicameral, where term limits will first take effect after the elections this fall, Barry draws on the results of a three-year study of the effects of term limits on state legislatures by NCSL, the Council of State Governments and the State Legislative Leaders Foundation in conjunction with a group of academic political scientists.  (The study will be published as a book, Institutional Change in American Politics: The Case of Term Limits by the University of Michigan Press later this year.)

How about a 20 day session limit...ten days...five?

by Tim Storey

In Alaska an initiative will likely qualify for this November's ballot to limit legislative sessions to 90 days.  Reforms similar to this that attempt to limit the authority of the legislature always seem to be popular with voters, so passage may be inevitable.  After states enacted a flurry of session limits in the 70s and 80s, few states have added session limits in recent years. 

My first thought upon hearing that Alaska voters gathered enough signatures to get the measure on the ballot in November was that they must be tired of having the legislature drag on and on with no formal deadline to force decisions and get them out of town.  But no, Alaska already has a constitutional limit on sessions of 121 days.  The measure would cut deliberation, committee meeting days and study time by 30 days each year.  Several current Alaska legislators who back the proposal argue that nothing happens in the first month of session anyway, so why not scrap it.  I suspect the 300-plus landlords of Juneau who rent apartments to legislators and staff during the session will mount at least token opposition. 

The legislature has bills pending to pre-empt the qualified initiative and apply a statutory 90 day limit with some innovative ideas like allowing remote voting by members--and legislators are in some pretty remote locations in the Last Frontier.  The measure may save the state millions of dollars in session costs.  If money is the only object, why not go farther and limit the session to only 20 days?  Perhaps outsourcing the entire legislative process might save even more money?  In 16 states there is essentially no formal session limit and about ten of those states meet year round with occasional recesses.  Most legislatures have some form of session limit although the specifics vary.  For a list of 2006 session dates, click here.

We're Flattered

by Karl Kurtz

In 2003 NCSL and its partners in the Alliance for Representative Democracy published a public opinion survey comparing the civic knowledge, engagement and attitudes of 18-26 year-olds ("Dotnets") with those of older generations.  Among our findings:

"The political knowledge of Dotnets is dismayingly poor.  Eight out of 10 of them can tell you that the television Simpsons live in Springfield, and 64 percent know that Ruben Studdard is the most recent American Idol. But less than half know the party of their state's governor, and only 40 percent can say which party controls Congress."

Now along comes McCormick Tribune Freedom Foundation with a new poll on public knowledge of the freedoms under the First Amendment.  What are their findings?

• "More than half (52%) of Americans can identify at least two of "The Simpsons," while only about half that number (28%) can think of two or more First Amendment freedoms.
• Americans are also much more likely to be able to name the three judges on the popular TV program "American Idol" than First Amendment freedoms."

We're pleased that these findings confirm and elaborate our view of the appalling level of public knowledge of American government.  And if imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, color us pink with pleasure.  But for our next poll, we'll try to think of some original comparisons of popular culture to civic knowledge.

Hurricanes and Representative Democracy

by Gene Rose

Voters in New Orleans are slated to go to the polls next month to elect their city officials. The vote, originally scheduled for February, has several intriguing storylines, not the least of which is how a city devastated by a disaster recovers while maintaining a system of governance.

The Louisiana Secretary of State's Elections Division hosts a Web site that addresses many of the difficulties this election poses. An article in today's Christian Science Monitor explores a few of these obstacles and points out that legal actions might bring further delays.

The question at the heart of this story is how well representative democracy will survive this disaster. While federal, state and local governments try to resolve their differences on rebuilding, some residents and displaced citizens are expressing concern that their voices are not being heard. The challenge is to legally decide who has the right to vote and express their views this election. It's a decision that's as murky as the water that flooded the city.

The magnitude of destruction in New Orleans is, fortunately, rare in the United States and consequently there's not a lot of guidance on how to ensure strong representative democracy following such a catastrophic event. For those of us who did not live in the city and surrounding areas when Hurricane Katrina hit, it's an interesting case study on how governments prepare, act and react to such an event and keep the system in motion. For those who were residents, it's a series of complex realities and hard lessons about representative democracy they never wanted to be part of.