The Thicket at State Legislatures

"Goodbye Denver"

by NCSL Communications Division

On Friday morning, the last edition of the Rocky Mountain News was delivered to subscribers across the Denver-Metro area. Cincinnati-based E.W. Scripps has owned the  News since 1926. In late 2008, Scripps announced plans to sell the paper if no acceptable offers emerged by late January. No bids were received and the paper has now closed its doors 55 days shy of its 150th birthday.

Denver has now joined the ranks of other large metropolitan cities, like Houston, that have become "one paper towns." Cities like Pittsburgh (video on the left hand side) and Seattle may be just a few short steps behind the Mile High City.

But who is reading newspapers these days? This is part of the problem. The Pew Research Center for People and the Press released a study confirming the downward slide of newspaper readership:
“The trend is unmistakable: Fewer Americans are reading print newspapers as more turn to the Internet for their news. And while the percentage of people who read newspapers on line is growing rapidly, especially among younger generations, that growth has not offset the decline in print readership.“ Here is a link to the full report.

Newspapers, television and radio stations are not only shutting their doors, they are also laying off hundreds of employees, with the "capitol beat" taking one of the largest hits. Hundreds of reporters who use to walk the steps of the legislature are now being replaced with reporters who cannot find the state capitol (sound familiar?) or not replaced at all. This has been an issue The Thicket has covered since last year (Who is Left in the Media, Anchor, News Coverage Away). 

Scott Cooper with OK Gazette published an article earlier this week that highlighted the number of cuts on the capitol beat. Coopers goes on in his article to determine who would be the biggest loser with fewer reporters covering state legislatures. The public? You bet! The problem of why newspapers are closing their doors and what that means to the watchdogs of our society is evident. It's not clear what can be done to keep newspapers afloat, stop reporters from becoming extinct and open transparency in government. 

In the May magazine of State Legislatures Magazine, we will examine this issue and find out if bloggers and the cyber world can pick up their coverage of state legislatures where "print" has dried up.

Why States Are Considering Health IT

by Meagan Dorsch

Technology is quickly transforming every sector of our population. We are now starting to see the nation's health care system jump on board.

Health Information Technology (IT) is the use of technology to electronically collect, store, retrieve and transfer clinical, administrative and financial health information. It offers the chance to improve quality of care and reduce costs in health care. President Barack Obama recently approved roughly $20 billion for health IT in the stimulus package.   

In this edition of The Buzz, we sit down with Sen. Richard Mooreof Massachusetts who is also the co-chair of NCSL's Health Information Technology Champions Project. Sen. Moore explains the vital role states are playing as the health sector transforms from a paper to an electronic system. While health IT offers many benefits, provider uptake has been slow due to high costs, as well as privacy and security concerns. Sen. Moore touches on what states are doing to keep the dollar figure down.

Listen to our podcast (10:38) and find out how health IT could alleviate some of the pain the next time you see the doctor. Also, make sure to visit NCSL's Health Information Technology Legislative Tracking Database.

Follow NCSL and Thicket postings on Twitter. 

Memorializing Congress

by Karl Kurtz

In the 10 Congresses from 1987 to 2006, state legislatures submitted an average of 411 memorials to Congress each biennium.  That's about 80 per state over that 20 year period.  The California Legislature memorialized Congress 542 times during that period and Louisiana 375 times, while Connecticut submitted only four memorials.  Events that sparked the memorials included Hurricane Katrina (Louisiana submitted twice as many memorials in 2005-6 as it had in any previous Congress), military base closures and the tobacco settlement.

These are a few of the interesting tidbits that I found, while preparing for an interview with a reporter about the state sovereignty resolutions, in a 2008 paper given at the American Political Science Association by J. Wesley Leckrone and Justin Gollob.

According to the Congressional Research Service:

A memorial is a request, usually from a state legislature, that the Congress take some action, or refrain from taking certain action. Memorials may be addressed to the House or Senate as a whole, to the Speaker or presiding officer of the Senate, or to individual Senators or Representatives. The Senate prints the full text of a memorial in its section of the Congressional Record, while the House only prints the title of a memorial.

The fact that the Senate publishes the text of the memorials allowed Leckrone and Gollob to do a content analysis of over 4,000 memorials from state legislatures.  Their purpose was to try to identify and measure the states' collective agenda for action by Congress.

Other states besides California and Louisiana that submitted more than 200 memorials include Michigan, Hawaii and Pennsylvania.  In addition to Connecticut, states that memorialized Congress fewer than 10 times over this 20 year period were North Carolina and Mississippi.

Why do some states use this process more often than others?  The answers are not entirely clear. 

Wait, Let's have Coffee!

by Karl Kurtz

At a workshop for new committee chairs in the Ohio House of Representatives conducted by NCSL a couple of weeks ago, former Tennessee House Majority Leader Kim McMillan told an amusing story that went something like this:

When I was first first elected to the Tennessee House in 1994, I looked very young and was one of only two women in the House, none in the Senate.  In my first year I was appointed to a joint House/Senate committee that required at least three members from each chamber to be present for a quorum.  I was sitting between two male House members.  The senator who was chairing the meeting announced, "We want to get started, but there are only two members and an intern [looking at me] present from the House.  So we'll have to wait.  While we're waiting, I hope that intern can get us some coffee."

I hesitated only a beat and left the room to get the coffee.  I found where it was, poured cups for everyone and carried them back into the committee room.  In the meantime, someone had clued the Senate chair in that I was a member of the House.  As soon as I walked in, he blustered, "A quorum is present.  Let's get started."

I smiled brightly and said, "Wait, let's have coffee before we start!"

McMillan's lesson for committee chairs from this story? Be prepared: Know the members of your committee, even if it's an ad hoc group that doesn't meet regularly.  Among other things, you'll save yourself embarrassment.

McMillan has recently announced an exploratory committee to run for governor of Tennessee in 2010.

Congress Doesn't Know State Legislative Procedure

by Karl Kurtz

The federal economic stimulus package (The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act) raises some interesting state legislative procedural questions.  Section 1607 of the Federal Stimulus Bill (HR1) states:

SEC. 1607. (a) CERTIFICATION BY GOVERNOR.—Not later than
45 days after the date of enactment of this Act, for funds provided
to any State or agency thereof, the Governor of the State shall
certify that: (1) the State will request and use funds provided
by this Act; and (2) the funds will be used to create jobs and
promote economic growth.
(b) ACCEPTANCE BY STATE LEGISLATURE.—If funds provided
to any State in any division of this Act are not accepted for use
by the Governor, then acceptance by the State legislature, by means
of the adoption of a concurrent resolution, shall be sufficient to
provide funding to such State.
(c) DISTRIBUTION.—After the adoption of a State legislature’s
concurrent resolution, funding to the State will be for distribution
to local governments, councils of government, public entities, and
public-private entities within the State either by formula or at
the State’s discretion.

Sections (b) and (c) were inserted because of the threat by several governors, led by Gov. Mark Sanford of South Carolina, not to accept funds.  Congress uses both joint resolutions, which must be signed by the president to become law, and concurrent resolutions, which do not go to the President. Presumably, Congress used the term "concurrent resolution" thinking that states have similar rules allowing such resolutions to pass without approval by the governor.  This is indeed the case in South Carolina, the state at which this provision was aimed.

However, the problem is that many states have no provision for "concurrent" resolutions.  As our North Carolina colleague Gerry Cohen points out, the North Carolina Constitution provides for joint resolutions, which do not require the signature of the governor, but contains no references to concurrent resolutions.  Nebraska has a unicameral legislature, so how can it enact a concurrent resolution?  What should state legislatures that don't have concurrent resolutions do?

That's not the only drafting problem in Section 1607.  Paragraph (a) is explicit about the time frame for certification by governors, but it doesn't say anything about the timetable for state legislative certification. Do legislatures have to act within the 45 days?  If so, what if the governor doesn't act one way or another until the 45th day?  Is the legislature out of luck?

NCSL is seeking guidance from the administration on these questions as they develop implementation plans.

All of this may prove to be academic, as the recalcitrant governors now mostly seem to be saying that they will accept all of the funds except for the incentives to the states to make changes to eligibility for unemployment compensation, which were clearly optional and would in any case require state legislative action for states to participate.

As a footnote, NCSL provided Congress and the administration with language that would have eliminated these problems.  Our suggested language would have substituted the word "state" for "governor" in paragraph (a), thereby deferring to each state's practice regarding the appropriation of federal funds.  Unfortunately, congressional drafters did not accept this language.

A rose from The Thicket to Gerry Cohen.

States Talk About Interoperability

by Meagan Dorsch

Emergency communications are especially needed during disasters.

Interoperability refers to the ability of emergency response agencies (police, fire and emergency medical services) to communicate with each other. A lack of communication can result in slow response times or ineffective response by emergency personnel during a critical time.

In this edition of The Buzz, we sit down with Bob Boerner, program principal at the National Conference of State Legislatures to discuss state interoperability programs.

Bob explains what states are doing to improve communication, who has passed laws regarding interoperability and how the federal government is assisting states.

Listen to our podcast (4:00) and find out how states are working to improve communications during crisis situations.

Follow NCSL and The Thicket on Twitter.

Be Careful What You Post

by Angela Andrews

As social networking websites explode with new users, more and more legislators are attracted to these sites as a way to connect and interact with their constituents. Legislators who use social networking sites, such as Facebook, are able to post real-time information about legislation being considered, share pictures of themselves serving in their official capacity, and can quickly seek input and opinions from their "friends" about the many issues being debated before them. But, what happens when legislators post inappropriate pictures or comments for all to view?

Massachusetts State Representative Denis Guyer recently dealt with this scenario when he posted an unflattering comment about his legislative colleague, fellow Massachusetts State Rep. William "Smitty" Pignatelli, on his Facebook page, which caught the attention of the local newspaper, The Berkshire Eagle. As the newspaper reports, Rep. Guyer "blasted" Rep. Pignatelli on his Facebook page.

The posting publicized a private feud and required both legislators to respond to the rift and assure their constituents that they can continue to work together. Rep. Guyer posted another item on his Facebook page. This time it was a statement issued to his constituents regarding his actions:

"[W]e all have our own moments... [when] we perhaps make a phone call we shouldn't, mail a note we never should have penned or hit the send or post button on something via the internet. I would ask you all understand; I am human too, I have made a mistake."

This posting debacle might be Rep. Guyer's last mistake with social media, but it is almost certain that other legislators and public individuals will make the same mistake as more start to use this medium. This story offers a lesson to everyone that uses Facebook, MySpace, Twitter or any other social networking website: be careful what you post. For legislators who have ventured, or plan to venture, into this new networking frontier, a question remains: how do they draw the line between their professional use of social networking sites and their private use, where they feel comfortable sharing their most intimate feelings with their closest "friends?"

Photo of Rep. Denis Guyer from his Facebook profile.

Black History Month: A Look at African American Legislators

by Meagan Dorsch

February is Black History month. On this edition of The Buzz, we interview Morgan Cullen, a policy specialist in NCSL's Legislative Management Program, to discuss the current demographic trends among African American legislators over the last 20 years. He talks about the types of changes we are likely to see in the future and how history was made during Colorado's 2009 legislative session. We also discuss the increase of Latino state legislators nationwide. 

Listen to our podcast (6:40) and find out how well these groups are represented in state legislatures, how they have increased their representation and why it is important to have all demographic groups well represented within state government.

States Assert Sovereignty

by Jan Goehring

At least ten states have filed bills or resolutions asserting state sovereignty under the 10th amendment, according to the Tenth Amendment Center web site. The measures in Arizona (HCR 2024 and SCR 1038), Georgia (HR280), Montana (HB246), Michigan (HCR 4), Missouri (HR 212), New Hampshire (HCR 6), Oklahoma (HJR 1003), South Carolina (H 3509), Texas (HCR 50) and Washington (HJM 4009) generally ask the federal government to stay out of state business and end certain mandates. More states may follow. 

Some states addressed specific issues. Montana's bill, the Firearms Freedom Act, seeks to exempt Montana-made firearms from the commerce clause based on 10th Amendment authority. The Missouri resolution declares the state's sovereignty under the 10th amendment and urges Congress to reject the Freedom of Choice Act that deals with abortion regulations.

The Arizona concurrent resolutions, HCR 2024 and SCR 1038, seek relief from certain federal mandates.  The House resolution reads in part:

Be it resolved by the House of Representatives of the State of Arizona, the Senate concurring, that:

1.   That the State of Arizona hereby claims sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States over all powers not otherwise enumerated and granted to the federal government by the Constitution of the United States.

2.  That this Resolution serves as notice and demand to the federal government, as our agent, to cease and desist, effective immediately, mandates that are beyond the scope of these constitutionally delegated powers.

3.  That all compulsory federal legislation that directs states to comply under threat of civil or criminal penalties or sanctions or requires states to pass legislation or lose federal funding be prohibited or repealed.

4.  That the Secretary of State of the State of Arizona transmit copies of this resolution to the President of the United States, the President of the United States Senate, the Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, the Speaker of the House and the President of the Senate of each state's legislature and each Member of Congress from the State of Arizona.

Is this a movement that is gaining traction?  It's easy to introduce resolutions.  Will they pass?

What Does the Stimulus Mean for States?

by Meagan Dorsch

How are states legislatures going to use the stimulus money? Will the governors or legislatures be in charge of distributing the money? How much money did my state get?

These were just some of the questions reporters from across the country asked experts from The National Conference of State Legislatures during a media conference call Wednesday afternoon.

Experts in our Washington DC office took time to explain to reporters what the $787-billion America's Recovery and Reinvestment Act signed by President Barack Obama on Tuesday will mean for states.

NCSL, working on behalf of state lawmakers, pressed Congress and the president to include support for these essential programs and services in the stimulus package. State legislatures are meeting in sessions now to make tough decisions on how to balance their budgets.

Legislators across the country are working on ways to implement the funding expeditiously to help create jobs, fix an aging infrastructure, and avoid reductions to vital programs and services.

Some 43 states are reporting cumulative budget shortfalls of $183 billion for fiscal year 2009, according to findings from NCSL's most recent fiscal survey in January. That gap is expected to balloon to more than $200 billion for fiscal year 2010. Because states are required to balance their budgets each year, the decisions they make to reduce spending and raise taxes have the effect of deepening and prolonging economic downturns. 

Listen to the media call and find out what this economic stimulus package could mean for your state.