The Thicket at State Legislatures

A. Alan Post, Pioneering California Fiscal Analyst

by Karl Kurtz

Another legend of legislative staffing died this week. A. Alan Post, 96, served as California's Legislative Analyst from 1950 to 1978. Post established the Legislative Analyst Office's reputation for balanced and unfearing assessments of state budget and fiscal policy, taking on governors and legislators alike. Dan Walters, long-time columnist for the Sacramento Bee, offered this assessment:

It would be difficult to overstate Post's achievement in 28 years as legislative analyst. The second person to hold the position, he established the Legislative Analyst's Office as a fiercely independent and nonpolitical source of data and advice about state finances.

His three successors stoutly maintained that approach even when their guidance on fiscal and managerial issues infuriated politicians, bureaucrats and special-interest lobbyists....

Post's successors – William Hamm, Elizabeth Hill and now Mac Taylor – maintained his rational, fact-based approach, advising legislators to do what was needed, even if politically risky, to bring budget income and outgo into balance. But governors and lawmakers just as consistently resorted to gimmicks, borrowing and bookkeeping tricks to postpone the day of reckoning.

The current legislative analyst, Mac Taylor, released this tribute:

We were saddened to hear of Alan’s passing. Alan became the second Legislative Analyst in 1950, during the office’s infancy. Over the next three decades, he built the office’s reputation for objective, nonpartisan work, turning the LAO into a national model for other states and Congress. Alan accomplished this through a strong intellect; a quiet, almost professorial manner; and a fierce determination to speak truth to power. He was unafraid of taking on Governors of either party and others to tell the Legislature and the public what he felt was the best course for the state based on sound policy and fiscal analysis. A. Alan Post was truly a giant of 20th Century California state government. We mourn his death but celebrate his legacy.

Mac is right that the LAO and Alan Post were "a national model for other states and Congress." The LAO was the first legislative fiscal office in the nation. In the 1970s, during the heyday of the creation of state legislative fiscal offices around the country (as well as the Congressional Budget Office in 1974), Alan was often consulted and cited as the model of what independent, nonpartisan fiscal analysis could do to promote legislative independence and authority. He always gave generally of his time and knowledge to other states.

 

The Cost of Voter ID

by Wendy Underhill

What does it cost to implement strict photo ID requirements for voting?  That seems to be the question du jour, at least in NCSL's part of the elections world.  No one had a good answer to it until last week, when an analysis from Sean Greene of the Pew Center on the States became public.  In Debate Over Photo ID at the Polls Shifts to Costs, an article in electionlineWeekly, Greene says “Most states are facing serious fiscal challenges and large budget shortfalls. Opponents of photo ID legislation have seized on this point to buttress their arguments against these new requirements.”

Greene used 14 fiscal notes from this year’s photo voter ID bills, plus data from Georgia and Indiana, two states that pioneered strict voter ID requirements.   The fiscal notes vary wildly. Nebraska, for instance, expects no additional costs and a negligible loss of revenue, whereas Missouri expects combined costs and revenue losses to be $9.9 million over FY 2012 and 2013.

The huge variation is an outcome of what was measured in each state.  Some states included the costs of providing free ID cards, outreach campaigns to tell the electorate about the new regulations, and training for precinct workers. Others didn’t.  Some states included reductions in fees collected for ID cards; others didn’t.  An Iowa study suggested that estimates should include potential litigation costs, along with all these other costs; nowhere else was this mentioned. 

Greene’s work is a starting point. Just today I found another cost-related report, The High Cost of Voter ID Mandates, from the advocacy groups, Common Cause Minnesota and Citizens for Election Integrity Minnesota.  I’m expecting any day now to get similar reports from the pro-ID side of the debate.

The takeaway from all this? If the cost of Voter ID were on Facebook, it would be listed as “It’s Complicated.”

An Expert's "Favorite" Filibuster: The Rhode Island Senate in 1923-24

by Karl Kurtz

In follow-up to recent postings on legislative filibusters and walkouts, University of Miami Prof. Gregory Koger, who is the author of Filibustering: A Political History of Obstruction in the House and Senate and has reviewed hundreds of historical filibusters in all kinds of legislatures, sent a description of "my favorite filibuster." It's a combination of a filibuster and a walkout that involved shutting down the Rhode Island Senate for an entire session, a gas bomb, and fisticuffs among the members. Here is Koger's summary from an early draft of his book that was trimmed in the final version:

In January 1923, the Democratic minority in the Rhode Island Senate began a low-intensity filibuster against all major legislation in an effort to force the Republican majority to call for a new constitutional convention.  They were aided by a Democratic Lieutenant Governor presiding over the Senate, Felix Toupin, who refused to recognize any Republicans seeking to make motions, except a motion to call for a convention.  This conflict reached a peak in June, 1924 when the Rhode Island Senate stayed in continuous session for 22 hours until the Republican majority simply got up and left.  Three days later they returned for a 42-hour day-and-night session which began with a mass fistfight over control of the gavel and ended when Republican operatives placed a poison-soaked rag behind Toupin to gas him out of the presiding officer’s chair.  No one was permanently harmed, but the Republican majority relocated to Rutland, Massachusetts for six months until Republican victories in the 1924 elections put an end to the struggle.

This sounds a lot like the Alabama Senate fight of 1999, described in "Legislative Walkouts are Nothing New," in which a lieutenant governor from the minority party refused to recognize majority legislators for motions, leading to a walkout by the majority party. Minus the gas and the punches.

Here's a screen shot of an excerpt from a November 16, 1924 article from the New York Times (again courtesy of Greg Koger) about the Rhode Island filibuster. It provides more color about the issues involved, as well as a flavor of the Times' reportage and writing style of the time:

S.C. Governor to Issue Report Cards for Legislators

by Karl Kurtz

South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley recently sent a letter to all state legislators saying that she intends to issue a report card on their votes on key issues on her agenda. The Times and Democrat summarized the letter:

Haley said in a letter to legislators her report card would track results of important legislation, including requirements for more roll call voting, state spending limits, reorganizing state government and upholding her budget vetoes.

Haley claimed the move was not personal or partisan but "good government."

"I intend for the report card to be a public document and I hope that this tool will help us, as elected officials, make better decisions," Haley wrote.

I was asked by a reporter if I knew of a governor in any other state who had published a report card on legislators' voting records. I replied that I have not heard of it, but that didn't mean it hasn't happened.

I went on to say that I think you can view this action in two different ways. On the one hand, any good governor has such a report card in his or her head. Governors know exactly how each legislator votes on the issues that are important to them, and many of them use that information to berate legislators in public and reward or punish their supporters or opponents. The legislators' votes are matters of public record anyway, so what's the harm in a governor publishing her view of those votes?

On the other hand, the idea of a report card carries a couple of unfortunate connotations. First, grading legislators' votes is something that special interest groups routinely do to advocate for their causes and gain political influence. As the chief executive of the state, shouldn't a governor be above that? Second, a report card carries the image of a school or a workplace--a superior teacher or boss who evaluates the performance of those who are under her. The legislators are not pupils of the governor nor do they work for her. The legislature is an independent and co-equal branch of government in our separation of powers system.

The legislative institutionalist in me tends toward the latter view--that other hand. But then again, I'm not sure I can see the report card as much of a problem. It's not as if Gov. Haley is usurping the Legislature's power or bypassing its authority. If the governor thinks the report card will help her get her way, she should go for it. The problem with the report card is more symbolic than real. It's not likely to change the balance of power in a state with a strong tradition of legislative independence and authority.

In other words, I need a third hand that's right in the middle between the other two on this one.

Majority Rule and Minority Rights: Perspectives on Legislative Obstruction in Wisconsin and Indiana

by Karl Kurtz

In my conversations with reporters about the Wisconsin Senate and Indiana House legislative walkouts, I have been careful not to choose sides on either the substantive or the procedural aspects of the conflict. I have tried to add perspective to the procedural battles by suggesting that both sides in the debate are doing exactly what you would expect them to do: the majority has attempted to use its considerable powers to enforce its will on the chamber, and the minority has used every available tool to protect their rights and make their points. The fact that the majorities are Republicans and the minorities are Democrats in both Wisconsin and Indiana has nothing to do with it from the standpoint of understanding representative democracy.

I have been meaning for some time to go the next step and to catalog some of those powers of majority rule and protections for minority rights but had not gotten around to doing so. Then I read a very interesting review essay, "Legislative Obstruction," (sorry, link to abstract only; full review available free to American Political Science Association members or for purchase to general public through JSTOR) by Yale political scientist David Mayhew of Gregory Koger's book, Filibustering: A Political History of Obstruction in the House and Senate. The essay also covers several other recent books on the U.S. Senate filibuster.

Mayhew summarizes Koger's classification of types of legislative obstruction as follows:

As a practical matter, congressional obstructionists have had a palette of three options from which to choose: prolonged speaking, dilatory motions, and disappearing quorums (that is, do not show up, thus preventing any legislative business).... In turn, congressional majorities trying to suppress obstruction have had three options from which to choose: formal rules (that is, calling the previous question, suspending the rules, voting cloture, arranging unanimous consent agreements, or ruling members out of order), attrition (that is, wearing the obstructionists down), and parliamentary innovation (that is, changing a chamber's rules or precedents)....

Legislative Scholar in the Middle of New Jersey Redistricting Fight

by Karl Kurtz

Alan Rosenthal, a pre-eminent scholar on American state legislatures, finds himself in the middle of the kinds of political conflicts that he has written eloquently about throughout his career as a political scientist at Rutgers University. He has been appointed by the chief justice of the New Jersey Supreme Court to serve as the 11th, tie-breaking member of the State Legislative Apportionment Commission. The other 10 members consist of a power line-up of five appointees each by the Democratic and Republican state party chairs, including the speaker of the Assembly, a majority leader, a state party chair who also serves in the Legislature, a confidante of the governor's and several current and former legislators.

New Jersey is one of four states that will hold state legislative elections later this year, so they are under greater pressure than most states to get redistricting done quickly. Under the New Jersey Constitution, the 10-member commission had one month from the release of Census data for the state (in early February) to reach agreement on a plan for state legislative districts. The failure of the commission members to accomplish this goal triggered the appointment of Rosenthal by the chief justice on March 3. The judge had consulted about this appointment with both parties, which agreed on Rosenthal as a suitable 11th member. Rosenthal had served in  similar roles in 1991 and 2001 for the state's congressional (not state legislative) redistricting process. The 11-member commission now has until April 4 to come up with a plan. If they fail, New Jersey's districts will be drawn by the courts.

Rosenthal, the intellectual guru of NCSL's Trust for Representative Democracy, is a frequent speaker before state legislative audiences, and his books have been widely read in the legislative community. His mantra, shared by the Trust, is "Representative democracy works, not perfectly but better than any conceivable alternative form of government."

So I wasn't surprised when he said in a phone conversation today:

Maybe I should wait until the end of this process before I say this, but I think New Jersey's redistricting process is working. Both sides agree on the standards that we need to meet--and we will meet them. They disagree primarily on issues of minority representation. And each party is rightfully seeking some advantage in the drawing of districts. My objective is to find one map that everyone will agree on. I think there's a good chance that we will reach that goal--but I wouldn't advise anyone to bet on it.

Rosenthal, 78, added with a laugh, "It's definitely a game for grown-ups. Only trouble is I'm not sure I've grown up yet."

Last week the Star-Ledger ran an engaging story about Rosenthal that reveals some of his personal background and history and elaborates on his philosophy about the political process of redistricting.

Photo credit: Jennifer Hulshizer for the Star-Ledger

Minnesota's Ed Burdick, Icon Among Legislative Clerks and Secretaries, Dies

by Karl Kurtz

Edward Burdick, 89, the retired long-time chief clerk of the Minnesota House, died yesterday. He worked in the Minnesota House for 62 years, beginning as an intern in 1941. He served as chief clerk 1967-2005. He was one of the longest serving legislative clerks or secretaries in the country.

A statement issued by Minnesota House Speaker Kurt Zellers said in part, "Ed was a Minnesota icon." He was also revered nationally by the American Society of Legislative Clerks and Secretaries for his leadership of that group, his commitment and devotion to the institution and his willingness to share his encyclopedic knowledge of the legislative process. An obituary in the Pioneer Press captures some of these qualities, as well as his impartiality that gained the confidence of the 16 speakers that he worked under.

Ed is the only Minnesotan who had a bust of himself installed in the state capitol while he was living. NCSL's Brenda Erickson, who once worked in the Minnesota House, says that on the day that his bust was unveiled, his devoted former staff all wore t-shirts saying, "I'm an Ed head."

With his stentorian voice, upright bearing and shock of white hair, you always knew when Ed Burdick was in the room. And you always learned something when you talked to him. His NCSL family misses him.

Over One Million Constituents

by Tim Storey

The U.S. Census Bureau released data today for California making it the 27th state to receive redistricting data from the 2010 census. 

California State Senator Bill Emmerson, from Senate district 37, has the most constituents of any state legislator in the country. Using the 2010 census data, Senator Emmerson's current district (before redistricting) boasts a staggering 1,215,876 people. His district is one of eight California Senate districts with more than one million people. California Senate district 37 is, in fact, larger than all current U.S. House districts, and has more people than the total population of eight states (AK, DE, MT, ND, RI, SD, VT, & WY).

There are also two Senate districts in Texas that top one million people.

It is interesting to compare Senator Emmerson's 1.2 million person constituency to a New Hampshire State House district which averages 3,291 people. NCSL has a 50-state table on the web showing the average district size in each state using the new 2010 census data.

Even Senator Emmerson's district is relatively paltry compared to the average size of an L.A. County Supervisor's district which is 1,963,721 people. According to the new census,  L.A. County's population surged to 9,818,605 in 2010. The county legislature consists of five supervisors (commissioners).

Hard to Get to State Capitals

by Karl Kurtz

How many state capitals don't have an airport with commercial air service? And how many are not on the interstate system? Those are the questions that fellow state capital trivia buff Bob Erickson of Nevada posed to us. With all the risks that lists like this pose (see "Where, Oh Where is My State Capital?"), I'll do my best to answer this question. Corrections are welcome.

The state capitals I know of that don’t have commercial air service are:

• Topeka (73 mi. from Kansas City International)
• Dover (42 mi. from New Castle airport and 68 mi. from Philadelphia)
• Montpelier (36 mi. from Burlington airport)
• Carson City (29 mi. from Reno airport)
• Annapolis (24 mi. from BWI)
• Frankfort (23 mi. from Lexington Blue Grass Field and 54 mi. from Louisville)
• Jefferson City (21 mi. from Columbia airport)
• Concord (19 mi. from Manchester).

If you factor in number of flights a day, then Jefferson City is the most difficult to reach by air, since there are only two flights a day into Columbia. The nearest major airport to Missouri's capital is Kansas City, 180 miles away. There are also only one or two commercial flights a day into Augusta, Pierre and Santa Fe, but at least they have airports in their own names. And how about Denver? It obviously has a major airport, but DIA is 25 miles away from the state capitol--about the same distance as many of the above capital cities are from a major airport.

The only state capitals that are not on an interstate highway are Carson City, Dover, Jefferson City, Juneau and Pierre. Juneau wins the prize for most inaccessible capital on this one because it’s the only capital that you cannot drive to from any other city in the state. A ferry or an airplane is necessary to get to Juneau.

Heads Up

By Meagan Dorsch

Approximately 1.7 million people suffer a traumatic brain injury (TBI) annually with 52,000 dying. While most of these injuries are mild, resulting in short-term disruption, such as from a concussion, many are severe, resulting in prolonged unconsciousness or amnesia and occasionally leading to permanent disability or death.

State lawmakers are working to develop policies dealing with TBI that seek to prevent injuries from occurring, diagnose cases of TBI, and to respond and rehabilitate TBI patients effectively. Two populations particularly vulnerable to TBI that policymakers have addressed are athletes, especially youth athletes, and veterans.

In this edition of The Buzz, we talk with Hollie Hendrikson, a policy analyst at the National Conference of State Legislatures who is tracking state legislation regarding TBI. Hollie talks about

Listen to this podcast (3:10) and find out what measures states are taking to protect young athletes.

You can also learn what steps states have taken to prevent traumatic brain injuries in youth sports.

Also, you can read an interview with NFL Commissioners Roger Goodell as he talks about the importance of laws to help prevent head injuries in students athletes in the February edition of State Legislatures Magazine. You can also view videos about legislation and see other steps the NFL is taking to improve football safety.