The Thicket at State Legislatures

Fixing a Deficit in State Legislative Experience in the Presidency

by Karl Kurtz

In Governing's Ballot Box blog today, Alan Greenblatt notes that it is rare in modern political history that former state legislators become president and that Sen. Barack Obama's claiming of his party's nomination for the presidency means that "...now every state legislator in the country -- all 7.400 of them -- can, like U.S. senators, look in the mirror and see a potential president."

In January 2007 in The Thicket we noted that six of 19 declared candidates for president in the 2008 election were former state legislators.  How soon we forget Tancredo, Gravel, Vilsack, Thompson and Kucinich, leaving only Obama as a presidential candidate with state legislative credentials.  We have also written in "State Legislators who Became President" about how 22 of 43 (51 percent) presidents are former state or colonial legislators but that there have been only five since 1900.

This reminded me that in 1994 I had proposed a fundamental change in American government that would have had the sure-fire effect of producing presidents who had backgrounds in state government: requiring that all candidates for federal office have previous state legislative experience.  The piece was entitled "Reinventing Federalism" and was based on a hypothetical question that U.S. District Court Judge William L. Dwyer had asked both sides in a constitutional challenge to Washington state's limit on the terms of members of Congress: If states can make experience a disqualification for federal office (i.e. term limits), then could they impose an experience requirement as a qualification for office? 

I pounced on this idea and, tongue-mostly-in-cheek, urged that "State legislatures across the nation should immediately initiate state constitutional amendments requiring six years of state legislative service for anyone who runs for the U.S. House of Represenatives, Senate or president."  I spun this fantasy out into a number of variations that would strengthen American federalism by repairing damage done by the establishment of direct election of senators in the 17th Amendment. I concluded with the idea that the combination of term limits for members of Congress and experience requirements for federal office would mean that: "The best and the brightest state legislators would have someplace to go at the end of their terms, and Congress and the presidency would be replenished with experienced and committed practitioners of federalism."

Had the states taken me up on my proposal, then neither John McCain nor Hillary Clinton would have been eligible for the 2008 nomination for president.  That's not a knock on them; it's only a daydream of a state legislative junkie.

The Case of the Missing 34 Pages

by Brian Weberg

U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi admits she used some "uncustomarily crude" language last week when she found out the just-passed (1,768 page, $289 billion) farm bill had gone to the President with 34 pages missing. Described by most as a clerical error, the glitch quickly became political fodder for those opposed to the bill and an embarrassment for Congressional leadership.

President Bush had vetoed the measure in spite of the veto-proof majority that had passed it. Both chambers voted to override. Then the mistake came to light. The House decided to bring the entire bill up again and passed it again. The Senate will take it up again when they return from recess, but few believe the bill will pass the Senate again with a similar veto-proof majority. 

Somewhere deep in this story there is a human tale about the House enrollment clerk who inadvertently dropped one of the 15 titles out of the bill. We probably won't hear much about this part of the incident, but one expects that this clerk had a tough time last week.  The Speaker, congressional leaders and their political advisor's were all angry, wringing their hands and working the spin. And this clerk, having made a human error, was probably taking some serious heat for the mistake. 

I can't imagine there is anyone who works in a state legislature who has not been part of, witnessed, or suffered for a clerical error in the legislative process. They are rare, which is testimony to the skill of these professionals. But they do happen and it can be messy. People get angry and embarrassed, and there are a few who try to gain from the situation. But in the end, these problems are almost always worked out. Life goes on, the process survives, and people continue to do their best. This is all we can and should ask. 

The fact is legislatures and the democratic process depend on these clerks and the people who toil in the background through the enactment of 1,768 page bills or who work through the night struggling to keep everything in order in a flurry of legislation. It isn't easy work, but somehow those who do it...love it. I hope the clerk in the U.S. House is OK.  I hope he/she is hearing encouraging words this week, rather than reprimands.

 

What Happened at NCSL's Spring Forum?

By Meagan Dorsch and Michelle Blackston

How can states address their educational capacity for training nurses? What effects do immigration raids have on families and how can child welfare agencies be prepared? Plus, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear a case from North Carolina during its next term that could dramatically change the rules for 2010 redistricting for all states.

These are just some of the sessions held last month at NCSL's Spring Forum in Washington, D.C. This year, more than 600 state legislators and legislative staff were able to attend. 

Listen and enjoy over 12 different sessions highlighting federal and state policy issues ranging from health care and REAL ID to the 2008 Elections.

REAL ID Extension Deadline

by Michelle Blackston and Jeremy Meadows

Yesterday was the last day states could apply for an extension from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to delay REAL ID. All but two states received an extension and two others--Montana and New Hampshire--got it without asking for it. The two remaining--Maine and South Carolina--also enacted statutes last year indicating they would not comply with the unfunded mandate that looks to cost states upwards of $4 billion to implement.

South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford sent a letter to DHS saying the state already had made significant improvements to the security of the state’s driver’s license--meeting as many as 14 of the Departments material compliance criteria--and it won’t ask for an extension.

Maine, whose governor sent a similar letter to DHS last week, still is waiting to hear whether they will receive an extension. And late last night, DHS Secretary Michael Chertoff set a new deadline of 5 p.m. Wednesday to give the state "more time to show progress toward meeting Real ID guidelines," according to the Associated Press.

Come May 11--Mother's Day 2008--residents from states that do not comply with the federal Department of Homeland Security's standards for state-issued driver's licenses and IDs and have not received this initial extension won’t be permitted to use those licenses as valid ID to board a plane or enter a federal building. Other federally issued IDs--such as passports, military IDs, or federal employee cards--will still suffice.

In an article from the Christian Science Monitor: “DHS had given all states except Maine and South Carolina more time. In letters to Montana and New Hampshire, the Department explained that it was granting an unrequested extension because the states had taken steps toward adopting stricter license security standards.”  Maine and South Carolina are undoubtedly expecting similar treatment.

So, where does this leave the REAL ID?  The President has so far requested pennies-on-the-dollar for what REAL ID will cost the states.  U.S. Senator Lamar Alexander (R-Tennessee) is reportedly planning to submit legislation to delay REAL ID implementation until the federal government picks up the tab.  Most, if not all, states have the Department's blessing to delay implementation until December 31, 2009.  Legislatures continue to debate REAL ID policy and funding in the state capitals as the 2008 legislative sessions move into the second quarter.

In the coming week, NCSL will release a summary of state legislative activity on REAL ID through the first quarter of 2008 that may indicate state reactions to the final rules released by DHS last January.  REAL ID will be on NCSL's Agenda for April Spring Forum, where Senator Alexander is scheduled as a plenary speaker.  And all eyes will remain on Capitol Hill for indications of congressional appetite to tweak the REAL ID law or to ante up federal funds to cajole state compliance.

REAL ID Without Real Debate

by Matt Sundeen

On January 11, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security released the long-awaited final regulations for implementing new federal standards for state-issued driver's licenses found in the infamous REAL ID Act of 2005.  Many of the negative reactions to REAL ID, both before and after the event, focused on the enormous cost burden for states and the perceived erosion of privacy caused by the new provisions.   Many people were also concerned about the lack of process when Congress adopted the bill in the first place.  And now, the rule-making process may exacerbate this process problem by not giving state legislatures enough time to deliberate on the issue.

Last summer, I spoke about the federal REAL ID Act before the New Mexico Legislature's interim transportation study committee.  After my 20 minute presentation, the next speaker, Jim Harper of the Cato Institute, began his remarks to the legislators by saying, "Congratulations.  You have now spent more time debating REAL ID than Congress did."

Jim wasn't joking, and he was right on point.  The REAL ID Act is a big deal.  It replaced 99 years worth of state driver's license work with new federal standards.  Such a major piece of legislation should have been carefully vetted through a legislative process that included public hearings, public debate and negotiation among members of Congress. 

Instead, REAL ID was attached as an amendment to a must-pass war spending and tsunami relief bill in 2005 and moved through Congress after no hearings and no public deliberation.  It terminated a federal "negotiated rulemaking" process, passed by Congress in 2004, that had brought together numerous state and federal stakeholders to develop the best strategy for securing driver's licenses.  REAL ID also effectively ended many state driver's license security improvement efforts as state legislators and motor vehicle administrators waited for final REAL ID regulations.

[Read about how the federal regs affect state legislative deliberation after the jump.]

Report Recommends Streamlining Indiana Local Government

by Karl Kurtz

A blue-ribbon Commission on Local Government Reform appointed by Gov. Mitch Daniels and co-chaired by a former governor and the state's chief justice of the supreme court released a report earlier this week that may be of interest to other states.  The report calls for sharply reducing the number of local elected officials by replacing three-member elected county commissions with a single elected county executive, eliminating township governments and appointing sheriffs. 

Indiana's local government structure was designed in the 1850s and has changed little since then. Commenting that the design of local government had skipped the 20th century, Gov. Daniels said, “If you want to get property taxes down and keep ’em down, this commission has given us a terrific road map for doing that.”

Legislative leaders, though, said that the proposal was too large and complex and fraught with political potholes to consider during the legislature's short session in 2008.  They said that they are more likely to take it up in 2009.

Here are links to the commission's report and an Indianapolis Star story and Masson's Blog about it. 

Indiana county map by Geology.com

Real ID: Where Does the Issue Stand?

by Meagan Dorsch

In this edition of The Buzz, Jeremy Meadows with NCSL's state and federal relations division sits down for a one on one interview with Richard Barth, Assistant Secretary for Real ID Implementation, U.S. Department of Homeland Security.

Barth addressed legislators from all 50 states at NCSL's Fall Forum in Phoenix, Arizona. Barth took the opportunity to update lawmakers on the new rules of Real ID.  Barth said they will cut down on the cost for states to implement Real ID and give states more flexibility in creating the new forms of identification.

Barth also talks to Meadows about the role NCSL played in representing states as the Real ID rules were being drafted.

To listen to the podcast and hear the latest on Real ID, click here. (19:22).  For more information on Real ID, log onto NCSL.    

Maine Legislature Adjourns

by Ron Snell

Sine Die on June 21 in Maine saw Republicans and Democrats both congratulating themselves and each other for a successful budget process for the biennium, though their measures of success differed a little.  The Legislature passed its budget by more than a two-thirds majority in each house, which required a bipartisan effort.  D's (who control both chambers) praised increased spending for K-12 education, which increased the state's share in an effort to help local governments control property taxes.  R's took pride in avoiding the $136 million tax increase that Governor John Baldacci had called for at the beginning of session.

Maine Senate Democrats' summaries of the session are here and here; Senate Republicans here.

One nationally significant enactment was legislation to prohibit administration of the federal Real ID law in Maine.

Another significant success for the Legislature was approval of  $295 million in bond issues, of which voters strongly approved $131 million  for transportation and environmental purposes in June.  The remainder will go to voters later in the year.   Democrats took pleasure in the approval of the bond issues.  Republicans took credit for whittling it back from $2 billion in proposals to what they saw as an acceptable amount that prioritized investments in infrastructure.

Among the year's issues, the most controversial were the governor's proposal for a $1 a pack increase in the cigarette tax, which was defeated; his proposal for dramatic consolidation of school districts; and a legislative proposal for extensive state tax reform.  School district consolidation was approved in a weakened form, but, as part of the budget package, caused the Senate Republican Leader and other Senate and House Republicans to vote against the budget.  Tax reform, a session-long project would have shifted some of the tax burden from the income tax to a broader-based sales tax and thus to tourists.  Final agreement was impossible, but Governor Baldacci has announced his concern for tax reform and raised the possibility of a special session in the fall.

[Photo of Maine Capitol dome by Eric Oxendorf]

Is Anger Over Real ID Unprecedented?

by Carl Tubbesing

A New York Times reporter called yesterday. Writing on deadline, he needed a quote. His question: “Have state legislators ever been as angry as they are over Real ID?”

“Ever,” of course, is a long time and, being an NCSL employee who learned to hedge his bets many years ago, I said, “It’s without precedent in the past 20 years.”

No Child Left Behind probably comes in second. The difference between Real ID and NCLB is that NCLB really didn’t offer legislatures a choice. (When the Utah Legislature threatened to opt out of No Child Left Behind, the Department of Education told its leaders they risked losing all of their federal education funding, not just the state’s NCLB money.)

States can choose not to make their driver’s licenses “Real ID compliant,” if they are willing to tell their drivers they can’t use them to get on airplanes or to enter federal buildings. According the NCSL’s Matt Sundeen, who is tracking this activity for us, the Washington, Montana and Idaho legislatures have passed bills so far this session that will prohibit their states from complying. Seven others have adopted resolutions urging Congress to repeal the law.

Erasing the Stigma of Food Stamps

by Nicole Moore

Food Stamps aren't "Food Stamps" in the proposed reauthorization of the Farm Bill, Secretary of the U.S. Department of Agriculture Mike Johanns told state legislators and legislative staff today at the NCSL Spring Forum in Washington, D.C.

"One of the barriers to increased participation in the Food Stamp program is the stigma associated with the name," Johanns said. "As we modernize the administration of the program, I believe it's time to eliminate the "Food Stamp" program in terms of the name."

Johanns said the administration has goals to increase access in nutrition programs, ensure that taxpayer dollars are used most efficiently and to make Americans healthier. To help achieve these goals, the USDA has proposed renaming Food Stamps the "Food and Nutrition Program." Listen to Johanns discuss this issue and other relevant parts of the Farm Bill reauthorization. (2:46).

Johanns also talked about federal incentives for alternative fuels.

"If someone had told you ten years ago that we'd be growing corn and soybeans to fuel cars, pick ups and trucks, I wonder how much of that we would have believed," he said. "Clean, renewable energy like ethanol and biodeisel allows us to reduce our dependence on foreign oil and creates new jobs in rural areas and economic opportunities." Listen to Johanns discuss federal incentives in the Farm Bill. (1:28)