Half of Readers OK With Part-Time State Legislators
Readers weren’t interested in the poll last week, the total number of votes was less the usual:
Q: Missouri legislators are “part-time” public servants, should we have full-time legislators to manage the state?
- No 31 [50%]
- Yes 20 [32.26%]
- Maybe 6 [9.68%]
- Unsure/no opinion 4 [6.45%]
- Other: 1 [1.61%]
The one other answer was:
We should go to every other year
That’s a bit confusing since house members are elected every other year. State senators are elected every six.
– Steve Patterson
What’s confusing about “we should go to every other year”? If I remember correctly, Kentucky’s legislature meets for 60 days every other year. I’m a big believer in stuff expands to fill the available space, whether it’s the stuff we own or the legislation legislators are considering. We tend to work toward deadlines, and our legislature is no different – more time won’t necessarily mean better legislation! Seriously, what has come out of the legislature this year that was that time critical? Shorter sessions reduce the number of frivilous bills and allows more citizen legislators to serve, not just full-time politicians (who may or may not have real-world experience running a business or meeting a payroll).
What’s confusing about “we should go to every other year”? If I remember correctly, Kentucky’s legislature meets for 60 days every other year. I’m a big believer in stuff expands to fill the available space, whether it’s the stuff we own or the legislation legislators are considering. We tend to work toward deadlines, and our legislature is no different – more time won’t necessarily mean better legislation! Seriously, what has come out of the legislature this year that was that time critical? Shorter sessions reduce the number of frivilous bills and allows more citizen legislators to serve, not just full-time politicians (who may or may not have real-world experience running a business or meeting a payroll).
Kentucky is a clear step up.
If St. Louis and Kansas City dominated the two houses this poll would be 90% in favor of full time.
Ok, make sense now – I was thinking elections, not sessions.
That was my vote and my intention. I was in a bit of a hurry and didn’t flesh out my answer. Well put, JZ71.
In principle I agree, give more time and you won’t necessarily get a better bargain and therefore support part time legislature on the state level over a fulltime any day. The one drawback of course is sometimes you will only get frivilous bills, to me that defined the last Missouri Session. Beyond the typicall budget debate which is needed and can be done every two years as a lot of state legislators do, this year it was about overturning a voter referendum on puppy mills, the usuall voter card issue and some more GOP nonsense followed by the Democratic nonsense of the lady from U City who believes the she knows whats best for St Louis police departmen but could care less about the residents of St. Louis.
Of course I’m biased at the moment, was excited that a specail session was called to tackle economic development through tax credit refrom and local police control. Once again, some much needed changes are going down in flames due to egos and lack of understanding by voters. Back to the status quo of multiple tax credits for multiple items for multiple special interests while the state can’t even fix a decades old chem lab at UMSL let alone find a way to supprt a well placed underutilized asset such as Lambert. In the menatime, economic development will continue to be based on puppy mills, the cheapest cigs in the land to go with some of the cheapest gas in the land as far Missouri state house and Gov is concerned.
Prior to the current special session, the legislature met from this year from early January to the end of May, for approximately 18 weeks. Assuming that they met 4 days a week, that’s 72 days. Compare that to the Board of Aldermen, who meet once a week, weekly for 32 weeks, taking the summer off. One could argue that the BoA actually accomplishes more. I’m sure the big reason for continuous sessions at the state level is travel distance, to allow for multiple committee meetimgs, but one could also argue that modern technology (tele and videoconferencing) negates much of that historic requirement. (We all need to understand that the bulk of legislating takes place with staff and in committee meetings; the actual voting is only the final step in a long process.)
Kentucky is a clear step up.
If St. Louis and Kansas City dominated the two houses this poll would be 90% in favor of full time.
Ok, make sense now – I was thinking elections, not sessions.
Kentucky’s legislature (like Nebraska’s, and I’m sure there are others) meets for 60 days in even numbered years and 30 days in odd numbered years.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kentucky_General_Assembly
Kentucky’s legislature (like Nebraska’s, and I’m sure there are others) meets for 60 days in even numbered years and 30 days in odd numbered years.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kentucky_General_Assembly
That was my vote and my intention. I was in a bit of a hurry and didn’t flesh out my answer. Well put, JZ71.
In principle I agree, give more time and you won’t necessarily get a better bargain and therefore support part time legislature on the state level over a fulltime any day. The one drawback of course is sometimes you will only get frivilous bills, to me that defined the last Missouri Session. Beyond the typicall budget debate which is needed and can be done every two years as a lot of state legislators do, this year it was about overturning a voter referendum on puppy mills, the usuall voter card issue and some more GOP nonsense followed by the Democratic nonsense of the lady from U City who believes the she knows whats best for St Louis police departmen but could care less about the residents of St. Louis.Â
Of course I’m biased at the moment, was excited that a specail session was called to tackle economic development through tax credit refrom and local police control. Once again, some much needed changes are going down in flames due to egos and lack of understanding by voters. Back to the status quo of multiple tax credits for multiple items for multiple special interests while the state can’t even fix a decades old chem lab at UMSL let alone find a way to supprt a well placed underutilized asset such as Lambert. In the menatime, economic development will continue to be based on puppy mills, the cheapest cigs in the land to go with some of the cheapest gas in the land as far Missouri state house and Gov is concerned.Â
Prior to the current special session, the legislature met from this year from early January to the end of May, for approximately 18 weeks. Assuming that they met 4 days a week, that’s 72 days. Compare that to the Board of Aldermen, who meet once a week, weekly for 32 weeks, taking the summer off. One could argue that the BoA actually accomplishes more. I’m sure the big reason for continuous sessions at the state level is travel distance, to allow for multiple committee meetimgs, but one could also argue that modern technology (tele and videoconferencing) negates much of that historic requirement. (We all need to understand that the bulk of legislating takes place with staff and in committee meetings; the actual voting is only the final step in a long process.)