the following question: "Do you happen to know who will represent your district or locality in the State Senate next year?" In response to a similar question concerning State Representatives, 24 percent answered "yes." In terms of popular esteem, the same poll found 69 percent of the sample indicating their legislature was doing a "fair" or "poor" job; only 12 percent judged it to be "excellent." On the matter of compensation, the latest survey by the Council of State Governments shows that the salary, per diem, and living expense allowances of legislators have increased during the past three years; yet the median compensation for the last biennial period still fell in the $5,800 to $6,300 range. Regarding legislative sessions, annual sessions were approved in 1966 in California and Kansas; but 29 State legislatures still meet biennially, including Kentucky and North Dakota, where reform efforts were turned down by the voters in 1966. In terms of the length of the legislative session, California and Tennessee voters sanctioned unlimited sessions, but 33 States still have time limits on their regular sessions, including North Dakota where an unshackling proposal was not supported at the polls. On housekeeping matters, 15 State legislatures do not maintain a printed daily journal of the previous day's legislative proceedings and a comparable number do not include all rulings of the presiding officers in their legislative records. In terms of introduction of bills, all but one State legislative body have pre-session bill drafting services, but pre-session filing is permitted in only 14 States. On committee proceedings, 40 do not keep verbatim records of hearings, and the minutes of committee proceedings and hearings are maintained in only half of the legislatures. One-third of the States provide professional staff to only one major standing committee in each house of the legislature and only two provide yearround staffing. Regarding permanent legislative service agencies, 44 States now have a legislative council or similar agency to provide research information to legislators and most of the remaining 6 have some form of substitute service; yet in 12 instances, these services do not include legislative counseling for members and committees; in 16 legislatures they do not include preparation of bill and law summaries; in 15 they do not include continuous study of State revenue and expenditures; and in 14 they involve no budgetary review and analysis. Only one-tenth of the States provide individual offices for all legislators; an additional 6 provide individual offices for Senators and in approximately 10 States, legislators share office space. Finally, one-third of the States provide individual secretarial help for legislators and an additional 4 States provide secretaries for Senators only; the rest of the States have pool arrangements--except for 8 or 9 that make no formal arrangements for secretarial help. Strengthening the State Legislature- In order to help strengthen the position of State government recommends that the holding of annual sessions be given serious Despite great efforts by many public spirited organizations to modernize this feature of State government, 1967 finds more than half of the State legislatures still meeting on a biennial basis. Many of these legislative bodies convened in January and had adjourned by April--faced with a rigid 60 or 90-day constitutional limitation. In this day and age of increasing responsibility and complexity in governmental affairs, problems requiring State legislative action do not time themselves so as to arise only in alternate years. Moreover, adequate meshing of State and Federal appropriations becomes impossible when consideration of State enabling legislation or appropriations may lag nearly two years behind the action of Congress. The Commission urges the lifting of a number of existing constitutional restrictions upon the length and frequency of legislative sessions in order to * Governor Dempsey dissents from this recommendation and states: "I do not subscribe to this recommendation because it is my feeling that the operation of State legislatures should be decided completely by the States themselves on the basis of their individual needs, experience and desires. The biennial sessions system in Connecticut has worked well and has permitted Connecticut to handle its business efficiently and economically. The Connecticut record of leadership in many fields of legislation attests to this. provide a more effective partnership in Federal-State programs. Equally significant, the Commission urges this course of action to correct what has come to be a symbol of weakness and impotence in State government--the limited, biennial session of the State legislature--and thereby strengthen the federal system. Closely related to the question of annual sessions is the problem of legislative pay. As was noted earlier, the median compensation for the most recent biennial period still fell in the $5,800 to $6,300 range despite significant efforts in many States to increase the salary, per diem, and living expense allowances of legislators. The Commission is convinced that the salutary features of annual sessions--especially as they involve grant-in-aid operations-will fail to have the maximum effect if legislative stipends ignore the increased time, increased responsibilities, and increased legislative prestige that is implicit in a change to annual sessions. Year-Round Staffing of Major Committees Recommendation No. 25 In order that the legislature may keep abreast on a policy basis State legislative leaders are concerned with the lack of legislative participation in framing Federal-State cooperative programs. In most States the legislature is not informed of developments in Federal-State program relationships that might have a bearing on legislative policy for the future. Even if steps were taken by the executive branch to maintain a fuller flow of information to the State legislature about Federal grant programs, it is questionable if legislative committees could make an effective contribution. They are hampered by lack of year-round staff. In many States the between-sessions legislative staff is small and attached to the State legislative council. It would be faced with an almost impossible task if it attempted to keep abreast of the evolution of a multitude of Federal statutes and regulations in all of the subject matter fields in which the State is involved. This information problem might be partially overcome if the principal substantive committees on the legislature were professionally staffed on a year-round basis and were made responsible for keeping abreast of major relevant issues in Federal-State relations. A great deal of valuable investigatory and preparatory work in connection with initiation of legislation affecting grant programs and with budget analysis could be performed by legislative committees between sessions if they were provided with interim staff facilities. State Legislators and Congressional Hearings- In order that the State legislative voice may be heard in the The list of witnesses appearing before congressional committees in connection with Federal grants-in-aid always includes a liberal assortment of mayors, county officials, and representatives of the professional or functional area being aided or about to be aided by the legislation in question; a Governor's name appears on the witness list now and then; but a State legislator's hardly ever! The traditional State legislative practice of presenting memorials to Congress is a largely meaningless form of communication and in no sense is an adequate substitute for a direct dialogue. The Commission believes that an increased interchange of views between key State legislators and congressional committees would be helpful in revitalizing the role of the legislature in major areas of United States domestic affairs, improving intergovernmental relations, and assisting the deliberations of congressional committees. Moreover, such enunciation of State legislative views before Congress, it is hoped, might be worked out in conjunction with comparable State executive branch efforts. In any event the Commission is of the opinion that a dialogue should begin between State legislators and Members of Congress. Chapter 3 FISCAL FEDERALISM AND ECONOMIC GROWTH THE IMPETUS FOR REVENUE SHARING We have no nationwide quantitative norms for judging the adequacy of the response of our system of decentralized government to the needs of the American people. This is an issue that must be resolved periodically on election day in thousands of jurisdictions. Tax, expenditure, and debt data, however, do permit us to trace in a general way the responsiveness of State and local governments to the challenges of change. These public finance statistics constitute the price tag the 50 States and 80,000 local governments place on governing and servicing the needs of a growing America. Judged by these fiscal measuring sticks, the post-World War II response of State and local policymakers was truly remarkable. Between 1946 and 1966, State and local tax collections increased from $11 billion to $59 billion and, when related to the economy, from 5 percent to 8 percent of Gross National Product. The willingness of State and local governments to support education is reflected in the ten-fold increase in school expenditures, from $3 billion to $33 billion. Their investment in capital plant in the twenty years following the war exceeded $240 billion and entailed an increase in outstanding State and local debt (after repayment) from $16 billion to $107 billion. The task of servicing the needs of a growing population might be expected to increase in direct proportion to the number of people served. But when these people interact in an increasingly urbanized environment their needs take on new dimensions and as they become more affluent, their demands for public services become more sophisticated and still more insistent. While some State and local governmental activities lend themselves to cost-cutting techniques by the replacement of manpower with machine- power, a wide range of governmental operations are essentially face-to-face confrontations between the government employee and the citizen. In these people-related service situations, it is difficult to economize without impairing service quality. There is a limit to the number of pupils a teacher can instruct effectively. same service logic applies to the public health nurse and the social worker. The Thus, the public sector is propelled to ever higher levels, largely beyond the control of its political managers, by the explosively dynamic forces of a growing and increasingly mobile population, the need for an ever-widening scope of governmental activity, the demand for higher quality of job performance, and the service-type operation that not only defies cost-cutting techniques |