ROANOKE TIMES
Copyright (c) 1997, Roanoke Times
DATE: Monday, February 10, 1997 TAG: 9702110001
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: A-4 EDITION: METRO
SERIES: Second of two parts
IF VIRGINIA is to uphold its tradition of a part-time General Assembly of citizen-lawmakers, it must counter the pressures that are pushing states toward full-time professional legislatures.
If the current system with its considerable strengths is to flourish, in other words, its weaknesses must be shored up. Specifically, Virginia needs to find ways to address:
*The relative lack of technical expertise among citizen-legislators at a time when state government is growing more complex.
*A shrinking pool of prospective citizen-legislators, as workplace demands in the modern world make it increasingly difficult for any but the wealthy, the retired or the ideologically zealous to afford the time to serve in the General Assembly.
*The inevitable conflicts of interest that arise when part-time legislators serve two masters - their constituents in the public arena and their full-time employers or business interests in the private arena.
Part of the answer to the first problem is for Virginia's citizen-legislators to continue nourishing those resources - the Division of Legislative Services, Joint Legislative Audit and Review Commission, State Council of Higher Education - on which they have long relied for nonpartisan information, expertise and technical assistance. Legislators of both parties should resist efforts by anyone, governors included, to turn these and other state agencies into partisan playthings.
Not part of the answer is extending the lengths of legislative sessions. That might help part-time lawmakers stay on top of growing workloads, but would further shrink the pool of citizens who can even consider legislative service.
But must so much of the legislature's business be conducted only in Richmond, and must the 45 or 60 days in session be consecutive? For the long term, the assembly should consider new and citizen-friendly ways to do its work. Maybe a rolling schedule for introducing and considering bills? Limits on the number of bills that can be introduced? Parts of the 45- or 60-day sessions spread out over weekends, rather than lumped together in their entirety near the beginning of the year? Use of telecommunications technology to conduct more business long-distance, so citizen-lawmakers would not lose so much time journeying back and forth to Richmond?
Meanwhile, adoption of reforms such as fairer committee assignments, a merit system for selecting judges and nonpartisan redistricting could reduce or more evenly spread legislative workloads. That hasn't been the primary impetus behind those good ideas, but it could be a beneficial side-effect.
Finally, the conflict-of-interest problem, though not limited to part-time legislatures, is inherent in their nature. That shouldn't be an excuse for ignoring the issue, but rather motivation for paying more attention to it. Citizen legislators need to exercise particular vigilance in clarifying and enforcing conflict-of-interest standards, and ensuring prompt, accessible and meaningful disclosure of private financial interests.
Despite its virtues, the part-time citizen's legislature is in trouble. Virginia must fix it, or face the prospect of losing it.
LENGTH: Medium: 61 lines KEYWORDS: GENERAL ASSEMBLY 1997by CNB