Review: Frederick Wiseman's 'State Legislature'
Representative democracy may not be entertaining, but it does work.
By Alan Rosenthal
June 2007
After studying the subject for many years, I have concluded that representative democracy in the states works remarkably well. It works in large part because legislatures work, even if the public doesn’t believe it. But just how they work is not easy to figure out.
Most of us rely on the media for our perception of the legislative process. The media, however, are in business. To remain viable, their stories have to appeal to an audience and to advertisers. In order to do this, the media tend to stress the negative--the influence of campaign contributions, conflicts of interest, collusion, and corruption. Statehouse reporters are always looking for deals made in smoke-filled rooms and the selling out of the public interest. What the media reports on most is only part of the story, and a small part at that.
Frederick Wiseman’s new documentary, State Legislature, reports on another part of the story, one that is central to lawmaking in legislatures. His objective is to show how democracy works.
“Unlike a textbook description in a political science course of how a bill becomes a law,” Wiseman says, “a film of a legislature can convey in a unique way the actuality of the legislative process, that is, how decisions are made and power is exercised in a democratic society....”
A three-time Emmy Award winning director, Wiseman has 34 documentary films to his credit. This one, the most recent, was shot in Boise during the Idaho Legislature’s entire 12-week session in 2004. Out of 160 hours of film, Wiseman’s edited product runs three hours and 37 minutes. It is without any narration, so what you see is what you get. It is a long haul for even a legislative junkie, not to mention normal folks.
What the viewer gets, among other things, is a picture of the people who serve in the Idaho Legislature. Like legislators everywhere else, they are not held in high esteem by most citizens in the state. Idaho’s legislators are paid about $16,000 a year, That's just enough, in the words of the speaker of the House, to cover their expenses, but not enough to compensate them for their time. They are serious, responsible people, who through study and discussion become informed and even expert on many issues. Unless they are simply acting for the cameras, Idaho legislators would seem to be in public office for the right reasons--to do good, in terms of their own values and judgments and to advance their constituents’ interests.
What also comes across is diversity--not of the members so much, but of the issues. There are more problems, more issues in Idaho (as well as in other states) than anyone could possibly imagine. During the 2004 session, 619 bills (as well as 76 resolutions) were introduced, which is extremely low compared to the 17,214 introductions in New York, 7,718 in Massachusetts, and 4,637 in Indiana, for example. Wiseman’s film suggests that a legislature has to handle everything that members, lobbyists, and ordinary citizens bring its way, such as deregulation of telephone rates, secondhand smoke, violence in the schools, mad cow disease, electronic waste, teacher salaries, sex offenders registry, crime victims’ rights, driver's licenses for illegal immigrants, charter schools, same-sex marriage, to mention some of the issues during the course of the session.
And just about anyone who wants it has access to the process. Wiseman focuses on the diversity of those who come forward: a representative of the police testifying before a committee on behalf of a bill to deal with the problems of “video-voyeurism,” lobbyists for public transit meeting with House and Senate leadership in the speaker’s office, a woman whose daughter was murdered testifying on victims’ rights legislation, among others.
“A public hearing is a nice thing when people listen and pay attention,” one legislator comments. Idaho’s legislators (at least in front of Wiseman’s camera) are attentive; they might be watching the final episode of The Sopranos, they are so attentive.
What comes across loud and clear are the differences among legislators on issues. In one instance, a bill to regulate smoking in public places separates those who think the risks of secondhand smoke are too great from those who oppose further governmental regulation. In a floor debate some House members speak in favor of requiring children to be enrolled in kindergarten by a specified age; other House members want to continue leaving it to parents to make the decision as to when their children start school. Wiseman’s cameras nicely capture the deliberative aspects of lawmaking. Indeed, much of what transpires in any legislative body involves legislators (as well as individual citizens and lobbyists representing organized groups) arguing the merits of their case and others arguing the merits on the opposing side. Each side, of course, sees the merits and demerits very differently.
Whereas the media often make the case against the legislature, Wiseman makes the case for it. As his cameras portray it, lawmaking is a tedious process--but, by democratic standards, an effective one. Citizens testify; legislators deliberate; votes are taken and decisions are made. The membership of Idaho’s legislature is largely Republican, so partisanship doesn’t divide members, as happens in so many states. Still, divisions exist--by chamber, by values and philosophy, by region, and from member to member.
Every legislature labors mightily to build consensus and achieve the successive majorities required for a bill to become law. Study and deliberation go far, but not all the way. Unless the Idaho Legislature is unique, it too must work to build consensus and reach settlements on issues, and Wiseman shows little of this in his film. Proponents of a measure negotiate, bargain, and compromise in order to get the required number of votes for a measure to move forward. Opponents try to prevent that from happening. Proponents and opponents strategize continuously. Lobbyists visit one-on-one with members. Legislators buttonhole colleagues. Representatives of the two sides try to agree on a compromise. Leaders attempt to round up votes for the budget bill and other measures. Deals get made. A lot transpires before and during the deliberative phases and between deliberation and decision. It is political and exciting activity. But, except for a hint here and a hint there, many of these aspects of lawmaking are left out of this documentary.
Perhaps one cannot expect any medium or any product to convey the totality of a complex, human, messy, but nevertheless remarkable process. Ralph Wright, the former speaker of the House in Vermont, and Tom Loftus, the former speaker of the Assembly in Wisconsin, manage to convey a good deal, but not all, in the memoirs they wrote. And James Richardson’s biography of Willie Brown, the former speaker of the Assembly in California, concentrates on the politics of the legislative process. Now, we should be grateful to Wiseman for bringing forward what counts so heavily--not the intrigue, politics, or strategizing--but rather the issues that legislatures handle, the different views legislators have on them, and the substantive arguments made regarding the merits of each case.
As a result of his journey with the Idaho Legislature, Wiseman concludes (as reported in the Thirteen/WNET New York press release): “For me, the drama lies in the commonness of the issues, in the ordinariness of the people called on to resolve them, and the seriousness with which they accept the responsibility for participating in decisions that affect all aspects of our lives.” State Legislature may not be the average person’s choice of television fare, but those who watch will likely come to the same conclusion as Wiseman: Representative democracy may not be entertaining, but it does work.
Alan Rosenthal, a renowned expert on state legislatures, is a professor at Rutgers University.