• Mission & Governance
• Services Overview
• How to Get Involved
• Standing Committees
• NCSL Foundation

• Issue Areas: A-Z
• State-Federal Relations
• NCSL Standing Committees
• News from D.C. and the States

• About State Legislatures
• Elections, Campaigns & Redistricting
• NCSL's StateConnect Directory
• Web Sites

• Online Guide to NCSL Services
• Staff Sections and Networks
• Meetings & Professional Development
• Staff Directories

• Meetings Calendar
• Online Registration
• Meetings Home Page
• Legislative Summit

• Bookstore
• State Legislatures Magazine
• NCSL's StateConnect Directory

Legislative Effectiveness & State Government Committee

Meeting Summaries
April 2006

Meeting Session:	Legislative Powers Under Attack
Overview & Panelists:	Recent lawsuits have taken aim at key legislative authority, such as the responsibility to seat legislators and the right to make bill drafting records confidential prior to bill introduction.  This session examined what legislatures are doing to preserve their power. Moderator: Pat Saville, Secretary of the Senate, Kansas Presenters: Peter Wattson, Senate Counsel, Minnesota Bill Pound, Executive Director, NCSL John Murray, Chief of Staff to the Senate Majority Leader, Wisconsin
Summary:	Pat Saville opened the session by noting four aspects of recent legal attacks on legislative powers: disputes with the executive branch, challenges from interest groups, partisan disagreements and questions of state constitutional nature, such as those connected to educational funding required to meet equal educational opportunity provisions.  She introduced the panelists. Peter Wattson described a Kentucky court case in which he represented NCSL.  The case involved the authority to determine the qualifications of a senator.  In Kentucky Senate District 37, the Republican candidate won with 51% of the vote, but her election was challenged on the basis of residency.  The Kentucky Constitution requires residency for six years prior to the election, and there was evidence the Republican candidate had bought a house, registered her car and voted in Indiana in that time.  However, she also continuously owned a home and continued to teach school and attend church during that time in Kentucky.  Her opponent brought an action in Jefferson Circuit Court, which the candidate and Kentucky Senate leaders chose not to appeal. The Kentucky Senate reviewed the circumstances and determined that the winner of the election was a resident of her district and voted to seat her.  NCSL was involved in the appeal in order to help preserve the legislative authority (reflected by long-time practices in England before we became a country and by provisions of the U.S. and Kentucky constitutions) saying that a legislative body is the sole judge of the qualifications of its members.  NCSL’s decision to participate in the case was also based on the possibility that an adverse decision could have ramifications in other states. The Kentucky Supreme Court’s decision went against the State Senate, but the court’s rationale limited the likelihood the decision will have great applicability.  Peter stressed the lessons learned of respecting the courts and appealing, rather than ignoring, unfavorable court orders.  Also, legislators need to respect public opinion and avoid any comments indicating that the legislature is above the law.  The emphasis must be on the devotion of the legislature to the purposes of the state constitution, not on partisan differences. John Murray described a current case in Wisconsin where Attorney General Peggy Lautenschlager is challenging the authority of legislators to keep bill drafting requests confidential until the bill is introduced.  She asserts that legislators lose their right to confidential status when they share the preliminary bill drafts with interest groups outside the legislature.  John described the strong interest that legislators have in maintaining this current system.  Victims of crimes and others who fear some type of retaliation can be free to contact their legislators about bill requests without worry about having their names being revealed.  Legislators can thoroughly develop legislation and be politically and personally comfortable with it before having to defend it publicly.  The current system protects citizens, yet provides full security once the bill is introduced.  There are hearing, fiscal estimate and other procedures that ensure tat bills get a thorough and public review.  John mentioned that both majority and minority senators are united in their support for defending the legislative authority.  The Wisconsin governor also supports the legislative position in this case—an adverse court decision could make a logistical mess of the governor’s current budget bill creation process. Bill Pound made some observations about key lawsuits involving state legislatures around the country.  He agreed with Peter that to be successful, legislatures needed to separate institutional concerns from partisan issues.  The media has had a hard time understanding those institutional concerns, and one of the lessons learned is that more effort must be given to making the case with the media.  A number of recent legislative legal battles have involved the item or partial veto, with governors seeking huge inroads on legislative authority in some cases.  Despite these challenges, Bill noted that legislative leaders think legislatures are getting stronger.  The legislature is the most representative and transparent branch of government, and those aspects are critical to increasing public confidence in their lawmakers.  The legislatures have opened their processes further with broadcasting, webcasting and great amounts of information on the internet.  Citizens have the greatest opportunity to influence the legislative branch of government.  All of these positives must guide our efforts to protect legislative power.  Lastly, Bill noted that attacks on state legislative power have also come from the federal system—preemption is a continuing problem.  It is another area where partisan disagreements have often prevented state legislative solidarity in defending their powers.

Meeting Session:	E-Democracy: Using IT to Connect and Communicate
Overview & Panelists:	How are legislatures using new technologies to encourage citizen involvement and participation in the democratic process?  This session highlighted innovative new ways for legislators to inform constituents and communicate with the public about pressing policy issues. Co-Moderators:  Assemblyman Upendra J. Chivulkula, New Jersey Jim Greenwalt, Director of Information Systems, State Senate, Minnesota Presenters:  Evelyn Messinger, Executive Messinger, Executive Director, Internews Interactive, California Representative Aaron Pena, Texas Ric Cantrell, Assistant to Senate Majority Leadership, Utah Daniel Bevarly, Senior Director, Neighborhood America, Naples, Florida
Summary:	Assemblyman Chivulkula described the format for the session and introduced the first two panelists.  Representative Pena noted that he knows little about computers, but he is a strong proponent of blogging.  Blogs--short for “web log”—are online public journals that document a person’s daily thoughts and experiences.  Representative Pena stumbled upon this option and found it was an ideal way to tell his constituents what he was doing.  An election opponent alleged that Pena was “never around” the district, but the blog let him show constituents that he was constantly working on their behalf.  Pena has had over 41,000 hits on his site.  You can use pictures, exchange ideas and do a great deal through blogging.  You can also learn a lot about the people who come to the site.  Legislator bloggers can choose from various blog programs and set parameters by deleting certain objectionable responses.  Most take pride in the openness of their sites and the willingness to listen to any criticism.  You can update your blog anytime, anywhere.  It does allow your opponent to know what you are doing and may provide fuel for a campaign issues, but the advantage of blogging for constituent communications are huge.  The real issue for legislators does not involve the problems with starting a blog; rather it is the time and effort to maintain a blog.  Finally, Representative Pena noted that you cannot get so carried away with the blog that you forget that there are constituents who will not see your blog, and you have to continue to reach them in other ways. Ric Cantrell described a blog for the Senate Republicans in Utah.  They wanted some additional ways to reach the citizens beyond working through the traditional media.  Using a vision of creating a site that is classy, deliberative, informative, good humored, relevant, and interesting, they have sought to create a direct link with constituents.  The Senate Republicans have encouraged their members to be creative and share thoughts on current events, describe their political philosophies, make observations and so on.  In essence, they want to describe some of the interesting background that goes on in the political life of a legislator.   This is a chance for a legislator to be creative, informal and human. Jim Greenwalt introduced the last two panelists and noted that e-democracy has really been used to inform, engage and empower citizens in regard to their government.  To this point legislatures have done an excellent job of informing citizens, but the engagement and empowerment has just begun. Evelyn Messinger described the need across the country to combat excessive partisanship.  The internet has fueled this to some extent, with sites often being used to “spin” issues in certain ways.  She suggested that efforts must be made to help people connect on issues, to find areas of compromise or agreement.  She described the RedBlue project that will allow citizens to engage directly with someone “on the other side” of the political spectrum.  The site will be designed to allow the two “matched” individuals to share ideas, learn about each others’ values and concerns, and explore possible areas of agreement.  The project emphasizes the value of cooperation in dealing with our political problems and building trust among those dealing with those problems. Dan Bevarly described the short history of the e-democracy phenomenon and urged legislators to look closely at their target audiences.  Using blogs and email significantly widens the access to the legislative process for your constituents.  One example is to use the technology to receive public comment on key issues.  With new web-based solutions, legislators can collect data and quickly analyze and report the results.

Meeting Session:	How to Run a Top-notch Intern Program
Overview & Panelists:	How do you attract and train talented legislative interns?  This roundtable discussion session provided tips on creating an intern program that is meaningful for the legislature and the interns. Moderator: Pete Poynter, Director of Government Affairs, BellSouth, Georgia Presenters: Karl Kurtz, Division Director, Trust for Representative Democracy, NCSL, Colorado Hannah Shostack, Associate Executive Director for Research, Assembly Majority office, New Jersey Antonina Chernysheva, House Economic Matters Committee, Maryland Olga Konovalova, Health Committee, District of Columbia City Council
Summary:	Pete Poynter introduced the panelists and the topic, noting that legislative interns have a chance to learn about the ins and outs of democracy far better than the average citizen.  However, all involved in these programs have a special responsibility to make them work.  Legislators need to make time to ensure that interns get their questions answered and receive helpful direction. Karl Kurtz set the context for state legislative intern programs.  They vary greatly on almost all aspects.  Roughly two-thirds are undergraduate programs and one-third are graduate programs.  Management varies by using an academic, legislative or a combination approach.  Some interns work for individual legislators, while others work for a staff office.  Program size ranges from five to 50, and the length of time commitment varies as well.  Some interns are paid, while others may receive only academic credit.  Some interns receive extensive training, such as a required class before starting the program, while others may receive just a two-hour orientation.  However, the intern program goals tend to be similar: provide legislative staff support, educate students about representative democracy, and create a recruiting program for future legislative staff. Antonia Chernysheva noted that she is part of a special intern program through NCSL and the U.S. State Department.  She has been interning with a committee in the Maryland legislature, primarily doing research.  Her advice to legislators and others who oversee the programs is to always keep the interns busy.  The worst times have been when there is really nothing to do; the best times have been when the interns can really contribute in a meaningful way that helps a legislator. Olga Konovalova noted that the NCSL/State Department program has placed interns from Russia at various legislatures throughout the country, and they have encountered all the variety that Karl Kurtz mentioned.  Olga said that she was particularly surprised to learn the significant role that staff play in developing legislation, noting that staffers often drive the process.  She agreed with Antonina that keeping busy was critical for interns and she suggested that intern coordinators have a project waiting when their interns start. Hannah Shostack provided the perspective of an intern coordinator, describing her experiences with Rutgers University and Prof. Alan Rosenthal.  Alan teaches a class that the interns must take before starting legislative work and the Rutgers’ group decides who is accepted.  The nonpartisan legislative office also interviews the students, but only one student was ever rejected and that was over partisanship issues, not competence.  There is an ongoing training component that the students help shape.  They chose the topics and almost always hold a training session on the media. Finding work for the interns is a continuing issue.  The coordinator will circulate a memo to legislative staff to search for the right topics, but factors like the expertise required, the time available and priorities will rule some assignments out.  Often the projects for interns are those where an intense effort and amount of time is needed.  The coordinator has to be a salesman or saleswoman, looking for opportunities and convincing staff to use the interns.  Hannah also stressed the critical importance of the orientation in starting the intern experience correctly. The coordinator has to take the interns to meetings and make sure they see a variety of people and situations.  The coordinator has to figure out what tasks are within the interns’ capabilities.  Drafting, for example, is out.  Hannah provided some final bits of advice: Incorporate a system of feedback so that you meet expectations Use interns on internet research projects—they tend to be great at it Have interns write down their perspectives at the start; it is fascinating to see how their experiences often combat the cynicism they bring in at the start.

Meeting Session:	Committee Business Meeting
Overview & Presiding Officer:	Committee officers and members discussed plans for committee sessions at the 2006 Annual Meeting and committee work products. Presiding Officer: Committee Chair: Senator Dori Connor, Delaware
Summary:	Annual Meeting Planning The committee made plans for sessions for time slots at the upcoming 2006 Annual Meeting August 15-18.  The committee suggested nine items, some of which may involve multiple time slots, so we will try to partner with staff sections and other groups to find available time throughout the meeting.  Some sessions may be deferred to later NCSL meetings.  The approved items are: The Politics of Hope: Reaching Across Party Lines.  This session is with trainer Donna Zajonc, a former Oregon legislator, and includes a workshop and a luncheon session. How a Bill Really Becomes a Law.  This session will look at how the various legislators and legislative staff positions do “their part” in making the transformation from bill to law. Interns: The Best Programs.  The committee members liked the Spring Forum session on interns and want to do a follow-up session in Nashville. New Staff Track.  With the cancellation of the Skills Development Seminar this year, the committee recommended that NCSL provide a track for new legislative staffers at the annual meeting.  The track would be like the legislator training track in concept and would feature training in key core areas, like making presentations and writing for the legislature. Legal Research Short Course.  Legislative staffers often have to teach themselves about legal research, at least enough to help legislators understand a legal problem.  This session will provide tips and best practices. Forum or Workshop session.  A request was made to provide one or more sessions in some highly interactive format that really promotes active participant participation. How to Staff a Committee.  This session looks at the key responsibilities and attributes of those who provide staff work for legislative committees. HR: A Hiring Guide for Legislators and Staff.  Legislators are often required to be the “boss” of a staff, yet they may have little time, inclination or training to carry out that role.  This session would provide some practical advice from the human relations field. Using Technology to Your Advantage.  The committee wants to continue our look at how to improve legislative work by taking advantage of technology. CD Series The committee officers and members heard reports on their project to create a “How to be an Effective Committee Chair” CD and suggested that the next CD in NCSL’s training series be one specifically designed for new legislative staff.  The current CD series has dealt with a number of key aspects of being a legislator, so maybe the time has come to create a CD for new staff.  A legislator commented that all legislators would benefit if their new staff members could get some general grounding beyond the training available in their own states.