A Study of the Legislative Process
in Virginia

A Report Submitted
to the Virginia Joint Rules Committee

National Conference of State Legislatures

November 2000

Final Report

Contents

Acknowledgements.....5

The Citizen Legislature.....12
Recommendation 1.....12

Organization and Scope of the Legislative Session.....13
Recommendation 2.....14
Recommendation 3.....15

Floor Time.....17
Recommendation 4.....17

Days in Session.....18
Recommendation 5.....18
Recommendation 6.....19

Mechanisms to Streamline the Legislative Process.....20
Recommendation 7.....20
Recommendation 8.....20
Recommendation 9.....20
Recommendation 10.....20
Recommendation 11.....21
Recommendation 12.....22
Recommendation 13.....23
Recommendation 14.....24
Recommendation 15.....25
Recommendation 16.....26
Recommendation 17.....26

Committees and Subcommittees 28
Recommendation 18.....29
Recommendation 19.....30
Recommendation 20.....31
Recommendation 21.....31
Recommendation 22.....32
Recommendation 23.....32
Recommendation 24.....33
Recommendation 25.....33
Recommendation 26.....33

Interim 35
Recommendation 27.....35
Recommendation 28.....35
Recommendation 29.....35
Recommendation 30.....36
Recommendation 31.....37
Recommendation 32.....38

Technology.....40
Recommendation 33.....40
Recommendation 34.....41

Staffing.....43
Recommendation 35.....43

Appendices.....45
Appendix A.....45
Appendix B.....49
Appendix C....52
Appendix D....54
Appendix E.....56
Appendix F.....58
Appendix G.....60
Appendix H.....61
Appendix I.....62
Appendix J.....63

Acknowledgements

Technical assistance projects such as the one described in this report offer NCSL staff a unique opportunity to work closely with legislators and legislative staff. Ultimately, we take away as much learning from these efforts as we contribute in ideas and recommendations. The project for the Virginia General Assembly was no exception.

This project could not have been completed successfully without the assistance and cooperation of the members and staff of the Virginia General Assembly. We wish to thank them for their constructive and candid observations. They clearly care about the General Assembly and want it to be an institution that effectively works for the benefit of Virginia citizens.

We also wish to thank the individuals outside the legislature who provided additional observations about the legislative process of Virginia. This report benefited from their valuable insights.

The project team consisted of Michael Bird and Brenda Erickson. However, other NCSL staff played important roles in the development of this report. Rich Jones, Alysoun McLaughlin and Kay Warnock offered critical reviews of the report draft.

Executive Summary

In June 2000, the National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL) entered into a contract with the Joint Rules Committee of the Virginia General Assembly. NCSL agreed to conduct a study of the legislative process in Virginia. This study was conducted with the intent of maintaining the Virginia General Assembly as a citizen legislature, promoting the full and open consideration of issues and increasing public accessibility to the legislative process. The study was prompted by concerns legislators have with conducting their business in the most efficient and effective manner and maintaining their part-time status. Time constraints and related session and interim time management concerns are among the challenges addressed in this report. The significant increase in the volume of legislation introduced and demands to keep the public informed are additional challenges addressed herein. To complete this report, the NCSL study team examined the rules and procedures of the Virginia General Assembly, conducted a written survey and completed dozens of interviews to identify ways of improving the efficiency and effectiveness of its legislative process.

The following recommendations are made to the Joint Rules Committee:

The Citizen Legislature

1. The Virginia General Assembly should remain vigilant in its efforts to preserve its citizen legislature as a co-equal branch of government.

Organization and Scope of the Legislative Session

2. The Virginia General Assembly should institute a formal organizational session. (Three options to accomplish implementation of this recommendation are on page 15.)

3. To maintain itself as an effective, co-equal branch of government, the Virginia General Assembly should preserve the unlimited scope of its legislative sessions.

Floor Time

4. The General Assembly should adopt procedures that increase the effective use of the early weeks of session.

   These procedures could include restricting floor sessions to one or two per week, implementing a non-conflicting committee meeting schedule and scheduling uncontested calendars for en bloc votes. (These procedural options are further discussed on page 17.)

Days in Session

5. The General Assembly should convene its regular sessions either on the last Wednesday of January or the first Wednesday of February. (Two alternatives are offered on page 18.)

6. The General Assembly may continue to meet in annual sessions of 60 days and 45 days in the even- and odd-numbered years, respectively. To maintain this schedule, however, will require addressing time management, work volume and other procedural concerns. The number of bill and resolution introductions, size of the biennial budget, new or emerging policy challenges all add pressure to the legislature’s ability to efficiently complete work under current time constraints.

Mechanisms to Streamline the Legislative Process

7. To improve its efficiency and time management, the Virginia General Assembly should increase the use of its authority to prefile legislation.

8. All members should have authority to prefile an unlimited number of bills and resolutions.

9. The number of bills that a member may file after session is convened should be limited. The number limit should be low enough to encourage discipline and prefiling, but high enough to allow members to introduce priority bills.

10. All governor and agency bills should be prefiled. An exception or extension could possibly be made for the first year of a new governor's term. (Five additional means for implementing recommendations 7-10 are found on page 21.)

11. The General Assembly should retain and biennially review, through the Joint Rules Committee, its deadline system and schedule to ensure that it aids the legislature’s effectiveness and efficiency.

12. The Virginia General Assembly should adopt a form of bill introduction limit that encourages prefiling and reduces the number of bills that may be introduced in session.

13. The General Assembly should consider procedures that allow a member to set priorities for his or her bills.

14. The Virginia General Assembly should either eliminate copatronage or adopt procedures to ensure that copatronage does not adversely affect the legislative process. (Six optional procedures to implement this recommendation are offered on page 25.)

15. The General Assembly should adopt procedures to reduce the number of duplicate bills that are drafted, introduced and passed. (Three alternative means to implement this recommendation are located at page 25.)

16. Given its short sessions and the volume of legislation that it has to process, the Virginia General Assembly should prohibit bills that have been defeated (or bills that are substantially the same as ones defeated) from being reintroduced--either as a bill or as an amendment--during the same legislative biennium.

17. The Virginia General Assembly should reconsider its carryover process. It should either adopt the more traditional definition of carryover, allowing true continuity of legislative sessions, or it should discontinue carryover so the first year of the biennium is truly distinct from the second. (Two alternative recommendations are made on page 27.)

Committees and Subcommittees

18. The General Assembly, particularly the House of Delegates, should reduce the number of standing committees. (Seven additional recommendations to fully implement this recommendation are on page 30.)

19. The Virginia Senate and House of Delegates should create committee groups and then assign a member to only one committee per group.

20. The Virginia Senate and House should limit the use of subcommittees. (Seven suggestions for implementing this recommendation and Recommendation 21 are located at page 32.)

21. Subcommittees should have uniform staffing and procedures for operation.

22. To eliminate meeting conflicts for members, the Virginia Senate and House of Delegates should establish schedules that set the day(s) of the week and time that each standing committee, including Rules, may meet.

23. Subcommittees of a standing committee should not meet opposite another standing committee unless a parent committee foregoes meeting in its allotted time slot to allow its subcommittees to meet.

24. The Virginia Senate and House should adjust the number and jurisdictions of committees to more evenly distribute workload, thereby improving the overall efficiency of the General Assembly.

25. Committee chairs should take the "extra minute or two" to explain what is being voted upon and allow members to cast votes that are accurately recorded by staff.

26. The Virginia General Assembly should have formal, written procedures for voting in committee. The Senate and the House of Delegates should prohibit the ability of a member to vote when he or she is not present. Committee chairs and members should be made aware of the chamber’s written voting procedures and be held strictly accountable for following them.

The Interim

27. The Joint Rules Committee should determine the overall interim workload and schedule. It should serve as the supervising "agency" for interim committees and their studies, budgets and personnel. This is exclusive of JLARC activities and interim work of the House Appropriations and Senate Finance Committees. (To implement this recommendation and Recommendations 28 through 31, see additional suggestions on page 36.)

28. The General Assembly should eliminate the use of letter studies.

29. The Joint Rules Committee should biennially review the need for continuing legislative commissions. All legislative commissions should be subject to a periodic sunset date.

30. When the legislature is not in session, the standing committees should become the interim committees for the purpose of conducting long-range studies of state policy issues. This does not preclude the retention or extension of legislative commissions.

31. The Joint Rules Committee should establish a uniform monthly meeting time during which interim committees may meet. The interim schedule should be set no later than the adjournment of the reconvening session.

32. The General Assembly should require all interim committees to complete their work by November 1 in even-numbered years and October 1 in odd-numbered years.

Technology

33. A well thought-out, coordinated strategic plan on technology should be developed for the General Assembly as a unit.
34. The Virginia General Assembly should investigate the viability of Internet coverage of the legislature.

Staffing

35. As a citizen, part-time legislature, the Virginia General Assembly should preserve its central, nonpartisan staffing structure and maintain individual, nonpartisan House and Senate clerk operations.

Introduction

In June 2000, the National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL) entered into a contract with the Joint Rules Committee of the Virginia General Assembly. NCSL agreed to conduct a study of the legislative process in Virginia. This study was conducted with the intent of maintaining the Virginia General Assembly as a citizen legislature, promoting the full and open consideration of issues and increasing the public accessibility to the legislative process. During the review, the NCSL study team examined the rules and procedures of the Virginia General Assembly to identify ways of improving the efficiency and effectiveness of its legislative process.

The areas that the contract outlined for study included:

1. Methods to encourage prefiling of legislation and administrative measures;
2. Deadlines for requesting, introducing and considering legislation during the session;
3. Application of technology to expedite the legislative process including electronic filing of legislation;
4. Interim committee work and schedules for interim committee meetings;
5. Dates for convening the regular session and other issues relating to session scheduling;
6. Introducing and processing legislation such as duplicate legislation, floor amendments and co-patrons; and
7. Other areas that are identified during the course of the study that would streamline the legislative process to improve its effectiveness and efficiency.

Methodology

The NCSL study team assigned to this project consisted of Michael Bird, senior federal affairs counsel in NCSL’s Washington Office and Brenda Erickson, program principal in the Legislative Management Program in NCSL’s Denver Office. Michael is the NCSL liaison to the Virginia General Assembly and has an understanding of its rules, procedures and operations. He has over 25 years of experience in working with state legislatures. Brenda specializes in the areas of rules and procedures, committee systems and legislative record keeping and documentation. She has over 20 years of experience working with legislatures.

The study team traveled to Richmond on multiple occasions; collected information; conducted personal interviews with legislators, legislative staff and other observers of the legislative process; observed legislative operations; and reported on the progress of the study. In addition, an opinion survey was mailed to all Virginia senators and delegates, of which 83 members responded.

Report Overview

The report is divided into the following sections:

• The Citizen Legislature
• Organization and Scope of the Legislative Session
• Floor Time
• Days in Session
• Mechanisms to Streamline the Legislative Process
• Committees and Subcommittees
• Interim
• Budget Process
• Technology
• Staffing

The Citizen Legislature

RECOMMENDATION 1. The Virginia General Assembly should remain vigilant in its efforts to preserve its citizen legislature as a co-equal branch of government.

The Virginia General Assembly is proud that it is a part-time, citizen legislature. In fact, one of the major purposes of this study was to help maintain this status.

But what is a citizen legislature? According to the definition used by NCSL, a citizen (or part-time) legislature spends comparatively little time in session, has lower member salaries and has a smaller, more centralized staff. Its members typically have jobs in addition to their legislative responsibilities.

What are the values of having a citizen legislature? A citizen legislature focuses its work on specific time periods. It allows--even encourages--members to have careers outside the legislature. As a result, citizen legislators must work under the laws that they enact just as their constituents and other citizens do. Highly professionalized, full-time legislatures tend to be seen as too removed from the "normal" lives led by the citizens. Extensive professionalism or congressionalization may fragment the legislative institution, making it more difficult for the legislature to resolve complex, divisive issues. Extensive professionalism or congressionalization of a legislature tends to focus members’ efforts on reelection and political career, diverting the members’ attention from other legislative responsibilities.

A citizen legislature must strive to maintain its status as a co-equal branch of government. The legislature is the branch of government that most closely represents the citizens of a state in their plurality. Thus, to the extent that a legislature is powerless, then so are the people.

According to survey results, the Virginia General Assembly feels that it functions better than average in many areas. Its ability to set state policy is fairly equal to the executive agencies; however, it is somewhat weaker than the governor in this area.

Survey Results: General Institutional Issues

Organization and Scope of the Legislative Session

"Perhaps the most trying aspect of a legislator's life is the frustration born of inadequate time to cope with the flood of issues and problems that a session involves." This quote by Duane Lockard, a former Connecticut state senator, summarizes a main concern expressed by Virginia legislators--that is, not enough time to study bills.

The timing of the legislative session is set by Virginia Constitution Article IV, Section 6. It states:

The Virginia General Assembly routinely meets for 60 calendar days during the first year of a biennium and for 45 calendar days during the second year. Yet, when asked if the General Assembly meets long enough in session to deal effectively with the issues it faces, most Virginia legislators were uncertain.

Survey Results: Time in Session

There are several options concerning session timing that the General Assembly should implement to enhance time management and preserve its part-time status.

RECOMMENDATION 2. The Virginia General Assembly should institute a formal organizational session.

The issue of an organizational session is not new to the Virginia General Assembly. In 1984, the Joint Subcommittee Studying Legislative Management recommended that the legislature consider "a December meeting date for the House and Senate organizational meetings and committee appointments." Today, there remains uncertainty among Virginia legislators about this option.

Survey Results: Time in Session

However, from a time management perspective, it is an option that the General Assembly should implement. Time is a scarce resource in legislative operations, especially for part-time legislatures. From the initial stages of the legislative cycle, time management has a rippling effect. Early organization of the legislature usually leads to more efficient use of its session days. Some states believe that pre-session organization helps preserve short sessions and part-time schedules.

The following table provides examples of states that have formal organizational sessions.

The following activities typically occur during a formal organizational session:

• Members are sworn in.
• Chamber and caucus leaders are elected.
• Other chamber officers--such as the clerks of the Senate and House--are selected.
• If necessary, the hiring of other staff is approved.
• Chamber rules are adopted.
• Session schedules (deadlines) are set.
• The number of, the names (sometimes, jurisdictions) of and the meeting schedule for committees are established. If possible, committee chairs and members are appointed.

In addition, chambers often hold orientation programs for new members and new committee chairs. Sometimes, briefings on the budget, revenue outlook or other major policy issues are presented.

There are options for the timing of the organizational session, depending upon whether the General Assembly wants to modify its regular session schedule.

• The organizational session could be held sometime between late November and mid-December in the odd-year after elections if the General Assembly chooses to keep the current opening date of regular session or to move it to late January or early February.
• The organizational session could occur immediately after the first of January, but before the regular session officially convenes under current constitutional provisions.
• The organizational session could be held when the legislature convenes under current constitutional provisions. The General Assembly would then recess until late January or early February.

Any of these options to create a formal organizational session would require a change in the constitution.

RECOMMENDATION 3. To maintain itself as an effective, co-equal branch of government, the Virginia General Assembly should preserve the unlimited scope of its legislative sessions.

There are two types of annual sessions--general and limited scope. Thirty-eight legislatures that meet annually hold general sessions each year; they consider all types of legislation during both years of a biennium. Only six legislatures that meet annually limit one year of a biennium to consideration of specific types of legislation. They are Connecticut, Louisiana, Maine, New Mexico, North Carolina, and Wyoming.

Shown below are descriptions of the session scope limits.

During interviews, individuals often raised this option as a mechanism to preserve Virginia’s short sessions and limit the amount of legislation to be processed, at least during one year of the biennium.

However, there are mixed reviews on the effectiveness of limited scope sessions. The subject limits are so broad (or vague) in Connecticut, Maine, New Mexico and North Carolina that they have little impact. In Louisiana, a limited scope session was set by constitutional amendment in 1994. Since the enactment of the "fiscal issues" limit, the legislature has been called into special session each even year to deal with general issues. Only the governor has the ability to call special sessions; as a result, there has been a shift in power from the legislature to the governor.

The Virginia General Assembly should be careful to protect the legislature’s prerogatives and not create any imbalance between the legislative and executive branches.

Floor Time

RECOMMENDATION 4. The General Assembly should adopt procedures that increase the effective use of the early weeks of session.

As previously noted, in order to maintain its short sessions, the General Assembly must make greater use of the early weeks of session. Responses to the survey and interview questions indicate that this is an area in which the General Assembly could improve its procedures.

Survey Results: Legislative Rules and Procedures

To implement this recommendation, the General Assembly should do the following.

• Avoid the convening of daily floor sessions during the first one to three weeks of session. The Senate and House may reduce the number of daily sessions and still meet its constitutional restriction against adjournments lasting longer than three days. For example, floor sessions could be held twice per week, such as on Monday and Thursday or Tuesday and Friday. This should free up more time for committee meetings.
• Establish a committee schedule that standardizes meeting dates, times and locations. This schedule will likely 1) make effective use of the time that is gained by limiting floor sessions, 2) discourage conflicts for member attendance, and 3) make it easier for the public to understand and participate in the legislative process.
• Schedule uncontested (consent) calendars once per week in order to allow more time for the discussion of controversial issues. To the extent possible, vote upon them en bloc.

Days in Session

The Virginia Legislature should consider moving the convening time for its session. Although this change would not necessarily lengthen session, it would give the General Assembly more time before the start of the session to train new legislators, conduct budget hearings, draft bills and generally prepare for the session. It also allows the legislature flexibility to move these tasks away from the holiday season. A constitutional amendment would be required in order to move the opening date of the legislative session.

RECOMMENDATION 5. The General Assembly should convene its regular sessions either on the last Wednesday of January or the first Wednesday of February.

While this option does not greatly increase the ability of the legislature to train new members or otherwise prepare for session, it might provide a short "breathing space" for legislators and staff so that they may have a little more time to enjoy the holiday season.

There are two other alternatives regarding session timing that the legislature may wish to consider.

• Delay the session by a month or more. Several state legislatures begin their legislative sessions much later in the calendar year. In Alabama, regular session convenes in February or March depending upon the year of the quadrennium. In Florida, the regular session begins in March. The Louisiana Legislature does not start its sessions until March or April, depending upon the year of the biennium. The Oklahoma Legislature does not convene until early February. Based on the NCSL survey, Virginia legislators do not favor this option.

Survey Results: Time in Session

• Recess the session to hold budget hearings and committee meetings. The Virginia General Assembly could continue to convene in January as it currently does, and then recess for a set period of time for budget hearings or committee work. For example, the Delaware legislature convenes in January and then typically recesses for six to seven weeks for budget hearings.

  Based on the NCSL survey, the support for this option among Virginia legislators is limited. During interviews, several individuals expressed concern that such a recess may divert the attention of members away from the legislature’s business and interrupt the "flow" of the session.

Survey Results: Time in Session

RECOMMENDATION 6. The General Assembly may continue to meet in annual sessions of 60 days and 45 days in the even- and odd-numbered years, respectively. To maintain this schedule, however, will require addressing time management, work volume and other procedural concerns. The number of bill and resolution introductions, size of the biennial budget, new or emerging policy challenges all add pressure to the legislature’s ability to efficiently complete work under current time constraints.

If the General Assembly does not address existing time management and session time use matters, enhance session preparation through increased prefiling and a more structured interim, and make additional changes to committee numbers, size and assignments, then NCSL would suggest equalizing the length of session to no less than 60 calendar days for both years of the biennium. This is significantly shorter than the national average for session length, which is approximately 120 calendar days per year.

The equalization of session lengths would not necessarily require a constitutional change. The Virginia General Assembly routinely takes advantage of its constitutional ability to extend its session during the second year of the biennium. It merely could increase the extension from 45 calendar days to 60 calendar days.

Equal session lengths simplify scheduling and staffing. Deadline systems do not have to be changed from year to year. As a result, they are easier for members and the public to remember. If the second session was extended to 60 days, committees would have more time to consider legislation and therefore, the public would have more time for direct testimony.

Mechanisms to Streamline the Legislative Process

Significant amounts of activity occur at the end of session in most state legislatures. A number of procedural reforms that legislatures have adopted in recent years have been designed to streamline the legislative process and address the so-called "end-of-session logjam".

During interviews, many legislators told us that the rush of legislation at the end of the session made it hard to understand all of the issues and keep track of what was going on. The end of session crunch is particularly difficult for newer legislators who have limited legislative experience.

RECOMMENDATION 7. To improve its efficiency and time management, the Virginia General Assembly should increase the use of its authority to prefile legislation.

RECOMMENDATION 8. All members should have authority to prefile an unlimited number of bills and resolutions.

RECOMMENDATION 9. The number of bills that a member may file after session is convened should be limited. The number limit should be low enough to encourage discipline and prefiling, but high enough to allow members to introduce priority bills.

RECOMMENDATION 10. All governor and agency bills should be prefiled. An exception or extension could possibly be made for the first year of a new governor's term.

Seventy-eight chambers expedite their legislative process by allowing lawmakers to prefile bills--that is, to file bills for introduction before a regular session officially has convened. Prefiling speeds up the legislative process by making it possible for legislative staff to complete the paper work that must be done before a bill can be officially introduced. This mechanism often allows committees to establish agendas before the first week of session so they can begin work as soon as session starts.

By their own admission, Virginia legislators do not make sufficient use of their ability to prefile legislation.

Survey Results: Legislative Rules and Procedures

In order to maintain its 60- and 45-day sessions, the General Assembly must make greater use of the early weeks of session. One way to accomplish this is to enhance the use of existing prefiling authority. To implement this recommendation and maximize its effectiveness, NCSL urges.

• The limits on session bill introduction authority for members also should be applied to the governor.
• All interim committees and commissions should report--with recommendations for legislation, if any--by October 1 in odd-numbered years and by November 1 in even-numbered years. Whenever possible, interim reports should contain drafts of legislation prepared by the Division of Legislative Services.
• All requests for drafts for prefiled legislation should be submitted to the Division of Legislative Services by mid-December. Requests for redrafts should be submitted at least one week prior to the convening of session.
• The General Assembly should retain all categories of legislation that may (or must) be prefiled.
• The General Assembly should require unanimous consent approval for late bill introductions.

Appendix B provides examples of chamber rules that establish deadlines for governor or agency bills.

RECOMMENDATION 11. The General Assembly should retain and biennially review, through the Joint Rules Committee, its deadline system and schedule to ensure that it aids the legislature’s effectiveness and efficiency.

In most legislatures, the end-of-session logjam is a serious problem. Logjams come about in part because many issues require a good deal of time to resolve because they are complex, controversial or both. There is no reason, however, that the conclusion of the essential bargaining process must be postponed until the end of the session. It can and should occur in stages according to a series of deadlines that offer a reasonable amount of time for both study and compromise. Since proper planning is absolutely essential for the orderly flow of work, more than three-fourths of legislative bodies have instituted deadline systems. This means that work at critical stages throughout the process must be finished by set dates.

The five most common deadlines are:

1. Introduction deadline--used in 73 chambers.
2. Committee action deadline--used in 47 chambers.
3. First house action deadline--used in 47 chambers.
4. Second house action deadline--used in 40 chambers.
5. Conference committee deadline--used in 33 chambers.

The implementation of deadlines creates a "domino effect" for the legislative process. Early introduction deadlines facilitate the referral of bills to committee. This, in turn, makes it easier and faster for committees to determine workload, establish agendas and begin working. Committee deadlines force committees to complete their work in a timely fashion, thus allowing their parent body to function more efficiently; and so on.

Survey results show that Virginia legislators are uncertain about changing the deadline system. Interviewees provided more insight into this uncertainty. Most felt that the deadline system used by the Virginia General Assembly already works well.

Survey Results: Legislative Rules and Procedures

RECOMMENDATION 12. The Virginia General Assembly should adopt a form of bill introduction limit that encourages prefiling and reduces the number of bills that may be introduced in session.

State legislators are faced with two conflicting pressures. On the one hand, lawmakers are asked to sponsor a great deal of legislation because constituents and interest groups insist "there ought to be a law" for public problems. On the other hand, legal provisions specify the length of time that most legislative bodies may remain in session. The ability to consider a steadily increasing volume of bills is not necessarily compatible with restricted session time. In response, many chambers have experimented with ways to curb the amount of legislation that enters the process. The most direct approach is to set a numerical limit on bill introductions.

Most legislative bodies using introduction limits feel that they help reduce the number of bills entering the legislative process. However, there are other views. Below are some of the arguments for and against bill introduction limits.

The 20 chambers shown below currently impose a limit on the number of bills that a member may introduce or request to be drafted. Appendix C provides a detailed description of the introduction limit used by these chambers.

Arizona House
California Senate and Assembly
Colorado Senate and House
Florida House
Hawaii House
Indiana Senate and House
Louisiana Senate and House
Montana Senate and House
Nevada Senate and Assembly
North Dakota Senate and House
Oklahoma House
Tennessee Senate
Wyoming Senate

Survey results and interview comments show that Virginia senators and delegates are not convinced about the benefits of bill introduction limits. However, they are much more receptive to one that allows unlimited prefiling prior to session and a restriction on bill introductions only after session convenes.

Survey Results: Legislative Rules and Procedures

RECOMMENDATION 13. The General Assembly should consider procedures that allow a member to set priorities for his or her bills.

At least eight legislative chambers use an approach that tries to enhance the effectiveness of individual legislators as well as streamline the process. These chambers are asking individual members to commit to those things he or she considers important by allowing them to set priorities for bills. (See Appendix D for a more detailed description of the bill prioritization mechanisms used by the eight chambers.)

It is important that state legislatures balance the ability of individual lawmakers to represent constituents with effective use of legislative time. Having legislators set bill priorities attempts to do this. Some effects of the process are:

• Members need to plan ahead and identify their top issues.
• Individual legislators have an equal opportunity to have bills prepared and considered.
• Core legislation usually is addressed earlier in the session.

Compared to other streamlining mechanisms, setting bill priorities is relatively new. As a result, many legislators--including those in Virginia--are not sure about trying this option.

Survey Results: Legislative Rules and Procedures

RECOMMENDATION 14. The Virginia General Assembly should either eliminate copatronage or adopt procedures to ensure that copatronage does not adversely affect the legislative process.

Ideas for legislation may be suggested by anyone--constituents, state agencies, political subdivisions or advocacy groups, to name a few. Most legislatures, however, require that bills and resolutions be introduced by a senator, representative, delegate or assemblyman, either acting individually or with other members. In most cases, the original sponsor of a bill or resolution will circulate it to obtain signatures of additional supporters (copatrons), which hopefully will give the legislation a much better chance of passage.

Four-fifths of the legislative bodies allow an author to gather an unlimited number of legislator signatures as cosponsors; the remaining chambers restrict the total number of signatures (including the main author’s). Also, more than half the legislative chambers impose a deadline for adding copatron names to a bill; the deadline helps ensure that bill authors will solicit their coauthors more quickly. Printing cost is cited as another reason that legislatures set time limits for adding bill cosponsors. Sponsor deadlines often correspond to the times when bills normally are printed, thereby saving money to reprint a bill just because another legislator signed in support.

In Virginia, members are holding bills just because they want to obtain copatron signatures. As a result, members are not using their ability to prefile bills. In fact, many bills are not introduced until the last possible moment. This in turn slows down the rest of the legislative process.

Survey Results: Legislative Rules and Procedures

Copatronage should not be allowed to negatively impact the legislative process. It appears that there is very little linkage between prospects for a bill's passage and the number of copatrons. However, copatronage may be so embedded that its elimination may be unachievable. Therefore, the following alternatives are suggested:

• Change the deadline for copatronage. Allow copatrons to be added up until the first vote on passage in the bill’s house of origin.
• Permit electronic signatures for copatrons.
• Allow standing committees to introduce bills in areas in which they have jurisdiction. This would allow interim standing committees to prefile legislation. It also would eliminate patronage issues when a committee consolidates several bills into one.
• Limit the number of bill signers to one chief patron and one copatron.
• Allow unlimited patronage, but do not print the names of patrons on bills, or
• Allow unlimited patronage, but place the names of copatrons at the end of the bill, so that the page and line numbers of a bill are not affected by changes in sponsorship.

RECOMMENDATION 15. The General Assembly should adopt procedures to reduce the number of duplicate bills that are drafted, introduced and passed.

Many interviewees identified duplicate bills as a problem for the Virginia General Assembly. Duplicate bills add to the volume of legislation to be drafted and processed in committee and on the floor. Problems in code language may be created when duplicate bills are enacted. For example, can the language of the enacted bills be blended? If not, which takes precedent?

Virginia is not alone in facing this difficult issue. It is one with which most state legislatures must deal. One or more of the following alternatives would accomplish implementation of this recommendation.

• Relax the confidentiality rule. Most bill drafting staff are required to keep drafting requests strictly confidential. However, some states relax the confidentiality rule in order to reduce duplicate bills. For example, in New Hampshire, House Rule 35 states "(b) The Office of Legislative Services shall not accept a request to draft any bill which is the same, or essentially the same, as any other drafting request already accepted in the same session. If duplicate or similar legislation is requested, the Director of Legislative Services shall notify the sponsors of each filing request and mediate an agreement for the filing of a single bill. Filing requests resulting from legislative committee work shall take precedence over all other duplicate or similar filings. The name of the House member whose LSR request is denied due to duplication may be substituted on request for that of the original sponsor if the original sponsor withdraws the drafting request prior to the sign-off deadline."
• Allow committees to consolidate duplicate bills into one.
• If duplicate Senate and House bills are introduced, the bill that crosses over from its house of origin to the opposite chamber first should remain alive; its "companion" should be tabled. This option not only eliminates duplicate bills, but it speeds bill processes.

RECOMMENDATION 16. Given its short sessions and the volume of legislation that it has to process, the Virginia General Assembly should prohibit bills that have been defeated (or bills that are substantially the same as ones defeated) from being reintroduced--either as a bill or as an amendment--during the same legislative biennium.

The 1984 Virginia Joint Subcommittee Studying Legislative Management recommended that "there should be a limitation on the introduction of legislation in the odd-numbered year if the measure failed in the previous even-numbered year." A similar proposal was suggested to the Joint Rules Committee again in 1997.

For legislatures, especially those with short sessions, this practice is an efficiency mechanism. Why should a chamber spend valuable committee and floor time on an issue that it already has rejected?

The principle that once a bill has been defeated it cannot be brought forth again during the same session is practiced in several state legislatures. Appendix E provides examples of chamber rules on the reintroduction of a rejected measure.

RECOMMENDATION 17. The Virginia General Assembly should reconsider its carryover process. It should either adopt the more traditional definition of carryover, allowing true continuity of legislative sessions, or it should discontinue carryover so the first year of the biennium is truly distinct from the second.

At the end of almost every legislative session, there are bills that have not been finally acted upon. Bill carryover permits a legislature to continue bills from one session to the next within the same biennium. The purposes of bill carryover are to enable continuity of the legislative process, to save time, effort and cost, and to help lessen end-of-session logjams.

Twenty-six states have carryover provisions. For most of these, the second year of a biennium is considered a continuation of the first, so bills remain at whichever point in the process that they were at when the first session ended. For example, if a bill was in committee, it remains there. If a bill was on third reading calendar, it remains there. The legislature just "picks up where it left off" when the second session opens.

The Virginia General Assembly, however, has adopted a modified version of bill carryover. By a set date (currently December 20), a committee must vote to "transfer" a bill to the next session. Otherwise, the legislation dies; then if a patron wants the bill to be considered during the next session, the bill must be reintroduced.

According to historical statistics, only a small number of bills are carried over; the remainder die. In addition, committees often wait until the last moment to act on carryover; therefore, bill patrons may not know until December the status of their bills and what action they need to take to prepare for the next session. It also is difficult for the public to track the status of bills.

If the General Assembly does not abandon its modified version of carryover, there are ways to improve it.

• Require each standing committee chairman to report by the reconvening session what bills or combination of related bills that the committee is holding for interim study. All other bills would "die in committee" at the adjournment of the reconvening session.
• Establish a limit on the number of bills that any committee may carry over. Again, require committees to report exactly which bills are being carried over at the reconvening session. All other bills would "die in committee" at the adjournment of the reconvening session.

Since bills that "die in committee" were not defeated, these bills could be reintroduced the next session. Since patrons would be aware of their bills’ statuses at the end of the reconvening session, these options possibly enhance prefiling for the next session.

Committees and Subcommittees

Deliberative assemblies usually establish committees, because it enables them to:

• Do many things that, because of sheer size, they otherwise would be unable to do.
• Conduct more business--by dividing the work among the members--than could be done if the whole body were obliged to devote itself to each particular subject.
• Act with a greater degree of freedom than usually is observed in full assembly.
• Be assured of the presence during floor debate of members who have made some examination of the question.

Committees do the homework of the legislature. According to Thomas B. Reed, noted parliamentarian and former speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, "The committee is the eye, the ear, the hand, and very often the brain of the assembly. Freed from the very great inconvenience of numbers, it can study a question, obtain full information, and put the proposal in proper shape for final decision by the House." Legislative committees are the central vehicles through which legislation must pass for scrutiny, debate and modification. During committee consideration, members have an opportunity to:

• Hear from supporters and opponents of a bill;
• Look closely at the details of proposed legislation;
• Give thoughtful consideration to proposed amendments;
• Acquire considerable information about the subject; and
• Become knowledgeable enough to make an informed decision about whether to vote for or against a proposal.

Committees serve as the major access point for direct involvement by citizens and interest groups, providing a formal opportunity for input into the legislative process. It is only during committee hearings that non-legislators have an opportunity to speak about proposed legislation.

As indicated by the survey results shown below, members and staff generally feel that committees do not have time to do their work and that there are "problems" with the committee system that need to be fixed.

Survey Results: Committees Generally

RECOMMENDATION 18. The General Assembly, particularly the House of Delegates, should reduce the number of standing committees.

There is no magic "correct" number of committees that a legislature should create. The number of standing committees varies considerably from state to state. Ten legislative chambers have 10 or less. By contrast, the Missouri House has 46 committees, and ten other bodies have 30 or more committees. Unlike most states where each legislative chamber has its own standing policy committees, Connecticut, Maine and Massachusetts use joint committees.

However, the number of standing committees should be manageable. There should be enough committees to enable each legislative body to develop some expertise in different subjects and to examine individual proposals in detail. However, there should not be so many committees that it becomes difficult to relate different bills to one another and to consider the proposals in terms of a single, unified policy. Having too many committees and subcommittees wreaks havoc on member and institutional schedules.

The survey results demonstrate that there is concern over the number of committees in Virginia. However, more concern has been expressed about the number of committees and subcommittees in the House of Delegates than in the Senate. Comments made during interviews support the survey results.

Survey Results: Number of Committees

Recommendations to the Virginia General Assembly to reduce the number of its committees are not new. In 1971, in The Sometime Governments, the Citizens Conference on State Legislatures made this recommendation.

There are benefits to having fewer committees.

• Members are exposed to a broader range of issues within a single committee’s jurisdiction.
• There are fewer committee assignments per member. This affords members greater control over their time and allows members to concentrate on key issues.
• Committees may be larger; therefore, more members will understand an issue when it reaches the floor.
• Facility scheduling and management is improved.

However, there are downsides as well.

• Committees may have a lesser degree of specialization.
• Committees may become too large.
• There are fewer chairmanships to be allocated.

To implement this recommendation, NCSL encourages the Virginia General Assembly, or the individual chambers thereof, to:

• Reduce the number of standing committees in the House to 15.
• Reduce the maximum number of standing committee assignments to 3 in the House. The Senate should maintain its 3-4 committee assignments per member distribution.
• Have no committees larger than 20 members in the House.
• Reduce the number of legislative commissions, and increasing the use of standing committees for interim studies.
• Establish time blocks for committee meetings to reflect work load.
• Expand the authority of committees to merge like or similar legislation to remedy duplicate introductions.
• Each session, determine which bills should be carried over for study purposes only. Committee chairmen should report this determination to the Joint Rules Committee prior to the reconvening session.

RECOMMENDATION 19. The Virginia Senate and House of Delegates should create committee groups and then assign a member to only one committee per group.

The number of committee assignments per member should be reasonable. Lawmakers should not have so many committee assignments that they cannot do justice to any one of them or to the work of the legislature as a whole. On average nationally, legislators are assigned to three committees. In Virginia, members often have four or five standing committee assignments.

The issue of member committee assignments is not new to the General Assembly. A recommendation that Virginia reduce the number of committee assignments was included in the 1971 publication The Sometime Governments. Current survey results and interview opinions suggest that this is a concern again.

Survey Results: Committees Assignments

It is not uncommon for legislatures to categorize or bracket their committees and then limit the number of committees upon which a member may serve in each group. This process helps avoid conflicts in committee assignments and meeting schedules. Appendix F provides examples of chamber rules that illustrate committee brackets or groups and member appointments to them.

RECOMMENTATION 20. The Virginia Senate and House should limit the use of subcommittees.

RECOMMENDATION 21. Subcommittees should have uniform staffing and procedures for operation.

A subcommittee is designed to do in-depth work for the parent committee. However, its functions are purely advisory, and a subcommittee reports only to the committee from which it was appointed, not to the full body. In most legislative chambers, a subcommittee is created by the committee chair.

The "life expectancy" of subcommittees varies considerably. Some subcommittees remain in place for an entire biennium. Usually, however, subcommittees are far more temporary in nature, being created to deal with a single issue or bill. These subcommittees dissolve when the issue or bill is reported to the parent committee. Nationally, the average subcommittee size is three to seven members.

The survey results demonstrate that there is concern over the number of subcommittees in Virginia. However, more concern has been expressed about the number of subcommittees in the House of Delegates than in the Senate.

Survey Results: Number of Subcommittees

Most interviewees commented that there are too many subcommittees. As a result, individual subcommittees may not have enough members, making them too diffuse and ineffective. Also, because of conflicts with other committee or subcommittee meetings, member attendance often is poor and quorums often nonexistent. These factors often lead to "rehearings" of bills by the full committee--which wastes valuable legislative time. Several interviewees mentioned meeting space problems for subcommittees.

In addition, staffing for subcommittees varies. Sometimes, the full committee staff supports the subcommittees. In other cases, the subcommittee chair’s personal staff performs this function. As a result, there is considerable inconsistency in subcommittee meeting notices, agendas, minutes, etc.

To implement these two general recommendations, NCSL suggests that subcommittees:

• Be empowered to pass/defeat bills.
• Except for House Appropriations and Senate Finance, be used sparingly at the chair’s discretion. Complex, controversial or issues requiring specific expertise might be candidates for subcommittee review.
• Meet at a regularly scheduled time that does not conflict with standing committee schedules or floor sessions.
• Meet only if there is a quorum is present.
• Require that members must be present to vote.
• Require that minutes be kept and that they include a record of member attendance, subcommittee actions on bills and other measures, such as witnesses heard.
• Meet only in places that allow adequate public access.

RECOMMENDATION 22. To eliminate meeting conflicts for members, the Virginia Senate and House of Delegates should establish schedules that set the day(s) of the week and time that each standing committee, including Rules, may meet.

RECOMMENDATION 23. Subcommittees of a standing committee should not meet opposite another standing committee unless a parent committee foregoes meeting in its allotted time slot to allow its subcommittees to meet.

The existing system for committee and subcommittee scheduling appears to need some revision. It is very apparent that members feel that subcommittees should have set times when they can meet and that their meetings should not conflict with standing committees.

Survey Results: Issues Relating to Committees

Again, this is not a new issue. In 1984, the Virginia Joint Subcommittee Studying Legislative Management stated "consideration should be given to the further elimination of as many conflicts as possible in the scheduling of committee meetings."

Appendix G illustrates the committee schedules for the Virginia Senate and House. Appendix H provides examples of the committee schedules used in Arizona and Minnesota.

RECOMMENDATION 24. The Virginia Senate and House should adjust the number and jurisdictions of committees in order to more evenly distribute workload, thereby improving the overall efficiency of the General Assembly.

Many interviewees commented that the problems they perceive in committee jurisdictions lead to uneven workloads of the various committees. Bill data reveals that some committees hear significantly more bills than others.

Appendix I illustrates the number of bills that were referred to Senate and House committees in 1999 and 2000. For instance, 381 bills in 1999 and 359 in 2000 were referred to the Senate Finance Committee, and only 44 bills in 1999 and 57 in 2000 to Rehabilitation and Social Services. Note, however, that the latter committee has had years when its workload has been higher. There is even greater disparity in the House numbers: 384 in 1999 and 336 in 2000 to Courts of Justice, but only one bill in 1999 and two in 2000 to Interstate Cooperation.

RECOMMENDATION 25. Committee chairs should take the "extra minute or two" to explain what is being voted upon and allow members to cast votes that are accurately recorded by staff.

Voting is the way by which a committee formally expresses its will or decision. The voting process receives great interest, because the outcome of a vote may mean the life or death of a piece of legislation. During our interviews, several issues surrounding voting procedures in committee surfaced.

Committees of the Virginia General Assembly are responsible for processing staggering amounts of legislation in an extremely short period of time. As a result, moving legislation along quickly is important. However, speed is not the only consideration. When votes are being taken, it is important that committee members know what they are voting on and that staff has time to accurately record the votes. Concerns have been raised that often neither of these are the case. Taking extra time also keeps the public informed of legislative actions.

RECOMMENDATION 26. The Virginia General Assembly should have formal, written procedures for voting in committee. The Senate and the House of Delegates should prohibit the ability of a member to vote when he or she is not present. Committee chairs and members should be made aware of the chamber’s written voting procedures and be held strictly accountable for following them.

Another issue of concern regarding voting is that, in order to enhance voting records in committee, legislators are being allowed to circumvent established voting procedures that require a member to be present to vote or to improperly use pair or proxy voting mechanisms.

Remote voting--that is, the ability of a legislator to vote when he is not present in committee--is prohibited both in committee and on floor action by 47 legislative assemblies. In fact, many of these chambers have rules that specifically require members to be present to vote. Only a few legislative bodies allow members to cast votes in committee without being present. Seven chambers allow committee members to vote in pairs. They are the Alabama Senate, Arkansas Senate, Mississippi Senate, Texas Senate and House, Virginia Senate and West Virginia House. The Indiana House, Missouri House, Montana House, Pennsylvania Senate and House, South Carolina Senate and Virginia Senate allow committees to accept proxy votes. The Maine Senate gives this voting option only to certain committees.

On one hand, remote voting provides flexibility and efficiency within the legislative process. Lawmakers split their time between personal and legislative duties. They divide their legislative time between their districts and the capitol. While at the capitol, legislators attend committees, caucuses and floor sessions; prepare legislation; meet with constituents, staff, lobbyists and others; and respond to correspondence and telephone calls. Remote voting helps members respond to occasions when multiple duties call. Proponents feel that there are other advantages as well. They believe remote voting also:

• Allows an absent member to have a position recorded on an issue.
• Saves time.
• Reduces per diem and travel costs.

On the other hand, the main concern about remote voting centers on the integrity of the process. Opponents feel that there should be a way to verify that only the authorized senator or representative is casting a vote. Requiring a member's physical presence creates a comfort level that this procedural standard is being observed. Other possible negative impacts on the legislative process by allowing a member to vote when he is not present are that it:

• Diminishes the importance of committee meetings or session.
• Reduces the incentive to attend committee meetings or session.
• Undermines the whole foundation of collegial interaction.
• Eliminates the benefits of hearing testimony and debate.
• Reduces the thoroughness of debate.
• Deprives members of the written materials distributed or available at a meeting or session.
• Increases the opportunity for voting errors.

The public often has difficulty understanding basic legislative procedures. Opponents believe that remote voting causes more confusion among the general public. They feel it deprives the public of the opportunity to witness debate and voting. In addition, many groups and individuals worked hard for the passage of open meeting or "sunshine" laws, and they fear that remote voting could be used to circumvent these statutes.

Interim

During the session, legislators are immersed in the immediate issues and preoccupied with assessing particular bills and appropriations. They have little, if any, time to explore broad policy issues or conduct research and investigation in any depth. Indeed, the more severely the length of a legislative session is limited, the more important it is to carry out these activities during the interim. As a result, interim activity often becomes the "homework" of a legislature. The more a legislature can do during the interim, the more it can do during session.

Some interviewees felt that the use of the interim in Virginia is not as effective as it could be. The main issues surrounding the interim are discussed below.

RECOMMENDATION 27. The Joint Rules Committee should determine the overall interim workload and schedule. It should serve as the supervising "agency" for interim committees and their studies, budgets and personnel. This is exclusive of JLARC activities and interim work of House Appropriations and Senate Finance.

RECOMMENDATION 28. The General Assembly should eliminate the use of letter studies.

RECOMMENDATION 29. The Joint Rules Committee should biennially review the need for continuing legislative commissions. All legislative commissions should be subject to a periodic sunset date.

Just as time during the regular session is planned with care, so should time during the interim. The interim must be looked at strategically and realistically to ensure that the most important issues are being addressed. To be of use during the next regular session, interim study results or legislation must reported in a timely fashion.

The procedures used by the Virginia General Assembly to set interim studies were the focus of much discussion. Survey results and interviews indicate that members are not necessarily satisfied with the process.

Survey Results: Issues Relating to the Interim

Appendix J outlines the procedures used by Nebraska and Washington to set interim activities.

To implement this recommendation, the Joint Rules Committee should:

• Select the studies to be worked on during the interim based upon recommendations from committee chairmen for carrying over legislation and other recommendations.
• Based on the issue, recommend the type of study--Senate, House or joint--and which standing committee(s) or other commissions are to be involved.
• Announce the finalized list of studies and committees to which they are assigned at the reconvening session.
• Eliminate any previously established commissions that have not been meeting.
• Require interim committees and commissions' reports to include language for legislation, when appropriate.
• Require interim reports be filed with the Joint Rules Committee by the established deadlines, so that reports may be distributed in a timely fashion before session and any recommended legislation may be prefiled.

Letter studies bog down the interim planning process. Their numbers have ballooned beyond their utility. Letter studies also detract from setting priorities for interim standing committees and commissions.

RECOMMENDATION 30. When the legislature is not in session, the standing committees should become the interim committees for the purpose of conducting long-range studies of state policy issues. This does not preclude the retention or extension of legislative commissions.

Mechanisms that enhance the flow and continuity of the legislative process save valuable legislative time and increase efficiency. As a result, many legislatures use their standing committees to perform interim work.

By using the existing standing committees, there is no delay in beginning interim work. The committee chairs and members are already set. Standing committee members typically have some background in the issues to be studied, so there is a shorter "learning curve." Standing committees already have procedural rules under which to function, so no time is taken to establish process.

Also, these are the committees that more than likely will deal with the issue the next session. If they do the work during the interim, there is less chance that they will "redo" it during session, resulting in less repetition of efforts. Chambers often encourage their standing committees to meet jointly during the interim; again, this is an attempt to minimize duplication of effort.

Based on survey results and interviews, Virginia legislators are open to the idea of increased use of standing committees during the interim.

Survey Results: Issues Relating to the Interim

RECOMMENDATION 31. The Joint Rules Committee should establish a uniform monthly meeting time during which interim committees may meet. The interim schedule should be set no later than the adjournment of the reconvening session.

The ability for legislators to plan ahead increases their effectiveness. Advance planning probably is even more important during the interim, when citizen legislators are trying to balance their private jobs with their public responsibilities.

Survey Results: Issues Relating to the Interim

In 1984, the Virginia Joint Subcommittee Studying Legislative Management recommended that "scheduling of legislative meetings during the interim should be limited to a certain set time each month to allow legislators to block off that time months in advance."

In Arkansas, the Legislative Council meets the third Friday of each month during the interim. Interim committees also hold meetings throughout that week, alternating months between Group "A" and Group "B" committees. Florida also has interim committee weeks each month. Interim committees in Washington hold "committee weekends," which usually are the first Thursday, Friday and Saturday of each month. In West Virginia, most interim committee meetings begin on the second Sunday of the month and run for three consecutive days, ending on Tuesday.

Interim committee meetings do not always have to be held in the capital. Virginia legislators generally agree that, within reason, holding meetings around the state is effective and encourages public participation. A number of interviewees pointed out that it is difficult for citizens to get to Richmond, so committee meetings held out of the capitol provide them with a valuable opportunity to speak personally with legislators, testify, or simply observe government in action. It also gives legislators the opportunity to visit various parts of the state and meet with local officials.

Some states have taken this concept a step further. For example, Minnesota and Utah have used "mini sessions." Two or three locations are selected as the "mini session" sites, and dates are established for each site. Then, instead of having just one committee meet, all committees are encouraged to hold meetings at the "mini session" locations.

RECOMMENDATION 32. The General Assembly should require all interim committees to complete their work by November 1 in even-numbered years and October 1 in odd-numbered years.

As noted above, to be of use during the next regular session, interim study results or legislation must be reported in a timely fashion. Unfortunately, according to several interviewees, this often is not the case in Virginia.

It is common for study committees or commissions to still be meeting in December. At this time of the year, however, the Division of Legislative Services staff must switch their focus--from staffing committees to drafting legislation. As a result, interim reports are "put on the back burner" and frequently are not published until three to six months after the session.

The following are suggested as additional means to implement recommendations related to the interim:

• Choose studies for interim standing committees and commissions from among carried over legislation and member recommendations.
• Conduct interim standing committee studies as either joint or single house activities, using one or more standing committees as appropriate for each particular issue.
• File interim committee reports with the Joint Rules Committee.
• Include in interim committee reports legislative language prepared by the Division of Legislative Services that tracks the report's recommendations. Prefile this legislation.
• Eliminate commissions that do not meet or that no longer need to function.
• Conduct interim standing committees under the same general rules as used in session.

Budget Process

The Virginia General Assembly's budget duties are carried out by the House Appropriations and Senate Finance Committees and their respective staffs. Like 17 other states, they develop a biennial budget that is typically revisited in the second session of each biennium. For the most part, NCSL's survey and interviews found satisfaction with the budget process, both with session and interim activities. Of note, however, were concerns raised about the amount of time for members to review the conference agreement and how much time, without other session distractions, conferees have to complete their negotiations.

Survey Results: Legislative Rules and Procedures

These concerns suggest that the General Assembly should consider a couple of options. First, a recess near the end of session might allow for conferees to meet for the time needed to complete negotiations. With a recess, conferees would not have to deal with other session responsibilities. However, a recess would prolong the number of days it would take to get to adjournment. A second option would be to provide additional time for members to review the work of the budget conferees. Once again, any additional time may be hard to find in the current 60- and 45-day session structure.

Technology

Paper is no longer the only medium through which legislators and the public can gain access to legislative information. State legislatures are using technology to deliver material electronically, and the information is being presented in a variety of ways—for example, through dial-up access, Internet and CD-ROM.

Based on survey responses, access to computer resources does not seem to be a problem for Virginia legislators.

Survey Results: Computer Resources

Other issues related to technology were raised during the interview portion of this study. NCSL believes each of these concerns merits further consideration and analysis. These issues include:

• Providing members with personal computers in both legislative and district offices.
• Providing committee clerks with laptops for purposes of expediting committee recordkeeping.
• Ensuring that all legislative reports and information related to legislative session action is placed on-line in a timely and, therefore, usable fashion.
• Making all fiscal impact statements available electronically.

RECOMMENDATION 33. A well thought-out, coordinated strategic plan on technology should be developed for the General Assembly as a unit.

Technology is a major issue in Virginia and across the country. It is changing the way we work and the speed in which we expect things to happen. As a result, legislatures must make key decisions. For example, is technology going to determine the legislative process or is the legislative process going to determine technology’s use? Legislatures must consider the economic impact of their decisions, because keeping software and hardware up to date can be very costly.

A coordinated strategic plan on technology would address these issues. In addition, it promotes the development of an organized--rather than a piecemeal--technology system. Otherwise, the Senate, House and other legislative divisions may play (or may be played) one against another, which may cause divisive internal relations. Having the General Assembly work as a unit also strengthens the role that the legislature plays in developing statewide "electronic government" systems.

RECOMMENDATION 34. The Virginia General Assembly should investigate the viability of Internet coverage of the legislature.

State legislatures are going beyond merely posting information and publications on the Internet. Some are offering audio or video coverage of legislative proceedings. Internet coverage began in Washington in 1996. By 1998, seven states were transmitting their sessions, and the number of states continues to grow. Forty-six chambers (shown below) provided coverage of floor deliberations in 2000. Beginning in 2001, Ohio will offer streaming audio and video coverage.

Many states work with public television stations, educational institutions or nonprofits to provide Internet broadcasts. These organizations may already have the technology and infrastructure (i.e., sound and video equipment, cameras, control rooms, etc.) necessary for the broadcasts, helping to keep costs down.

Just like other legislative issues, however, Internet coverage has its proponents and its opponents. Proponents argue that Internet coverage:

• Helps bring government closer to constituents.
• Offers greater flexibility in program scheduling than other broadcast venues.
• Allows legislatures and citizens not to be dependent on television stations to carry the broadcast signal.
• Is reasonably priced, especially when compared to television broadcasting.

Critics argue that Internet coverage:

• Could be downloaded, allowing remarks to be taken out of context and used for political purposes.
• Could be manipulated by leadership to provide an unfair amount of coverage for the party in control.
• May benefit lobbyists and legislative and government employees more than the average citizen, who may be less likely to watch the proceedings.

Although Virginia legislators currently seem uncertain about Internet coverage, it is an issue that, in NCSL’s opinion, warrants further consideration.

Survey Results: Public Information and Medial Relations

Staffing

RECOMMENDATION 35. As a citizen, part-time legislature, the Virginia General Assembly should preserve its central, nonpartisan staffing structure and maintain individual, nonpartisan House and Senate clerk operations.

Staffs play a critical role in making legislatures strong, effective, co-equal branches of state government. The growth and development of legislative staff over the past 30 years has been one of the major forces that helped transform legislatures into the strong and capable institutions that they are today.

Legislative staffs are generally of three main kinds:

• The nonpartisan, institutional, specialized staff that serves the legislature as a whole,
• Partisan staff who work with all members of a particular political caucus, and
• Staff aides who work for individual legislators.

Citizen legislatures, as previously noted, tend to have smaller, more centralized staffs. Central, nonpartisan staff support is the most economical and efficient approach to legislative staffing. It also tends to build and preserve institutional memory, because there usually is less staff turnover.

However, the trend toward decentralization has been evident in state legislatures for many years. And once decentralization begins, it is difficult to stop.

For the most part, the Virginia General Assembly uses a centralized staffing pattern. And generally, the General Assembly seems satisfied with it staff resources.

Survey Results: Staff Resources

Should any of the changes recommended earlier in this report be adopted, there could be a direct effect on the operations of the Division of Legislative Services and the offices of the House and Senate Clerks. Any effect, however, would not appear to compromise the strengths of these well-established staffing operations.

In interviews, additional ideas were put forward that merit further consideration. These ideas focused primarily on the number and availability of session aides as well as training programs for aides. Concerns were raised that increased session workloads, constituent requests and performance of interim duties is placing increased demands on members attempting to remain part-time lawmakers. NCSL suggests that the Joint Rules Committee look further into this particular legislative staffing aspect in the near future.

Appendix A

Summary of the Survey of Virginia Legislators

General Institutional Issues

Resources Available to the General Assembly

Demographic Information

Examples of Legislative Chamber Rules
Regarding Deadlines for Governor or Agency Bills

Appendix C

Bill Introduction Limits

Arizona House

California Senate and Assembly

Colorado Senate and House

Florida House

Hawaii House

Indiana Senate and House

Louisiana Senate and House

Montana Senate and House

Nevada Senate and Assembly

North Dakota Senate and House

Oklahoma House

Tennessee Senate

Wyoming Senate

Appendix D

Bill Prioritization Mechanisms

Appendix E

Examples of Chamber Rules on Reintroduction of a Rejected Measure

Appendix F

Examples of Committee Brackets or Groups

Appendix G

Virginia Senate Committee* Schedule

2000

Virginia House Committee* Schedule

2000

Appendix H

Arizona Senate Committee* Schedule

1999-2000

Minnesota House of Representative Committee* Schedule

1999-2000

Appendix I

Number of Bills Referred to Virginia Senate and House Committees

Appendix J

Examples of Mechanisms to Select Interim Studies