For average citizens whose knowledge of the lawmaking process stems mostly from snippets of TV coverage of Congress, a grade school field trip, or attendance at a city council or local school board meeting, witnessing the machinations of the North Carolina legislature up close and personal for the first time is often a surprising experience.
A congressional committee’s vetting of a single bill often takes more than one meeting of several hours each and features panels of expert witnesses reading pages of lengthy and painstakingly prepared testimony, often followed by lengthy questioning and speech-making from lawmakers and committee staff.
City council and school board gatherings may not be so grand or highfalutin, but they often run late into the night as constituents come forward to oppose or support a proposed ordinance or policy change.
In contrast, the process in Raleigh is almost always remarkably quick and informal.
Indeed, a typical General Assembly committee’s public consideration of a bill – even a proposal of some substance and controversy – often takes just a few minutes. A committee meeting might proceed as follows:
First, the members of a committee gather at an appointed one-hour time slot. The meeting often takes place in a small, crowded, sometimes windowless and spartan room that features a narrow horseshoe of tables for lawmakers to sit at arm-to-arm, and a few rows of general seating for the public and media members. Often, legislators trail in after the proceedings have commenced and depart early.
And for the next 50-or-so minutes, the committee chair leads the group of perhaps 10-20 members through the list of scheduled bills. One-by-one, bill sponsors troop to the front of the room, explain the bill in a couple of minutes – sometimes accurately, sometimes not so much — and ask for support. During busy times of the year – like the current silly season that’s underway right now – each meeting’s agenda could include as many as a dozen or more bills.
Sometimes, there are a few questions, comments or a bit of professional staff input, sometimes not. Often, the legislation — almost all of which is sponsored by Republicans since Democratic proposals seldom get a hearing in the GOP-dominated legislature – will be approved on a voice vote in just a minute or two.
Occasionally, a member of the public – a lobbyist, a government agency staffer, an average citizen – will ask to speak. Sometimes they will be granted permission – often with an air of impatience from the chair — and sometimes not. Normally, while they are speaking, a sergeant-at-arms staff person will hover close by, assuring that they do not exceed the time allotted to speakers – usually just two minutes, or sometimes one
Speakers who oppose bills favored by the chair tend to get a faster hook.
Sometimes, amendments or rewritten versions of bills known as “committee substitutes” will be hastily crafted and adopted on the fly. At other times, bills are quickly okayed with a vague proviso directing staff to incorporate “clarifying” amendments before the bill goes to the floor, or when it gets to another committee.
And that’s basically it.
That’s how important and frequently complex new state statutes – statutes that create new crimes, alter which toxic chemicals are and aren’t permissible to release, or amend what can and can’t be done in public schools – are vetted.
And right now, as lawmakers hurtle toward their self-imposed May 8 “crossover deadline” – the date by which many bills must be approved in one house in order to be eligible for consideration in the other one this year – the process is at what is arguably its chaotic worst. In the coming days, look for scores — perhaps hundreds — of bills to be summarily whisked through committee and House or Senate floor votes based on little more than a sponsor’s general description and the hope that the other house may figure out a way to pay more attention.
As the old saying goes, it’s a crazy way to run a railroad. Whether, however, there is a better and truly feasible way to run things is very much an open question.
A legislature that lacked artificial deadlines would presumably have more time to dissect legislation, hear from genuine experts, and better understand what it was voting on – as might a legislature that committed to listening to public testimony for more than 60 or 120 seconds at a time. Mandating detailed explanations from professional legislative staff for every bill considered and requiring a week’s public notice before a bill could be considered would help as well.
But, of course, remedies that promote transparency, hard questions and public input tend to take more time, drive up costs and, most importantly, diminish the power of the people running the show behind the scenes. So don’t hold your breath.
For now, the best chance for many important bills to receive something closer to the thorough vetting they deserve likely rests with the Gov. Josh Stein and, ultimately, the chance that Democrats on Jones Street will stick together long enough to make any vetoes he might issue stick. Stay tuned. A mostly relatively low energy session is about to shift into high gear.
Read More Details
Finally We wish PressBee provided you with enough information of ( It’s silly season at the North Carolina General Assembly )
Also on site :