Experts Expound: How much is too much?

“Should there be a hard limit on the number of committees a legislator can serve on?” 

“No.  The performance sorts this out.”

“A hard limit would be an impossibility at this juncture given the paltry number of republicans in the legislature.”

“That’s a leadership call. Some committees have a heavy workload, others not so much. Putting a number limit on it doesn’t solve any issues.”

“No, because committees are all different. Some meet weekly, some rarely. Some require a lot of time outside of committee hearings, some hardly any. Not to mention, each member (and their staff) are different and can handle differing amounts of work. So it should be up to the individual member, the Senate President pro Tem and their caucus leadership to decide who can handle how much. But, I think it is incumbent on people in leadership roles to monitor each legislator’s performance, and if they are missing key hearings or votes, or if there is a specific conflict in when two committees meet, or if the member is obviously overwhelmed, then they need to let something go.”

“Well that would be tough on the Reeps since there are so few of them AND there need to be at least two on every Standing Committee.  As a Dem, I just wish there weren’t that many Dems.  The super majorities mean no checks & balances… each house just passes every bad & uncooked idea to the second house to deal with.”

“Not sure about committees, but there should be a much lower, hard limit on the number of bills any legislator can introduce. The number of bills introduced every session is insane.”

“Yes.”

“Well, if you do THAT, you will reduce the political contributions they can generate from the interest groups that spend much of their time in those specific committees. So, that ain’t gonna happen. Maybe require that Members actually read the bills they vote upon in committee? Oh, wait, that won’t happen either!”

“No, I don’t think so. The problem isn’t the number of committees itself; it’s the leadership’s inability to handle the pressure from their own members to give them everything they want. Limiting the Members committee workload would generate much better results all the way around. That requires discipline from the top.”

“The Question really should be: Are there too many committees? Before discussing how many committees a member should sit on – start by eliminating committees. Select Committees are nothing more than a disguised attempt to have more staff – generally as a reward for campaign work. Broaden the jurisdictions of existing committees to include what the select committees cover. That alone reduces the number of committees members sit in. Theoretically every member could sit on a fiscal committee (Appropriations and Budget Subs – increase membership of some budget sub committees). By broadening some committee jurisdiction you can increase memberships. Limiting members to three policy committees (no more select committees) and placing each member on a “money committee” – you arrive at four committees to work legislation over a two year cycle and two budget years for the Assembly and four years for the Senate. That is an entirely manageable work load for members.”

Our panel of experts: Elizabeth Ashford, Hector Barajas, A.G. Block, Barry Brokaw, Samantha Corbin, Jon Costantino, Richard Costigan, Gregg Fishman, Tim Foster, Rex Frazier, John Howard, Fiona Hutton, Gale Kaufman, Steven Maviglio, Mike MeCey, Paul Mitchell, Jack Ohman, Kassy Perry, Matt Rexroad, Garry South, Paula Treat, Micah Weinberg, Bill Wong, Daniel Zingale