Proving a Point I Made Earlier

When I posted in support of the amendment to return the KY General Assembly to biennial meetings, I received some criticism on Bluegrass Roots.

I was told that the amount of time spent on gay-bashing and joining church and state would shrink in comparison to the good work that could be done if our legislators were given more time to meet.

My response:

I am not convinced that longer sessions would lead to proportionately smaller time spent on bad bills. I think the panderers would do what they did in 2004 with the anti-marriage amendment, which was to bring it up again and again until they got what they wanted. Meanwhile, the budget languished.

The 2008 Assembly is proving this point. Jody Williams is still looking to see if he has the votes to pass the casino bill (even if the House cannot agree on one version!).

His only worry is his lack of time:

Time is running out for the legislation, and Richards acknowledged that “momentum has been lost on it, no question about it.”

But he added, “A lot of our members would like to see that bill, that amendment pass.”

Longer, more frequent sessions would just give him time to twist more arms. In the meantime, the legislature is resistant to other approaches that would bring KY revenue because they would be unpopular with a much larger group of people.

As long as certain officeholders view the Assembly as one long campaign commercial, this sort of crap will continue. Either the legislature should be limited in its ability to hurt Kentuckians by keeping its sessions short, or some way of limiting non-budget-related bills and floor amendments should be devised.

Broke at the crossroads and no one can agree on a direction

Okay, now Beshear is talking about increasing cigarette taxes, since the casino proposal appears to be a bust. He wants to use it as leverage to borrow money.

The House Democrats have turned him down, calling the idea of borrowing money 'irresponsible'. I would have added 'Republican'.

The KY General Assembly doesn't want to use casinos, increased taxes, or borrowed money to get the state out of the hole it's in. They don't want to downsize employees except by attrition (shrinking and delaying services), and they certainly don't want to cut out any pork!

Below is a proposed income stream they haven't thought of yet. It's certainly as likely to get through the Assembly as anything else.

The Constitutional Amendment We Need Most

I must apologize to Kathy Stein, Mary Lou Marzian, Ruth Ann Palumbo, and Ernesto Scorsone, along with any other politicos who are really interested in putting the welfare of Kentuckians first, because they would be punished along with the rest of the Kentucky General @ss. However, this is the constitutional amendment I would most like to see on November's ballot:

SB 161/LM/AA (BR 145) - T. Jensen, R. Stivers II, B. Leeper
AN ACT proposing an amendment to Sections 36 and 42 of the Constitution of Kentucky relating to legislative sessions.
Propose an amendment to Sections 36 and 42 of the Kentucky Constitution to repeal annual sessions; provide ballot language for submission to voters.

The wording on the ballot:

"Are you in favor of repealing annual legislative sessions for the General Assembly and allowing the General Assembly to convene in regular session during even-numbered years for no more than sixty legislative days and to meet in odd-numbered years for no more than ten legislative days only for the purposes of electing legislative leaders, adopting rules of procedure, and organizing committees?"

Unlike the proposed gambling amendment, I think this would have an immediate and guaranteed benefit for the people of Kentucky. Having annual sessions has not hastened the finalization of budgets or meeting the needs of Kentuckians. It has merely doubled the number of harmful, hot-button bills proposed.

The only complaint that I have about this amendment is that it does not go far enough. The KY General Assembly should only meet during odd years. 50% of the time, there would be no election , since the year following a presidential election is always a non-voting year. This would greatly cut down on the bills sponsored to attract donations or the support of voter blocs.

Imagine years in which the gay community was not attacked, in which women's reproduction was left alone, in which no one tried to force prayer into the public schools. Imagine years in which corporate handouts weren't given to King Coal, HMOs, or the construction industry while ignoring the needs of Kentucky's large, aging, lower-income population. Imagine politicians having to run on their record, rather than the bills they introduce to voters with short memories.

Me, I imagine fewer years in which I would need to scan proposed legislation for ones that hurt Kentuckians.

It's a shame.