Opinion: Current legislative system needs restructure, reform

The $50 million “junior” spending bill Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham vetoed last week provided a current-events lesson in just one of the dysfunctional aspects of our state’s legislative structure.

The bill provided supplemental spending for a host of purposes picked by individual lawmakers. The $50 million would come from the state’s general fund, even though about half of it was earmarked for capital projects, usually funded through general obligation bonds.

In vetoing the legislation, the governor noted some of the projects wouldn’t get enough funding to be completed. She makes a strong point, especially considering $1.8 billion in capital outlay money remains unspent since last fall, often because projects have yet to get full funding.

It’s also hard to defend a proposal that has absolutely no transparency or vetting: Each lawmaker receives a certain amount of money to spend — $600,000 for each senator and $360,000 for each House member — and their pet projects are bundled into one package with no way of knowing who wanted what.

Yet the governor’s veto sparked immediate blowback from lawmakers, who said they were blindsided. Legislators on both sides of the aisle last week were calling for an “extraordinary session” to override the veto.

Lujan Grisham said she wasn’t convinced the junior bill “upholds principles of fiscal responsibility” and expressed hope the veto would be a catalyst for changing the practice of supplemental appropriations.

But much more needs to change than supplemental appropriations.

We already know the many drawbacks to the state’s current legislative structure. Debate over modernizing the Legislature has intensified in recent years as Democratic and Republican legislators alike have proposed changes to the state’s system of citizen legislators and short, intense legislative sessions.

New Mexico lawmakers draw per diem payments rather than a salary; we have the only non-salaried legislature in the nation. And most of their work is handled in regular sessions of 30 and 60 days in alternating years, far shorter sessions than those of other legislatures.

Getting lawmakers to send voters legislation amending the New Mexico Constitution depends largely on pressure from constituents. At some point, voters must realize it’s time to modernize the Legislature, implementing processes that lead to better legislation and more accountable spending.

But simply paying lawmakers or expanding the time they legislate is not enough. Any new structure needs to look at transparency, staff support, session rules and funding capital outlay projects.

It’s time for the Legislative Council Service to analyze other states’ structures and come up with recommended best-practices models.

It’s well past time for lawmakers to acknowledge what many of their constituents have shared: The current system bars too many New Mexicans from serving in the Legislature, and rush jobs are a poor way to run a state.

The part-time, unpaid citizen Legislature envisioned by the drafters of the New Mexico Constitution more than a century ago today actually limits participation and encourages conflicts of interest. And the structure of our sessions stymies adequate vetting of real reforms.

— Albuquerque Journal