Back in January, this column predicted that I would be unhappy with the legislative session. I was spot on.
That’s because I always want at least a little systematic change based in constitutional amendments. But the Legislature likes to play around the edges and make changes through the flawed system they’re used to.
For example, my favorite proposed constitutional amendment was to have a regular 60-day session every year, eliminating the 30-day budget sessions in even years. The Legislature didn’t get around to that because there wasn’t enough time in the short session.
Another of my favorite amendment proposals was to allow legislative salaries and to create a commission to set them. They didn’t vote to pay themselves because they weren’t paid and didn’t value their own work. We’ll continue to get what we pay for.
And so on. What actually happened is that many interesting constitutional amendments moved through one house and died in the other. Joint resolutions generally start in one house, go through two committees and finally to a vote. They then move to two committees and a vote in the other house.
My favorite amendments passed their two committees with favorable votes, but weren’t pushed to the floor or to the other house by legislative leaders. There was plenty of time, but no will. Contrast that with the two constitutional amendments that we will vote on in November. Legislative leaders sent them through promptly. It’s a mystery to outsiders why some things move and others don’t.
One amendment allows counties to set salaries for their commissioners. Currently, the state Legislature categorizes counties by size and sets commissioner salaries accordingly.
I agree that counties should set their commission salaries, but why did the authors of the constitution ever think legislators would know more about counties than the counties themselves? And why did it take 112 years to propose a fix? Legislators don’t get credit for stopping being stupid.
The other amendment is a minor reform to the Appellate Judges Nominating Commission. I doubt 1 in 10 voters knows this commission exists, much less that the dean of the University of New Mexico School of Law is the chair. The reform is to let the dean delegate a qualified alternate as chair. Is that something you want to vote on? Well, it will be on the ballot, ready or not.
The New Mexico Constitution, like many state constitutions, has a lot of unnecessary detail. The constitution should probably just say that there shall be an Appellate Judges Nominating Commission, with the form of the commission determined by law. You shouldn’t need a statewide vote for trivial reforms.
That’s why I’m angry that the Legislature fixed trivia while ignoring systemic problems. But what specific problems did they fix with their unfixed system? Legislators seemed self-satisfied during their ceremonies and awards on the last day of the session. I wish they kept a timer on all the ceremonial stuff and didn’t count it against the 30-day limit. But then the session might last twice as long.
Republicans were mostly happy to have stopped things from happening, while Democrats were happy with some modest accomplishments. They did pass a budget based on a record surplus. I suppose that’s worth celebrating, without looking too close at what’s in it.
There were several proposals to increase regulation of the oil and gas industry. That’s the industry responsible for the surplus. Apparently, legislators don’t want to kill the golden goose, but the proposed reforms were small in cost and significant in benefit to an industry with high profit. The environment would be safer for people who work in the industry or live near it. Reasonable reforms were affordable, but all of these died.
The governor proposed many reforms related to guns and violence. Only a couple of gun reforms passed. I always assumed it was illegal to pack heat to the voting booth. It wasn’t, but it is now. The governor has said she might call a special session to act on her public safety bills. Good. If I were governor, there would be a special session every year to deal with the bills that never got to a vote. That’s why I’m not governor.
The governor has until today to sign, veto or ignore bills, or to veto line items. If she kills some bills by ignoring them (called a pocket veto), legislators may regret not working harder on a proposed amendment that would have eliminated pocket vetoes. It would serve them right.
We could go on and on with what passed and what didn’t. Some good things passed and some bad things were stopped, and vice versa. We’ll be better able to evaluate when the dust clears.
