Weekly Opinion Editorial
by Steve Fair
Nebraska is the only state in the U.S.
that has a unicameral legislature.
Unicameral means there is only one chamber. There are 49 members of the Nebraska
legislature, who are referred to as Senators, even though this is no Senate. The members are elected non-partisan, which
means they do not have to declare their political Party affiliation. Nebraska was like the other states until
their U.S. Senator, George Norris, traveled to Australia and saw a unicameral
parliament at work in Queensland. Legend
has it that after Senator Norris retired he made it his mission in life to move
Nebraska from the two chamber system to unicameral. The ‘Unicameral,’ as it is referred to by
Cornhuskers, met for the first time in 1937.
Norris answered those who said the two chamber system provided checks
and balances with this quip: "They
say we have a system of checks and balances," Norris would say. "Well, we do. The politicians cash the
checks and the lobbyists keep the balances."
Some in Oklahoma agree with Norris and are
promoting the idea for Oklahoma to move to a unicameral body and send one half
of the state legislature packing.
Currently there are 101 members of the State House and 48 members of the
State Senate. Supporters of Unicameral
want to whittle the number of lawmakers down to 70. Advocates for unicameral concept say
eliminating half the legislators will
not only save money, but that Oklahoma government will be more efficient.
If Oklahoma were to move to a unicameral
legislature, first the people would have to approve it in a statewide
vote. That would require an initiative
petition drive, requiring 123,725 signatures of registered voters gathered in
ninety days. The unicameral is not a
good idea for the following reasons:
First, there is no such thing as a
non-partisan race or office. Every
candidate and elected official stands for something and while they sometimes
don’t like to wear the label, they should identify which side they are on. For the most part, Republicans believe in
smaller government and lower taxes, Democrats, larger government and more
taxes. If a liberal Democrat runs as a
conservative to get into office, but governs as a liberal, voters didn’t do
their job. Non-Partisan races are nothing
but opportunities for elected officials to hide their values and beliefs. Every race should be partisan- from Dog
Catcher to President, including the judiciary.
Second, reducing the number of state
legislators will drastically decrease the amount of influence each Oklahoman
will have with their local lawmaker.
Currently a House member represents 38,396 Okies. Under the unicameral proposal, a legislator
would represent 55,400. In 1975, an
Oklahoma legislator represented 27,475 Okies.
Today that number is 30% higher.
Accessibility to local legislators by average citizens is critical for
good government. Today's Oklahoma House members represent 12,000 more Oklahomans or 30% more than their 1975 counterparts. Instead of decreasing our representation, perhaps its time to add to the legislature.
Third, reducing the number of legislators
will increase the amount of influence lobbyists and bureaucrats will have on
Oklahoma government. Influence peddlers
would love to have less lawmakers to buy lunch for and give free tickets
to. Bureaucrats would love to have less
oversight over their agencies. Reducing
the number of legislators makes it more easier for them to influence the
process, increasing the possibility of waste and fraud.
Fourth, reducing the number of legislators
will simply not save that much money.
Sure, some monies would be saved by reducing the number of
representatives, but the savings would be little compared to the overall size
of the state budget. The savings would be less than .03% of the state budget- a minuscule amount.
Fifth and most important; legislation
tends to move very quickly in a unicameral.
That means bad legislation can be passed and signed into law before it has been properly vetted. A unicameral legislature provides little opportunity for revision of
bills. The single chamber could pass ill-considered bills with ‘unintended
consequences,' with no safeguard. Our
founders were wise in having a two chamber legislature. As
Will Rogers said, “the reason we have a Senate and House is because if the
House passes a dumb bill, the Senate can fix it.”
Oklahoma government does need to be
streamlined, but there are far more places in Oklahoma state government that
need cutting before we start trimming our representation.
No comments:
Post a Comment