Virtual File - Item

Text: If NCSL didn't exist, we would have to invent it" is a
phrase we hear often. So who did "invent" NCSL? How
has it changed? What are the milestones in its 25-year history?
How has NCSL become "the forum for America's
ideas"?

In the early 1970s, there were three competing national
organizations for state legislators. The National Legislative
Conference was founded by a group of legislative service
agency directors in 1948 to promote the coordination of
research and exchange of ideas a:bout legislative procedures,
organization and services. Working as a wing of the Council
of State Governments, NLC remained largely a staff organization
until the mid-1950s, when legislators began to par-
ticipate and assume leadership roles.

Legislative leaders from some of the larger states formed
the National Conference of State Legislative Leaders in
1959. They felt that the Council of State Governments was
dominated by governors and the National Legislative Conference
by staff. They wanted to focus on the role of legislative
leaders and to create an organization to rival the
National Governors' Association.

Rank and file legislators reacted to the formation of the
leaders' conference by establishing the National Society of
State Legislators in the early 1960s. The society was a relatively
small organization, but had particularly effective relations
with an association of private sector leaders who were
committed to the improvement of state legislatures.

In 1970-71 the three organizations, with the help of the
Citizens Conference on State Legislatures (a private, non-
profit organization committed to legislative improvement),
discussed a possible merger. These negotiations
eventually bogged down, but did result in greater cooperation
among the three organizations, especially in the
area of federal representation in Washington, D.C.
Merger talks revived in 1973-74 under the leadership of
Connecticut Speaker William Ratchford, Ohio Speaker
Charles Kurfess, Pennsylvania Speaker Herbert Fineman,
Florida Representative George Firestone, Tennessee Representative
Tom Jensen and staffers William Snodgrass of
Tennessee and George McManus of Pennsylvania.

These leaders commissioned the Eagleton Institute of
Politics under the direction of Alan Rosenthal to survey
legislators and staff about the need for a single national
organization and to make recommendations about the
structure of a merged organization.

In August 1974 the National Legislative Conference
and the National Society of State Legislators met in Albuquerque,
along with the executive committee of the
National Conference of State Legislative Leaders. The
three entities voted to dissolve their organizations and
form the National Conference of State Legislatures effective
Jan. 1, 1975. Speaker Kurfess characterized the
merger as "the most important step we can take to convince
the nation of the strength and the quality of state
legislatures."

Crucial to the success of the merger was the support of
the Council of State Governments, which granted
$500,000 to the new organization to support its first six
months of operations until it could obtain its own funds
from state appropriations. The Council of State Governments
was the home of four regional organizations of
state legislators, and this arrangement continued after the
merger of the national organizations.

The structure of NCSL today is a direct result of the key
issues and compromises in the merger negotiations of
1975. During the final stages, Maryland Senate President
Pro Tern Steny Hoyer (now a member of Congress) argued
effectively that the most fundamental powers of the organization
should reside in the annual meeting-the largest
and most democratic forum of the organization. As a

SO YOU THINK YOU KNOW NCSL

1. Who was the first woman officer of NCSL?
2. Which annual meeting had the largest attendance (and the most media coverage)?
3. What city has hosted the annual meeting most frequently?
4. Who was the first African American officer of NCSL?
5. Presidents Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush and Clinton have all spoken numerous
times at NCSL functions. However, only one has spoken in person at the annual
meeting during his term in office. Who, where and when?
6. What state has had the most officers of NCSL?
7. What three state capitals were the finalists for selection as the NCSL headquarters?
8. What were the original names of the Assembly on Federal Issues and the Assembly
on State Issues?
9. What are the voting rules for NCSL to take a policy position?
10. What major event in U.S. political history occurred one week before the 1974
annual meeting in Albuquerque at which the formation of NCSL was approved?
11. What former presidents of NCSL currently serve in Congress?
12. What are the names of the four people who have served as directors of NCSL's
Washington office?


result, annual meeting participants must approve the
NCSL budget, review its annual audit, elect its officers
and executive committee, and adopt all policy positions.
Initial NCSL annual meetings drew 2,000 to
2,500 participants. Attendance at the 1979 event in San
Francisco jumped to over 4,000, and participation of
6,000 legislators, legislative staff, private sector and
families has become routine in the 1990s.

Each of the original groups left legacies still present
in the structure of NCSL today. Legislative leaders
were concerned that leaders play a key role in the new
organization, so the bylaws specified that the president
and at least 10 members of the executive committee
be legislative leaders. NCSL regularly conducts
seminars and produces publications specifically for
leaders and maintains a Leaders' Center to respond to
their needs.

The National Legislative Conference played a critical
role in supporting the communication and professional
development needs of legislative staff, and
these services were continued and expanded under
NCSL. Three of the seven NCSL officers are staff, and
legislative staff are represented on the executive committee
in a ratio of two legislators to one staff person.
The original NCSL executive committee of 34 members
has grown to 60, but the 2:1 legislator-staff ratio
has remained constant. NCSL has 10 very active professional
societies of legislative staff operating under
its auspices.

As a carryover from the National Society of State Legislators,
NCSL established a close working relationship
with the State Government Affairs Council (SGAC), a
national organization of private sector leaders who
share NCSL's commitment to strengthening the legislative
institution and the states1 role in the federal system.

Today's Assembly on Federal Issues was an outgrowth
of an intergovernmental relations committee
of the National Legislative Conference and has been
in place virtually in its present form since the first
days of NCSL. AFI develops NCSL's policy positions
on federal issues and lobbies Congress and the
administration on behalf of the legislatures. The
Assembly on State Issues was founded in 1978 as a
state issues counterpart to AFI. ASI serves as a forum
for the exchange of ideas on state issues and generally
does not adopt policy positions.

NCSL established the Foundation for State Legislatures
in 1982 as a nonprofit, tax-exempt corporation that raises
money to support the objectives and special projects of
the conference. Its volunteer board of directors is composed
of corporate and union executives, as well as state
legislative leaders and senior legislative staff.

OFFICES AND STAFF

The first decision that confronted the
executive committee of the new National
Conference of State Legislatures was the
selection of an executive director. Earl S.
Mackey, one of two candidates from among
Earls. Mackey the directors of the predecessor organizations,
was chosen to run NCSL. Mackey had
previously served in the Missouri House of Representatives,
on the staff of the United States Senate and as an
association executive.

After hiring an executive director, the executive committee
conducted a national search to selecfa headquarters
city. After considering Washington, D.C., the committee
decided that a national organization of states
should be located in a state rather than the federal capital.
Denver was selected in a competition with nine other
cities because of its good air transportation, attractiveness
for recruiting staff and the presence of a number of other
national and regional organizations of state officials. The
Denver office has occupied space in four different downtown
locations since 1975.

The NCSL leadership was committed to a strong office
in Washington, D.C., to represent the interests of legislatures.
NCSL's Washington offices were located with the
National Governors' Association and the Council of State
Governments, and NCSL was immediately recognized as

WHO WAS WHO

By the middle of 1975, a number of staff who continue to serve as leaders of
NCSL today were working for the new organization. Karl Kurtz, current
director of state services, and Dick Merritt, director of the Intergovernmental
Health Policy Project, had worked for the National Legislative Conference and
joined the staff of the new organization. Executive Director Bill Pound and
Deputy Executive Director Carl Tubbesing came to work soon after the headquarters
opened in Denver in 1975. Jerry Sohns, director of the NCSL Foundation
for State Legislatures, was the first director of NCSL's Washington office. Other
staff with more than 20 years of service with NCSL include Doug Sacarto, Diane
Chaffin, Doug Webb and Larry Morandi in the Denver office and Joy Johnson
Wilson and Kathy Brennan-Wiggins in the Washington office.
Many NCSL staff have gone on to other distinguished positions in and out of
government. Among the more noteworthy are:
• Jim Edgar, NCSL's first director of state services, served as governor of Illinois
from 1990-98. Before that he was an Illinois representative, on Governor Jim
Thompson's staff and secretary of state.
• Two former NCSL staff members became directors of congressional budget
committees. John Callahan was director of the Senate Budget Committee under
Tennessee Senator James Sasser and now serves as assistant secretary for management
at the Department of Health and Human Services. Rick May served as
director of the House Budget Committee chaired by Ohio Representative John
Kasich. May now lobbies in Washington, D.C., for Davidson and Associates.
• Former NCSL executive director Earl Mackey is vice chancellor of the Ohio
Board of Regents.


part of the Big Seven organizations of state and local government
officials. In 1976 NCSL, CSG and NGA established
the Hall of the States in Washington as a home for
most of the major state government associations and
individual state offices.

The new executive director was charged with hiring
the rest of the staff. Several people who had worked for
the National Legislative Conference came to work for
NCSL. The staff numbered approximately 25 at the outset
in 1975. A year later it had grown to 54. Today the
staff includes 146 in Denver and 51 in Washington, D.C.

Mackey served for 12 years as NCSL's executive
director. William T. Pound succeeded
him in 1987 and continues in that role
today. Pound had worked for NCSL since
early in 1975 and had previously taught
political science at the University of Denver.

25 YEARS OF SERVICE TO YOU

For the past 25 years, we have been at your service: answering
your questions, giving you the kind of research you need to do
your job better, providing you with ideas for solving America's
problems. You've turned to us and in all our work, you come first.
Here's a snapshot of that work over the past quarter century.
• Number of state legislators we have served: 112,500
• Members of Congress we have lobbied: 7,400
• Presidential administrations we have lobbied: 7
• The number of times you've asked us for information, and we've
answered: 304,124, plus hundreds of thousands more that you
get answered from www.ncsl.org that we can't count
• The number of books, magazines and periodicals we've written
and published: 1,708
• The number of meetings we've put on: 500
• The attendance at those meetings: 175,000
• The number of issues we've lobbied: 1,250
• The number of topics covered in the magazine: 5,000
• The number of issues researched by NCSL: 21,000 • The total of research grants won on behalf of the states: $88
million
• The number of times we visited states to testify or support your
work on issues: 900
• Number of NCSL staff who have provided these services: 868
As we enter a new century, just as we have for the past 25 years, we
will be here to help you advance your ideas, bring you the latest
ideas, promote the exchange of ideas and take America's ideas to
Capitol Hill.


EXPANSION OF SERVICES

NCSL's flagship publication has always been State Legislatures magazine.
However, the one-color newsletter style of
the January 1975 issue bears little resemblance to NCSL's
modem magazine. State Legislat:ures began accepting advertising
in 1983 and moved to four-color printing in 1986.

From the outset, NCSL staff placed high priority on
prompt, accurate, bipartisan responses to information
requests. In the earliest days of the organization, a small
group of NCSL generalists would meet every Monday morning
to review all pending information requests and discuss
how to answer them. Those days are long gone. Information
requests now number several thousand per month, and
the staff are issue specialists.

In order to facilitate the exchange of information among
state legislatures and to reduce the number of questions
asked of NCSL, a small group of legislative staff directors
worked with NCSL in the late 1970s to develop an electronic
information exchange of legislative research reports
called LEGISNET. This was an important milestone in
NCSL's growth and was a very early use of on-line information
systems for exchange of policy information among the
states. In 1994 NCSL began making LEGISNET available
through an electronic bulletin board system that soon
evolved into a presence on the World Wide Web. Today,
over half a million legislative policy documents are accessible
to legislators and legislative staff via NCSLnet, NCSL's
Web site (www.ncsl.org).

NCSL made some fundamental budget decisions in 1975
to emphasize services in two areas: the management and
organization of the legislative institution and state fiscal
policy. These early decisions about the allocation of
resources are still present in the NCSL budget today. NCSL
emphasizes the legislative institution because it is unique in
this field, and improving the quality and effectiveness of
legislatures is one of its fundamental goals. State fiscal
policy has been a focus because the power of th~ purse
is the most fundamental legislative power, a:Qcl NGSL
believes it should be expert in this field.

NCSL was actively involved in providing training
and professional development for legislative staff from
the outset. The development of training and' technical
assistance programs fot legislators was facilitated by a
grant from the federal gml'ernment under the Intergov- .
ernmental Personnel Act beginning in 1976.

This grant, called Project TRAIN, provided resources
to allow NCSL to tailor training programs to the needs
of individual states and deliver services directly in state
capitals. After Project TRAIN funding ran out, NCSL
continued to provide specially tailored individual state
assistance programs.

Today, NCSL delivers more than 100 programs in ·
three-quarters of the states every year. In the 1990s, it
has moved into the international arena to assist emerging
democracies in strengthening their legislatures and
federal systems.

The National Legislative Conference brought a few
federal and foundation grants to NGSL in education
firnmce and science and technology. The energy crisis·
of the late 1970s caused the federal government to urge
states to invest more in alternative energy sources and
led to a great expansion of NCSL grant activity in the
areas of energy, natural resources and the environment.
NCSL's growing reputation in these policy areas.
helped to obtain grants in human services, health care
and criminal justice.

In the early 1980s the first Reagan administration
substantially reduced federal grants to state and local
government, and this led to the first significant.cutbacks
in NCSL funds and staffing. It also caused NCSL
to expand marketing of its products and services,
including advertising in the magazine and sale' of pub,
lications and exhibits at the annual meeting in order to
diversify funding sourees.

After the first Reagan administration, grants and
contracts gradually expanded again. In the early 1990s
grants· made up 42 percent of NCSL's funding and
allowed staff to specialize in specific policy areas in
ways that would not be possible without them. Almost
- all of these .grants were in the Denver office.

In 1996 the Intergovernmental Health Policy Project
and the Health Policy Tracking Service, formerly
housed at George Washington University, agreed to
transfer operations to NCSL in its Washington office.
This greatly expanded both NCSL services in health
care policy and the, size and mission of the Washington
office.

NCSL's core funding co.mes from the appropriations
that state legislatures make to support the organization.
This means that there is an annual test of the
value of this invention: whether or not the 50 states
provide the necessary operating funds. In NCSL's first
fiscal year, 1975-76, 46 states appropriated funds to
support the new organization. Within one year, 49
states were participating, and by 1977-78 all 50 states
were members. Since that time, state, territorial and
· commonwealth legislatures have confirmed the value
of NCSL every year by appropriating more than 95 percent
of the funds requested of them.

Working in partnership with the state legislatures,
NCSL has rnatured into a vital organization. As legislatures
have taken on, more and more responsibilities,
NCSL has grown in its ability to support their work.
Together NCSL and the state legislatures have become
the forum for America's ideas.

Then and Now

For 25 years NCSL has served the states. Some things have changed,
others haven't.

By Julie Lays

In some ways it was a different world in 1975
when NCSL was founded. America was in a
terrible recession. Unemployment reached an
average national high of 9 .2 percent. Six million
Americans were drawing unemployment compensation.
Spending for social services reached
an all-time high. Five of the 10 largest bankruptcies
in U.S. history occurred. Transportation,
railroads, airlines, truckers and banking were in
bad shape.

Educational systems were plagued by inflation,
teacher strikes and resistance to desegregation.
Mortgage rates rarely dipped under 9 percent. The
median income of American families was
$12,840. Twenty-two states established new taxes
or raised existing ones.

With OPEC controlling much of the world's
oil, gas prices rising and air pollution a concern,
Americans were buying small cars: popular were
the Ford Pinto, Chevy Chevette, AMC Pacer and
Plymouth Volare.

A federal campaign, Whip Inflation Now
(WIN), was catching the public's attention.

And IBM came out with a new SO-pound computer
that sold for less than $9,000, as compared
with the previous low of $35,000.

But in some ways the world was all too familiar.
Americans were debating many of the same
issues in 1975 as we are today, with a slightly different
twist.

• What to do about a rise in crime in the nation's
schools.
• Whether to further control the spread of guns,
especially "Saturday night specials."
• How to protect the environment and ozone
from strip mining and fluorocarbon propellant
aerosols.
• How to better track down deadbeat parents.
• What to do about prison overcrowding and
rioting, especially in the South.
• How to reform social services, particularly food
stamps.
• How to stop the rise in bombings, arson and
suburban crimes.
• How to eradicate the leading causes of death:
heart disease and cancer.
• How involved to get in the conflicts around the
world (Vietnam was still fresh on our minds): There
was fighting in Eritrea, Israel, Cambodia, Northern
Ireland, Lebanon, Rhodesia, Cyprus; coups in
Ecuador, Honduras, Peru, Bangladesh, Chad; independence
declared in Mozambique, Papua New
Guinea, Angola.

Although many of the issues remain the same,
state legislatures were different places in 1975. Democrats had
a majority in both houses of 3 7 state legislatures; today that
number is down to 20. (Republicans have 17, and 12 are split.)
There were 5,100 Democratic state lawmakers and 2,385
Republicans. Today there are 3,881 Democrats and 3,471
Republicans.

Twenty-five years ago, 2.7 percent of lawmakers said their
main occupation was full-time legislator, today 15 percent
are full-time. Legislators were making different salaries in
1975, too. In California the salary was $21,120, today it is
$99,000. In Nebraska it was $4,800, now it is $12,000. That
sounds good. But the trouble is that those 1999 dollars buy a
smaller basket of goods than the 1975 dollars in both states.
In New Hampshire they don't worry about those things,
though. Their salaries were $100 then and are $100 now.

There were 604 female lawmakers (8 percent) in 19 7 5
compared with 1,652 or 22.3 percent today. The average
legislator represented 28,549 people in 1975; today the
average is 36,682 (but now there is help with fax machines,
e-mail systems and cell phones not available 25 years ago).

And there were fewer than 27,000 staffers in 1975 compared
with more than 36,000 today.

The post-Watergate era had begun, and Gerald Ford was
president (even though both Squeaky Fromme and Sara Jane
Moore had tried to end that). It was the International
Women's Year. More than 1,300 delegates from 133 countries
attended the UN World Conference of the International
Women's Year in Mexico City.

Medical malpractice insurance was soaring, there was talk of
national health insurance, and no one had heard of AIDS.

James Hoffa disappeared. U.S. Supreme Court Justice
William 0. Douglas retired. Patricia Hearst was captured
after being kidnapped 19 months before. And Chiang KaiShek
died.

There were no executions in 1975 due to the 1972 high
court ruling that capital punishment was unconstitutional;
last year there were 68 executions and there have been 30
so far this year. Women comprised only 19 percent of the
arrests for serious crimes. (Today they make up 25 percent
of the total.)

Violence in the entertainment industry had not reached
the height it has today. Popular TV shows were "All in the
Family," "The Waltons," "M*A*S*H*," "Maude," "Sanford
and Son" and "The Six Million Dollar Man. 11 The "Star Trek"
craze was continuing. "Jaws" and "The Godfather, Part II"
were hit movies. John Denver and Elton John were pop stars.

And Sports stars were still sports stars (but with much
smaller salaries). Jack Niklaus dominated golf; Pele, soccer;
and Muhammad Ali, boxing. The Pittsburgh Steelers
defeated the Dallas Cowboys in Super Bowl X. The Cincinnati
Reds beat the Boston Red Sox in the World Series. And
the Golden State Warriors defeated the Washington Bullets
for the NBA championship.

America 25 years ago was the same as it is today-yet different.
It needed state legislatures to tackle the problems
facing it, just as it does today. The more things change ...

Staff Section Stories: A History

Staff, an important part of any legislature, are also an important part of NCSL.

By Jeanne Mejeur

Legislative staff have been an essential part of the establishment,
growth and direction of NCSL. Many legislative staff worked with
the National Legislative Conference and supported the merger of that
organization with the National Conference of State Legislative Leaders
and the National Society of State Legislators into what is now
NCSL. Legislative staff played a key role in the merger negotiations
in the early years of NCSL to ensure that the new organization
would serve as a source of support and professional development
for staff. They fought for participation with legislators
on the NCSL Executive Committee and the ability to govern
their own affairs.

Early on, legislative staff saw the importance of working
with their counterparts. Legislative staff before the
1960s were primarily generalists, performing many
different tasks. And most of them who were active
in the National Legislative Conference valued
meeting with all types of staffers. But as staffing
in legislatures grew more specialized, so did
the staff organizations.

The staff groups, called "sections,'
developed out of the need to share
information and learn from colleagues
in other states. Although
NCSL provides an umbrella of
support for the staff sections, it
has also greatly benefited from
their leadership, participation
and support.

Four of the staff sections
predate the founding
of NCSL, growing
out of the National
Legislative Conference. Their histories parallel the growth of NCSL.

American Society of Legislative Clerks and Secretaries (ASLCS) 1943

The American Society of Legislative Clerks and Secretaries was
NCSL's Jeanne Mejeur works with the Research and Committee Staff Section. Other NCSL
staff section liaisons also contributed to this article.
established in 1943, making it the oldest of NCSL's 10 staff sections.
Joseph A. Beek, secretary of the California Senate, and T. Thomas
Thatcher, clerk of the Michigan House, were the founding members
of the society, which began with 107 members. Beek served as president
for 25 years, beginning in 1943.

ASLCS has a number of milestones in its history. The society presented
its first seminar in 1967 in Albany, N.Y., with 16 members in attendance.
Its newsletter, The Legislative Administrator, was first published
in 1969. Bylaws and membership dues were adopted in 1972.
ASLCS published the first edition of its code of ethics in 1973
and had a logo designed in 1975. In 1993, ASLCS celebrated its
50th anniversary.

The society now has more than 350 members,
including principal clerks, secretaries and associate
members, and publishes a number of publications,
including The Legislative Administrator, Journal of
the American Society of Legislative Clerks and Secretaries,
ASLCS Roster and Reference Guide, International
Directory, and, in cooperation with
NCSL, Inside the Legislative Process and
Mason's Manual.

Legislative Research Librarians Staff Section (LRL) 1972

Legislative librarians began
gathering informally in 1968
at a National Legislative Conference
(NLC) meeting in
St. Louis, Mo., and published
their first directory
in 1971.

The group formally
organized as the Legislative Reference Library Services Section
at the 1972 meeting of NLC in New Orleans, and elected Maine librarian
Edith Hary as chair. Several current LRL members were among the
charter members of the staff section, including West Virginia's Mary
Del Cont, Louisiana's Suzanne Hughes and Irene Stone of California.

LRL published its first newsletter in 1977, adopted bylaws in 1978,
printed its first directory in booklet format in 1980 and presented its
first professional development seminar in 1989 in Denver
with 22 librarians in attendance.

The support the legislative librarians provided to NCSL
was invaluable in designing and maintaining LEGISNET,
the first on-line searchable database of legislative research
reports, program evaluations and articles. LRL currently
publishes the LRL News line and an annual Staff Contacts
Directory. The staff section also publishes Core Reference Collection
for Legislative Libraries, Survey of Automation in Legislative
Libraries, and Legislative Intent Research: A 5O-State
Guide.

National Legislative Services and Security Association (NLSSA) 1973

A group of legislative staff working together in 1973 with
the National Legislative Conference to produce a manual on
legislative security established the National Legislative Services
and Security Association. The group discovered common
needs for training in security measures and the benefits
of sharing information.

NLSSA was founded in 1973, and elected Tony Beard Sr.,
chief sergeant at arms for the California Assembly, as the
first president. Following in his father's footsteps, Tony
Beard Jr. now serves as the chief sergeant at arms for the California
Senate and was NLSSA president from 1987 to 1989.

The staff section established specific membership qualifications
and is one of only two NCSL staff sections to
charge dues. The group held its first training conference in
1974 in Sacramento, Calif., drawing 100 members from 33
states.

NLSSA continues to provide an annual training conference
and publishes a quarterly newsletter and an annual
directory of its members. In cooperation with NCSL, NLSSA
also produces Services and Security Inside the Legislature, a comprehensive
survey on state legislative security, and Protocol: A
Handbook for Legislative Staff, which offers information on
proper protocol and etiquette in handling important guests,
state funerals, flags and legislative ceremonies. The group
celebrated its 25th anniversary in 1998.

STAFF SECTION TRIVIA:

• ASLCS is the oldest staff section, founded in 1943.
• LINCS is the newest staff section, established in 1999.
• Leadership was the first staff section formed after the founding of NCSL.
• NLSSA is the smallest staff section, with 215 members.
• RACSS is the largest staff section, with 1,700 members.
• Four staff sections-ASLCS, LRL, NLSSA and NLPES-are older than NCSL
• Joseph A. Beek is the longest serving staff section officer, having served as
the president of ASLCS for 25 years beginning in 1943.
• The oldest newsletter is The Legislative Administrator, first published by
ASLCS in 1969.
• Alan Rosenthal was a speaker at the first professional development seminar
sponsored by the Leadership Staff Section.
• ASLCS had 16 members at its first professional development seminar in
1967.
• LRL members served as an integral part of LEGISNET, NCSL's online data
base.
• NLSSA members have written a book on legislative protocol and etiquette,
Protocol: A Handbook for Legislative Staff.
• Only two staff sections charge dues: ASLCS and NLSSA
• LSSS is the only national legal professional organization representing
legislative legal staff.
• Leadership is the' only staff section to have its professional development
seminar disrupted by the eruption of a volcano-Mt. Spur-at its meeting in
Anchorage, Alaska, in 1992.
• ASLCS is the only staff section to hold a meeting while under tsunami
warnings, at its professional development seminar in Monterey, Calif.,
in 1994.
• NALIT is the most recent staff section to begin holding an annual
professional development seminar.
• Four staff sections-LSSS, NALFO, NLPES and RACSS-jointly sponsor
NCSL's annual Skills Development Seminar.
• In 1993, ASLCS celebrated its 50th anniversary.
• In 1997, LRL celebrated its 25th anniversary.
• In 1998, NLSSA celebrated its 25th anniversary.
• The newest staff section, LINCS, will hold its first formal meeting at the
NCSL Annual Meeting in Indianapolis this summer.


National Legislative Program Evaluation Society (NLPES) 1974

The National Legislative Program Evaluation Society
traces its beginnings to the early 1970s, when many states
began forming legislative units to evaluate the efficiency
and effectiveness of government programs.

In 1974, legislative staff from Illinois, Connecticut, New
York, North Carolina, Minnesota, Mississippi, South Carolina,
Massachusetts, Montana and Virginia established the
Legislative Program Evaluation Section, in
affiliation with the Government Research
Association.

The group produced a newsletter, published
a report on the status' of program evaluation
in the states, and met at the Government
Research Association's annual meetings.

NLPES joined the National Conference of
State Legislatures as one of the original staff
sections when NCSL was formed in 1975.
Gerald Silliphant of New Jersey was elected
as the first chair. And two of the chairs from
the staff section's early years continue to be
involved today: Florida's John Turcotte,
who served as NLPES chair in 1978, and
Virginia's Philip Leone, who chaired the
staff section in 1981.

In the late 1970s, NLPES worked with the
Eagleton Institute of Politics at Rutgers University
to create a national clearinghouse of
legislative program evaluation reports. The
staff section held its first formal professional
training seminar in 1987, hosted by the Minnesota
legislative auditor's office. Before that
members met informally and held training
sessions for several years with the General
Accounting Office in Washington, D.C.

Now with more than 1,000 members,
NLPES offers an annual training conference
and continues to publish a newsletter, the
NLPES News. It also has a listserv and an
impressive Internet site that includes research
links and a nationwide database of published
legislative program evaluation reports.

Leadership Staff Section (LSS) 1975

The Leadership Staff Section was the first
to be organized after the establishment of
NCSL. Sue Bauman of Kansas, Patricia Briggs
of New York and Tim Campbell of Illinois
were instrumental in founding the Leadership
Staff Section, having realized the value
of sharing information with other staff who
worked for legislative leaders. Having laid the
groundwork in 1975, staff section status was
granted to "Leadership" at the NCSL Annual
Meeting in Kansas City, Mo., in 1976.

It was a busy year for Leadership. The staff
section adopted bylaws and elected its first
executive committee, chaired by Robert
Smartt of New Jersey and Maria Garcia of
Colorado as vice chair. The group also held
its first professional development seminar in
1976 in St. Paul, Minn., with Alan Rosenthal
as a featured speaker on a program that
included panels on leadership staff roles,
management techniques, and legislative
staff organization and development.

In 1981, Leadership began publishing a
newsletter, From the Offi.ce of the Leader, which
evolved into Leadership Staf(Notes in 1987. In
addition to the newsletter, LSS presents an
annual training conference for its members.

National Association of Legislative Fiscal Officers (NALFO) 1977

NALFO was created by members of the
Eastern Fiscal Officers Association, the Western
States Legislative Fiscal Officers Association,
the Mid-Western States Legislative Fiscal
Officers Association, and the Fiscal Affairs
and Government Operations Committee of
the Southern Legislative Conference, who
saw the need for a national organization representing
legislative fiscal staff.

Discussion about establishing NALFO began
in 1976 at the NCSL Annual Meeting in
Kansas City, Mo. The group formally adopted
bylaws at the 1977 NCSL Annual Meeting in
Detroit.

NALFO elected Maralyn Budke of New
Mexico as chair, Al Roberts of New York as
vice chair and Gerry Rankin of Iowa as secretary
for 1977, and held its first training seminar
that year. NALFO members contribute
to The Fiscal Link, an on-line newsletter, and
publish an annual NALFO directory, NALFO
Fiscal Offi.ce Salary survey, State Budget Actions
report and State Tax Actions report.

The group was one of the first staff sections
to use a listserv as a means of sharing information
among members. In 1998, NALFO
completed a staff training video developed
for use in orienting new staff to the work of a
legislative fiscal analyst.

National Association of Legislative Information Technology (NALIT) 1978

NALIT had its roots in the Legislative Information
Needs Committee that served as a
forum on technology for legislators, staff and
vendors in the mid-1970s, and the Legislative
Information System Task Force, which was
established by NCSL and included legislative
staff from Connecticut, Illinois, Iowa, Ohio,
Oregon, Washington and Wisconsin who had
an interest in technology issues.

At the 1977 NCSL Annual Meeting, legislative
computer staff laid the foundation for
what would become the Computer Applications
Staff Section. It was formally recognized

in 1978. Founding members included Washington's
Ed Miller and Illinois' Walt Kesselman,
who were among the few professional
information technology staff back then.

From fledgling technology issues in word
processing and document reproduction, legislatures
began considering computer networks,
chamber automation, fiscal analysis
systems, databases and bill drafting software.

Reflecting the enormous importance of
technology in support of the legislatures, the
staff section became the National Association
of Legislative Information Technology
in 1992. From a handful of staff, NALIT has
grown to more than 400 members and
boasts an interactive Web site, on-line directory
and listserv; publishes the NALIT
Newsletter; and presents an annual professional
development seminar.

Research and Committee Staff Section (RACSS) 1979

The impetus for what is now RACSS came
from legislative council and agency directors,
including Bonnie Reese of Wisconsin,
Serge Garrison of Iowa, Dave Johnston of
Ohio, Lyle Kyle of Colorado and Carl Frantz
of Connecticut, who had been meeting
informally at NCSL's meetings. RACSS was
formally established in 1979, as the Research
and Substantive Committee Staff Section.

Bylaws were adopted in 1979 and the staff
section began presenting programs at NCSL
meetings.

Originally established for research and
service agency managers, by 1987 staff section
officers, including Allan Green of Connecticut
and Joyce Honaker of Kentucky,
agreed that they should include nonmanagement
staff as well. As a result, RACSS
began a concentrated effort to reach out to
all legislative staff who are involved in
research or policy analysis, and in 1988,
changed its name to the Research and Committee
Staff Section.

Also in 1988, the staff section published
the first RACSS Newsletter, and in 1991 added
its annual Directory of Key Research Contacts.
In 1994, RACSS began presenting an annual
seminar for senior professional development.

At more than 1,700 members, RACSS is
the largest of NCSL's staff sections, and one
of the most diverse, with both partisan and
nonpartisan research staff, committee staff,
legislative attorneys, caucus staff and individual
member staff.


Legal Services Staff Section (LSSS) 1982

As the NCSL staff sections became more
specialized, legislative attorneys felt the need
to have a forum of their own.

Established in 1982 at the NCSL Annual
Meeting in Chicago, Ill., Legal Services
started with a core group of legislative attorneys
who had worked closely with NCSL,
including Becky Lennahan and Douglas
Brown, both of Colorado, William Russell of
Vermont, James Clodfelter of Tennessee and
Dennis Cooper of Washington. A long-time
staff section member, Bruce Feustel who was
with the Wisconsin Legislative Reference
Bureau and chair of Legal Services for 1993-
94, is now a senior fellow in NCSL's Legislative
Management program.

Legal Services is still the only national
legal professional organization dedicated to
legislative attorneys and paralegal staff. In
1987, Legal Services began publishing its
newsletter, The Legislative Lawyer, and has
since added an annual directory, Legal Services
Key Contacts.

Legal Services has long sponsored the
senior bill drafting seminar and recently
joined in the professional development seminars
of NLPES and RACSS, as a co-sponsor.
Legal Services supports a listserv for communication
among legislative legal staff and
maintains an active Web site. Legal Services
also provides extensive support to bill drafting
staff in emerging democracies.

Legislative Information and Communications Staff Section (LINCS) 1999

The genesis for NCSL's newest staff section
began in 1997 at the Public Information and
Media Relations seminar in Washington,
D.C., when four legislative staff articulated
the same ambition: to enhance and expand
the resources available to legislative communications
professionals.

Susan Swords and Penny Silletti from the
New Jersey Office of Legislative Services, and
Sheila McCant and Brenda Hodge from the
Louisiana House and Senate joined forces to
explore the creation of a staff section for legislative
public information staff.

Although NCSL had sponsored biannual
training seminars for communications staff
for a number of years, staff agreed there was
a need for ongoing support and formal information
exchange on a continuous basis.
The initiative took greater shape in late
spring 1998, when letters were received from
26 states in support of the idea. A staff sec-
tion mission statement and bylaws were
drafted and presented at the 1998 NCSL
Annual Meeting in Las Vegas. In January
1999, the NCSL Executive Committee
granted full approval to the new staff section
at its meeting in Louisiana.

LINCS is developing its home page on the
NCSL Web site and will continue to use its
newsletter, The Informant, as a primary means
of communication. The LINCS executive
committee will hold its first formal meeting
at the NCSL Annual Meeting in Indianapolis
with the Public Information and Media Relations
seminar to follow in the fall.

LOOKING AHEAD

As the staff sections continue to expand
the programs and services they provide for
their members, they also continue to help
shape the future of NCSL. Each of the 10
staff sections has two representatives on the
Legislative Staff Coordinating Committee
(LSCC), which serves as the guiding entity
for legislative staff activities and services at
NCSL. Through its committees and task
forces, the LSCC has developed products
such as the Model Code of Conduct for Legislative
Staff and the Model Policy for Appropriate
Use of The Internet, and promoted professional
development opportunities. Many
staff section members have gone on to
serve on NCSL's Executive Committee and
several have been elected as NCSL staff
chair, the highest legislative staff position
within NCSL.


THE STAFF NETWORKS

The Legislative Education Staff Network
provides a forum for legislative
staff with responsibility for education
policy and finance issues. Cosponsored
by NCSL and the Education Commission
of the States (ECS), activities include a
newsletter, an on-line discussion group,
a directory of legislative education staff
and regular seminars on education issues.

The Legislative Health Policy Staff Network
promotes the exchange of information
and ideas for legislators and legislative
staff interested in health policy. The
network sponsors an on-line discussion
group and meets in conjunction with
NCSL's Annual Meeting.



The Modern Legislature:

State legislatures have changed dramatically over the last 25 years
and will continue to do so in the new century ahead, adapting and evolving to meet our country's shifting needs

By William T. Pound

Each one is unique, yet they are all strikingly similar. Each has
diverse responsibilities, yet they all share common problems.
State legislatures-"the first branch of government." -are the most
revitalized and changed government institutions in America, and
today they have a vastly increased capacity to govem.

Yet they find themselves challenged as seldom before. Public
esteem and perceptions of the legislature, as well as of many other
institutions, fell steeply early in this decade. Although positive support
for legislatures has improved recently in tandem with the strong
U.S. economy, the public remains skeptical of public officials, Term
limits and other restrictions on the legislative b.ranch have spread in
recent years, in contrast with the preceding quarter cenmry when legislative
power was generally strengthened and constitutional restrictions
on legislatures were relaxed. The earlier changes were intended
to strengthen legislatures and make them more professional institutions.
Recent changes, however, are intended to roll back these
efforts.

The impact of term limits and of several recent constraints on the
authority of some legislatures to raise taxes or spend money will
probably not be fully felt for some years. Six states-California, Colorado,
Maine, Michigan, Missouri and Oregon-have directly felt the
effects of term limits. Loss of experienced members, rapid turnover
among leadership and increased numbers of bill introductions are all
in evidence, as ate legislators' changing relationships with staffs and
lobbyists.

In those states that allow it, the initiative process is being used to
bypass or restrict the legjslature. Not only has the number of initiafores
increased, but they also are creating momentum on issues in
states without them. Term limits, gambling and marijuana use for
medical ptirposes all gained public attention as initiatives, but were
soon being pushed as policy issues in legislatures throughout the
country.

Electronic and print media coverage of legislatures has also changed.
Television coverage has declined, as has newspaper coverage of the legislature
in some states. The pz:ess is likely today to be more critical in
its coverage and to apply ever higher standards to ethical issues.

Technological changes and the. new challenges of the .
glpbal economy also conftont legisiatures as. neV;~r before ..
Issues that were on~e matters of mostly locai rnncer'n
now must be dealt with at the state le'Vel. At the same
time, Congress, the admin.istration ·and ihternati~nal
agreements are ·bypassing some traditional areas. of state
authority. State regulatory authority ~nd re:venue systems ..
will face. dramatic challenge and change in. the. e·a:rly 21:st
century;

A TRANSFORMED INSTITUTION

It is easy to lose sight of how the modern state legisla-
ture has evolved and becom.e strong. Interested citizens,
legislative staff, lobbyists and even lawmakers themselves
may take the resources and capabilities that have fostered
this change for granted, but state legislatures in 1999
have progressed more than any other goveniment institution
over the past 35 years. In the 1950s, a national
study referred to state legislatures as "19th century institutions."
But by the early 1980s futurist John Naisbitt
called state and local governments "the most important
political entities in America." And events of the last
decade have only enhanced their role. Legislatures have
been transformed in a number of ways to make them
equal partners in state government.

The reapportionment revolution of the mid-1960s
was the catalyst for the modernization of state legislatures,
State and federal courts handed down the oneperson,
one-vote rule, requiting legislative districts to be
drawn with equal povulation. But the impetus for
change hatl already begun as early as the 1930s as legislatures
added staff and started doing their own budg.et
analyses. In: these earlier years, limits were removed on
session lengths, salaries, and the matters legislatures
could consider. In 1941 only four legislatures held
annual sessions. That number grew to 19 by 1962, to 35
in 1972 and to 43 today. Only Arkansas, Kentucky,
Montana, Nevada, North Dakota, Oregon and Texas
still have biennial sessions.

SESSION LENGTH: A REVERSAL IN ATTITUDE

During the 1960s and 1970s limits on legislative sessions
were eliminated or relaxed. This was an important
step in strengthening legislatures by giving them
more time to act on issues. Some of these changes continued
into recent decades. For example, Utah lengthened
its sessions by 10 days per biennium in 1984
when it changed from a 60-day first year and 20-day
second year system to 45 days per session. New Hampshire
went to annual sessions in 1985. However, in the
'80s and '90s we saw somewhat of a change as legislatures
reacted to public pressure concerning the time
spent in session. They tried to be more efficient and
looked for ways to reduce the length of sessions.

Alaska adopted a 120-day limit in 1984, replacing its
previously unlimited sessions. Colorado imposed a
limit of 120 days in 1988, and Nevada did so in 1998.
Washington set limits when it went from biennial to
annual sessions in 1981. Oklahoma in effect limited
sessions in 1989 by specifying that the Legislature
could meet only from February through May.
Louisiana in 1995 shortened and limited the scope of
its sessions. Movements to adopt more restrictive session
limits surface periodically, particularly in the
states with the longest sessions.

Other results of the reduction in constitutional
restrictions and the changing operating environment
of state legislatures are seen in the ability of 31 legislatures
to call themselves into special session. In the past
15 years, they've done so more frequently. Twelve state
legislatures may extend their sessions, giving them
more flexibility in getting work done.

Some states without constitutionally limited sessions
now recess subject to the call of the leadership
rather than to adjourn sine die. This allows the legislature
to act at any time and react immediately to
changing situations rather than handing over interim
authority entirely to the executive branch.

Several of the medium-sized states actually spend as
many days in session as do the full-time legislatures.
More than two-thirds of the legislatures were in session
more than 100 legislative days each biennium during
the 1980s and '90s. And full-time legislators are more
likely to spend considerable time in district offices and
place a high priority on service to constituents.

OCCUPATION: 'LEGISLATOR'

William Schneider, a fellow at the American Enterprise
Institute who studies politics and public opinion,
says that "professionalism makes it more difficult for
institutions to solve policy problems."

"The very things that a career legislator must do to
stay elected make it more difficult for the collective
body-the legislature-to solve problems," Schneider
says. "The problem, very simply, is that to most voters,
professionalism and politics don't mix.

"In fact, most Americans see them as antithetical,"
he says. "The very notion of a professional politician
strikes voters as an oxymoron."

Yet it is clear that the public wants and needs constituent
services and that legislators are taking on this
time-consuming role.

More legislators than ever define their occupation as
"legislator." Although the vast majority of lawmakers
combine legislative service with another vocation, the
percentage of legislators serving full time increased dramatically
from 3 percent in 1976 to 11 percent in 1986
to 14 percent in 1995. In 12 states it was the most common
profession members listed. In New York and
Pennsylvania more than three-quarters of the lawmakers
describe their occupation as "legislator," according
to an NCSL study.

Lawyer legislators exist in greatest numbers in the
South, but their numbers have dropped since the '70s.
Business owners and farmers have also seen their representation
in legislatures decrease. Both occupations
require a great deal of time, which can conflict with
the "ombudsman11 style of service demanded by constituents.
Women and minority representation continues
to increase each biennium. There are now
more than 1,600 women (22.3 percent-the highest
ever) and more than 800 minority members among
the country's 7,424 state legislators. Women and
minority legislators are starting to move into leadership
positions.

PAY MADE A DIFFERENCE

Adequate pay for legislators was an important element
in legislative modernization. Constitutional
restrictions on legislators' salaries were removed, and
today only six states set legislator salaries in their constitutions.
The others do so by statute, often with some
type of compensation commission to make binding or
advisory recommendations. States with salary limits tend
to provide the lowest levels of legislator pay.

Current salaries range from $100 per year in New
Hampshire to $99,000 in California. And in many states,
legislative leaders and committee chairs receive additional
pay. However, when adjusted for inflation, legislator
salaries have remained fairly flat over the past two
decades.

STRONGER COMMITTEES

Other contributions to the modernization of state legislatures
include stronger committee systems and procedures
and a greater emphasis on interim committee
activities. Committee strength varies from state to state,
but in most legislatures committees have greater substantive
expertise than in past years and are more influential
in shaping legislation. Most states have cut back
on the number of committees. In many legislative bodies
today, most bills are killed in committee, not on the
floor.

Money committees have become increasingly powerful
as legislatures have taken on more budget authority.
There has also been an increase in the tension between
money committees and the other standing committees
in legislatures.

Legislatures have also become more active during the
interim period between sessions. The effectiveness of
interim committees varies widely. A growing trend is to
use standing committees during the interim. In states
with strong interim or legislative council traditions,
interim committee bills often have a high rate of passage.
Even when no direct legislation results from interim
work, the interim may have a substantial educational
effect on subsequent legislative action.

Legislatures also override gubernatorial vetoes with
greater frequency than in past years. In part this is due to
veto sessions that provide the legislature greater opportunity
to consider the governor's action on bills. But in a
number of states, it is primarily due to increased independence
in the legislative branch and split partisan control
of the branches of government. A rise in legislatureexecutive
conflict is attributable to greater legislative
resistance to vetoes and the more aggressive role of the
modern legislature in budget policy.

These changes have been accompanied by continual
expansion of legislative capacity th
rough staffing, facilities
and information resources.

Legislative councils (first established in Kansas in
1933) allow legislatures to function during interim periods
and give them some permanent research and legal
capability independent of the executive branch or outside
resources. Likewise, specialized fiscal staffs allow legislatures
to develop their own budget analysis, independent
of the governor's office.

The permanent staff of state legislatures totals about
28,000 employees, with another 8,000 as temporary or
session staff. Nearly all the growth in staff has occurred
since 1969 with the development of specialized staff in
areas such as fiscal, legal services, auditing and program
evaluation, administrative rule review, media relations,
computer services, and committee staff. In recent years
the growth in legislative staff has leveled off, with most
of it occurring in caucus staff and staff for individual
legislators.

Legislative facilities have been improved in nearly
every state. At the beginning of legislative reform, few
states provided more to legislators than a desk on the
floor. Committee rooms were nonexistent or inadequate.
Legislatures have gradually moved other governmental
offices out of Capitol buildings, increasing the
space available to the legislature and providing offices
for legislators as well as modern committee and staff
facilities.

AND NOW, THE COMPUTER

In like manner, the information technology available
to legislatures has expanded steadily. Increased staff
resources have meant greater independent information
and support for state legislatures. In the 1950s most legislatures
were primarily dependent on the executive for
information and support services.

Today, computers and the Internet are transforming the
legislative process. Pennsylvania pioneered the idea of
having a separate computer staff for the legislature in
1967. Now, every state has an in-house computer staff,
ranging from two or three information "techies" in
smaller states to hundreds in some of the larger, full-time
legislatures.

In the 1980s many legislatures were using bill drafting,
bill status and statute retrieval systems that operated
on mainframe computers. There were less than a
handful of companies that supplied computerized
bill drafting and statute retrieval
programs, and most states relied on those
vendors to develop and maintain the systems.
Today legislatures have far more
options. Many use commercial, off-the-shelf
software that in-house staff or consultants
have customized for them. Many legislatures
have moved off mainframe computers.
Personal computers can be found everywhere
in Capitol buildings, including legislative
chambers and committee rooms.
Relatively few legislative staff had computers
in the 1980s; now most use PCs daily.
Even fewer legislators had computers until
recently. Now lawmakers in more than half
the states use a computer in the chamber,
and many have laptops that go with them
to committee rooms, district offices and
home.

In just the past few years, the Internet has
brought about a significant change in citizen
access to and involvement in the legislature.
Most legislators have e-mail addresses, and
many correspond directly with constituents
via e-mail. Citizens no longer have to travel
to the Capitol for copies of bills and bill status
reports. Every state now provides bills or
bill status on legislative Web sites, and, in 49
states, statutes are available on the Internet.
In at least six states, citizens can get free
automatic updates via the Internet for specific
bills they want to follow. At least 17
states have live audio or video coverage of
sessions so the public can tune in via computer.
Legislatures are also exploring other
innovative ways of interacting with citizens
online. Utah set up weekly "on-line chats"
between citizens and committee members,
and a Virginia joint committee recently
posted bill drafts on the Web for citizen
comment.

NEW THINGS TO DO

Over the past quarter century legislatures
have undertaken many new functions.
They became more aggressive in the oversight
of executive branch programs. Some
have created mechanisms for the review or
veto of administrative rules. Many have
established program evaluation units. Constituent
services, district offices and public
information efforts have been developed by
a number of legislatures, particularly in the
larger states.

The environment in which legislatures
function is changing as the relationships and
responsibilities of various governmental levels
change. With the responsibility for most
domestic programs becoming centered in
the states, lobbying pressures are increasing
and the cost of election campaigns is rapidly
rising. The number of registered lobbyists in
many states has more than doubled in the
past 10 years. And the costs of state legislative
election campaigns have risen to hundreds
of thousands of dollars in the larger
states, with proportionate increases in the
smaller states.

The role of the state legislator has not necessarily
become easier, despite the increased
resources. Programmatic, budget and constituent
demands will continue to grow. Legislators
and staff today, as the men and women
who served before them, bear a responsibility
as guardians of the legislative process and
institutions. Term limits, public skepticism
and a negative press have put increased pressure
on the institution. The challenge of the
next 25 years for state lawmakers is to make
representative government work in an everchanging
environment and renew public confidence
in representative institutions.


A WIDE VARIETY STILL EXISTS

Since the 1970s, state legislatures could be categorized into three groups.
• The first are those that are "professionalized," a group that includes highly
urbanized states with large populations, such as California, New York, Pennsylvani'a,
Mqssachusetts, Michigan, Ohio, Illinois, Wisconsin and New Jersey. These legislatures
tend to have higher compensation, unlimited time in session, large pro-fessional staffs and
members who define their occupation as legislator.
• The second category comprises about half the states and is best described as
transitional, having some characteristics of both the highly professionalized legisla-
tures and the more traditional citizen legislatures.
• The states in the third category (about 15) are termed traditional legislatures.
They are generally limited in session length, have lower legislator compensation
and small central staffs. These states also have higher turnover rates, and members
who do not see legislative service as .a career. These legislatures are found
primarily in New England and the less populous agricultural states of the Midwest
and West.
• The 1990s brought about what may become a fourth category of legislaturethosewith
term limits. Eighteen states throughout the country now have limits
on the time members can serve. As term limits become more widely implemented,
the differences between the legislatures with term limits and those with-
out will be significant.


Karl T. Kurtz, NCSL's director of state services, worked for the National
Legislative Conference before joining the NCSL staff in 1975.

Julie Lays is an assistant editor for State Legislatures.

William T. Pound is NCSL's executive director.