Bills, Bills, Bills

SACRAMENTO — An 80-page FBI affidavit has become must reading around the Capitol. The document was prepared as part of an investigation into government corruption. In clumsy prose, but delicious detail, it describes an “accommodating relationship” between Alan Robbins--then a state senator, now an admitted felon--and a prominent lobbyist named Clay Jackson.

“There were times,” goes one passage, “when Jackson wanted Robbins to help him get a bill passed out of a committee . . . with the understanding that the bill would die on the floor or in another legislative house. Jackson did this on occasion so that he could impress his clients.

“Likewise, there were times when Robbins wanted a bill that he authored or favored to get through a committee or one of the houses of the Legislature, and he would request Jackson not to oppose it. They would agree that the bill would eventually die. Robbins needed such assistance from Jackson so that he could impress his supporters or constituents.”

With that, we have our first and perhaps most provocative answer to today’s government-in-action quiz: Why is it that, in times of boom and bust, drought and flood, whether facing grotesque surpluses or billion-dollar deficits, the state Legislature feels obliged each session to crank out thousands upon thousands of new bills?

*

Since January, more than 3,000 pieces of legislation have been introduced by the 120 members of the Assembly and Senate. The bills cover everything from workers’ comp reform, to cremations fees, to carjacking, to neutered cats. There are bills to discourage criminals from wearing body armor, bills to provide tax breaks for certain computer companies, bills to advise President Clinton on the issue of gays in the military. Many bills.

Explanations for this legislative bounty range from the banal to sinister. As the affidavit suggests, some legislation--no one can say how much, because no one I spoke with pretends to read each and every bill--is introduced to grandstand. Lobbyists must justify their fees and expense accounts to clients. Legislators must justify their existence to constituents.

“The incentives all favor the introduction of more and more bills,” said state Sen. Tom Hayden, who’s been on the losing side of sporadic efforts to rein in legislative excess. “You can send out more press releases. You can create the appearance of being very busy. You can show you are on the side of constituents. You can raise money. There are no incentives for not writing bills.”

To be fair, some bills are straightforward attempts to tackle substantial problems. To be honest, bills in this noble category number about 100 each session. Many bills are merely mechanical, routine pieces of minor legislation required to resolve a problem back in the district. Conversely, some bills are written by special interests, for special interests. No one makes any bones about that.

Some bills are perceived to be devices for raising campaign contributions; passage is not as important as selecting an issue certain to stir the monied advocates. The longer debates last, the more money flows, the more everyone benefits. “A lot of what goes on here,” said one legislative aide, “is fat white guys pretending to hurt one another.”

Some bills are so-called spotter bills: sparsely worded instruments introduced simply to beat the March filing deadline and provide a vehicle for details to come later--perhaps when fewer people are paying attention. And some bills, many bills, are just wasted motion.

“It’s just doodling,” said one Sacramento veteran. “They all feel like they have got to have one of everything. You got to have your jobs bill, your stimulus package. You got to have your seniors bill. You got to have your crime bill. Your education bill. It’s like buying dishes, you got to have a whole set. Or else you look bad.”

*

Who gets hurt? The volume can create an image problem--as one aide put it, “we’re seen as fiddling while Rome burns.” Also, strange and sometimes nefarious things can occur in the chaos of the late session bill crunch; legislators must vote on bills they have not even read. And there are those who believe that, rather than processing thousands of nickel-and-dime bills each year--”the Assembly Line model,” said Hayden--more time should be devoted to debate, deliberation and oversight.

The prevailing attitude, however, seems to be that the bill count is no big deal. It’s just how things work here, and to ask about it is to expose your naivete. So I’m told.

Thus ends our short course on why the Legislature writes so many bills. Next: Why can’t the Legislature ever seem to get anything important done?