State Legislatures

The state legislator is the actualizer of civic representation. The sole individual responsible for initiating action representative of their constituency among a swamp of bureaucracy and seeming oftentimes a despotic autocracy. State legislators are not arbiters of objective truth, nor operators of self-interest; but representatives obligated to uphold the general welfare of society. But the bureaucracy bears an interest of its own in contemporary polity; its actions far removed from the needs of the people. This divide between government agenda and the constituent representation remains evident, with an increasing apparency in contemporary polity; thus summoning Christians to fill the cracks of darkness and civic distress with God’s Light. Through the actions and abilities of the citizens, morally resilient state legislators can be elected that will remain consistent no matter the influence of the Establishment that persistently strives to siphon inherent power from the citizenry.

Authors Ann O’M. Bowman and Richard C. Kearney note in their Tenth Edition of State and Local Government; oftentimes “[l]egislatures have their own dynamics, their own way of doing things,” (Bowman & Kearney, p. 148). The citizen must continue to be cognitive of his conditions. The legislator must work to represent the needs brought forth by their district; whilst negating the election of political operatives motivated by the prospect of self-enrichment and the attainment of power. As it is scribed in the New Testament by Peter, “[b]ut there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction,” (2 Peter 2:1; KJV). The same remains true today, as many seek to enact the narrative, precluding access to objective truth. Misinformation spewed from the federal government equates to demagoguery, as deception is a trait that ought not be found within a Constitutional Republic. Therefore the legislators job description remains essential; not only as a vital task within America’s Constitutional Republic, but to preclude the incurrence of tyranny.
Black’s Law Dictionary notes that the term Legislature is defined as, “[t]he branch of government responsible for making or changing laws. The federal government and most states have bicameral legislatures, usu. consisting of a house of representatives and a sentate” (Garner, B., p. 1083). Bryan Garner adds that a Legislator is “[s]omeone who makes laws within a given jurisdiction; a member of a legislative body,” (Garner, B., p. 1083). Garner notes that a Legislator is “[a]lso termed lawmaker,” (Garner, B., p. 1083). Bouvier Law Dictionary defines a legislator as, “[a]n individual member of a body that holds legislative powers of a government,” (Sheppard, S., p. 348). Bouvier expounds, citing its 1853 derivation; “in order to make good laws, it is necessary to understand those which are in force; the legislator ought, therefore to be thoroughly imbued with a knowledge of the laws of his country, their advantages and defects; to legislate without this previous knowledge is to attempt to make a beautiful piece of machinery with one’s eyes shut,” (Sheppard, S., p. 1608). Bouvier cites its derivation of the term Legislature to its 1853 definition, “[t]hat body of men in a state which has the power of making laws” (Sheppard, S., p. 1608).

A Legislator’s Job Description

A legislator is tasked with many responsibilities. The legislator must navigate through their imposed government limitations, whilst upholding their official responsibilities. As Ann Bowman notes, the duties of “[l]egislatures engage in three principal functions: policymaking, representation, and oversight,” (Bowman & Kearney, p. 137). Ann Bowman expounds on these three duties; writing, “[t]he first, policymaking, includes enacting laws and allocating funds. The second decade of the twenty-first century found legislators debating issues such as health care, public education, criminal justice, and immigration,” (Bowman & Kearney, p. 137). Legislatures are expected to engage in policymaking, influence the course of regulations, and steward the power of the purse. Citizens rely on their elected representatives to make their voices heard and influence the direction of policy geared towards the individual’s community. Bowman notes “[i]n their second function, legislators are expected to represent their constituents—the people who live in their districts—in two ways. At least in theory, they are expected to speak for their constituents in the legislative chamber—to do the will of the public in designing policy solutions,” (Bowman & Kearney, p. 137).
The roles legislators are tasked with include formulating fiscal policy on a national level, with their states and local communities in mind. This delicate balance means that every district ought to be balanced and clearly articulated in the consideration of fiscal policy. This includes State appropriations, therefore its important each district possesses a similar number of citizens. Bowman confirms that, “Legislators are elected from geographically based districts, with each district in a state containing approximately the same number of inhabitants, (Bowman & Kearney, p. 140). But, notes Bowman, “[u]nequal representation, or malapportionment, has characterized many legislative bodies. In the past, for example, some states allocated an equal number of senators to each county. (This system calls to mind the U.S. Senate, which has two senators per state.) Because counties vary in population size, some senators were representing ten or twenty times as many constituents as their colleagues were. Bowman adds one example that, “New Jersey offered one of the most extreme cases. In 1962, one county contained 49,000 residents and another had 924,000, yet each county was allotted one senator, and each senator had one vote in the senate,” (Bowman, & Kearney, p. 140). Therefore, the federal funding requested by each U.S. Representative on behalf of their constituency is not always equal to State representation; especially of those who oppose the policy.
Legislators are also responsible for creating statutes; but additional burdens placed upon the legislature decreases their capacity to address immediate problems within their constituency. Therefore, a majority of everyday laws are reliant on the common law system. Common law is an essential basis of foundational liberty, allowing the presupposition of per existing laws without the requirement of legislature to impose excessive statutes upon the population. Ann Bowman notes, that “State courts adjudicate (resolve disputes and administer justice) by interpreting state statutes, the state and federal constitutions, and common law. In developing and deciphering the common law, courts are concerned with the legal rules and expectations that have developed historically through the citizens’ custom, culture, and habits, and that have been given standing through the courts’ decisions rather than from statutes,” (Bowman & Kearney, p. 226).

Interagency Relationships

Relationship with the Bureaucracy

Representatives are expected to do more than represent the constituent, despite their name. Bowman adds that legislators “third function, oversight, is different from the policymaking and representation functions. Concerned that the laws they passed and the funds they allocated frequently did not produce the intended effect, lawmakers began to pay more attention to the performance of the state bureaucracy,” (Bowman & Kearney, p. 137). Elected members of Congress are expected to influence the regulation of bureaucracy that operates behind the scenes of the political operation. Oftentimes bureaucratic entities exploit their function, however in the context of politics—they are an unfortunate requirement. Without bureaucracy, the elected officials and the president would be overwhelmed with tasks, and likely unable to fulfill them. Thus, it is of extreme importance that the bureaucratic entity that exists behind the scenes is controlled, preventing an out-of-control “fourth branch” of government.

Internal Relationships. Bowman and Kearney note that as “[a] primary rule of legislative bodies is that you must ‘go along to get along,’ a phrase that emphasizes teamwork and paying your dues. Legislators who are on opposite sides of a bill to regulate horse racing might find themselves on the same side of a bill outlawing the use of cell phones while operating a motor vehicle. Yesterday’s opponent is today’s partner. For this reason, no one can afford to make bitter enemies in the legislature and expect to flourish,” (Bowman & Kearney, p. 149). This means two things: the first, (1) the U.S. government's legislature is controlled by the uniparty, whereby only those willing to make enemies with their political brethren will find themselves truly representing civic dissent as intended by their constituency; and the second (2) that every legislator's loyalty to their district remains contingent on a willingness to dissent against Congressional behavior on a national level. But legislators seeking Congressional tenure will spare no opportunity to fulfill the expectations of the uniparty; voting in accordance with the majority, ensuring their re-election and perpetual incumbency. Politicians are human; thus easily succumb to human weaknesses inherent in man; including greed, power, and self-interest. While these traits are a typical influence throughout the legislature; this is not the case with all legislators. Those who retain their moral compass throughout their incumbency will often face political persecution from the centralized cohort within the Establishment during reelection. But representation requires personal sacrifice. If not sacrifice by revenue, then the willingness to sacrifice representation and become subject to ridicule by the mainstream media, so long as an advocation for the needs of their district remains, over that of conforming to the will of career politicians and the permanent bureaucracy.

Despite the inefficacy of many state legislatures and their tendency to submit to internal coercion; citizens ought not judge the individual apart from their actions. Conversely, some members of the U.S. legislature strive to accurately represent their constituency, at any cost to the image shown by the media in the public square. Oftentimes, the concept of policies can be distorted by media to show a legislator in a negative light, should the oppose the Establishment’s unitary self-serving agenda. Further, seemingly innocuous bills can be disguised under a delicious piece of pork, whose temperature is contingent on the barrel it exists in; as it covers many other pieces of undercooked distasteful pieces of pork the public would reject with disgust if presented directly. Yet pork barrel legislation persists offering single issue voters an opportunity to further a legislative agenda. Therefore it is important that legislators reflect the interests of their constituents over their own, or the majoritarian bipartisan consensus. The legislator ought not reject national popular opinion, nor can he reject the interests of his local district. Incumbency advantage only gets the politician so far, they must appease their voters and stakeholders with some aspect of progress toward the declared outcome objectives within their local communities.

Among nefarious pol, there always exists a platform for redemption, through God’s mercy and grace. The citizen bears the obligation to dissent should tyranny attempt to manifest within the legislature. Elsewhere, the elected officials are expected to conduct oversight and filter the swamp of malevolency. The citizen must apply consistent resistance against tyranny; relying not only on the supremacy of the Constitution, but also to exercise individual autonomy within the jurisdiction of law. This includes civic disobedience, as experienced during the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus pandemic; whereby the constituency was tasked with rejecting the Establishment’s attempts to thwart Christianity and the concept of free-will. But “[l]egislators who cannot abide by the rules find it difficult to get along,” (Bowman & Kearney, p. 149).

Relationship with the Executive Branch

Conflict will arise between the governor and the legislature; “but it is not necessarily destructive,” (Bowman & Kearney, p. 156). Bowman writes this effect “is inevitable because both governors and legislators think that they know what is best for the state,” (Bowman & Kearney, p. 156). Therefore, it is important these entities are rooted in various influences. Similarity does not equate to better conductivity when actualizing policy. As “[a] governor and a legislature controlled by the same party do not necessarily make for easy interbranch relations either. Especially in states where the two parties are competitive, legislators are expected to support the policy initiatives of their party’s governor,” (Bowman & Kearney, p. 159).
Yet as witnessed by the constituency during instances of crises, “Governors have a media advantage over deliberative bodies such as a legislature. The governor is the visible symbol of state government and, as a single individual, fits into a media world of thirty-second sound bites,” (Bowman & Kearney, p. 159). But media exposure only advantage the incumbent politician so far. Ann Bowman notes that “[t]he legislature is not without its weapons. If the legislature can muster the votes, it can override a gubernatorial veto. In fact, new research shows that in states with term limited legislatures, the incidence of veto overrides is actually higher than it is in states that do not limit legislative terms,” (Bowman & Kearney, p. 159). Moreover, “some states have limited the governor’s power to initiate transfers of funds among executive branch agencies,” (Bowman & Kearney, p. 159). By these metrics it appears that term limited legislatures are more likely to represent the dissent of their constituency against policy, as they are less concerned with forming long term bonds with political opposition, for the sake of professional etiquette. In legislatures that lack an incumbency advantage, the legislator is far more likely to shift their focus in a light most favorable to their constituency, as to be remembered for achievement rather than facilitating persistent crises.

Legislative Obligations to Their Constituency

Constituent Service

Legislators are public servants. Constituent services are thus a required aspect of State Legislatures. Ann Bowman notes that “[a]s a general rule, states paying a more generous compensation typically demand more of a legislator’s time than do low-paying states,” Bowman & Kearney, p. 140). Additionally, “[l]awmakers in the most professionalized legislatures are paid more, devote more time to the job, and have far greater staff resources at their disposal than their counterparts in citizen legislatures,” (Bowman & Kearney, p. 154). Ann Bowman notes that constituent services were the traditional focus of each legislature, as legislative compensation originally was bound by U.S. Constitution. Thus, the modernization of the legislators acts as a “double edged sword,” as “legislators can vote themselves pay raises, and the public can turn around and vote them out of office for doing so,” (Bowman & Kearney, p. 140). Under these circumstances, man's propensity for depravity ensues within the legislature. Since the modernization of Congressional salaries has occurred, legislators have worked to remain in office, and bolster their funding for re-election; rather than find solutions to the problems plaguing the constituency they are tasked to represent.

Identification of State Priorities

Bowman & Kearney note that “Richard Nathan, a veteran observer of the states, argues that the key to increased government productivity is the empowerment of the governor;” thus the state’s priority ought to be on the governor, (Bowman & Kearney, p. 154). Richard Nathan’s theory proposes that the focus of each State ought to be on empowering the governor to ensure the highest level of State productivity. But State Supreme Courts base “their rulings in their own constitutions instead of basing them on the national constitution,” (Bowman & Kearney, p. 248). But, in accordance with Article VI’s Supremacy Clause, “when there is an irreconcilable conflict between state and federal laws, the latter prevails,” (Bowman & Kearney, p. 248). Thus, the American legislature must position itself to formulate and self-regulate a hierarchy that places instances of federal above the state’s priorities, whilst best representing their district in accordance with the will of their constituency.

Legislative Controls

The legislature’s “controls increase administrative accountability,” (Bowman & Kearney, p. 160). The controls of the legislator including, “legislative oversight committees, the postaudit function, and sunset laws [are] among the most effective bureaucratic controls available,” (Bowman & Kearney, p. 160). Another device, notes Bowman, is the “legislative investigation of an agency, an administrator, or a program, (Bowman & Kearney, p. 160). But authorities that strive to operate on their own autonomy, like the governor, often consider “many forms of legislative oversight are simply meddling and, as such, they undermine the separation of powers,” (Bowman & Kearney, p. 160).

Federal Funding. Federal funding is another obligation of the legislature. Congress can request appropriations annually through an omnibus bill; a federal budget approved by Congress and signed by the president before being ratified. Bowman adds that “[s]ince the early 1980s, legislatures have played a more active role in directing the flow of federal funds once they have reached the state,” (Bowman & Kearney, p. 160). Should legislators remain effective, “control of federal funds is necessary;” as [w]hen funding for a specific program dries up, it is the legislature’s responsibility to decide whether to replace it with state money,” (Bowman & Kearney, p. 160). Ann Bowman further notes “[r]evenues are the funds that governments have at their disposal. They are derived from taxes, fees and charges, and transfers from other levels of government,” (Bowman & Kearney, p. 45).

Evaluative Responsibilities. Legislatures bear the obligation to evaluate the activities of the bureaucracy. This includes reviews of conduct and compliance; as “[f]orty-seven state legislatures conduct reviews of administrative rules and regulations, but they vary in their methods,” (Bowman & Kearney, p. 160). To achieve this, legislators “may assign the review function to a special committee (such as a rule review committee) or to a specific legislative agency, or they may incorporate the review function in the budgetary process,” Bowman & Kearney, p. 160). Yet the authority of the legislature’s ability to review rules is a subjective one. Ann Bowman calls it a “true gray area of legislative-executive relations,” citing that “court rulings at both the national and state levels have found the most powerful of these actions, the legislative veto, to be an unconstitutional violation of the separation of powers,” (Bowman & Kearney, p. 160). Bowman offering an example, writes that “in 1997, the Missouri Supreme Court ruled that the legislature’s rule-review process was an unconstitutional intrusion into the functions of the executive branch,” (Bowman & Kearney, p. 160). As Ann Bowman further notes, “Legislative oversight involves four activities: policy and program evaluation, legislative review of administrative rules and regulations, sunset legislation, and review and control of federal funds received by the state,” (Bowman & Kearney, p. 160). From this duty, “[l]egislatures select auditors to keep an eye on state agencies and departments,” (Bowman & Kearney, p. 160). These auditors are expected to fulfill the task of “[evaluating] the performance of state programs as to their efficiency and effectiveness, a task sometimes known as the postaudit function,” (Bowman & Kearney, p. 160).

Sunset Legislation. Sunset Legislation is a term given to half the states; allowing for “[a]n agency [to] be saved from termination only through an overt renewal action in the legislature,” (Bowman & Kearney, p. 160). This allows bureaucratic agencies and their subagencies to consider their efficiency rather than make decisions solely on self-interest. Tenure ought not be offered to agencies, as transparent government requires evident improvements in national, state, and local governments; relaying these industrial progressions unto society and local communities. Sunset legislation is an effective means of scrutiny, especially as it concerns the existence of the bureaucracy itself. Cornell Legal Information Institute explains that the term “Sunset law,” is “also known as sunset provision;” and “a law that automatically terminates an agency, a law, or a government program, that fails to procure legislature approval beyond a fixed period of time,” (LII).
Ann Bowman notes that these “reviews evaluate the agency’s performance and its progress toward achieving its goals,” (Bowman & Kearney. p. 160). Sunset legislation was popular during the 1970s; thus “widely hailed as an effective tool for asserting legislative dominion over the executive branch,” (Bowman & Kearney, p. 160). Conversely, with nearly a half-century “of experience with the technique” it has built a mixed cohort of impassioned legislators; “and some states have repealed their sunset laws,” as “[a]gency reviews tend to be time-consuming and costly,” (Bowman & Kearney, p. 160). Therefore, the perceived authority of the legislature stands divided when its actions are placed in various jurisdictions, falling contingent on the external factors within different States.
As Luke the physician scribed a decree from the Lord, “[d]o not judge others, and you will not be judged. Do not condemn others, or it will all come back against you. Forgive others, and you will be forgiven,” (Luke 6:37; NLT). The disciple Peter scribes further, “[b]ut chiefly them that walk after the flesh in the lust of uncleanness, and despise government. Presumptuous are they, selfwilled, they are not afraid to speak evil of dignities. Whereas angels, which are greater in power and might, bring not railing accusation against them before the Lord,” (2 Peter 2:10-11; KJV). Thus, the acclaimed efficacy of the legislature’s evaluative responsibilities remains divided, depending on the source. Politicians tasked to best represent their constituency are likely to favor enhanced scrutiny over their seemingly autonomous counterparts. But politicians self-removed from the operating in a manner correlative with their legislature, consider civic representation a slippery slope unto a ‘majority rules’ pure democracy. Therefore, there must exist a balance between the representation of the constituency, oversight of unrepresentative political bodies, and control of the overlap in responsibility between the two groups holding contrasting positions.

Conclusion

In sum, the legislature is an important function of the federal system of government in America, allowing for civic representation in policy; while reigning in the bureaucracy, where possible. The legislators tasked with this duty are themselves citizens of the districts they are elected to represent. But once elected into office, these Representatives find themselves drawn to efforts of bipartisanship, both for their career and public image. Legislators opposed to the uniparty find themselves branded as outcasts by the media and their fellow political brethren. The core function of the legislature is to regulate money and make laws, independent of the president to divide the government. Yet the American legislature was crafted in a way that divides vertically the horizontal axis of powers, decentralized by the U.S. Constitution. The legislator must pay attention to the needs of their constituency, and consider what can be done to improve the quality of their local communities. But the influence and ambitions of politicians remain divided. Worse, with the federal bureaucracy, legislators must navigate coercive influence from special interest groups, whilst formulating a standard threshold for bureaucratic entities that cannot be crossed, to avoid the encroachment of the constituents it was sworn to represent.

---

Bibliography

Bowman, A. et al. (2018). State and Local Government. Cengage Publishing.

Capaldi, N. et al. (2011). The Two Narratives of Political Economy. Wiley. Kindle Edition.

Garner, B.A. (2021). Black's Law Dictionary, Eleventh Edition. St. Paul, MN: Thomson Reuters.

KJV. 2 Peter 2:1, 10-11

LII. (Accessed on September 4^th, 2024). Sunset Law. Wex. US Law. LII. Legal Information Institute. https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/sunset_law

NLT. Luke 6:37

Sheppard, S.M. (2012). The Wolters Kluwer Bouvier Law Dictionary; Desk Edition Volume 1: A-L. Wolters Kluwer: New York, NY.

Sheppard, S.M. (2012). The Wolters Kluwer Bouvier Law Dictionary; Quick Reference. Wolters Kluwer, Law & Business: New York, NY.