Point of View
Palm Beach Post
By: Robert McKnight
June 3, 2016
Legislature was public service oriented; should be again
It is a strange feeling to have been a member of the Florida Legislature 40 years ago, and watch the process today. The people involved are really the same: Most are sincere about public service. Most take pride in the representation of their constituents.
But I often hear complaints; e.g. “They don’t reach across the aisle anymore”; and “All of them are mean-spirited.” The criticism seems valid.
So what happened? The process of lawmaking seems to have changed the governance model. The model I worked within was based on characteristics such as respect for colleagues; your word is your bond; always seek bipartisanship; use the expertise of the staff; respect the opinions of lobbyists and the public; obey the rules of the chamber.
These characteristics are in short supply today. It is not the individuals involved but the process, and that starts with the culture of the time. The 1970s and 1980s were a special time in Florida politics. The participants included Gov. Reubin Askew, Senate President Mallory Horne and Gov. Bob Graham.
It was considered an honor to serve in government then. It was generally a theme of give, rather than take and keep all you can.
The 1960 Census and state constitution changes in 1968 forced many of the traditional “Pork Chop Gang” out of office, replaced by urban-oriented legislators.
In the 1980s, changes were introduced to help minorities. Grass-roots organizations formed to demand changes. Then came the Internet, and the checks and balances by the press became diluted. And courts ruled that there were no limits to financial participation in government.
Some might question whether lawmaking has really changed as much as I suggest. Here’s an example: public education.
Public education then: I was in the Senate Appropriations Committee meeting in 1979 when Chairman Harry Johnston interrupted to welcome a visitor — Senate President Phil Lewis. Lewis said he understood the committee had put his name on an appropriation for a school in his district. He asked that his name and the appropriation be removed because they had not gone through the normal process. The removal was made unanimously.
Now: A few years ago, a state university was included in the Senate appropriations bill, without any staff or agency recommendations, at the request of then-Chairman J.D. Alexander. It was to be in his home district. The press illuminated the conflict, but the members and Gov. Rick Scott saw nothing wrong, and approved it.
The individuals involved with the “now” example probably did not see anything wrong with their decisions — based on the current culture. The culture needs to revert back.
ROBERT W. MCKNIGHT
TALLAHASSEE
No comments:
Post a Comment