BY GREGORY A. HALL
The Cincinnati Enquirer
COVINGTON -- The first constitutional question in this year's Kentucky election asks Commonwealth voters whether the General Assembly should meet every year, joining every other state east of the Mississippi River.
The question, critics and proponents both say, is a matter of whether people trust their legislature.
Two leading Kentucky lawmakers debated the proposed constitutional amendment Friday at a Northern Kentucky Chamber of Commerce forum at the Metropolitan Club in Covington.
Specifically, the proposal would cut days from the legislative session during the off years when leaders are elected from 10 to five days. It would then add a 25-day session where anything could be considered.
House Speaker Jody Richards, a Bowling Green Democrat, said annual sessions would mean legislators could give proper oversight to state employees who write the administrative rules that regulate various industries.
He said he trusts legislators, the elected representatives of the people, over the "mischief-making minions buried in the bowels of the bureaucracy."
Senate Minority Floor Leader Dan Kelly, a Springfield Republican, said the proposal would provide the legislature with even more of an opportunity to create bad laws.
"I hope everyone's afraid of more government," he said.
On a basic level, proponents say the proposal would mean fewer costly special sessions to deal with problems the state faces outside of the 60 days every two years permitted by the state constitution. Critics say the amendment wouldn't mean any less time in Frankfort. In a historical context, the move for annual sessions plays into the legislature's independence from the executive branch that dates back to the late 1970s. Prior to that, the governor was a kingmaker. Now that Kentucky voters have decided to allow governors to serve two successive terms for the first time in modern history, the executive branch stands to be stronger.
Historian Lowell Harrison said the current debate over annual sessions mirrors the reasons Kentuckians put an end to them in the 1850 and 1891 constitutions.
In the state's first two constitutions, the legislature met every year, according to a Legislative Research Commission report. The 1850 constitution set legislative sessions at 60 days every other year. An amendment allowed the General Assembly to extend the session if two-thirds of the legislators agreed.
As the extension became the rule, the current 1891 constitution capped the session at 60 days.
"I think it was simply because of the belief that the less the legislature legislated the better off the state would be," Mr. Harrison said. " . . . I notice that cropping up again now."
Biennial sessions were the norm for most states as late as the 1940s, the report says. Now Kentucky is one of only seven states that meet every other year.
"I think the system of annual sessions is a better way," Mr. Richards said, comparing it to the car over the horse and buggy and air conditioning instead of opening the window.
"This model would give tighter rein over the bureaucrats," he said.
Oversight of the bureaucrats would mean the legislature would be changing all the industry regulations all the time, Mr. Kelly said.
While Mr. Richards said the extra time is needed to right those administrators' wrongs, Mr. Kelly said most businesses don't mind regulations so long as they don't change all the time.
"We would be changing the rules so frequently it would add to the problem," he said. "It really is an invasion of the executive branch of government."
Until Gov. John Y. Brown Jr.'s administration, governors dictated who would be the legislative leaders and what bills would be passed. Since that time the legislature has become stronger.
Now the governor's office stands to be stronger thanks to the constitutional amendment passed several years ago that gives Gov. Paul Patton the chance for re-election. Letting the legislature meet every year would help balance that, Mr. Richards said.
"This is not a power grab on the part of the General Assembly," he said.
He said he remembers hearing two things in college classes that were needed to improve the state: gubernatorial succession and annual sessions of the legislature.
"I think both of these are progressive moves for Kentucky," he said. "And I think that would preserve a balance between the three branches of government."
Mr. Kelly said the governor's ability to serve a second, consecutive term won't destroy the recent power balance.
"I think that we have a pretty good balance now," he said. "I think this would distort it the other way (toward the legislature)."
The current system has led to 15 special sessions in the last 10 years, Mr. Richards said. Allowing annual sessions would cut down on that and mean fewer legislative days a year. Governors could wait for the annual session, rather than calling a special one mid-year. "This is not a wild and crazy idea," he said. "It's not reinventing the wheel."
Annual sessions would mean more time in Frankfort and government by committee, Mr. Kelly said.
"There was a good reason," he said, "why we had biennial sessions."
