Yesterday, I wrote a blog post looking at some of the bills that the Education Committee of the Connecticut General Assembly is considering this year. Today, I went with Kim to a meeting of political activists and thought I should look to see what bills the Government Administrations and Elections (GAE) Committee is considering.

Before I go to far into this, I want to note a few things. Kim works for Common Cause as a senior organizer and as such is a paid lobbyist on their behalf. Common Cause “remains committed to honest, open and accountable government, as well as encouraging citizen participation in democracy.” As such, they have a keen interest in many of the bills before the GAE.

I, too, have a keen interest in encouraging citizen participation and I suspect that in many cases my views are likely to be similar to those of Kim and of Common Cause, but I want to make it clear that these are my personal views.

With that in mind, let’s look at some of the bills and my thoughts about whether or not they encourage citizen participation.

Election Day Registration

Bill 5012: That the joint standing committee on government administration and elections conduct a study on the need to expand early voting in order to minimize lines at polling places on election day.

Election Day Registration is a key issue for Common Cause, CT this year. When I initially heard of this bill, I thought it would be a good idea. However, this has been studied enough. It is time to start moving.

Bill 5082 An Act Concerning Election Day Registration

Typically, I’ve been including the text of the bills, but this is a long bill talking about the conditions in which people could register to vote on election day. We can, and should, argue about these details to make sure that it is the best possible bill, but on first glance it looks like a very good bill that should be supported.

Bill 5083: That the general statutes be amended to require all college and university introductory packets that are sent out to students who are about to enroll to include mail-in voter registration forms.

While I would like to see us move away from unnecessary paper, I think it is more important to facilitate the participation of all citizens in our electoral process and this sounds like a good way to do it.

Absentee Ballots and Early Voting

There are several proposed bills to address Absentee Ballots and Early Voting.

5833 That section 9-135 of the general statutes be amended to permit voting by absentee ballot regardless of the reason why the elector is unable to appear at the polling place.

5386 That the Constitution of the State be amended to remove the provisions that prevent state law from expanding the purposes for which voters may vote by absentee ballot.

5375: That the state constitution be amended to allow additional reasons for early voting by absentee ballot.

5013: That the Constitution of the state and the general statutes be amended to authorize the use of absentee ballots for any reason.

5170: That the general statutes be amended to authorize the use of absentee ballots, for purposes of convenience, when voting in a town referendum.

Each of these bills seems to be trying to do pretty much the same thing and I think they are great. I’ll leave it to the legislators to figure out the best way to do these.

5831: That the general statutes be amended to provide permanent absentee ballot status to voters who are permanently disabled.

This bill seems like something that ought to already be the case. Since it appears not to be, we should get that fixed as soon as possible.

Citizens’ Election Program

5008: That the general statutes be amended to provide that no value shall be attached to any materials used in a prior election whenever the opponent of the incumbent is not a participating candidate under the Citizens' Election Program.

I have mixed feelings about this. I think it is a great idea to reuse campaign material wherever possible, including recycling the frames for lawn signs, and so on. I also like the stated goal of trying to make it a more level playing field.

With 78% of candidates participating in the program this time around, a number I hope to see grow over the years, I don’t expect this to be a big issue. I also see a downside in that it favors people who have run in the past that have old materials to use.

5014: That section 9-705 of the general statutes be amended to reduce the amount of the grant that a participating candidate is eligible to receive under the Citizens' Election Program by twenty-five per cent.

I’m curious about how much people really used. My understanding is that it varies based on how competitive the race is, what the cost of media in the district is and numerous other factors. I’m not sure that an across the boards 25% cut is a good idea, but I would love to get more information about the costs and what a better number should be.

In addition, it seems like the value of the grants should be adjusted for inflation, or perhaps even deflation.

Another bill, 5366 proposes a different formula for the changes and should be given the same consideration as bill 5014.

5015: That the constitution of the state and the general statutes be amended to increase the term of office for members of the General Assembly from two years to four years. Additionally, the election of such members shall be staggered to have one-half of the members of each chamber of the General Assembly elected at each general election.

Bill 5383 suggests pretty much the same thing. I put these in the CEP section since part of the justification is to reduce the costs of the program. Yeah, reducing the costs is a good thing. However, I like to have frequent elections to keep candidates accountable. I’m leaning against these.

Municipal Websites

This is an important issue to me. As I understand things, in a previous session, the legislature passed a bill requiring the timely posting of agendas and minutes of public agency meetings on town websites for towns that have websites.

I’ve been told that some towns view this as a burdensome unfunded mandate and are proposing shutting town their town websites so they don’t have to comply. I think this is very short sighted of the towns. That said, ways to encourage towns to post agendas and minutes of public agency meetings in as timely a manner as possible seems like a good thing.

A related issue is whether or not towns should be allowed to consider posting notices on websites in lieu of placing notices in local papers.

5009: That section 1-225 of the general statutes be amended to provide towns with a fourteen-day period in which to post the minutes from meetings of their public agencies on the town's web site.

I don’t know how many days the new regulation calls for. I think it is seven. Is stretching things out to fourteen days a good thing? Well, if it gets more minutes online, it probably is, although I do hope towns will work to get their minutes up as quickly as possible.

5214:That section 1-2 of the general statutes be amended to provide that any provision of the general statutes, the special acts or the charter of any municipality that requires the insertion of an advertisement of a legal notice in a daily newspaper shall be construed to allow such notice to be posted on the web site of the municipality.

This is another nail in the coffin for local newspapers. As something that will further lead to the demise of local newspapers, I’m disinclined to support it. I could also make the arguments about digital divide and not everyone being online. Yet all in all it seems like a reasonable bill. I like to see more stuff being put online.

5218:That section 1-225 of the general statutes be amended to delay the implementation of posting required municipal information on web sites until on or after July 1, 2012.

I find it interesting that 5218 is proposed by the same people that proposed 5214. I opposed 5218. Perhaps linking them makes sense. The only municipalities that can take advantage of 5214 are those that are already complying with the posting requirements that 5218 seeks to delay.

Bills 5368 and 5384 are pretty much the same thing is bill 5218.

5365: That section 1-225 of the general statutes be amended to eliminate the mandate on towns requiring the posting of minutes and agendas of public agency meetings on town web sites.

Should we give towns more leeway, give them two more years to implement the posting of minutes and agendas on town websites, or just do away with it. Bill 5365 is the worst solution of all and should firmly be opposed. Bill 5379 is essentially the same bill and should likewise be opposed.

One other bill that tries to tie all of this together is
5371:That section 1-225 of the general statutes be amended to (1) delay implementation of the requirement that towns post notices on the town web site, (2) authorize towns that comply with Freedom of Information requirements to post minutes on its web site not more than fourteen days after a meeting, (3) eliminate the requirement to post special meeting notices within twenty-four hours, and (4) provide that notices be posted only on web sites used for official business.

This takes a bad idea and really jumbles it up. For the delay, it doesn’t even say how long the delay should be. Nice try, but just say no.

Registrars

5169:That section 9-190 of the general statutes, concerning registrars of voters, be amended to eliminate the provision authorizing towns that are divided into two voting districts to have two registrars of voters for each such voting district.

I don’t know the details of the law, but this seems a bit suspect to me. Are towns authorized to have more then two registrars or required to have more than two registrars if they have two voting districts? If they aren’t required to do so, and only authorized, why not leave it up to the town to determine the best way of registering voters in a town?

5226:That the general statutes be amended to allow local registrars of voters to determine the number of polling places required for a primary.

I don’t know how the number of polling places is currently determined. Generally speaking, I think it makes sense for the local registrars to determine the number of polling places, provided it does not unduly make it more difficult for people to vote which could reduce participation.

Other issues

5016: To move towards implementing the Interstate National Compact regarding a national popular vote for the election of the President, rather than the electoral college system.

Here, I posted the statement of purpose instead of the text of the bill, since the bill is long and complicated. This is also a complicated issue which has been discussed elsewhere. I think we should be moving in this direction, I’m just not sure the best way to get there.

5081:To require that the Insurance Commissioner be a state-wide elected official.
(Again, just the statement of purpose). Sounds like a good idea. I’m curious about opposition to the idea.

5010: That the general statutes be amended to establish an Office of Inspector General.

Sounds like a good idea to try and “combat waste, fraud and inefficiency in state government”. One would hope that it would save more than it costs to implement. That said, I’d be interesting in hearing other ideas on how to combat waste, fraud and inefficiency in state government.

5011: That the general statutes be amended to provide that any materials used in a prior election be valued at five per cent of the fair market value for such materials.

Five percent seems awfully low and it seems like this favors people who have run in the past. I’m not sure I think this is a good idea.

5055: That the general statutes be amended to prohibit the former executive director of any state commission or a staff member of any such state commission from serving as a member of such commission for a specified period of time.

I would like to know what period of time, and how much of a problem we currently have. I can see arguments for either side.

5113:That section 49-41 of the general statutes be amended to increase the amount of the surety bond required by contractors in contracts for public buildings and other public works to one million dollars more than the amount of the contract.

Again, sounds like a good idea. I can see objections about it costing more for the additional bonding, but it seems like it is probably money well spent. I’m curious about if there have been issues of contractors running into difficulties and not having bonds large enough.

5166:That section 2-46 of the general statutes be amended to provide that a chairperson of a General Assembly committee may not issue a subpoena to compel the attendance and testimony of a witness before said committee unless a majority of the members of the committee who are present vote in favor of issuing the subpoena.

The purpose of this bill is to “prevent abuse of subpoena power by committee chairs”. Has subpoena power been abused? Is this the best way to address such abuse if it exists? I hate to see power abused, but I suspect this is a check that isn’t really needed.

5367:That the general statutes be amended to establish an Office of the Ombudsmen, within the Attorney General's office, for condominium disputes between condominium owners and their associations.

No big opinion on this. Again, I don’t know the scope of the problems and whether such an office is really needed.

5167:That the general statutes be amended to authorize municipalities to acquire abandoned cemeteries provided the municipality exercises due diligence to identify the owners of the cemetery or unoccupied lots or grave sites, and to require the municipality to maintain the characteristics of the cemetery and not make any change to use of the land or transfer title to the property.

Are municipalities currently prohibited from acquiring abandoned cemeteries? If so, then this seems like a good idea. Otherwise I don’t see the purpose.

5168:That the general statutes be amended to establish August twenty-third of each year as Missing Persons Day to raise awareness of the plight of the families of state citizens who have been reported as missing.

I don’t see the harm in this. However, I don’t see it really doing much to raise awareness either.

5370:That the general statutes be amended to require all future state funded projects that include plantings to require one-fifth of all said plantings to be mountain laurel.

Nice sentiment, but doesn’t really seem like a good idea. I would prefer that those designing projects come up with appropriate plantings. I could go off on arguing for planting more shade trees as part of energy conservation, more varied plants to support bio-diversity etc.

5385:That chapter 33 of the general statutes be amended to designate the ballroom polka as the official state polka.

Okay. It is getting late. I don’t have strong opinions about which polka should be the official state polka. Where I hear the word polka, I usually think of the Beer Barrel Polka. However, They Might Be Giants Fans might think of the Famous Polka

The famous person wears the same size water skis as me
She's got three cars, as many years I've lived in this city
Her hair is blond and mine is brown, they both start with a B
But when the phone inside her rib cage rings it's not for me
But when the phone inside her rib cage rings it's not for me
Hey

So, there you have some reflections on some of the bills that are being considered by the Government Administrations and Elections Committee of the Connecticut General Assembly. I’m sure that our representatives will do a good job in representing us on many of the issues raised, but as I noted at the top, a key issue is to support citizen participation, and simply reading and thinking about bills being considered in the state legislature is a good start.

So, what state legislative bills matter to you?