Legislatures of The Future: Implications of Change

i
Legislatures of the Future: Implications of Change

A Report of the Task Force on Legislatures of the Future of the Legislative Staff Coordinating Committee
William T. Pound, Executive Director 1560 Broadway, Suite 700 Denver, Colorado 80202 (303) 830-2200 444 North Capitol Street, N.W., Suite 515 Washington, D.C. 20001 (202) 624-5400
July 2000
National Conference of State Legislatures
73
ii
The National Conference of State Legislatures serves the legislators and staffs of the nations 50 states, its commonwealths, and territories. NCSL is a bipartisan organization with three objectives: To improve the quality and effectiveness of state legislatures, To foster interstate communication and cooperation, To ensure states a strong cohesive voice in the federal system.
The Conference operates from offices in Denver, Colorado, and Washington, D.C.
Printed on recycled paper 2000 by the National Conference of State Legislatures. All rights reserved. ISBN 1-58024-111-5
iii
CONTENTS
Legislatures of the Future Task Force .................................................................................................... iv Preface and Acknowledgments ............................................................................................................ v Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................... vii 1. Introduction .................................................................................................................................. 1 2. America in the Year 2025 ................................................................................................................ 2 3. The Harassed Legislature 2025 ....................................................................................................... 5 4. The Circumvented Legislature 2025 ............................................................................................... 8 5. The Traditional Legislature 2025 .................................................................................................. 11 6. The Diminished Legislature 2025 ................................................................................................. 14 7. Conclusions and Implications ....................................................................................................... 17 Appendices A. State Legislatures 1960-1999 .............................................................................................. 23 B. Driving Forces: Demographics ............................................................................................ 29 C. Driving Forces: Economics .................................................................................................. 33 D. Driving Forces: Technology ................................................................................................. 35 E. Driving Forces: Political ....................................................................................................... 37 Glossary ........................................................................................................................................... 39 References ........................................................................................................................................ 41
iii
iv
LEGISLATURES OF THE FUTURE TASK FORCE

The Legislatures of the Future Task Force was created in 1998 to study how legislatures may change in the future and develop ideas to meet the challenges caused by change. The task force developed scenarios that describe possible futures that legislators, legislative staff and other observers can use to identify and guide future changes in ways that are most beneficial to state legislatures. The following legislative staff served as members of the task force. Max Arinder, Mississippi, Chair Steve Watson, Nevada, Vice Chair Clare Cholik, South Dakota, Vice Chair Jim Ashford, California Robert Erickson, Nevada Patrick Flahaven, Minnesota Marcia Goodman, Connecticut Jim Greenwalt, Minnesota Connie Hardin, Tennessee Bob McCurley, Alabama Gary Olson, Michigan Sanford Scharf, Iowa Susan Clarke Schaar, Virginia Robert Shapiro, Ohio Philip Twogood, Florida
iv
PREFACE AND ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

An executive committee, comprised of state legislators and state legislative staff, governs the activities of the National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL). The staff members of the executive committee are joined by other staff from across the country who represent various professional disciplines to form the NCSL Legislative Staff Coordinating Committee (LSCC). The LSCC meets four times a year and oversees NCSL activities and programs that are designed to foster the professional development of state legislative staff. In addition, members of the LSCC conduct studies and examine issues relating to the effectiveness of legislative staff and the improvement of state legislatures. Legislatures of the Future: Implications of Change and its companion publication, A Practical Guide to Futures Study are the products of such a study. Legislatures of the Future: Implications of Change represents the culmination of a two year study conducted by the LSCC Task Force on Legislatures of the Future. Chaired by Max Arinder, director of Mississippis Performance Evaluation and Expenditure Review Committee staff, the task force conducted a futures study to identify those forces that are likely to shape the nature of state legislatures in the 21st century and the environment in which they will operate. Maxs creative guidance, perseverance, knowledge and commitment to the purposes of the task force were crucial to its success. The task force, LSCC and NCSL members are grateful and fortunate for the leadership that he contributed to this project. Over the past year a subcommittee of the task force compiled the information developed by the full task force during the course of its study and produced Legislatures of the Future: Implications of Change. The following members of the task force generously contributed their energy, ideas and time to this publication. Steve Watson, subcommittee chair, Nevada Connie Hardin, Tennessee Robert Shapiro, Ohio Susan Clarke Schaar, Virginia
Rich Jones, director of Legislative Programs at NCSL, supported the task force in its work. Heidi Gamber, administrative assistant at NCSL, assembled the publication. Karen Hansen, director of Publications at NCSL, expertly edited the publication and honed the task forces language into a concise and readable text. Leann Stelzer deftly orchestrated the process of turning the words and pages into a professional publication and Scott Liddell formatted and designed the publication.
vi
vii
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
In the summer of 1998, the Task Force on Legislatures of the Future began a study of the future of state legislatures. The focal question for the study was: What actions will be required to keep state legislatures relevant to the democratic process in the year 2025? The task force charge was to return to the NCSL Executive Committee with observations on what can be done to ensure that the legislative institution will be prepared to face the challenges of the 21st century. The task force wrote four possible scenarios of the future of the legislature based on three critical uncertainties: societys use of direct democracy, confidence in the legislature as a problem-solving institution, and demand for governmentally provided services. The four scenarios are:
The Harassed Legislature, where direct democracy challenges the fabric of the institution; The Circumvented Legislature, where direct democracy initiatives dominate a weak legislature; The Traditional Legislature, where the legislative institution has maintained public confidence and has reduced the perceived need for direct democracy initiatives; The Diminished Legislature, where a loss of interest and confidence in representative government has allowed strong political personalities to assume unchallenged leadership.
All four scenarios suggest the potential for a marked change in the level of public involvement in and support for state legislatures. As political activity is dispersed through strong voter initiatives or a move away from traditional representative democracy, there is always the accompanying possibility of decreased confidence in the legislative process, especially if the alternatives to traditional policy-making are seen as more responsive to citizens concerns. Based on an analysis of the scenarios, the task force arrived at the following general implications of change: Legislatures Must Take a Positive Approach to Change While Protecting the Core Values of a Representative Democracy In the face of impending change, legislatures must be prepared to assess carefully the factors that are leading the public to a desire for change and must use the knowledge gained to bring legislatures into closer alignment with the will and needs of the people.
vii
viii
The future strength of the institution depends on how well legislatures of today are able to act in accord with the following nine core values and to transmit the benefits derived to their constituencies. To remain strong, legislatures should: 1. Be ethical institutions. 2. Be committed to representative democracy as opposed to democracy by polls and other forms of direct democracy. 3. Be responsive and open to the needs of the people. 4. Be committed to collegiality among their members. 5. Have a clear sense of themselves as institutions and be active in advocating on their behalf to the public. 6. Be committed to being independent, coequal branches of government. 7. Be committed to a deliberative process of making public policy. 8. Be committed to being high-quality institutions, including attracting high-quality legislators and staff. 9. Value leadership that promotes the core values of the good legislature. Legislatures Must Help Improve the Quality of Public Participation in All Forms of the Democratic Process The implication for the legislature is that it should not fight the trend toward greater direct democracy, but should seize the opportunity to find ways to inform the peoples choices, taking every opportunity to promote the core value of deliberation in the process. Legislatures Must Help Improve the Quality of Policy Debate on Public Issues, Showcasing the Advantages of the Legislative Arena Where Possible Technology will make it easier for legislatures to get information out to the public about policy issues. The task will be to win the publics attention and to help citizens understand how the institution of the legislature provides a desirable arena for solving complex problems and for bringing together competing interests to arrive at solutions that are sensitive to the interests and needs of a broad range of stakeholders. Legislatures Must Continually Reassess and Refine Their Public Policy Role Legislatures should carefully consider the role they may be asked to play when initiative processes lead to conflicting or competing laws or, more importantly, what role they can play to keep such conflicts from arising. Legislative leadership will be especially important in setting up communication processes and deciding when and how to provide a quick response to public concerns. Legislatures Must Protect the Balance of Power The more dynamic the political environment, the more critical the legislatures role in providing an effective check on the executive and its accompanying bureaucracy. Under most scenarios, both the legislative and executive branches will face increased pressure as the information age reaches maturity and wide-ranging access to information has its ultimate effect.
Executive Summary
ix
Legislatures Need a Renewed Commitment to the Institution, Better Education for the Public and the Membership, and Expanded Communication and Technological Capability Commitment, education and communication are the keys to whether the legislative institution remains as a major conduit for policymaking or whether it declines. As information overload threatens to consume legislators, even in part-time legislatures, the institution must find ways to compensate, giving legislators at least a fighting chance to be effective policymakers. Legislatures must provide leadership to ensure a broad public understanding of the role and benefits of representative democracy. Legislatures must find ways to communicate to the public that the legislative process is contentious because it encompasses different and competing values, interests and constituencies, all of which are making claims on government or one another. Effective legislative performance in representing and resolving competing interests in society is the best defense of representative democracy.
1. INTRODUCTION
The health of state legislatures is crucial to the future of representative democracy. What will the future hold for state legislatures and what can they do to prepare for it? How will demographic, technological, economic and other changes in society affect the legislative institution in the 21st century? To answer these questions and to help state legislatures prepare for the future the Legislative Staff Coordinating Committee of the National Conference of State Legislatures created the Task Force on Legislatures of the Future. Over the course of two years the task force conducted a futures study to identify those driving forces that are likely to shape the nature of state legislatures in the 21st century and the environment in which they will operate. Based on different projections for these driving forces the task force developed four potential scenarios that describe legislatures in the 21st century. The goal of this effort is provide legislators, legislative staff and other observers with visions of the future that they can use to prepare for the implications of future changes. NCSL hopes that legislatures will use these materials, supplemented with information that describes how the driving forces may affect their specific states, to identify the implications of future changes for their legislatures. Rather than predict the future, the goal of the task force is to provide legislatures with information to begin considering how future changes may shape the legislative institution in their state. Legislatures may also want to use the companion report, A Practical Guide to Futures Study, to conduct a futures study for their own state legislature. Legislatures can use these materials to identify the potential results of future changes and develop strategies for promoting those that are positive and avoiding those that are negative. The following sections of this report identify future changes likely to affect state legislatures, describe four possible scenarios of future legislatures and lay out the implications of these future changes for legislatures. Chapter 2 describes how the driving forces will shape America in the year 2025. Chapters 3 through 6 each describe a different scenario for future legislatures. Chapter 7 discusses the implications for state legislatures of these changes. A history of state legislatures from 1960 through 1999 is presented in appendix A, information describing the driving forces is contained in appendices B through E and a listing of references and a glossary of terms appear at the end of the report.
The task forces goal is to provide legislatures with information to begin considering how future changes may shape the legislative institution.
2. AMERICA IN THE YEAR 2025

You are now in a time warp. As you begin reading this, you are being transported to the year 2025. The rules for the trip are simple: suspend disbelief, do not ask how this future came to existit simply is; do not question its fundamental assumptions. You are living in this future and you must cope with it.
Demographic Change
America in 2025 is an older and more diverse society. During the first quarter of the new century, the political arena is largely comprised of members from four different generations with different generational perspectives: the silent generation, baby boomers, Generation X and the Y Generation. In addition to these generational distinctions, there are a few additional demographic trends that have changed the face of America in the year 2025. Immigration, not birth rate, is a predominant factor in U.S. population growth and change. Hispanics and Asians have accounted for seven of 10 immigrants between 2000 and 2025. More than 70 percent of all immigrants are concentrated in six statesCalifornia, Florida, Illinois, New York, New Jersey and Texas. Legislatures in 2025 generally reflect the diversity of the society at large. The total number of African-American, Hispanic and Asian legislators continues to increase. In addition, the number of women legislators has increased. Given the aging of America more retirees are serving in state legislatures than in previous generations. Inter-ethnic and racial politics influence the dynamics within some state legislatures. Appendix B contains more detailed information about demographic changes likely to affect future legislatures.
America in 2025 is an older and more diverse society.
Economic Change
The legislatures of 2025 are facing a number of economic realities that have had a significant effect on legislative thinking. A limited number of metropolitan areas in the United States in 2025 contain more than 80 percent of the total population. These metropolitan areas cross existing governmental boundaries, have limited governing structures, and generate most of the nations income, taxes and economic growth. Manufacturing has declined in the United States. While the number of jobs in the United States is growing in the 21st century, the number and relative importance of manufacturing jobs in the overall national economy continues a decline that has extended over the past 40 years.
America in the Year 2025
International trade is highly important, accounting for a significant percentage of our economic growth. New international trade treaties and negotiations have led to the rewrite of existing federal, state and local laws and regulations affecting ownership, real estate regulation and securities. These agreements have further led to calls for creation of a supra-national body to prohibit discrimination against out-of-state investors based upon environmental or political practices. Changes in the U.S. economy test the ability of state tax systems to collect the revenue necessary to finance state government. Appendix C contains more detailed information about economic changes likely to affect future legislatures.
Technological Change
A technology driven paradigm shift has taken the United States from an economy based on atoms (manufactured things) to an economy based on bits (digital information and data). The Internet, television, phone service and other forms of communication and electronic entertainment have merged into one integrated, digital stream accessible through small, wireless, voice activated devices. Immense computing power is available at low cost and in very small devices allowing computers to become almost invisible and embedded everywherein clothing, chairs, human tissue and even the blood stream. Advances in computing power and artificial intelligence drive other technological advances in the areas of biology, genetics and medicine that pose complex, fundamental moral, ethical and religious questions to policymakers and those who support their work. Direct voting forums, groupware and computerized decision support systems provide a constant impetus toward participatory or direct democracy. Appendix D contains more detailed information about technological changes likely to affect future legislatures.
The United States has moved from an economy based on atoms to an economy based on bits.
Political Change
These economic and technological changes have generated some interesting possibilities for citizens of the year 2025. Electronic commerce, Internet communications and worldwide economic interests, to name a few, now challenge the viability of traditional political boundaries and the governmental authorities that operate within them. The global village allows people to see and virtually inhabit the world from any angle. Lacking a firm local perspective, individuals begin to lose their ability to make consistent judgments on policy based on stable parochial interests. Appendix E contains more detailed information about political changes likely to affect future legislatures.
Alternative Futures
What are the implications of such dramatic shifts for the institution of the legislature? The LSCC Legislatures of the Future Task Force believes that there are at least three critical uncertainties operating within this world that will have a profound effect on the answer to this question. The three uncertainties are: 1. The direction society takes in the use of direct democracy; 2. The level of confidence society maintains in the legislature as a problem-solving institution;
3. The position society takes in demand for government services. A swing to the high or low end of these three critical factors dramatically alters the institution of the legislature. To allow further exploration of how the legislature of 2025 may be different, the task force has created four alternative political futures for consideration. These alternative futures represent extremes created when society shifts radically to one end or the other of the three critical uncertainties identified above.
The Harassed Legislature The harassed legislature is marked by high use of direct democracy initiatives. It is a strong legislature that maintains the confidence of the people as a problem solving institution. There is stable demand for government services delivered through either traditional government programs or non-profit or private sector organizations. The harassed legislature operates in a very competitive political environment. If it does not meet the publics needs, the public will use technology to go around it with direct democracy alternatives. Driven by self-preservation, the harassed legislature will add staff and technology to reach out to the public, identify citizens needs and attempt to take action to meet those needs. The level of demand for government services in the states will determine whether legislatures use their power to add to existing services or to cut back on government. The Circumvented Legislature The circumvented legislature is marked by high use of direct democracy initiatives. It is a weak legislature that has lost the confidence of the people as a problem solving institution. There is stable demand for government services delivered through increasingly nongovernmental, libertarian means. The public has determined that the legislature is not meeting their needs and has seized the opportunity presented by technology to increase the range and scope of direct democracy initiatives in making public policy decisions. Increased use of private and non-profit organizations as alternatives to government programs represents a significant shift away from traditional government. The Traditional Legislature The traditional legislature is marked by infrequent use of direct democracy initiatives. It is a strong legislature that has maintained the confidence of the people as a problem solving institution, and the stable demand for services is delivered through traditional government means. The public turns to the legislature to resolve public policy disputes and uses direct democracy infrequently. There is stable demand for governmental services delivered through either traditional governmental programs or nonprofit or private sector organizations.. The Diminished Legislature A turning away from traditional government marks the world of the diminished legislature. Direct democracy initiatives are infrequently used and a weak legislature has lost the confidence of the people as a problem solving institution. The public wants government services, but has limited confidence that the state legislature or direct democracy approaches will meet their needs. The state legislature is supplanted by a strong executive or other level of government which could include international governmental bodies. This results in less democratic methods for making public policy.
The following chapters describe these potential future scenarios in more detail and outline the implications of each for state legislatures.
The task force has created four alternative political futures for consideration.
3. THE HARASSED LEGISLATURE 2025

Buoyed by decades of professional growth and institutional development, state legislatures are prepared to respond creatively and responsibly to societal and technical trends that expand citizen input into policymaking and the democratic process. In particular, state legislators and their staff develop strategies and methods for mediating the interests of an active citizenry that effectively balance the goals of representative and direct democracy. As a result, the public is generally supportive of the legislative institution and its deliberative role, while they also advocate expanded use of initiative processes and other forums where routine, technically supported plebiscites add contour and shape to state law. The political and policy environment of the legislature is very fluid. Issues and priorities shift rapidly based on polling and forecasting information and data. Legislative staff who combine technical skills with political sensitivity collect, manipulate and analyze a broad range of polling, demographic and economic information to determine new legislative priorities, reinforce partisan positions and spin, or to help lawmakers rapidly assess the positions and assertions of lobbyists and other political players. In this environment, state legislators, staff and the institution and its processes evolve significantly, while retaining certain traditional characteristics. As a whole, the legislature is much more attentive to public opinion. However, unlike previous decades, this new kind of public opinion is increasingly presented through forums that are legitimized in the legislative process. By design, sophisticated polling techniques and procedures emerge that abandon the up or down finality of the traditional initiative. This development moderates the whiplash nature of the traditional initiative while providing legislators with routine and legitimized information about the citizens policy preferences. State legislators are subject to a constant barrage of information, analyses, constituent service requests and public comment. In all but a few states, the job of state legislator truly is a full-time role. Access to legislators and the legislative process supported by technology and encouraged by an activist political culture allow few options for legislators to escape from a 24-hours-a-day, seven days-a-week immersion in legislative work. These new polling techniques allow creation of virtual communities with town meetings that can be held regularly. Local, district or statewide plebiscites are possible on any issue, but Americans historic disinterest in government creates a backlash against frequent polling or voting on complex issues. So legislators routinely ask for statewide voter input on key issuesmonthly, quarterly or annuallywhile soliciting information from their own district even more frequently. In addition, members are compelled to demonstrate how this input is translated into legislative actions.
The public generally supports the harassed legislature and its deliberative role.
Traditional geographic district boundaries prevail due to constitutional requirements and they continue to guide the collection of citizen opinion. District profiles developed through the evolution of technology earlier used for redistricting, gives members, lobbyists and other activists precise and multi-dimensional information about the characteristics, habits and preferences of district citizens. Legislative staff agencies develop special technical units that unite geographic, election, marketing, economic, consumer and other information into a data base capable of producing customized virtual maps of a members district. These tools become increasingly important as members try to anticipate the appeal to voters of certain issues and as members and their staff work to compete with outside interests who possess similar capabilities. Although traditional legislative districts continue to define electoral populations, many other traditional political boundaries disappear or are overshadowed by new regional identities and economies. These new identities become the focus of political interest, advocacy and power. State legislatures evolve to reflect these populations through the realignment of committees, the selection of leadership and the character of legislative debate. The look and activities of legislative leaders are transformed in this future. Leaders emerge according to their ability to assimilate and provide useful information, and identify and mobilize ad hoc coalitions around key issues. More often than in the past, leaders are at the helm of coalition majorities that bend but hopefully do not break under the stress of rapidly shifting public expectations and legislative priorities. Leaders in this era carry little ideological baggage because they must appeal to a broad range of interests. That appeal is built more upon the leaders skills of persuasion, consensus building and communication. A public frustrated with the role of money in politics has removed most of the campaign financing tools that leaders traditionally used to garner support. Leaders, therefore, are much more dependent upon the quality of their legislative skills and persuasive abilities as keys to their selection. The media and its relationship to the legislature are largely unchanged. Peoples attraction to drama, conflict and personalities does not wane and continues to be the driving force behind media strategies for enhancing market share. What has changed is the range of media markets and products available to the public, as well as the technical sophistication of businesses that purport to be journalistic. Television, phone service and the Internet merge into a single, unified communication stream that offers multiple and customized sources of information. Empowered voters become quality-conscious, sophisticated data miners capable of designing and directing the flow and character of programs and information that comes into their homes. Lobbying and the job of the lobbyist are very different. Traditional alliances such as the NRA or AARP have disappeared under the pressure of new, more fluid coalitions that form and disperse according to the participants more sophisticated assessment of how key policy decisions will affect their households or regions. Issue managers, supported by sophisticated polling methods and utilizing smart computers loaded with immense amounts of demographic, economic, preference and other person-specific data, guide the formation and mobilization of these temporary coalitions. Depending upon economic conditions, most corporations eliminate or largely scale back their permanent government affairs operations in favor of contract issue managers. As in the past, those without sufficient resources are not able to play politics at this level. However, accessibility to cheap yet massive
In the harassed legislature, leaders emerge according to their ability to assimilate and provide useful information.
The Harassed Legislature 2025
computer power combined with universal access to information and software empowers resource deficient groups well beyond their means. The legislature, strengthened by popular support and publicly endorsed investments in institutional capacity building, easily balances power with the executive branch. Governors remain visible and influential, but legislaturesthrough their strategic development of techniques and vehicles for public inputlargely control that portion of the policymaking agenda that is not under the total control of public initiatives. Legislative staff play key roles as analysts, advisors, educators, and technical and issue specialists. They also act as mediators between an actively engaged public and its elected members. Traditional staff roles such as bill drafter, fiscal analyst, researcher, program evaluator and computer technician merge together in response to the multidimensional nature of most public policy issues and the demand for quick, comprehensive support services. Legislatures, in direct competition with the private sector and well-funded interests, dramatically upgrade the conditions of employment for legislative staff in order to attract highly skilled, knowledge workers. Legislators in most states have one or more personal professional staffers in addition to personal clerical support. District offices become common in most states as members demand them and as technology allows members to virtually participate in legislative activities. Legislatures in 2025 are characterized by a diverse membership composed of multiple ethnic, racial and generational types. Women hold legislative office in proportion to their percentage of the population, and in some states exceed that mark. Each demographic division in the legislative membership has a parallel organized group that actively promotes its self-interests. Coalitions are defined not only by political party but also by demographic makeup. Baby Boomers, now in their 60s and 70s, along with Generation Y, in their 30s and 40s, make up the majority of the membership. Generation X, notorious for its lack of faith in government, has largely opted out of public service. Boomer members, struggling to remain effective and viable, depend upon assistance from their Generation Y colleagues and staff to make use of technology and communication innovations. Generation Y members, supported by their comfort and understanding of modern technology are more in tune with public perceptions of what the legislature has becomea freer-flowing marketplace and forum for public input and decision making. They have a knack for knowing how to make the legislature work. And they have an interest. Generation Y assumes many of the leadership positions in the legislature. An emerging Millennial Generation, obedient and creative, fuels the power of the Generation Y membership. Boomer staff who do not voluntarily retire receive separation packages they cannot refuse. Those Generation X staff who remain find themselves routinely at odds with the younger members and staff. Legislative life for members is increasingly entrepreneurial, fast paced and constituent driven. Term limits have largely disappeared due to public support for the institution and the desire by most active groups to retain their point of contact at the legislature. Turnover, nonetheless, remains high as members move in and out of public service and as shifting coalitions throw support to new candidates. Unicameralism comes into vogue as citizens question the cumbersome nature of two chamber legislatures that are more difficult to modify to the new, inclusive, technology-driven ways of conducting debate and making policy.
Legislative life for members is increasingly entrepreneurial, fast paced and constituent driven.
4. THE CIRCUMVENTED LEGISLATURE 2025

Individualism and the push for direct democracy have moved government beyond the traditional legislative body. Seen as largely irrelevant, the legislature is increasingly bypassed by strongly individualistic voters who show little patience with institutional processes. Constitutional limitations and other barriers to direct democracy are swept aside as direct democracy becomes the norm. The modus operandi for this highly volatile environment is to disregard diplomacy and compromise (the traditional hallmarks of representative government) in favor of marshaling powerful, like-thinking coalitions to get things done by moving issues out of the legislative arena through initiative action.
The circumvented legislature increasingly is bypassed by strongly individualistic voters.
The entrepreneurial spirit that generally marks American society has made significant inroads into traditional government service structures. Innovative private sector models and a renewed spirit of volunteerism have caused many communities to turn away from government services in favor of private for-profit and private non-profit offerings. This move away from government as the chief architect for social and economic programs reflects, as much as anything else, the zeitgeist of 2025. Nostalgic for the return of the pioneer spirit and emboldened by the successes of small entrepreneurial efforts, voters increasingly reject the tendrils of big brother in favor of local action. Traditional government service areas are radically altered by this change in thinking. The next great accountability revolution is reaching its peak. No longer content with promises of change and performance improvement, the citizen entrepreneur is proactive in making performance demands and in following up when those demands are not met. In education, for example, the results are creative private/public partnerships that reward successful teachers and administrators and that draw many of the best and brightest back into the classroom. Likewise, other areas such as public safety, human services, arts and culture, land and environmental use, transportation and economic development now carry a distinctly entrepreneurial, socially responsible and highly localized stamp. Information technology and communications advances enable creative coalitions for service and change. Strides in direct democracy, in turn, make such efforts a reality. The significant downside to this resurgent spirit of individualism is that for every success there are many failures. The benefits of deliberate, incremental change are often sacrificed to the larger goal of personal initiative and rapid progress in all things. The successes are grand, but the failures have serious implications, given the loss of the safety nets that have long been the underpinning of governments approach to programming. The spirit of moving government closer to the people that began in the 1980s is now coming to full flower. Term limits have reached all states and the institutional memory of the typical legislative body does not extend much beyond a single term. As a result, the
The Circumvented Legislature 2025
political voice of the legislative body is weak and fragmented, while individual legislators, especially those skilled in the information and communication arts, make their mark in the limited time available, and speak with loud voices. The core professional staff who helped to hold the institution together in earlier days has come to be seen as too powerful and obstructionist, and is being replaced by a staffing model more in tune with rapid change. The new style of legislative staffing is directed at acquiring research and projecting capacity. Staffers who can keep the legislature even the slightest bit ahead of a vocal, actionoriented public are highly valued. Little more than competent hired guns, this new breed of political professional tends to come and go with political regimes, allowing the old core of non-political staff to maintain the information and service infrastructure they need to do their jobs well. Politically impatient, voters are loyal neither to parties nor to individuals. Failure to act quickly and effectively is the cardinal sin for any elected official in this highly reactive environment. Grassroots action committees and individually initiated campaigns dot the political landscape. In an effort to avoid circumvention, politicians conduct extensive polling, but even this proves ineffectual as the taste for direct democracy overpowers the more deliberative legislative process. Success breeds success as empowered voters ban together for sweeping change. Traditional lobbyists and special interests find their political position challenged by a savvy citizenry that has equal access to information. With the ability to self-educate and communicate, traditional constituencies become more self-sufficient, bringing together coalitions for action without depending on elected officials or professional lobbyists. Party politics tend to collapse in this dynamic, information-driven environment. Changes in the demographic makeup of the broader society do little to stem the tide of majority rule through direct democracy. Though ethnically more diverse, socioeconomic class has clearly come to be recognized as a more significant barrier to social harmony and progress than ethnicity. Economic condition has become the tie that binds diverse groups into a politically active voice. General economic growth, access to education and information, and the entrepreneurial spirit have made the middle class an attainable goal for many. As a result, the voice of the poor is not so loud it disturbs the general harmony of the relatively comfortable majority. It is, however, a very real voice that could burst forth at any time in active dissent should the economy stumble, increasing the numbers who find themselves within this group. As America has become a more mobile society, political systems have yielded to the everchanging pattern of wants and needs created. Interesting, unexpected and almost counter intuitive trends have emerged from this mobility. As the shift from a manufacturing to a technology-based economy allows more people to live where they want, they choose to live where they can reclaim a sense of community and neighborhood spirit. The restrictive covenants of the gated communities of the 80s and 90s have become the social contracts for entire towns and cities. The paradoxical result is that the individualists of 2025 find themselves seeking common ground with others and banding together in groups of like mind. With no preconceived intent, American society is migrating into economic, cultural, religious and ethnic enclaves where majority rule and direct democracy can be safely practiced, at least at the local level.
Failure to act quickly and effectively is the cardinal sin for any elected official in the circumvented legislature.
10
The implications of this new round of cultural fragmentation are dramatic for state and national politics. The voter of 2025 is empowered by technology to be a direct participant and will not settle for less. Legislators have to think fast and act fast to survive. To do less causes them to be bypassed in favor of direct voter action and self-brokered coalitions. One area where the legislator has occasion to shine is when competing groups disagree on a course of action and neither group has the clear majority to impose its will. Someone must broker compromise between competing interest groups. A legislators ability to quickly bring accurate, complete information to bear on pressing issues and to complete a feedback loop to constituents will be paramount to any success. Coming from fairly homogeneous voting groups, a legislators ability to function in this environment depends on his or her perceived integrity, ethical standing and commitment to the group. A legislator must have the proxy of the group to achieve compromise in a political environment where compromise is not a preferred or even a desired action In this highly voter-empowered environment, neither the legislative nor the executive branch is in a position to greatly prosper. Both are enslaved by the principle of majority rule. Efforts to protect minority opinions and interests are quickly sidestepped by grassroots initiatives to put desired programs in place or to eliminate unwanted programs. There is little perceived need to find common ground on divisive issues, since the majority generally get its programs into play. A significant downside to this environment is that the thwarted interests of the minority fester. With few options for breaking the bonds of absolute majority rule, the potential for sudden and violent backlash is ever-increasing. With little time and attention devoted to preservation of the traditional, core values of a representative democracy, many feel they have lost their voice at a time when voters as a whole are more empowered than at any other time in history. Gaps between the rich and the poor in their ability to exercise political power come into sharp focus. With little incentive and opportunity to compromise, the circumvented legislator becomes more focused on his or her narrow constituency or is bypassed in the process. As direct democracy finds its feet, representative government is largely abandoned as a problem solving option. Decision making and policy formation become fragmented into localized and self-interested groupings with a strong emphasis on the majority. The possibility of conflict resolution through government processes is limited and the core purposes of centralized democratic institutions are threatened. In some areas, the final fruits of this trend are reductions in the size of legislatures, conversion to a unicameral or parliamentary model, or statewide election of key legislative posts. Indeed, the circumvented legislature is a high-risk venture that could result in the demise of the central legislative body as a meaningful institution.
As direct democracy finds its feet, representative government is largely abandoned as a problem solving option.
Appendix A
11
5. THE TRADITIONAL LEGISLATURE 2025

The weight of the traditional legislatures service, information and problem-solving infrastructure, combined with adjustments in legislative processes to allow for more rapid responses to constituent needs, has enabled the legislature to mitigate the press for direct democracy. The general public believes traditional legislative processes are relevant and important, but the competing demand for immediate action has resulted in a schizophrenic quality to much legislative action. Most legislators are cognizant of the broader needs of society and struggle to engage in diplomacy and compromise on those issues, but are continually pressured to respond to the more immediate needs of their constituents. This is not unlike conditions at the turn of the century, but the direct constituent pressure is greatly multiplied. Much of the pressure for change results from the effect of the Internet on communication. Instant coalitions are formed around issues via the Internet, as legislators votes are immediately recorded, evaluated, tracked and disseminated to constituents, fueling their demands for action to serve their immediate needs. On every issue, legislators regularly receive the on-line equivalent of petitions from scores of constituents. Voice technology has extended accessibility of computers to even those without a technological bent. Virtually every household in America has an Internet connection. Recognizing the Internet as a tool for political power, the government has put computers into the households of low-income families. In this demanding environment, voters are politically impatient and loyal neither to parties nor to individuals. The legislatures ability to act reasonably quickly and responsively has been its salvation in this highly reactive environment. Grass roots action committees and individually initiated campaigns dot the political landscape, but these efforts are quickly recognized by the political establishment and their efforts are co-opted into more traditional issue development frameworks. As a result of increasing constituent demands, legislators in 2025 are often less the trustees of their constituents than their direct representatives. Much of their daily emphasis is on determining and responding to what constituents want rather than determining and addressing societal needs. In addition, partly because of the generous supply of misinformation and misrepresentation on the Internet, legislators have increasingly had to educate their constituents about the facts and help them understand the ramifications of positions on issues. This expanded role as civics educator has been one of the more significant successes that has kept the legislature a viable institution. A legislators ability to quickly bring accurate, complete information to bear on pressing issues and to complete a feedback loop to constituents is paramount to continued success.
The general public believes traditional legislative processes are relevant and important.
11
12
The legislature often scrambles to keep up with the executive branch in the very important arena of public policy development.
Over time, the legislative process has been adjusted to address the demands of a highly vocal constituency. As legislators have devoted decreasing time to broader social issues, committees have phased out much of their policy-shaping role, and are now largely organized around the need to process an extremely high volume of new legislation. Legislators often work from their homes, communicating with staff, their colleagues and constituents over the Internet. The old-style, in-person public hearings have been replaced with interactive communication over the Internet, and many committee meetings are held via Internetbased videoconferencing. Committees vote out most bills as works in progress, and legislative leaders and their staffs broker legislation into final productsnot quite a return to the smoke-filled rooms of the middle of the last century, but with those overtones. However, even legislative leaders have little time to establish broad policies for the state, and policymaking is, by default, increasingly becoming the responsibility of the executive branch. Legislation often grants authority to the executive to set policy in regulations, and the legislature often scrambles to keep up with the executive branch in the very important arena of public policy development. On larger issues state legislatures look to national organizations to develop model legislation. To support the demand for immediate action and information, and with the de-emphasis on policymaking, the legislative staff is now organized to provide rapid response to specific information requests and on verifying factual information. Little, if any, time is spent supporting the development of policy. Technology plays a critical role in staff success. Thanks to technology, the expertise of staff, and the decreased role of the legislature in policymaking, legislators rely far less on lobbyists. Staff also continues to serve a need for institutional memory keepers. The membership of legislative bodies in 2025 is older. In states with urban centers, there are more members of Hispanic and African-American heritage, reflecting the change in the population at large. The oldest legislators are the last of the baby boomers, with their roots in political activism and social change. Benefiting from increased life expectancies, this generation maintains political influence and power longer than any previous generation. At what once was accepted as retirement age, these individuals remain involved in politics and the workforce, realizing that their pensions and savings may not carry them comfortably through the retirement years. They typically seek multiple terms in office. The other major change in composition of the legislature is that the Y Generation now makes up its majority. These are young, idealistic college graduates, who will typically serve only one or two terms in office. Regarded as more socially responsible than the members of Generation X, Y Generation legislators have an affinity for social issues and the desire to see constructive social change. Paired with their boomer parents and grandparents, the make-up of the legislature in 2025 favors support for disadvantaged people more than ever before. The tendency to fragment under the constant, direct pressure of specific constituencies is now the greatest obstacle to change. After a burst of interest in term limits around the turn of the century, no additional states have chosen to impose limits on length of legislative service. However, the average term of legislators has decreased as instant coalitions find it easier than ever before to defeat many incumbents for a perceived lack of responsiveness to local needs. After a flat-lined funding of services to the public following the turn of the century, the thrust in recent years has been on substantial new entitlements, particularly for elderly and low-income populations, to which the more diverse legislature is particularly sensitive. This trend began as the
The Traditional Legislature 2025
13
federal government started to return local services to the states earlier in this century. This effort is designed to reduce the increased division between the haves and the have nots that escalated earlier in the century and fueled protests by low-income populations that spanned ethnic and racial lines. The other ongoing major expenditures are for education, as the state funds technology in schools. New tax initiatives are typically possible only when earmarked for particular uses that meet the articulated needs of the public. Thanks primarily to the social conscience of Generation Y, there is a new interest in exploring ways to make the legislature more responsive to the public. Serious public debates are again underway on the virtues of representative versus direct democracy, and there is renewed interest in term limits. Debates focus on the ways in which the public can influence the globalization of their daily lives. The most vocal coalition has raised global environmental concerns prompted by manufacturing firms leaving the United States and moving into Asian countries with lax pollution regulations. Much of this concern has focused on Congress, as the Y Generation in particular, working with a segment of Baby Boomers, seeks to influence international environmental policy. Despite its ability to survive to date, the traditional legislature is bulging at the seams, and is again under attack in favor of direct democracy. Those who press for a more direct voice in government argue that the legislative institution was created to slow down the policymaking and lawmaking processes, so that they would be deliberate and deliberated. While this model met the public need for over two centuries, they now argue that there is a need for more immediate action. As such, the historical legislative process is quickly becoming a vestige of history that does not fit the current need. On a more practical level, the argument against continuation of the traditional legislature is that its frenzied efforts to meet the publics demands for immediate action have precluded the socially-committed legislative body from shaping meaningful social policy. Instead, the role of the legislature in broad policy issues is limited to tinkering with the governors proposals and making appropriations.
Despite its ability to survive, the traditional legislature is under attack by proponents of direct democracy.
14
6. THE DIMINISHED LEGISLATURE 2025

The State Capitol is pretty quiet these days. The legislators, lobbyists and reporters who used to fill the halls during the legislative sessions have all but disappeared. The legislators, it seems, prefer to work in their district offices rather than at the Capitol. After all, it makes sense. They are closer to home that way. Their personal staffs, on whom they have come to rely a great deal, are close at hand. If they happen to be away during a committee hearing or a floor session at the Capitol, they can always participate using video conferencing. They can communicate with their colleagues electronically. Being there in person is no longer a necessity. The lobbyists left with the legislators. They no longer need to make personal contact with them. In fact, they prefer to communicate with them or their staffs using e-mail. Reporters left, quite frankly, because the legislature just doesnt generate much news anymore. People arent interested. The public perception of the legislature is negative, and the media is always eager to do a story on an elected official accused on wrongdoing. This simply reinforces the publics view. Legislators dont get the attention or the respect they once did. Thus, its really no surprise that few are interested in running for the office. Many of the legislators these days are getting up in years. They are at the point in their lives when people used to retire and leave the work force, but not anymore. Whether it is for financial or other reasons, these people have decided to keep working. Serving in the legislature for them is a second career. In their primes, a lot of them never dreamed of running for public office. But now, the chance to give something back is appealing to them. Just about half of the legislators are women. Most of them are white and over 40 years old. They tend to devote most of their time to social and family issues, sometimes to the detriment of other matters that come before them. On the issues that concern them most, they are very vocal and cohesive. Even different party labels dont keep the women from uniting for their causes. Other legislators are very young in comparison. They are just starting their careers and are excited about serving. They are ethnically diverse, and have a wide array of priorities. They seem to focus particularly on those programs that will benefit their own ethnic group or other local constituencies. Conspicuously absent from the legislature are individuals of middle age. People of that generation just dont consider public service a very noble or worthwhile pursuit. If they do run, they run on a platform of change. They want to change a system that they find meaningless.
The public perception of the diminished legislature is negative; legislators dont receive the attention or the respect they once did.
14
The Diminished Legislature 2025
15
The legislature is a part-time, citizen body. The sessions have gotten shorter in recent years. Technology has expedited the work tremendously. The legislators breeze through the formalities of the legislative process with ease. Plus theyve learned the hard way that staying in session too long often serves no other purpose than to upset the voters. The camaraderie among them is gone. Their deliberations are difficult and there is gridlock on tough issues. Due to term limits and a host of other factors, most legislators arent around long enough to develop an appreciation or respect for the legislative process and institution. A lot of factors have lead to the demise of the type of legislature found at the end of the 20th century. The most predominant one is the ever expanding global village. It has affected every facet of life and the state legislature is certainly no exception. Issues formerly being addressed by individual states are now being addressed collectively by more than one state, or in many instances, on an international level. The interconnectedness felt around the world is taking its toll on the legislature. It is threatening many of the legislatures traditional roles. The states collection of taxes, for example, has been forever altered by the tremendous expansion in internet sales. As trade barriers disintegrate, the states have a harder time regulating business. Legislators are left with the unenviable task of trying to find ways to generate enough revenue to keep state government afloat. Its a difficult task during this era of vast change, and one that many might consider unnecessary. As the bureaucracies of government continue to flatten, some contend that the state legislature has outlived its usefulness. The new global approach to governing has taken power from the legislature and given it to the governor. It is the governor who most often takes the lead role in representing the state in developing compacts and regional agreements. She seldom involves the legislature in the process. She has the public on her side. They elected her by a wide margin, and they admire and trust her enormously. Her shadow extends far and wide. She can get her policies enacted into law simply by proposing them. The governors domination and their own dwindling role in state government causes a lot of consternation on the part of most legislators. Members of the governors own party, who control the legislature, are perhaps the most torn. They, too, in large part admire the governor and want to assist her in promoting her agenda. On the other hand, they long for the independence and the autonomy to be able to disagree with the governor or promote policies that may not have been generated in the confines of her office or in cooperation with other governors and regional coalitions. This is the dilemma they face. They have seen others try to promote legislation against the governors wishes, and they have seen them fail. Most of them dont want to try. They know their effectiveness within the party is gauged by how well they promote the governors agenda. In addition to a weak legislature, the public plays a minimal role in government activities. The people are constantly being bombarded with information. The new age of communication has dawned and brought with it more data than the average human being can absorb. The legislature tries to use technology to provide civic education to the citizenry, but it just gets lost in the mire of propaganda. The technology they have marveled over and come to rely on so heavily is perhaps now too much a good thing.
The new global approach to governing has taken power from the diminished legislature and given it to the governor.
16
Technology has brought [the public] to the point where direct democracy is possible, but they have rejected it.
Although technology has brought citizens closer to government than ever beforethey can watch the legislature in action, testify at a committee hearing, vote and e-mail their lawmakersthey are wary of it. Technology has brought them to the point where direct democracy is possible, but they have rejected it. Citizens dont know whom to trust. They have been burned by all or nothing initiative campaigns on specific policy matters. They have discovered it is difficult to protect the interests of a diverse society. They want to get the government out of their lives, but they are not yet willing to take control themselves. Political parties dont bolster the legislature much either. They are not the grassroots organizations they used to be. They primarily exist to promote the governor and their statewide candidates. Individuals have no loyalty to their party, and use them only to promote their own self-interests. Single-issue organizations linked to politics have fared better than the parties. They coalesce around issues, and just as quickly dissolve. They are successful at raising funds and technology allows them to pinpoint supporters and donors with ease. They keep their members well informed and the public feels comfortable joining a group with a narrow focus. These groups pose difficulties for legislatures. On the one hand, they are sources of information and money. But because their membership is fluid and they are unwilling to compromise on their positions, they can do political damage to lawmakers who challenge them, or even try to reach a middle ground. But the groups need the legislature, because an increasingly cynical public typically rejects all ballot issues. The downfall of the legislature has affected the entire legislative staff. The reputation of the nonpartisan legislative service agency for quality, unbiased research has eroded primarily because the executive branch tightly controls the information it will share with the legislature. The fiscal staff cant get reliable information from the governors office, so lawmakers depend on governors budget. The legislatures traditional control over the states purse strings is eroding and both lawmakers and staff are no longer very knowledgeable about state programs or finances. Personal staff workloads have increased dramatically because they must coach their members how to legislate and sort through the enormous amount of information available. Their work environment is more politically charged than ever before and they feel the stress. In short, technological advances have forever changed the legislative branch of state government. It didnt happen overnight. It was a gradual process. Many outsiders and even many of the insiders didnt see it coming. They are shocked that the publics tremendous access to government hasnt bolstered its popularity. Perhaps they werent paying enough attention. A few are left wondering what might have been. No one knows for sure.
17
7. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

Legislatures Must Take a Positive Approach to Change While Protecting the Core Values of a Representative Democracy
In the face of impending change, legislatures must be prepared to assess carefully the factors that are leading the public to a desire for change and, where appropriate, must use the knowledge gained to bring legislatures into closer alignment with the will and needs of the people. The task force believes that there will be an increasing perception on the part of citizens that they can and should have a more active and direct role in the political process. As the servants of the public will, legislatures must respect and accommodate this perceived need for change. But legislatures also have another obligation: to protect the core values of representative democracy and the deliberative process. The task force believes that nine core values represent the heart of the legislative institution. The future strength of the institution depends, to a great degree, on how well legislatures of today are able to act in accord with these core values and to transmit the benefits derived to their constituencies. To remain strong, legislatures should: 1. Be ethical institutions, 2. Be committed to representative democracy as opposed to democracy by polls and other forms of direct democracy, 3. Be responsive and open to the needs of the people, 4. Be committed to collegiality among their members, 5. Have a clear sense of themselves as institutions and be active in advocating on their behalf to the public, 6. Be committed to being independent coequal branches of government, 7. Be committed to a deliberative process of making public policy, 8. Be committed to being high quality institutions, including attracting high quality legislators and staff, and 9. Value leadership that promotes the core values of the good legislature Properly prepared and responsive, legislatures have little to fear from change. Better civic education, combined with increased attention to accommodating the changing role of voters in a representative process, will pay long-term dividends. The necessity of dealing with greater direct public involvement in the policymaking process should only serve as a reminder that legislators are stewards of the will of the people. As such, they must find ways to stay in close touch with that will or risk losing their role in the process.
Properly prepared and responsive, legislatures have little to fear from change.
17
18
Legislatures Must Help Improve the Quality of Public Participation in All Forms of the Democratic Process
A significant risk inherent in at least two of the scenarios is that increased opportunity for direct policymaking through initiatives does not guarantee the quality of such participation. While more people may choose to become involved in the process as the technical barriers to direct participation fall, many may choose to do so in a shallow, uninformed way. The great danger is that few individuals will study the issues and politics will continue to be one more thing to do when people already have too many things to do. In this environment, there is a significant risk that special interests will further co-opt the policymaking process. The implication for the legislature is that it should not fight the trend toward greater direct participation, but should seize the opportunity to find ways to inform the peoples choices, taking every opportunity to promote the core value of deliberation in the process.
The legislature should not fight the trend toward greater direct participation.
Legislatures Must Help Improve the Quality of Policy Debate on Public Issues, Showcasing the Advantages of the Legislative Arena Where Possible
A positive possibility inherent in some of the future scenarios is that competition between the legislature and alternative policymaking processes will actually increase the quality of debate on public policy issues. This is more likely to happen if the legislature is successful in finding better ways to frame critical issues for public discussion. To keep policymaking from becoming overly focused on the crisis of the day, legislatures must nurture longerrange, strategic approaches in which partisan interests come together to publicly debate possible solutions to long-standing problems. Technology will make it easier for legislatures to get information out to the public about policy issues. The task will be to win the publics attention and to help citizens understand how the institution of the legislature provides a desirable arena for solving complex problems and for bringing together competing interests to arrive at solutions that are sensitive to the interests and needs of a broad range of stakeholders.
Legislatures Must Continually Reassess and Refine Their Public Policy Role
One of the significant probabilities of 2025 is that the legislature must be prepared to defend its policymaking role in government. To the degree that the initiative process is seen not only as a viable, but a desirable alternative for policymaking, the legislatures role in policymaking may be reduced. Legislatures should carefully consider the role they may be asked to play when initiative processes lead to conflicting or competing laws or, more importantly, what role they can play to keep such conflicts from arising. Legislative leadership will be especially important in setting up communication processes and deciding when and how to provide a quick response to public concerns. An important supporting task is for legislatures to fine-tune their oversight processes. These will be important in any rapid response scenario where the legislature is forced to compete for the faith of the public in the political arena. Without such checks, much time and money can be wasted on ineffective or inefficient programs.
Conclusions and Implications
19
Legislatures Must Protect the Balance of Power

The more dynamic the political environment, the more critical the legislatures role in providing an effective check on the executive and its accompanying bureaucracy. As such, the issue of balance of power between the executive and legislative branches is going to be significant regardless of the scenario that materializes in 2025. Under most scenarios, both the legislative and executive branches will face increased pressure as the information age reaches maturity and wide-ranging access to information has its ultimate effect. The effects of greater information availability on the balance of power are likely to vary around the country based on the strength of political parties, specific regional factors and the current relationship between the legislature and the governor. However, no legislature in the 21st century can afford a lack of vigilance in protecting the prerogatives of the legislative branch. At the same time, it should be noted that information often equals opportunity and that any increased opportunities for cooperation between branches of government should be explored.
General Implications for Action Legislatures Need a Renewed Commitment to the Institution, Better Education for the Public and the Membership, and Expanded Communication and Technological Capability
Legislatures must be prepared for a range of contingencies relative to public involvement in and support for the legislative process. Commitment, education and communication are the keys to whether the legislative institution remains as a major conduit for policymaking or whether it declines. The legislatures of the early 21st century must seize the opportunity to ensure a strong future for the institution. Most scenarios for change offer the hope that legislatures will retain their traditional role in public policymaking. Whether they do depends to a significant degree on their ability to maintain the publics faith in their judgment and skill as decision makers. Legislatures must reemphasize their commitment to the core values of the legislative institution and transmit those values through increased citizen involvement in the democratic process. Legislatures should also devote significant energy to studying ways to make the legislative process more efficient. As information overload threatens to consume legislators, even in part-time legislatures, the institution must find ways to compensate, giving legislators at least a fighting chance to be effective policymakers. Even individuals who feel personally empowered by the information age are likely to respect and value good judgment, quality work, adaptability and responsiveness in others. In states where direct democracy initiatives and term limits are a very real part of the political landscape, legislators already face a challenging scenario. They must use their bully pulpit to ensure that the benefits of long-term decision making are not lost in the press for change. In this environment, the role of leadership in protecting the core values of the legislative institution cannot be overstated or overestimated. Legislatures must take a proactive role in civic education. They must provide leadership to ensure a broad public understanding of the role and benefits of representative democracy. The public today may not adequately recognize the extent to which there is disagreement
Legislatures ability to retain their traditional role in policymaking depends to a significant degree on their ability to maintain the publics faith.
20
in society and that it is the legislatures role to resolve those differences. Most people believe that the great majority of the population agrees with them, so why dont those guys in the legislature ever get anything done? The public does not like disagreement, and they view the legislature as constantly bickering. Legislatures must find ways to communicate to the public that the legislative process is contentious because it encompasses different and competing values, interests and constituencies, all of which are making claims on government or one another. Legislators and legislative staff themselves must recognize public discontent with the legislative process. In addition to explaining their actions more effectively to the public, they must renew their commitment to the ideals of representative democracy and to the principles of public service. Effective legislative performance in representing and resolving competing interests in society is the best defense of representative democracy. The legislatures must not mistake the possibility of public silence for satisfaction or approval. Legislatures must serve as educators, encouraging involvement in and public support for a dynamic, open legislative environment. Legislatures that have the wisdom to provide tools for constituents to communicate on public policy issues can take advantage of the natural affinity citizens have for their elected representative. Equally important will be tools for tracking issues and public interests, but this too must be done within the context of informing the deliberative process, not simply furthering government by poll. The ability of a busy electorate to engage in effective direct democracy should be a serious concern to all. The time is ripe for the rediscovery of a representative legislature that has renewed its commitment to public service. If legislatures maintain their core values, provide ongoing education, make continual adjustments, and convince the public of their values through action, they will be able to help their constituents deal with information overload and public support for the legislature will be high.
Effective legislative performance is the best defense of representative democracy.
Implications for Action by Legislatures

1. Legislatures should focus additional attention on promoting and sustaining the core values of the legislature and the legislative process. This includes encouraging strong, well-trained legislative leaders. They should conduct orientation programs for new legislators and new leaders to develop a culture of a strong legislature and a respect for the value and role of the legislative process. 2. Legislatures should explore ways to promote and maintain high ethical standards and high standards of accountability among both their membership and legislative staff. Special attention should be paid to the problem of campaign finance and the public perception that legislators are unduly influenced by large campaign contributions. 3. Legislatures should promote increased communication among legislative staff, particularly between nonpartisan and individual staff. 4. Legislatures should ensure the strength of legislative committees so the legislature can carry out its proper place in policymaking. Strong committees obviate the power of special interests. 5. Leaders should take a more aggressive role in educating the public about the legislatures role in a representative democracy.
Conclusions and Implications
21
6. Legislatures should focus on providing more efficient constituent service programs to build credibility with the citizens and make the legislature relevant to their lives. 7. Legislatures should stay in close contact with local government officials and better understand their roles. This may include requiring local impact statements on proposed legislation. 8. Legislatures should explore ways to improve direct communication with citizens, including the use of technology to reach more constituents. Video streaming and other such technologies may help to bring the public closer to the legislature. Legislatures should make every effort to harness technology, but not let it run away with the process. Legislatures should provide other means and mechanisms for communicating with people beyond the use of technology. They should consider providing funds for periodic mailings, for example. Legislatures should also make every effort to encourage more personal, face-to-face interaction between legislators and the public. 9. Legislatures should develop and support civic education efforts that promote a better understanding of the role and value of the deliberative process to a democracy. Legislatures should support youth education programs such as Legislators Back to School Day. 10. Legislatures should explore ways to make the initiative process more deliberative in an effort to improve both the quality of initiatives offered and the quality of the information upon which citizens will base their decisions. Where possible, legislatures should make efforts to revitalize support for representative government by giving people more access to the traditional deliberative processes of the legislature. 11. Legislatures should explore ways to dispel the notion among the public that the legislature is an insiders game. They should candidly report the results of the session to dispel the impression that legislatures do nothing. They should take pride in the legislatures accomplishments. They should explore additional ways to keep the legislature strong. 12. Each legislature should consider conducting its own futures study targeted to the driving forces that may be unique to a given region or state. Such individualized study may yield scenarios that offer significant insights into specific opportunities and threats that may be facing a particular legislative institution.
Each legislature should consider conducting its own futures study targeted to the driving forces that may be unique to a given region or state.
22
23
APPENDIX A. STATE LEGISLATURES 1960-1999

The trends identified during the period from 1960 through 1999 and the changes that occurred in legislatures will influence the shape of legislatures in the 21st century. Reviewing the changes that occurred in state legislatures during this period and the forces driving these changes provides a view of the past that can be used to help create a vision of the future. This section covers four broad areas:
Status of legislatures in the 1960s, Forces driving changes in legislatures during the past 30 years, Recommendations for strengthening legislatures of the 1960s, Changes that occurred in key legislative components.
State Legislatures of the 1960s

They are a series of sometimes governments; their presence is rarely felt or rarely missed. The Sometime Governments, 1971 Legislatures of a generation ago were racist, sexist, secretive, boss-ruled, malapportioned and uniformed. Governing, 1992 These two quotes sum up the status of state legislatures in the early 1960s. They were malapportioned and dominated by rural interests. They met infrequently, experienced high rates of turnover among the members, had little to no staff and were dependent on the executive branch and lobbyists for information. Members in most states did not have office space, and committee rooms were often too small to accommodate citizens wanting to participate in the legislative process.
Forces Driving Change

Several forces drove changes in state legislatures. Foremost among them was U.S. Supreme Court decisions in Baker vs. Carr (1962) and Reynolds vs. Simms (1964) that required legislative districts to be drawn with equal population (one person, one vote). As a result, many legislatures became more representative of the population and power shifted from rural to urban and suburban interests. The membership composition changed as the number of farmers declined and the number of teachers, other professionals, women and racial minorities grew.
23
24
At the same time citizen groups, universities, foundations and state legislatures conducted a series of studies of legislatures to make recommendations for improving their operations. As the federal government expanded programs and relied on the states to handle increased administrative responsibilities, there was heightened interest in seeing state legislatures become more vital institutions.
Recommendations for Strengthening State Legislatures

The groups that wanted to strengthen state legislatures had several goals:
Make legislative service more attractive so that high quality people will be interested in running for the legislature; Reduce the turnover among legislators; Expand the capacity of state legislatures to assess policy proposals independently; and Generally raise the professionalism of state legislatures.
To accomplish these goals they recommended the following actions to strengthen state legislatures:
Increase the length of legislative sessions; Pay higher salaries for legislative service; Increase the number of professional staffers; Improve legislative facilities such as committee hearing rooms and office space for legislators; Make the legislative process more open and accessible to the citizens; Enhance the legislatures capacity for policymaking and oversight; and, Strengthen the laws governing legislative ethics.
Changes in Legislative Components

State legislatures have adopted most of the reformers recommendations. Legislatures really did transform themselves, says Alan Rosenthal of the Eagleton Institute of Politics at Rutgers University and a participant in the legislative improvement movement. They are an institutional success story in terms of where they were 30 years ago and where they are now. The modern legislature is shaped by the reforms adopted over the past three decades. The net effect of these reforms has been to make legislatures more professional bodies. By raising salaries, providing office space, adding staff and making the state legislature an attractive place to serve, legislatures have attracted more people who consider legislative service their full-time career. However, the adoption of limits on legislators terms in 18 states during the 1990s runs counter to this move toward professionalization and may undo some of the changes adopted in the past three decades.
Legislators
The types of members serving in state legislatures have changed considerably over the past 30 years. There is more partisan balance with the number of Republican members increasing, particularly in the South. In 1960, 65 percent of all state legislators were Democrats and 35 percent were Republicans. By 1999, Democrats held a slight majority of seats
Appendix A
25
51 percent to 49 percent. As shown in figure 1, this change in partisan composition is particularly striking in the South where 90 percent of the members were Democrats in 1960 and only 60 percent were Democrats in 1999.
Figure 1. Partisan Balance in State Legislatures Nationally and in the South, 1960-1999
90 80 70 60
Percent
Democrats Nationally Republicans Nationally Democrats in the South Republicans in the South
50 40 30 20 10 0 1960 1999 1960 1999
The occupations of legislators have also changed over the past 20 years. The number of attorneys has declined and the number of full-time legislators has grown. In 1976, over 20 percent of all legislators nationwide were attorneys and the number of full time legislators was less than 5 percent. In 1993, the most recent year that NCSL has comprehensive data on legislator occupations, the number of legislators in each category is almost equal. Attorneys represent 16 percent and full-time lawmakers 15 percent of all the legislators in the nation. More women and racial minorities serve in state legislatures today. Women have grown from under 5 percent of all legislators in 1969 to 22 percent in 1999. The number of African American legislators has grown from 6 percent of all legislators in 1990 to 8 percent all legislators in 1999. Hispanic legislators represent almost 3 percent of all legislators nationwide in 1999. Turnover among the legislators steadily declined in all states from the 1960s through the 1980s. With the advent of term limits the turnover rates began to increase in the 1990s.
Legislative Staff
The number and type of staff working in state legislatures changed dramatically during the past three decades. There are more permanent, professionally trained staff and fewer parttime people hired only for the legislative sessions. In 1996 more than 35,000 staffers worked in state legislatures. The vast majority78 percentwere permanent employees. The 1960s and early 1970s saw dramatic growth in the number of staff as legislatures added research, legal, parliamentary and fiscal staff. These staff were located in central agencies that served members in both chambers and all parties. In the mid-1970s through the 1980s legislatures added staff with specialized functions such as managing the legislatures information technology or providing information on scientific and technological issues. Many also adopted a more decentralized staff structure and provided staff to individual members and party caucuses. During the 1990s, the rate of growth in the number of
26
legislative staff has slowed and some legislatures reduced the amount of staff as they tried to streamline the legislative process to do more with less.
Legislative Operations and Procedures

Today all but seven legislatures meet in annual sessions compared to 1960 when only 18 met annually. However, in 1999, 39 legislatures place limits on the length of their session compared to 33 in 1960. The number of bills that state legislatures consider and pass has remained fairly constant over the past 30 years. State legislatures nationwide consider about 114,000 bills each year passing just over 20 percent. The months that legislatures spend in session each biennium has increased for all categories of legislatures, growing by one third for the full-time legislatures and one half for the part-time bodies. In the 1990s legislators have emphasized streamlining the legislative process to reduce or at least cap the amount of time spent in session. Today, 23 legislative chambers limit the number of bills members can introduce, 47 legislatures have deadlines for introducing bills and 46 have a system of deadlines for moving legislation through the process. The role of committees has been enhanced. Staff have been added and the meeting rooms and other facilities improved. Today committees play a greater role in the legislative process than they did in the 1960s and have strengthened the legislatures capacity to make public policy. Legislative leaders in the 1990s tend to use a more consultative and open leadership style than the leaders of the 1960s and 1970s who were more authoritarian. In the states with term limits, turnover among leaders has increased. Changes in the operations of state legislatures can be seen in the types of recommendations made to improve legislative performance. In the 1960s reformers urged legislatures to formalize and open up the legislative process to greater citizen participation, add staff, build facilities and adopt ethics laws. In the 1980s legislatures were urged to streamline the legislative process, better manage their staff resources, focus on the external environment and strengthen ethics laws. By the 1990s recommendations for improving legislative performance focused almost exclusively on activities dealing with processes outside the direct control of the legislatures. For example, do more to reach out to the public and communicate the value of the legislatures work, improve the legislatures interaction with the media, strengthen ethics laws and better use technology in the legislative process.
Legislative Infrastructure
In the 1960s legislatures lacked adequate facilities such as committee rooms and office space in which to work. A major goal of reformers and legislators was to improve the facilities available to the legislatures. In fact, adequacy of facilities was one of the criteria that the Citizens Conference on State Legislatures used in the late 1960s to rate the quality of specific legislatures. During the past 30 years new legislative office buildings were built, committee rooms expanded, offices for lawmakers added and legislative facilities improved. Todays legislatures have adequate facilities in which to work. In addition to buildings and offices, legislatures have added a wide range of computers and other information technology devices over the past three decades. More than 30 legislatures give their members laptop computers for use on the floor and at home. Many have moved to electronic bills to streamline legislative proceedings and provide a wide array of
Appendix A
27
information about legislative proceedings through web sites on the Internet. Other legislatures use video conferencing to conduct legislative hearings and committee meetings to make it easier for citizens to provide input into the legislative process. Today, technology is seen as an important factor in improving the efficiency and effectiveness of legislative operations.
Legislative Policymaking Role

Legislatures of the 1960s lacked adequate resources to play an independent and co-equal role in proposing and shaping public policy. Todays legislatures have and use their enhanced capacity to take a leadership role in making public policy. The devolution of responsibilities from the federal government to the states increases the range and complexity of issues facing state legislatures. When combined with issues stemming from technological advances such as biotechnology, health care and telecommunications the variety of issues facing legislatures has grown in number, breadth and complexity. Legislatures have demonstrated their ability to address these challenges. The increased use of citizen initiatives poses difficulties for some legislatures. Twenty-four states and the District of Columbia have the initiative and referendum process and the use of citizen initiatives is on the rise. From 1981 through 1992, 346 initiatives were proposed compared to 248 initiatives proposed from 1940 through 1980. In many cases initiatives have been used to circumvent the legislative process. Other initiatives such as those to limit legislators terms and establish tax and spending limitations reduce the power of legislatures.
Public Support for State Legislatures

Public support for state legislatures is often affected by the overall mood of the country and the action legislatures take on policy issues. At the beginning of the 1990s the nation was mired in an economic recession and to balance budgets legislatures in 35 states raised taxes and most cut services. This period was marked by divisiveness, deadlock and political partisanship in state legislatures. Coupled with well-publicized scandals in a couple of states these actions resulted in public skepticism about legislatures and contributed to a negative image of public officials in general and legislators in particular. An analysis of public opinion data on state legislatures by Karl Kurtz at the National Conference of State Legislatures found that citizens had a more negative view of state legislatures in 1990 than they did in 1968. The irony of these findings is that by most accounts, legislators are considerably stronger institutions now than they were three decades ago. As the national economic picture improved so has the publics view of state legislatures and public institutions in general. In 1999, a review of public opinion data from selected states finds that the citizens generally give high marks to state legislatures. In an effort to increase public support, todays legislatures are undertaking several initiatives to boost public understanding of the legislative process and the role of legislatures. Increased public understanding of the role of legislatures is a key to increased public support. Legislatures are engaging in civic education efforts primarily aimed at students, they are providing a wide array of information to the public through web sites on the Internet
28
and are providing C-SPAN type coverage and broadcasts over the Internet of their proceedings. Because there remains a heightened concern with public scandals, legislatures continue to emphasize strong ethics laws for their members. Ethics laws have been strengthened considerably since the 1960s and many states have enacted stringent limits on the things that legislators can receive from lobbyists. Although the vast majority of legislators and legislative staff perform their duties without even the hint of impropriety, news of scandals that do occur travels quickly and is spread by increased national media coverage of state legislatures. The public also confuses actions that occur in the U.S. Congress with what happens in state legislatures.
29
APPENDIX B. DRIVING FORCES: DEMOGRAPHICS

Population Trends
1. America in 2025 will be older and more diverse than it is today. The U.S. Census Bureau projects that by 2020 those, 65 and older will comprise more than 16 percent of the population compared to about 13 percent now. By 2030, one of every five Americans will be age 65 or older. 2. The oldest, old, those aged 85 and older are projected to be the fastest growing age group, increasing from 1.4 percent of the population today to 2 percent in 2025 and to 4.6 percent in 2050. 3. Growth in the majority white population is projected to slow in the coming two decades. By 2020, non-Hispanic whites are projected to comprise about 64 percent of the population, down from almost 74 percent in 1995. Blacks, who comprise less than 13 percent of the population now, will grow to 14 percent in 2020. 4. Hispanics will account for most of the nations population growth between 1995 and 2020. They are projected to comprise 16 percent of the population in 2020, up from about 10 percent today. By 2010 Hispanics are projected to become the second largest racial/ethnic group in the United States Asian-Pacific Islanders are projected to grow from about 3.5 percent of the population today to just over 6 percent in 2020. 5. Hispanics also are projected to be the youngest population group in 2020, while nonHispanic whites are projected to continue to be the oldest segment of the population. By 2030 more than half of all American kids are projected to be racial or ethnic minorities while three of four people age 65 and older will be non-Hispanic whites. 6. Immigration is projected to be a predominant factor in U.S. population growth. It will likely account for about 29 million people or about one in nine Americans by 2020. Hispanics and Asians are projected to account for seven of 10 immigrants from now through 2025. 7. This diversity will not be evenly distributed throughout the states. Currently, 80 percent of U.S. counties are 95 percent white, with minority populations concentrated in 200 of our 3,000 counties. This concentration is projected to continue into the first part of the 21st century. Currently, four of 10 Asians live in three U.S. citiesSan
29
30
Francisco, Los Angeles and New Yorkand more than 70 percent of all immigrants will be concentrated in six statesCalifornia, Florida, Illinois, New York, New Jersey and Texas. 8. It is likely that legislatures in 2025 will reflect the diversity of the society at large. The total number of black, Hispanic and Asian legislators likely will continue to increase. However, these increases are likely to be concentrated in specific states. In addition, the number of women legislators also is likely to increase. Given the aging of America, it is likely that more retirees will serve in state legislatures. 9. Inter-ethnic and racial politics are likely to influence the dynamics within some state legislatures. For example, coalitions across ethnic groups are likely to become increasingly important in elections and in organizing legislatures. 10. Inter-ethnic conflicts over policies also could increase as an older, white population competes with younger Hispanic, Asian and black populations for resources. And if the trends continue for older people to become more conservative and to vote more frequently, it is possible that older, more conservative whites will be disproportionately represented in state legislatures. If these legislators support policies that are seen as favoring whites, ethnic minority groups could perceive that legislatures do not represent their interests. 11. The 351 metropolitan areas in the United States have 80 percent of the population. Eight out of 10 of the fastest growing metropolitan areas are in Florida. Metropolitan areas cross existing governmental boundaries. They have limited governing structures, although there are a number of metropolitan councils. 12. Metropolitan areas generate most of the nations income, taxes and economic growth. If taken alone, some metropolitan areas would be listed among the top 10 economies in the world. There are more metropolitan areas in the Eastern United States than the Western United States. Governing issues in and relating to metro areas are potentially problematic. 13. The proportion of children under age 18 living with two parents declined from 85 percent in 1970 to 69 percent in 1995. The proportion living with one parent grew from 12 percent to 27 percent. In 1995, 35 percent of the children in one-parent families were living with a parent who had never been married and 38 percent were living with a divorced parent. The proportions living with one parent in 1995 were 21 percent for white children, 56 percent for black children and 33 percent for Hispanic children. 14. In March 1995, 82 percent of all adults age 25 and over had completed at least high school and 23 percent had earned a bachelors degree or more. In 1995, 83 percent of whites, 74 percent of blacks and 53 percent of Hispanics had at least a high school diploma. Eighty-seven percent of whites aged 25 to 29 had at least a high school diploma compared to 81 percent of blacks in the same age category.
Appendix B
31
Generational Trends
1. During the first quarter of the new century, society at large-as well as state legislatureswill likely be comprised of members from four different generations with four distinct generational perspectives: the Silent Generation, Baby Boomers, Generation Xers and Generation Yers. 2. Silent Generation (1925 to 1945)
63 million people. Tend to be loyal to institutions and employers. Principal architects of the modern legislature and leaders of the legislative reform movement. Will comprise the oldest of the old in society. Uncomfortable with computer technology.
3. Baby Boomers (1946 to 1964)
76 million people ( largest generation). Often question authority and value independent thinking. Influenced by great political causes civil rights, anti-Vietnam War and womens movements. More comfortable with computer technology.
4. Generation X (1965 to 1978)
46 million (smallest generation). Tend to feel loyalty to themselves and their team and not to the organization they work for. Tend to be politically inactive. Could fill the ranks of state legislatures in the early 2000s. Very comfortable with computer technology.
5. Generation Y (1979 to 1994)
72 million (second largest generation). Most racially diverse generation. Tend to be civic minded and more interested in political activities than Generation Xers. Women working in traditionally male-dominated professions are the norm. Most technologically competent, having never known a time without computers.
6. Many people have written off the generation Xers as politically impotent. They frequently are described as a lost and selfish generation, too focused on their personal lives and lifestyles to care much about the nations future. They are described as having checked out of politics, preferring to disengage from Americas civic life. 7. More under-30 voters are identifying themselves as conservative than ever before. Many Generation Xers are almost pure libertarians. Many Generation Xers believe that it is futile to even engage in politics. The distrust in politics has led many Generation Xers
32
interested in public service to turn to the not-for-profit arena instead of entering traditional political or governmental activities. 8. Adults less than age 35 tend to see the free market as a liberating alternative to societys failed, centrally run institutions: big business, big labor and especially big government. Their view of the economy is a lot like their view of the Internet: it functions best when it is decentralized, rapidly changing and self-regulating. 9. One of the reasons younger adults disdain government is that they are used to speed: fast modems, fast cash and fast travel. Government does not act rapidly, and seems increasingly unable to respond to their needs. Among people aged 18 to 24, 78 percent disagree with the statement: Government can generally be trusted to look after our interests. 10. Because of their numbers, Generation Yers, like the baby boomers before them, will profoundly influence markets, attitudes and society. Their habits will shape America for much of the 21st century. Generation Yers are more competent, confident and wary than the Baby Boomers. 11. If you could sum up Generation Y in one word it would be diverse. They will be the first generation to seriously question all traditional racial categories because many of them are of mixed races. Generation Yers have more interaction between people of different races than Baby Boomers. 12. Generation Yers also will never know a world without computers. This generation views computers as basic equipment, like pencil and paper, not something to be feared. Innovations that seem like gimmicks from The Jetsons-such as video communication and computers to control functions in the home-will be commonplace for this generation. 13. The gap between the haves and have-nots of Generation Y is already wide, and in areas like technology and education, it could have a dramatic effect on the nations economy in the 21st century. It is estimated that it will take more than $50 billion over the next five years to provide a multimedia computer for every seven elementary school students. 14. This generation is growing up environmentally conscious, achievement oriented and far more tolerant of differences than their parents were. They have been far more active in political projects for youth than the Generation Xers were. Generation Yers have been described as good scouts; they show less hostility and anger than the Generation Xers. 15. The Internet is the medium of choice among Generation Yers in the same way as network TV was for the Baby Boomers. 16. According to a survey of college freshman of the class of 2001, Generation Yers trust their grandparents the most, followed by their parents. Generation Xers are trusted the least. Ninety-four percent intend to vote in elections. Almost three-quarters have volunteered in the past year, with most saying it is likely they will volunteer for a charitable organization in the future. Most important from a Baby Boomers perspective, almost two-thirds say it is their financial responsibility to care for parents when they become elderly and unable to care for themselves.
33
APPENDIX C. DRIVING FORCES: ECONOMICS

1. Manufacturing will decline in the United States. While the number of jobs in the United States is expected to grow in the 21st century, the number and relative importance of manufacturing jobs in the overall national economy will continue a decline that has occurred over the past 20 years. During the 21st century, the growth in manufacturing jobs is expected to grow outside the United States where wages are lower. 2. The U.S. economy will be driven by technology. Advances in information technology will continue to drive the U.S. economy. According to the U.S. Department of Commerce, high-tech computer and telecommunication industries accounted for 25 percent of the U.S. economic growth from 1993 to 1998. The United States. will continue to be the world leader in developing information technology innovations. 3. International trade will continue to be important. It contributes $1 trillion to the U.S. economy and has accounted for one-third of all growth since 1992. The world economy is continuing to break down trade barriers, and trade among nations will continue to increase and become more open. The European Union may well have a major effect on the overall U.S. economy. 4. New international trade treaties and negotiations, from NAFTA and WTO to the proposed Multilateral Agreement on Investment (MAI), could rewrite existing federal, state and local laws and regulations affecting ownership, real estate regulation and securities. These agreements could create a supranational body to prohibit discrimination against out-of-state investors based upon environmental or political practices. Another key element of these treaties is the business communitys desire for uniformity (national laws superseding state and local laws and international trade agreements superseding national laws) and elimination of obstacles to trade. 5. Large corporations will increasingly become multinational. The recent merger of the Chrysler Corporation and the Daimler-Benz Corporation are examples of a trend that will continue into the 21st century. The breakdown in trade barriers will accelerate this trend. 6. Labor shortages could plague the U.S. economy. The demographic trends in the United States will lead to a shortage of skilled workers in the U.S. labor market. The declining birth rate in the United States; coupled with the movement of the Baby Boomers
33
34
through the U.S. labor market, will likely lead to efforts to keep employees in the labor force longer. Immigration will play an increasingly important role as a source of needed workers in the United States. 7. Health care will grow in importance in the U.S. economy. As the U.S. population ages and the life expectancy of its people increases due to advances in medicine, the share of the U.S. economy dedicated to health care-related issues will increase. 8. State tax systems will be tested. The changes in the U.S. economy will severely test the ability of current state tax systems to collect the revenue necessary to finance state government. Examples of this include the threat to sales tax collections by Internet sales and the ability of state business taxes to adapt to rapidly expanding world trade. 9. The United States will move toward a networked economy in which businesses take advantage of advances in information and communication technology to create smaller, more versatile economic units. Businesses, as well as most organizations outside the business world, will begin to shift from hierarchical processes to networked ones. Nearly every facet of human activity is transformed in some way by the emerging interconnections. 10. The networked economy is fed by cheap, powerful computer chips and reduced telecommunications costs. It becomes feasible and cheap to exchange data almost anywhere, anytime. The Internet becomes the main medium of the 21st century. The result is a network that grows exponentially almost like a biological system. This growth results in innovation and change in the economy. Businesses get started, grow and fail more rapidly than the currently do. In addition, jobs are created and destroyed more rapidly than they currently are. 11. Throughout the world-nations will begin to adopt policies to deregulate their economies, privatize state-owned businesses, open their economies to foreign investment and cut government deficits. The world economy is predicted to grow at a 4 percent to 6 percent annual rate during the first decade of the 21st century. Almost every region of the planet is predicted to participate in this economic boom. 12. The U. S. educational system is likely to undergo a massive overhaul, driven by the need to produce more and better knowledge workers. A dramatic reduction in the number of unskilled jobs makes it clear that good education is necessary for survival. Nearly every organization in society will likely put learning at the core of its strategy for adapting to a fast-changing world. 13. The hierarchical government bureaucracies of the 20th century are likely to be flattened and decentralized through networks created by the adoption of new information and communication technologies.
35
APPENDIX D. DRIVING FORCES: TECHNOLOGY

1. A technology driven paradigm shift will take us from an economy based on atoms (manufactured things) to an economy based on bits (digital information and data). Debate over issues of ownership and intellectual property will expand. 2. The internet (e-mail, the web), television, phone service and other forms of communication and electronic entertainment will merge into one integrated, digital stream accessible through small, wireless, voice activated devices. Keyboards will become symbolic of the early days of the computer age. 3. Immense computing power will be available at low cost and in very small devices allowing computers to become almost invisible and embedded everywherein clothing, chairs, human tissue and blood streams, for example. 4. Artificial intelligence and immense raw computing power will allow computer-derived analysis of public policy decisions and advice on achieving optimal programmatic outcomes. Expert systems will see routine use as surrogate doctors, lawyersand, perhaps, legislative staff. 5. Printed products such as books, magazines, reports and other standard documents will be printed on electronic papera reusable, paper-like page on which new editions can be deleted and added. Magazine subscriptions, for example, will arrive each month via e-mail or some other digital method. The subscriber will download the new edition onto an electronic magazine platform. Old issues will be stored electronically for instant recovery and searching. 6. Databases will become the software vehicle for all information. Universal database codes and field identifiers will be developed to allow end users to correlate information and customize reports and analysis based on almost limitless amounts of interrelated data. Smart computers will anticipate problems and produce certain analyses before they are asked. 7. Multidimensional forms of information presentation and reporting will replace traditional formats of paper reports and verbal presentations. 8. Voice stress analysis and implanted technologies will allow instant verification of truthtelling, physical location and other aspects of a persons immediate condition and emotional state.
35
36
9. The privileged and underprivileged (third) worlds will be increasingly defined by those who are web-connected and those who are not. In privileged nations or regions, children will receive their web-address identifier (todays e-mail address) as a right of birth and perhaps as a requirement of government (much as the Social Security number exists today). 10. Direct voting forums, groupware and computerized decision support systems will allow issue-based policymaking and conflict resolution and support a transition toward participatory or direct democracy. 11. Telecommuting, enhanced through the application of advanced groupware systems, holography and virtual reality systems, will become commonplace and, perhaps, necessary due to urban overcrowding, high energy costs and public demand. Rural communities may reemerge as vibrant centers of human interaction and economic prosperity. 12. Nano technology, combined with leaps in computing power, will allow for development of ultra-small devices for medical applications, manufacturing of extremely precise instruments and tools, and self-repairing or self-correcting appliances. 13. Advances in computing power and artificial intelligence will drive other technological advances in the areas of biology, genetics and medicine that will pose complex and fundamental moral/ethical/religious questions to policymakers and those who support their work. 14. Medical advances will push human longevity to new realms. A new period of human life will emergeactive adults age 70 to 100for which the current society and economy have no place or resources. New competitions, both political and economic, will develop between this generation and others. 15. Stealth capabilities based on nano technologies and artificial computer hackers (intelligent viruses) will create new security concerns and opportunities for individuals, companies and governments.
37
APPENDIX E. DRIVING FORCES: POLITICAL

1. Electronic commerce, internet communications and regional interest (i.e. the Pacific Rim) will challenge the viability of traditional political boundaries and the governmental authorities that operate within them. 2. The global village accessible via the Internet will allow people to see and virtually inhabit the world from any angle. Lacking a firm local perspective, individuals will lose their ability to make consistent judgments on policy based on stable parochial interests. Deliberation and consensus building within public institutions will become more difficult as policymakers routinely shift their base or perspective on issues. 3. The role and influence of leadership will decline as politicians become more linked to voters and their daily opinions on policy questions. 4. State and local roles in governance and policymaking will expand as the federal governments influence diminishes. 5. Early voting, on-line voting options, instant polling and other technology-driven changes will alter the traditional conduct of political campaigns and fundraising. 6. Access to lawmakers, information and the legislative process made possible by communications technology will expand the arena of conflict beyond the legislature to groups and active individuals. Compromise will become more difficult as debate is waged increasingly through issue management campaigns conducted in the traditional media and on the Internet. 7. Membership in political institutions will become increasingly polarized as moderates abandon public service and are replaced by single-issue or poll-driven legislators. Increased polarization will exacerbate institutional gridlock and public frustration with lawmakers and with representative democracy. 8. Political parties will decline in influence and be replaced by fluid coalitions that vary according to changing legislative interests. 9. An abrupt swing toward forms of direct democracy made possible by technology and driven by public disenchantment with traditional institutions of governance will face a backlash as citizens become caught in the whiplash of single-issue, all-or-nothing
37
38
campaigns and policy decisions. Legislatures and other civic institutions will be sought for compromise approach to policymaking that balances participation and deliberation. 10. A public lacking interest and confidence in traditional parties and their candidates will be drawn to charismatic, single-issue candidates or to celebrities who may or may not have a firm agenda.
39
GLOSSARY
Core Value. Core values describe the essential beliefs and principles of a person, group or institution that we hope to preserve in the future. Core values serve as guideposts about the desirability of various scenarios of the future. Critical Uncertainty. Critical uncertainties are driving forces that have an uncertain future but that also have a potentially profound effect on the focal issue of the futures research. Critical uncertainties, when arranged as axes in a matrix, provide the foundation for identifying possible alternative scenarios of the future. Driving Force. A trend or forecast that has a high likelihood of affecting or changing the course of future events and the focal issue. Driving forces are divided into two types: 1) Predetermined forcesforces that we can predict with relative confidence. 2) Critical uncertainties[see definition above] Focal Issue. The key question or vision of the future that the futures researchers hope to answer or learn more about. The focal issue serves as the guiding light of a futures project by establishing parameters about the scope of work and the relevance of all project activities. Scenario. A story about the future based upon facts, predictions and possibilities uncovered in futures research. A good scenario employs imagery, characters and plot to create an interesting, readable, and plausible vision of the future. SWOT Analysis. An internal or external assessment of the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and treats faced by a group when conducting a project such as futures research. The SWOT analysis provides a good starting point for measuring the scope of a project against available resources and environmental factors. Snow Card Exercise. A brainstorming technique that requires individuals to write their thoughts about a specific question or issue on small white cards in advance of discussion about the question. The cards of all participants are placed together on a wall or panel (snow) and arranged according to common themes. The snow card technique allows many ideas to flow from a group in a short amount of time. STEEP Categories. A system for categorizing driving forces into social forces, technical forces, economic forces, environmental forces and political forces.
39
40
41
REFERENCES
Beck, Melinda. The Next Big Bulge: Generation Y Shows Its Might. New York: The Wall Street Journal, Feb. 3, 1997. Bezold, Clement. Scanning the Future: Some Implications for State Legislatures and Governance. Presentation to the National Conference of State Legislatures ASI/AFI Joint Meeting, Washington, D.C., Dec. 9, 1998. . Trends in State Legislatures. Presentation to the Legislative Staff Coordinating Committee Task Force on Planning and Designing a Legislature for the Future, Washington, D.C., Dec. 9, 1998. Binder, Sara A. The Disappearing Political Center. Washington, D.C.: The Brookings Review, 1996. Bonnett, Thomas W. Governance in the Digital Age: The Impact of the Global Economy, Information Technology and Economic Deregulation of State and Local Government. Washington, D.C.: National League of Cities, National Conference of State Legislatures, National Governors Association, 1998. Bonnett, Thomas W., and Robert L. Olson. Scenarios of State Government in the Year 2010: Thinking About the Future. Washington, D.C.: Council of Governors Policy Advisors, 1993. Bryson, John M., and Farnum K. Alston. Creating and Implementing Your Strategic Plan: A Workbook for Public and Nonprofit Organizations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1996. Burnham, Walter Dean. The End of American Party Politics. Society (January-February 1998). Grossman, Lawrence. Reshaping Political Values in the Information Age: The Power of the Media. Vital Speeches of the Day 63, no. 7 (Jan. 15, 1997). Hodgkinson, Harold. Demographic Trends. Presentation to the National Conference of State Legislatures Assembly on State Issues, Jacksonville, Fla., April 10, 1999. Jones, Jenifer. Cities Say Tech Will Play Key Role in Future Problem Solving, Civic.com (an IDG.net site).
41
42
Lang, Trudi. An Overview of Four Futures Methodologies. At http://www.soc.hawaii.edu/ future/j7/LANG.html, INTERNET. Lee, Kenneth. Rebel Children. The American Enterprise (September/October 1997). Le Roux, Pieter; Maphai, Vincent, et al. The Mont Fleur Scenarios. At http://www.gbn.org/ scenarios/fleur/fleur.html, INTERNET. Lifestyle Changes for the Next Millennium. Future News (June 1998). Louis Harris and Associates Inc. Generation 2001: A Survey of the First College Graduating Class of the New Millennium, May 4, 1991. At http://www.northwesternmutual.com/ 2001/summary-main.html, INTERNET. Mitchell, Susan. The Next Baby Boom. American Demographics, October 1995. At http://www.demographics.com/publications/ad/95_ad/9510_ad/ad813.htm Morrison, James L. Horizon Site at http://horizon.unc.edu/onramp, INTERNET. Morrison, J.L. Environmental scanning, in A Primer For New Institutional Researchers, edited by M.A. Whitely, J.D. Porter, and R.H. Fenske, 86-99. Tallahassee, Fla.: The Association for Institutional Research, 1992. Neuborn, Ellen, and Kathleern Kerwin. Generation Y, Business Week Online (Feb. 15, 1999). At http://www.businessweek.com/1999/99_07/b361600/.htm, INTERNET. Ornstein, Norman, and Amy Schenkenberg. The Promise and Perils of Cyberdemocracy. The American Enterprise (March 1996). Politics in Cyberspace. Futurist 33, no. 1 (January 1999), 14. Raines, Claire. The X Factor: What Generational Change Means for the Legislative Institution. Presentation to the National Conference of State Legislatures Assembly on State Issues, Jacksonville, Fla., April 11, 1999 Rosenthal, Alan. The Decline of Representative Democracy. Washington, D.C.: CQ Press, 1998. . The Good Legislature. State Legislatures (July/August 1999), 48-51. Schwartz, Peter, and Peter Leyden. The Long Boom: A History of the Future 1980-2020. At http:www.wired.com/wired/archive/5.07/longboom_pr.html, Wired, July 1997, INTERNET. Technology Breakthroughs for the Next Decade. Executive Speeches 13, no. 3 (December 1998/January 1999), 1-5. The Gallup Organization. Public Trust in Federal Government Remains High. At http:www.gallup.com/poll/releases/pr990108.asp, Jan. 8, 1999.
References
43
The Pew Research Center for the People and the Press. Deconstructing Distrust: How Americans View Government. At http://www.people-press.org/trustrpt.htm, April 1998, INTERNET. . Pew Value Update; American Social Beliefs 1997-1987. At http://www.peoplepress.org/valuetop.htm, April 1998, INTERNET. Thomas, Andrew P. Independents Day. The American Enterprise (November/December 1998). U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. How Were Changing, Demographic State of the Nation: 1997. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Commerce, March 1997. . Bureau of the Census. Population Projections of the United States By Age, Sex, Race and Hispanic Origin: 1995-2000. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Commerce, February 1996. Wilkinson, Lawrence. How to Build Scenarios. At http://www.wired.com/wired/scenarios/ build/html, INTERNET. Woodyard, Chris. Generation Y: The Young and the Boundless Are Taking Over Pop Culture. USA Today, Oct. 6, 1998. Zink, Nicholas, and John Robinson. The Generation X Difference. American Demographics. At http://www.demographics.com/publications/ad/95_ad/9504_ad/ 9504af01.htm, April 1995.
44

Legislatures of The Future: Implications of Change

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Legislatures of The Future: Implications of Change

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

i

Legislatures of the Future: Implications of Change

National Conference of State Legislatures

Legislatures of the Future: Implications of Change

National Conference of State Legislatures

National Conference of State Legislatures

Legislatures of the Future: Implications of Change

LEGISLATURES OF THE FUTURE TASK FORCE

National Conference of State Legislatures

PREFACE AND ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

National Conference of State Legislatures

Legislatures of the Future: Implications of Change

National Conference of State Legislatures

National Conference of State Legislatures

Legislatures of the Future: Implications of Change

National Conference of State Legislatures

National Conference of State Legislatures

Legislatures of the Future: Implications of Change

National Conference of State Legislatures

National Conference of State Legislatures

Legislatures of the Future: Implications of Change

2. AMERICA IN THE YEAR 2025

America in 2025 is an older and more diverse society.

National Conference of State Legislatures

America in the Year 2025

Legislatures of the Future: Implications of Change

National Conference of State Legislatures

3. THE HARASSED LEGISLATURE 2025

National Conference of State Legislatures

Legislatures of the Future: Implications of Change

National Conference of State Legislatures

The Harassed Legislature 2025

Legislatures of the Future: Implications of Change

4. THE CIRCUMVENTED LEGISLATURE 2025

The circumvented legislature increasingly is bypassed by strongly individualistic voters.

National Conference of State Legislatures

The Circumvented Legislature 2025

National Conference of State Legislatures

Legislatures of the Future: Implications of Change

National Conference of State Legislatures

5. THE TRADITIONAL LEGISLATURE 2025

National Conference of State Legislatures

Legislatures of the Future: Implications of Change

The Traditional Legislature 2025

National Conference of State Legislatures

Legislatures of the Future: Implications of Change

6. THE DIMINISHED LEGISLATURE 2025

National Conference of State Legislatures

The Diminished Legislature 2025

National Conference of State Legislatures

Legislatures of the Future: Implications of Change

National Conference of State Legislatures

7. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

National Conference of State Legislatures

Legislatures of the Future: Implications of Change

Conclusions and Implications

Legislatures Must Protect the Balance of Power

Legislatures of the Future: Implications of Change

Effective legislative performance is the best defense of representative democracy.

Implications for Action by Legislatures

Conclusions and Implications

National Conference of State Legislatures