Nevada Legislature reforms needed

When people think of government, they usually first think of the president, who is committed to his job year-round throughout his four-year term. Then they probably consider the U.S. Congress, in which the legislators in the House of Representatives and the Senate work about 125 days out of the year.

But the Nevada State Legislature is different. This group meets for only 120 days every two years. For example, this year, the 72nd session of the legislature began on Feb. 3, and will end no later than June 2. But the legislature will not convene again until February 2005.

To me, this does not seem like an effective way to govern a state. First, I will explore other states' methods of legislative government, and secondly, I will explain why working only 120 days every two years is impractical and inefficient.

In my research, I did not find any other state legislatures operating in the same way as Nevada's. In fact, all of the state legislatures I read about met much more often than 120 days every two years.

For example, the New York State Legislature meets every year and opens in January on the first Wednesday after the first Monday (whew!) and typically ends in June. This equates into about 120 days a year.

The California legislature, on the other hand, is biennial. They have met in a two-year session since 1972, and currently convene the first Monday of December in even-numbered years. The legislators are then required by law to adjourn by midnight Nov. 30 of the following even-numbered year, although they traditionally come to a close in September. An example of the maximum length legislative session in California would be Dec. 2, 1996 to Nov. 30, 1998.

Even Alaska's legislature meets yearly, though their sessions consist of only 120 calendar, not working, days.

But just the fact that other states' legislatures meet for longer periods of time is not reason enough for Nevada to adopt a similar policy. The Nevada State Legislature is in desperate need of reform for many other reasons.

First, the members of the Nevada Assembly and Senate are not even paid enough to live on. These legislators must find other jobs when the legislature is out of session just to support themselves. I don't know about anyone else, but I would prefer government officials who are dedicated only to their positions to ones who have to work another job to survive.

Secondly, there are occasions in the state when changes need to be made right away. And while most legislatures cannot make this happen even when they meet yearly, a legislature that meets every other year such as Nevada's is at an even further disadvantage. Third, just because Nevada has used this system for 150 years and the state has so far avoided major catastrophe is no reason to stick with it.

Sometimes things need to be repaired, even if they aren't broken yet.

Finally and most important, the legislature needs to be reformed so legislators can get more done. In Nevada, legislators are always working on limited time. It is a race against the clock to see if they can actually pass the necessary bills in less than 120 days. And the last few days of a legislative session are some of the most stressful days of legislators' lives. This 120-day deadline is simply too restrictive. Legislators have to be given sufficient time to make changes in our state.

There are many reasons for the Nevada Legislature to meet more often than 120 days every other year. Sadly, though, in their brief sessions, the legislature will likely never have a chance to make this change.

Jessica Smallman is a senior at Carson High School. She is writing a regular column for the Nevada Appeal as her senior project.