Local Lawmakers Against Full-time Legislature

Washington lawmakers have returned to their home districts after another busy legislative session, prompting some in Olympia to question whether the state’s part-time Legislature still fits the demands of modern state government. However, northeast Washington legislators say they remain cautious about any move toward a full-time Legislature, arguing that the citizen-legislator model keeps lawmakers grounded in their communities and accountable to the people they represent. Washington operates under a hybrid, part-time legislative system. According to state law, lawmakers meet for 105 days in odd-numbered years and 60 days in even-numbered years, with the possibility of special sessions if called by the governor. Before 1979, the Legislature met only once every other year for 60 days. Supporters of moving toward a longer or full-time model argue that state government has become more complex and that short sessions leave lawmakers trying to handle major issues, including budgets, taxes, housing, education, and federal policy changes, in a compressed period of time. A resolution introduced this year would have given Washington lawmakers more flexibility to set their own calendar without a constitutional amendment. Supporters said that could allow the Legislature to hold longer sessions when needed. State Democrats have added that it’s also harder to react to moves by the federal government when the state legislature is not in session. Some Democrat lawmakers have said they had to retire from their day job because it was difficult to balance. One said that lawmakers take a “vow of poverty” to be legislators. But Rep. Hunter Abell, R-Inchelium, said he remains in favor of Washington’s citizen legislature model. “I’m a strong proponent of the current legislative model, because you have the legislature go back home and live under laws passed,” Abell said. “That’s really important, along with bringing other skills to the table, other than serving the government.” Abell said he believes the state’s founders intentionally built a system that keeps lawmakers from becoming a permanent political class. “Our founders were really passionate about this and put it in our constitution,” Abell said. “Originally, we were only in session every other year, since then, they’ve created a short session, a 60-day session.” He said moving toward a full-time system could reduce turnover and create fewer incentives for elected officials to return to private life. “It creates a hurdle for turnover, I think we need to turnover people so we don’t have a permanent ruling class,” Abell said. “In other states, there is little incentive for people to leave.” Abell said anyone who runs for the Legislature should understand the sacrifice involved. “Anyone who takes on this position needs to be aware it’s an honor to do so, they’re going to have to engage in time management,” Abell said. For Abell, that means balancing legislative work with family and his law practice. “I’m a single dad, I spend a lot of time with my kids, that’s important, and after that, it’s legislative service. After that and everything else, it’s my law practice,” Abell said. Still, Abell said the job can already feel like more than full-time during session. “It’s absolutely full-time and more than full-time during session – 24-and-ahalf hour floor debate over state income tax – that’s not allowed in the private sector,” Abell said. “It’s very unique during the session, it’s full-time and more.” Outside of session, Abell said lawmakers continue working on constituent issues, policy research and meetings in their districts. “This is when we do research and find out info for potential bills for next session,” Abell said. “We have a lot of meetings in the district. Right now, we’re having a lot of conversations about wildfire response and prevention, along with meeting with state agencies and citizen organizations, and really finding out how we can best position our district for next session.” Abell said complaints about the difficulty of the recent session had more to do with the substance of bills, such as the state income tax, than with the length of the work. “Nothing to do with work, but the bills,” Abell said. “Generation impactful bills, bad for the state of Washington, and even among the majority caucus. It was very controversial, so of course, the session was brutal.” Rep. Andrew Engell, R-Colville, said he treats the legislative role like a fulltime job now, even though the Legislature is not formally full-time. “There have been a number of philosophies. Personally, I treat it like a fulltime job; most people can’t live on the salary, even though I do get paid more than a normal person in the district,” Engell said. Engell said he is not convinced that more pay or more time in Olympia would automatically produce better government. “Really, what would it look like if you changed the design? Not sure if more pay would be better work or better legislators,” Engell said. He said he works year-round because he wants to stay connected with the people he represents. “I’m not convinced that going to a fulltime lawmaker model would achieve that goal,” Engell said. Engell said lawmakers are set to make about $67,000 a year, which is above the average salary in parts of his district, though the pay is not enough to make someone wealthy. He said one of the values of the system is that lawmakers spend a few months in Olympia and then return home to live alongside their constituents. “There is a lot of value going to Olympia for two to three months most years, and then you come home next time and get connected back with the community, even people with full-time jobs still working in community living life alongside constituents,” Engell said. Engell said he would be concerned about making Washington’s Legislature more like Congress, with lawmakers based primarily in the capital. “If you make it to be like a little Congress where you live in Olympia, come back once in a while, that’s a problem,” he said, adding that full-time models in other states does not necessarily mean better representation. “California is full-time, year-round. Is that model working? What’s important is to represent their people. The best way to do it is by living more like the people, not getting paid more and spending more time in Olympia,” Engell said. Engell said lawmakers already work on bills during the interim and do not need to spend more time in Olympia. “I do work on bills during the summer, some don’t even look at the bill until session or worse,” Engell said.