Our hardworking state legislators have finished their 2019 term, and their success or lack thereof is very likely a function of your own partisanship. I’m pretty happy with things. But there is one thing that kind of nags at me, and that has to do with how long the legislative session runs, roughly four months. Aren’t we a big enough and important enough state to merit a year-round legislature?

You may recall a number of stories about the near-frantic pace of the Colorado legislative calendar. The Dems, enjoying majorities in both Houses as well as all the top state jobs, got quite a bit done in the brief January through early May schedule. If you are a GOPer, you are likely unhappy with what got passed and perhaps more importantly, what did not. That said, things are likely quiet in our State Capitol these days. 

I grew up in Ann Arbor, Michigan, where as a politics geek, I observed the Wolverine State’s elected at work pretty much full-time, pretty much all year. As my first military posting was in Wyoming, while in the Cowboy State I also tried to observe the state legislature in action. The only problem was, well, they were not in session that year. It seems Wyoming, along with Montana, Nevada, and a couple more have sessions everyother year. A number of states follow Michigan’s model and have effectively full-year legislatures.  Others are somewhere in between.

There are, or at least there were in the olden days, good reasons for this amazing variation among the fifty states. The glory that is Wyoming may not needto be legislated year-round, or even every year, but we in Colorado should ask ourselves if we want to be more like Wyoming, or more like Michigan. I doubt too many people think that, say a giant state like California (we are talking populations, not physical size) would need a year-round legislature. I posit that we are at least as important as California, eh?

A quick internet search will show the remarkable range of sessions, from once every other year for a couple of months, to a near-daily session year round. I suspect that much of the reasoning behind short sessions is that many people, perhaps most, really would like the government to do as little as possible. By restricting the sessions, states can significantly limit how much work (or how much “damage,” if you want to be cynical). But recall that in our just finished session the elected officials in Denver worked until the wee hours regularly, all in the huge rush to get bills on the floor, debated, passed, and signed into law. Would it be so terrible if we gave them, say, an extra week? Month? Maybe all year? 

There are advantages to more frequent sessions, especially in terms of representation. As I type these words, the (nearly all) good women and men elected to the Colorado legislature are back home, posting their accomplishments and/or frustrations on social media. In Michigan, those legislators call that a long weekend, and it’s back to session for them.

If we really believe that elections are important, and we as voters take seriously the responsibility to pick those who legislate on our behalf, then doesn’t it make sense that we give them as many days and as many tools as possible? How responsive, for example, will your state House member be in June? He or she may well be a good person and may be very responsive. Or they may feel it’s months until their next work days, so the heck with it.

These short sessions also mean that good ideas that are crafted after May but before January must await the cold winter day in the next January, when the Legislature again convenes. To give you an example, I saw that another state had made a physical attack on a sports official a felony, rather than a misdemeanor. As a 61-year-old who officiates High School football and some basketball, I can tell you I’d really like that additional protection. If you think I’m over-stating, stop by a rivalry game and listen to what the parents yell at officials, to include occasionally challenging them in hallways, parking lots, and such. I’d like to contact my state rep and ask that this bill from another state be explored and possibly crafted for Colorado. Unfortunately for me, I read about that other state’s new law too late for this year’s Colorado session. 

We are a full-time state, with serious people doing important things, plus skiing and such. Let’s boost their pay and ask our legislators to represent us all year round. 

Hal Bidlack is a retired professor of political science and a retired Air Force lieutenant colonel who taught more than 17 years at the U.S. Air Force Academy in Colorado Springs.