Trenton's "Routine Business" Weaponizes Governmental Processes
WANJ Watches Senate Committee Break Rules in Real-Time and We Can Prove It
For far too long, New Jerseyans have tolerated a hackneyed, crazy-quilt approach to lawmaking in Trenton. It’s no way to run a branch of government. All too often it results in poorly worded laws which are ineffective, exploited by those with less than noble intentions, require ‘corrective legislation’ within a short time after being enacted (when all of the problems become apparent) or even prove to be DETRIMENTAL.
The New Jersey Constitution requires the state budget be passed by the legislature and approved by the governor before midnight on June 30. If that doesn’t happen, a shutdown occurs until a plan to fund state government is finalized and approved. In addition to the budget, many bills are added, removed from consideration, or amended during committee meetings as the June budget deadline approaches. This year, early reports of a budget ‘agreement’ between state legislative leadership and Governor Murphy seemingly gave way leading to June 28 committee votes being delayed until after 10 and 11 pm, respectively.
Background:
In general, NJ Senate and Assembly rules require all bills be introduced and move through committee and voting processes in an orderly, well-defined manner. One of the rules stipulates that a copy of all bills, resolutions and amendments must be available in the Office of Legislative Services’ (OLS) Bill Room. However, statements made by members of the legislature, the public and sources familiar with the process frequently describe bill text being drafted, filed and made publicly available in ways that seem to diverge from the official rules. Throughout the last two days of Fiscal Year 2024 budget meetings (June 27 & 28, 2023) committee chairs and members repeatedly referenced bills ‘not being ready,’ with some even stating they hadn’t seen copies before being asked to vote.
What Happened:
Not surprisingly, the June 27 Senate Budget Committee agenda listed a handful of changes to the bills scheduled for consideration. I used the ‘Bill Search’ function on the NJ Legislature website to check out bills which were added or removed. A few returned a ‘No bills found’ result, leading me to investigate further. One that caught my eye was S3980. The agenda didn’t include any information about the bill topic, just that it was sponsored by Senator Paul Sarlo, the Budget Committee chair. A few clicks later I discovered that this ‘yet to be realized’ bill had been included in the June 22 Legislative Calendar - a free informational publication of the Office of Legislative Services - as having been added to the June 27 committee agenda with the description ‘Debt Defeasance Allocations.’
Defeasance
1. A provision in a loan or bond removing it as a liability on a balance sheet if cash or a portfolio is set aside for debt service. Usually defeasance occurs when a borrower owns a portfolio of Treasury securities, the coupons of which are used to service a debt. When the borrower has set aside sufficient assets to cover the debt, the debt does not need to be recorded on a balance sheet.
2. More broadly, a provision in an agreement voiding the agreement undercertain defined circumstances."defeasance." Farlex Financial Dictionary. 2009. Farlex 29 Jun. 2023 https://financial-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/defeasance
Since public debt is a MASSIVE issue in NJ and reduction of it has been a major policy focus of the Murphy administration, I became very interested in reading S3980 to learn more about how this Fiscal Year 2024 budget and finance related allocation fit into the bigger picture. So, early on the afternoon of June 27, I called the Bill Room in Trenton and asked if they had a copy of S3980. The friendly and helpful person who answered the phone told me there were a lot of bills coming in, but they hadn’t received it yet.
Senate Budget met for a couple hours that afternoon, but S3980 didn’t come up for consideration. After re-checking the online ‘Bill Search’ function in the evening and not seeing any updates, I called the Bill Room again. For the second time, an OLS employee told me that it wasn’t in the system and no copy was available. Later, Senator Paul Sarlo announced that the budget wasn't finished yet. The committee went into recess without completing all of the necessary budget and appropriations bills. Members would need to come back to Trenton to complete the meeting the following day. S3980 still hadn’t been updated, discussed or voted on by the end of June 27 .
The next day, I checked the NJ Legislature website for updates, but didn’t see any. Senate Budget reconvened late in the afternoon and to my surprise, S3980 came up for a vote. Senators Declan O’Scanlon and Michael Testa tried to introduce amendments. During the discourse O’Scanlon mentioned he hadn’t seen a copy of the bill, but referenced understanding it as being the same as the Assembly version. (Until that time I was unaware that there was an identical Assembly bill.) After failed committee amendments and comments it was released from Senate Budget by unanimous vote. Moments later the committee went into recess, so I called the Bill Room again. I was told that they were still ‘waiting for the bill to come down.’ After hanging up, I checked the website for any indication that S3980 was in the system with a description since it had already been read into the record and released from committee…the search result: ‘No bills found.’
Late on the evening of June 28 (while Senate Budget was still in recess) I finally saw it listed on the NJ Legislature website:
S3980 - Credits $400 million to "New Jersey Debt Defeasance and Prevention Fund"; appropriates $371 million to DOC, DLPS, South Jersey Port Corporation, and DOT; establishes process for authorizing future appropriations for debt defeasance and capital projects.
No bill text or statement was included. But the bill page linked the identical Assembly version so I clicked on it to see if further information was available, especially since Senator O’Scanlon had referenced that bill. Nope; bill number, description, sponsor. That was it.
The morning of June 29 arrived and I continued to monitor for updates on the bill page. By early afternoon a Statement about S3980 from Senate Budget was available, but no bill text had been added. This seemed odd, but also seemed to confirm what was described in committee the previous day. It appears that the technical process of drafting this bill may have happened - at least in part - AFTER it was approved by the committee.
(June 29 screen recording of Bill Search, S3980; note change to introduction date)
I called the Bill Room again. This time, after a brief hold, an OLS employee said they had it and offered to send a copy to me. Graciously, I accepted and checked my inbox…it was the Senate Budget Statement. A short time later I became aware that the bill text was finally available on the NJ Legislature website for public inspection. Based on my documentation and inquiries from June 27-29, S3980 was finalized and uploaded to the system nearly 24 hours after having been approved by the Senate Budget Committee.
Why It Matters:
Rules are put in place for a reason, but they appear to be broken all the time during ‘routine business’ in Trenton. It seems like common sense, but having a chance to read a bill before voting, testifying or sharing thoughts about it is pretty important. Introducing a bill and making what’s in it publicly available BEFORE a committee considers it gives everyone the opportunity to engage in the legislative process but based on what happens somewhat regularly, (as in the case of S3980) not making a bill publicly available until a late stage serves to consolidate power by minimizing the effectiveness of many voices - including those of some legislators.
Many only see the headline or news bites about what happens in the state legislature, but they often represent or refer to inefficiencies and “forced errors” in the legislative process. Functionally, the outcomes is often a reduction in time made available by legislative leadership for addressing pressing, current issues. This can feed a vicious cycle of mounting problems and ‘emergency’ handling of rushed bills to ‘fix’ things. Rinse and repeat.
Following the rules for introduction and publishing of bills could result in better draft legislation. There are indications more than one of the mentioned negative outcomes could occur in our case study bill addressing debt defeasance. Overall, it may turn out to be beneficial in the long run. But, in general, it seems that better laws could be passed if rules were adhered to and everyone could offer meaningful input before bills are scheduled for a final vote.
Voices representing diverse, sometimes opposing, perspectives on bill content have often been in agreement about issues with bill introduction, publishing and and (lack of) timely availability for review of amendments. It appears that Trenton’s version of ‘routine business’ weaponizes governmental processes and - by virtue of that - policies against the people. Let’s clean house, get rid of self-serving capital city characters orchestrating scenes like this at our expense and apply rules grounded in common sense. That course of action leads to opportunities for true public servants to emerge who can do the job of administering government in keeping with our founding documents and principles.