GOP House group: We want to ‘empower’ members, be more transparent
A coalition of state Republican lawmakers is seeking to change the House rules to allow more House members to have their bills heard, make it harder to remove House members from their committees and give lawmakers and the public more time to review proposed legislation before it passes.
Eight lawmakers co-signed a letter to House GOP Leadership asking for the changes to be made to the rules, which are generally set at the outset of the year’s legislative session. The letter was later sent to the full House Republican caucus.
Signers include Representatives Savannah Maddox, Steve Doan, Josh Calloway, Felicia Rabourn, Marianne Proctor, Steve Rawlings, Nancy Tate and Candy Massaroni.
A majority of those lawmakers are part of the informal ‘Liberty’ wing of the state GOP, as was the case with multiple lawmakers who were removed from committees at the end of the last legislative session. Some of those members, Rabourn and Calloway in particular, publicly challenged leadership near the end of last session.
Maddox, a strong ally of Rep. Thomas Massie, R-KY, ran for governor before dropping out of the GOP primary last December.
Rabourn told the Herald-Leader that she and other Republicans removed from their committees were informed that they will be restored.
She also said more than the eight signatories within the GOP caucus support the rule changes, and she hopes some Democrats will be persuaded to join them.
The letter’s recommendations center around empowering members to do more without explicit approval from House GOP leadership – Republicans hold an 80-20 majority over Democrats – as leadership generally controls the flow of legislation in both chambers.
“This is exactly how government should work,” Rabourn said.
“The elected representatives are the voice for their constituents, for the 4.5 million people of Kentucky. Oftentimes, we see a lot of the lobbyists’ agendas being pushed rather than the voice of the people, and I think that changing these rules is a good step to ensuring that constituent voices are heard.”
One proposed rule change, to require that bills changed in committee can’t make a floor vote until three days have passed, targets transparency concerns recently raised in a report by the League of Women Voters of Kentucky.
That report found the legislature has become less transparent over time, in part due to the adoption of committee substitutes with little discussion or public comment.
Here are the rule changes proposed:
Each member of the House, regardless of party, gets to designate one bill per session as a “priority bill.” Those bills must be heard by the sponsor’s committee of choice, and the House must call it to a vote within five days if it passes a committee vote.
If 25 or more House members sign a petition to hear a bill, it will come to the House floor for a vote
Removal of House members from committees should require a full committee vote if the member does not agree with the removal.
Committee chairs and vice-chairs will be selected by committee members themselves as opposed to the Committee on Committees.
Four “at-large” members, two selected by each caucus, shall join the Rules Committee, which currently consists of only party leadership. The at-large member of the majority party receiving the most votes, instead of the Speaker of the House as is currently the case, shall chair the Rules Committee.
Any bill listed in the Orders of the Day may be called by the sponsor for a floor vote the next legislative day.
The House Committee on Committee must refer all bills to a committee within five legislative days of its introduction.
No bill amended or substituted in committee can be placed in the Orders of the Day until House members have had access to it for three legislative days.
A spokesperson for House GOP leadership has yet to comment on the proposals. Rabourn said she had not received much feedback from House leadership as of yet.
The “priority bill” change to the rules would be a major departure from the way legislation has moved in recent years. Many Democratic legislators have not had bills voted on in committee, which is also the case for some Republican legislators in the Liberty wing of the Kentucky GOP.
“Allowing each member to at least have their bill considered in committee is an important way to make sure that all citizens in the Commonwealth are equally represented, whether they live in Louisville or Letcher County,” Rabourn posted.
In an 80-20 GOP majority, all committees are overwhelmingly comprised of Republican House members, meaning that Democrats’ “priority bills” would likely have a tough go at making it through committee.
Still, making it to a committee vote would be further than the vast majority of major Democratic-backed bills have since Republicans took the majority in 2016.
Rabourn predicts the proposals could receive support from both sides of the aisle.
A spokesperson for the House Democratic leadership said they have not had time to fully review the group’s proposed changes, but they “support any effort that gives the public more time to review legislation while giving a greater voice to those who are often silenced.”
They added they will be making their own rule change recommendations that correspond with the League of Women Voters of Kentucky’s report.
Rabourn added she thinks the “priority bill” provision will be the most discussed but “should be the least controversial.”
“By giving members the opportunity to have a priority piece of legislation, you’re empowering them to speak on behalf of their district’s needs. For some members, it’s going to be controversial due to members maybe not wanting to take a stance on an issue,” she said.
“It shouldn’t be controversial, because we as a body have the ability to vote on behalf of our constituents and to stop legislation if we don’t agree with it. This is all part of the process of hearing what members have to say on behalf of their constituents across the state.”
This story was originally published December 6, 2023 at 10:11 AM.
