DOCSLIB.ORG

Leadership Staffing Support

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Leadership Staffing Support SO=Session Only FT=Full Time PERSONAL STAFF - a study of western states PT=Part Time STATE PERSONAL STAFF OFFICER MAJORITY MINORITY Comments TERM SESSION LIMITS Alaska House 1-2 FT per member 4-FT 4-FT 3-FT None Annual 40 Members Alaska Senate 2-3 FT per member 4-FT 4-FT 3-FT None Annual 20 Members Arizona House 1-FT per 2 members 2-FT 1-FT 1-FT Yes Annual 60 Members Arizona Senate 1-FT per 2 members 2-FT 1-FT 1-FT Yes Annual 30 Members Arkansas House Constituent Services No Additional No Additional No Additional Chief Clerk hires staff Yes Annual 100 Members 4-6 FT Arkansas Senate Constituent Services No Additional No Additional No Additional Chief Clerk hires staff 35 Members 4 FT Colorado House 2-SO per member 1-FT 4-FT 4-FT Hours may be used in the Yes Annual 65 Members not to exceed 690 hrs 4-SO 3-SO interim per fiscal year Colorado Senate 1-SO per member 8-FT Shares Presiding 5-FT 50 hrs in interim Yes Annual 35 Members not to exceed 420 hrs 2-SO Officer Staff 2-SO $10.50 per hour per fiscal year Hawaii House 1-FT per member 4-FT 2-FT 2-FT Similar to Hawaii Senate None Annual 51 Members 2-FT Pro Tem (see below) Hawaii Senate 2-FT per member 5-FT V.P. 3-FT No Additional Monthly allocation for None Annual 25 Members (1 serves as 1-SO additional SO staff ($5,000 committee clerk) with an extra $1-2,000 if chairman or leader) Idaho House 1-SO per chairman 1-SO 1-SO 3-SO Leadership hires staff None Annual 70 Members 1-PT in Interim STATE PERSONAL STAFF OFFICER MAJORITY MINORITY Comments TERM SESSION Idaho Senate 1-SO per chairman & 3-FT 1-SO 1-SO Leadership hires staff NoneLIMITS Annual 35 Members pool of 5-SO 1-FT Pro Tem secretaries for all members Iowa House 1-SO per member 5-FT Shares Presiding 2-FT Members hire staff None Annual 100 Members Officer Staff Iowa Senate 1-SO per member 5-FT Shares Presiding 2-FT Members hire staff None Annual 50 Members Officer Staff Kansas House 1-SO per 2 members 3-FT 2-FT 2-FT Committee chairmen None Annual 125 Members 1-SO 1-SO 2-SO are given additional SO staff 1-FT Pro Tem 1-SO Pro Tem Kansas Senate 1-SO per member 3-FT 2-FT 2-FT Committee chairmen None Annual 40 Members 1-SO 1-SO 2-SO are given additional SO staff 1-FT Pro Tem 1-SO Pro Tem Louisiana House $2-3,000 per month 12-FT 1-FT per caucus 1-FT per caucus Allocation of funds based on Yes Annual 105 Members allocated per member (there are 6) (there are 6) seniority to be used for staffing district offices and session Louisiana Senate $2-3,000 per month 5-FT 1-FT per caucus 1-FT per caucus Allocation of funds based on Yes Annual 39 Members allocated per member (there are 6) (there are 6) seniority to be used for staffing district offices and session Minnesota House 1-FT per 2 members in 1-FT 8-FT 7-FT Chief of Staff supervises None Biennium 134 Members majority 4-SO 4-SO personnel committee 1-FT per 3 members in which handles the hiring minority STATE PERSONAL STAFF OFFICER MAJORITY MINORITY Comments TERM SESSION Minnesota Senate 1-FT per member 3-FT 8-FT 3-FT Advisory Committee aides in NoneLIMITS Biennium 67 Members hiring process (Human Resources, Majority/Minority Chief of Staff) Missouri House 1-FT per member 5-FT 1-FT 1-FT 1-FT for Budget Chair Yes Annual 163 Members Approx staff turnover with term limits is every 2 years Missouri Senate Allocation of funds Awaiting Information Yes Annual 34 Members Montana None Yes Biennial 100 / 50 Members Nebraska Senate 2-FT per member 3-FT N/A N/A Yes Annual 49 Members Nevada House 1-SO per member 4-SO 2-3 SO 2-3 SO Chief Clerk hires majority of Yes Biennial 42 Members SO staff. Also, a constituent services branch is available to members in the interim. Nevada Senate 1-SO per member 4-SO 2-3 SO 2-3 SO Chief Clerk hires 21 Members majority of SO staff New Mexico House 1-SO per 2 members LT. Gov. 1.5 FT 1.5 FT Leadership hires FT staff None Annual 70 Members 1.5 FT Chief Clerk hires SO staff New Mexico Senate 1-SO per member LT. Gov. 1.5 FT 1.5 FT Leadership hires FT staff None Annual 42 Members 1.5 FT Pro Tem Chief Clerk hires SO staff North Dakota House None 1-SO Shares Presiding 1-SO None Biennial 94 Members Officer Staff North Dakota Senate None 1-SO Shares Presiding 1-SO None Biennial 47 Members Officer Staff Oklahoma House 52-FT Shared 3-FT 1-FT 3-FT Shared staff divided by Yes Annual 101 Members 31-SO Shared 1-FT Pro Tem leadership--based on seniority & chairmanship STATE PERSONAL STAFF OFFICER MAJORITY MINORITY Comments TERM SESSION Oklahoma Senate 1-FT per member 4-FT No Additional No Additional YesLIMITS Annual 48 Members 1-SO Oregon 1- FT per member 7-FT 6-FT 9-FT None Annual 60 / 30 Members 1-SO per member South Dakota None None None None Yes Annual 70 / 35 Members Utah House 1-SO intern per 2 2-FT 1-SO per member 1-FT Full-time staff hires None Annual 75 Members members 1-SO 1-SO interns Utah Senate 1-SO intern per No Additional No Additional No Additional The intern is asked if they None Annual 29 Members member (3-4 prefer a certain political party Freshmen share an (university students) intern Washington House 1- FT per member 1-SO No Additional No Additional 1-SO for APH Chair None Annual 98 Members Washington Senate 1- FT per member 2-FT 2-FT per member 2-FT per member 2-SO for Finance Chairs None Annual 49 Members 1-SO per member Wyoming None 1-SO 1-SO 1-SO None Biennium 60 / 30 Members Members and leadership typically hire their own personal staff. Once a member terms out or loses an election, the new member may choose to retain current staff or hire their own. .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 2021 GENERAL ASSEMBLY ROSTER STATE EXECUTIVE OFFICERS 3 State Executive Officers Governor
    General Assembly Roster 2021 101st General Assembly Schedule First Regular Session Bill filing opens . .Dec. 1, 2020 Session convenes ..............................Jan. 6, 2021 Last day for bills to be considered . .May 14, 2021 Session adjourns ..............................May 30, 2021 Governor’s approval by .........................July 14, 2021 Effective date of laws . .Aug. 28, 2021 Veto session.................................Sept. 15, 2021 Second Regular Session Bill filing opens . .Dec. 2, 2021 Session convenes ..............................Jan. 8, 2022 Last day for bills to be considered . .May 15, 2022 Session adjourns ..............................May 30, 2022 Governor’s approval by .........................July 14, 2022 Effective date of laws . .Aug. 28, 2022 Veto session.................................Sept. 16, 2022 Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft State Capitol Room 208 Missouri Secretary of State E PLU UM RIB N US U Jefferson City, MO 65101 John R. Ashcroft www.sos.mo.gov JOHN R. ASHCROFT SECRETARY OF STATE STATE OF MISSOURI JAMES C. KIRKPATRICK STATE CAPITOL STATE INFORMATION CENTER (573) 751-2379 (573) 751-4936 Dear Fellow Missourians, Welcome to Missouri’s 101st General Assembly and a year-long celebration of Missouri’s Bicentennial! Many organizations around the state are participating in Bicentennial projects to bring Missouri’s history to life as we mark the 200th anniversary of the state on August 10, 2021. I encourage you to visit Missouri2021.org to familiarize yourself with the events and projects that are available to you, and to visit www.sos.mo.gov/ Archives/Bicentennial for a trip through Missouri history through primary sources, organized by a division of my office, the Missouri State Archives. In the following pages, you will find information about Missouri’s state and federal elected officials, the roles they serve and how to contact them.
    [Show full text]
  • Arizona Constitution Article I ARTICLE II
    Preamble We the people of the State of Arizona, grateful to Almighty God for our liberties, do ordain this Constitution. ARTICLE I. STATE BOUNDARIES 1. Designation of boundaries The boundaries of the State of Arizona shall be as follows, namely: Beginning at a point on the Colorado River twenty English miles below the junction of the Gila and Colorado Rivers, as fixed by the Gadsden Treaty between the United States and Mexico, being in latitude thirty-two degrees, twenty-nine minutes, forty-four and forty-five one- hundredths seconds north and longitude one hundred fourteen degrees, forty-eight minutes, forty-four and fifty-three one -hundredths seconds west of Greenwich; thence along and with the international boundary line between the United States and Mexico in a southeastern direction to Monument Number 127 on said boundary line in latitude thirty- one degrees, twenty minutes north; thence east along and with said parallel of latitude, continuing on said boundary line to an intersection with the meridian of longitude one hundred nine degrees, two minutes, fifty-nine and twenty-five one-hundredths seconds west, being identical with the southwestern corner of New Mexico; thence north along and with said meridian of longitude and the west boundary of New Mexico to an intersection with the parallel of latitude thirty-seven degrees north, being the common corner of Colorado, Utah, Arizona, and New Mexico; thence west along and with said parallel of latitude and the south boundary of Utah to an intersection with the meridian of longitude one hundred fourteen degrees, two minutes, fifty-nine and twenty-five one- hundredths seconds west, being on the east boundary line of the State of Nevada; thence south along and with said meridian of longitude and the east boundary of said State of Nevada, to the center of the Colorado River; thence down the mid-channel of said Colorado River in a southern direction along and with the east boundaries of Nevada, California, and the Mexican Territory of Lower California, successively, to the place of beginning.
    [Show full text]
  • General Operators for PDF, Common to All Language Levels
    STATE LEGISLATIVE BRANCH 2004 Legislative Elections By Tim Storey Before launching into the analysis of the 2004 state legislative elections, it is instructive to go back two years to the last major legislative elections. The year 2002 was a banner year for the Republican Party in legislatures; they seized eight legislative chambers and claimed bragging rights by taking the majority of legislative seats nationwide for the first time in 50 years. When it comes to state legislatures, Democrats Control of Legislative Seats bounced back big in 2004 despite their defeat at the Perhaps the parity in state legislatures is best top of the ticket where George Bush extended his understood by looking at the total number of seats stay in the White House by defeating John Kerry by held by each party. There are 7,382 total legislative a relatively close 35 electoral vote margin. The seats in the 50 states. Of those, 7,316 are held by Democrats took control of seven legislative cham- partisans from the two major political parties. Third bers and had a quasi-victory by gaining ties in both party legislators hold 16 seats, and Nebraska voters the Iowa Senate and Montana House—both con- choose the 49 senators there in a non-partisan trolled by the GOP before the election. The Demo- election. As of mid-January 2005, the difference crats also regained the title of holding the most seats between the two major parties was a miniscule one although their margin is a tiny fraction of 1 percent— seat, with the advantage going to the Democrats.
    [Show full text]
  • Distribution Listlist - New Information
    12.012.0 DistributionDistribution ListList - New Information - The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) pro- vided copies of this Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) to Federal, state, and local elected and appointed officials and agencies of government; Native American groups; national, state, and local environmental and public interest groups; and other organizations and individuals list- ed below. In addition, DOE sent copies of the Final EIS to all persons who comment- ed on the Idaho High-Level Waste and Facilities Disposition Draft Environmental Impact Statement; these individuals are list- ed in the Index (Alphabetical List of Commentors by Name) in Chapter 11 of this Final EIS. Other groups that received copies of the Final EIS but are not listed below are internal Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory and DOE employees, media representa- tives, and EIS project staff, as well as DOE reading rooms, which appear in Section 8 of the Final EIS Summary. 12-1 DOE/EIS-0287 Distribution List - New Information - In preparation for distribution of the Final EIS, The Honorable Ron Wyden DOE mailed postcards to EIS stakeholders, United States Senate (Oregon) inviting them to request copies of the document in various formats. DOE also issued press The Honorable Robert F. Bennett releases to Idaho media outlets, announcing the United States Senate (Utah) upcoming publication of the Final EIS and describing the document request process. DOE The Honorable Orrin Hatch will provide copies to other interested organiza- United
    [Show full text]
  • Senate Members and Their Districts
    PART II Senate Members and Their Districts Senate Members and Their Districts 79 Senate Members listed by District Number District Senate Page Number Member Party Number Littlefield, Rick (D) 128 2 Taylor, Stratton (D) 164 3 Rozell, Herb (D) 154 4 Dickerson, Larry (D) 'X) 5 Rabon, Jeff (D) 148 6 Mickel, Billy A. (D) 136 7 Stipe, Gene (D) 162 8 Shurden, Frank (D) 156 9 Robinson, Ben H. (D) 152 10 Harrison, J. Berry (D) 108 11 Homer, Maxine (D) 120 12 Fisher, Ted V. (D) 100 13 Wilkerson, Dick (D) 170 14 Roberts, Darryl F. (D) 150 15 Weedn, Trish (D) 166 16 Hobson, Cal (D) 118 17 Hemy ,Brad (D) 114 18 Easley, Kevin Alan (D) % 19 Milacek, Robert V. (R) 138 Xl Muegge, Paul (D) 144 21 Morgan , Mike (D) 142 22 Gustafson, Bill (R) 104 23 Price, Bruce (D) 146 24 Martin , Carol (R) 134 26 Capps, Gilmer N. (D) 88 29 Dunlap, Jim (R) 94 31 Helton, Sam (D) 110 32 Maddox,Jim (D) 132 33 Williams, Penny (D) 172 34 Campbell, Grover (R) 86 35 Williamson, James (R) 174 37 Long, Lewis (D) 130 38 Kerr, Robert M. (D) 122 ?f) Smith, Jerry L. (R) 158 80 The Almanac of Oklahoma Politics District Senate Page Number Member Party Number 40 Douglass, Brooks (R) 92 41 Snyder, Mark (R) lffi 42 Herbert, Dave (D) 116 43 Brown, Ben (D) 82 44 Leftwich, Keith C. (D) 126 45 Wilcoxson , Kathleen (R) 168 46 Cain, Bernest (D) 84 tfl Fair, Mike (R) 98 48 Monson, Angela (D) 140 49 Laughlin, Owen (R) 124 X) Haney, Enoch Kelly (D) 106 51 Ford, Charles R.
    [Show full text]
  • State Legislative Update
    Journal of Dispute Resolution Volume 2004 Issue 2 Article 4 2004 State Legislative Update Robert J. Fisher Katherine M. Massa Benjamin B. Nelson Cassandra A. Rogers Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.missouri.edu/jdr Part of the Dispute Resolution and Arbitration Commons Recommended Citation Robert J. Fisher, Katherine M. Massa, Benjamin B. Nelson, and Cassandra A. Rogers, State Legislative Update, 2004 J. Disp. Resol. (2004) Available at: https://scholarship.law.missouri.edu/jdr/vol2004/iss2/4 This Legislation is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at University of Missouri School of Law Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Dispute Resolution by an authorized editor of University of Missouri School of Law Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Fisher et al.: Fisher: State Legislative Update State Legislative Update* Robert J. Fischer Katherine M. Massa Benjamin B. Nelson CassandraA. Rogers I. STATE LEGISLATIVE Focus A. Confidentiality in Mediation: FloridaSenate Bill 1970' Bill Number: Florida Senate Bill 1970 Summary: This bill creates the Mediation Confidentiality and Privilege Act. It provides for standardized proceedings, so that both court-ordered and non court-ordered mediation are entitled to the same confidentiality status. Status: Signed by Governor, June 10, 2004 1. Introduction Confidentiality in mediation communications is an issue of vital importance to all those involved. The assurance of confidentiality in mediation proceedings promotes openness and candor between the parties. Often, it is openness that will lead parties to a resolution of a dispute. With the passage of Senate Bill 1970 the Florida legislature has recognized the importance that confidentiality protections play in the encouragement of successful mediations.
    [Show full text]
  • Prayer Practices
    Floor Action 5-145 Prayer Practices Legislatures operate with a certain element of pomp, ceremony and procedure that flavor the institution with a unique air of tradition and theatre. The mystique of the opening ceremonies and rituals help to bring order and dignity to the proceedings. One of these opening ceremonies is the offering of a prayer. Use of legislative prayer. The practice of opening legislative sessions with prayer is long- standing. The custom draws its roots from both houses of the British Parliament, which, according to noted parliamentarian Luther Cushing, from time ”immemorial” began each day with a “reading of the prayers.” In the United States, this custom has continued without interruption at the federal level since the first Congress under the Constitution (1789) and for more than a century in many states. Almost all state legislatures still use an opening prayer as part of their tradition and procedure (see table 02-5.50). In the Massachusetts Senate, a prayer is offered at the beginning of floor sessions for special occasions. Although the use of an opening prayer is standard practice, the timing of when the prayer occurs varies (see table 02-5.51). In the majority of legislative bodies, the prayer is offered after the floor session is called to order, but before the opening roll call is taken. Prayers sometimes are given before floor sessions are officially called to order; this is true in the Colorado House, Nebraska Senate and Ohio House. Many chambers vary on who delivers the prayer. Forty-seven chambers allow people other than the designated legislative chaplain or a visiting chaplain to offer the opening prayer (see table 02-5.52).
    [Show full text]
  • Senate Appropriations Committee Meeting March 17Th 2021 Brent and Trish Levinson - Affinity Global Solutions Page 1 of 2
    Testimony of Brent and Trish Levinson for the North Dakota Senate Appropriations Public Hearing on March 17th 2021. Chairman Holmberg and committee members of the Senate Appropriations Committee, This testimony is presented by Brent and Trish Levinson the owners of Affinity Global Solutions (AGS) whose IBARS (Internet Budget Analysis and Reporting System) product is used to source, analyze, and generate publications for the State's budget. In the upcoming biennium IBARS is to be replaced through a project sponsored by OMB and the Governor's Office. OMB has requested an "annual contract for a new budget system" with a request amount of $1,230,100 (see Exhibits A and B) with additional funding to be sourced through the Strategic Investment and Improvement Fund. It is unclear what the intent and scope of this contract is. Perhaps, this is a long term software as a service (SaaS) contract for $1,230,100 per year where the State owns no solution? AGS has been a partner with the State of North Dakota in sourcing, analyzing and producing reports and publications for the State's budget for over 25 years. The origins of IBARS were built to meet the needs of North Dakota's State budgeting process and then enhanced to meet the needs of many other States. For example, IBARS went live in December 2019 for the State of New Jersey. IBARS is an actively supported, developed, vibrant and competitive product built by and for North Dakotans. 2020 maintenance of IBARS for the State of North Dakota was $93,635. North Dakota has a perpetual license for IBARS.
    [Show full text]
  • 110Th Congress New Member Pictorial Directory
    P!"#$!"% &' ()" C*++,(("" *- H*./" A%+,-,/(!$(,*- New Member Pictorial Directory Prepared under the direction of THE COMMITTEE ON HOUSE ADMINISTRATION V"! -*- E)0"!/, C)$,! +$- | J.$-,($ M,00"-%"!-M1D*-$0%, R $-2,-3 M"+&"! N E W M E M B E R P I C T O R I A L D I R E C T O R Y A R I Z O N A A R I Z O N A Democrat — 5 Democrat — 8 Harry E. Gabrielle MITCHELL GIFFORDS RESIDENCE: Tempe, Arizona RESIDENCE: Tucson, Arizona EDUCATION: Arizona State U., B.A. 1962 EDUCATION: Scripps College, B.A. Sociology (political science); M.P.A. 1980 and Latin American History; Cornell University, Master of PROFESSION: High school teacher; college Regional Planning; Fulbright instructor Scholar POLITICAL CAREER: Tempe City Council, 1970-78; PROFESSION: Small Business Owner mayor of Tempe, 1978-1994; sought Democratic nomination POLITICAL CAREER: Arizona House of Representatives for superintendent of public 2000-2002; Arizona Senate instruction, 1994; Ariz. Senate, 2003-2005 1999-2006 (assistant minority leader, 2005-2006); Ariz. Democratic Party chairman, 2005-2006 Page 1 C A L I F O R N I A C A L I F O R N I A Democrat — 11 Republican — 22 Jerry M. Kevin O. MCNERNEY MCCARTHY RESIDENCE: Pleasanton, California RESIDENCE: Bakersfield, California EDUCATION: Ph.D. in Mathematics from the EDUCATION: Undergraduate and Masters in University of New Mexico Business Administration from California State University, PROFESSION: Wind Energy Businessman Bakersfield POLITICAL CAREER: Democratic Nominee for U.S. PROFESSION: Business Owner; District Director, House 2004 Congressman Bill Thomas POLITICAL CAREER: Calfornia State Assemblyman; Assembly Republican Leader Page 2 N E W M E M B E R P I C T O R I A L D I R E C T O R Y C O L O R A D O C O L O R A D O Republican — 5 Democrat — 7 Doug Edwin G.
    [Show full text]
  • February 23, 2021 the Honorable Karl Rhoads Chair, Hawaii Senate Judiciary Committee Hawaii State Capitol 415 S
    February 23, 2021 The Honorable Karl Rhoads Chair, Hawaii Senate Judiciary Committee Hawaii State Capitol 415 S. Beretania St., Room 204 Honolulu, HI 96813 The Honorable Jarrett Keohokalole Vice Chair, Hawaii Senate Judiciary Committee Hawaii State Capitol 415 S. Beretania St., Room 231 Honolulu, HI 96813 The Honorable Rosalyn H. Baker Chair, Hawaii Senate Committee on Commerce and Consumer Protection Hawaii State Capitol 415 S. Beretania St., Room 230 Honolulu, HI 96813 The Honorable Stanley Chang Vice-Chair, Hawaii Senate Committee on Commerce and Consumer Protection Hawaii State Capitol 415 S. Beretania St., Room 226 Honolulu, HI 96813 RE: ATA SUPPORT FOR SENATE BILL 970 On behalf of the American Telemedicine Association (ATA) and the over 400 organizations we represent, I am writing to express our support for Senate Bill 970, which clarifies that a patient-practitioner relationship may be established during a telehealth appointment. The ATA is the only national organization completely focused on advancing telehealth. We are committed to ensuring that everyone has access to safe, affordable, and high-quality care whenever and wherever they need it. This empowers the health care system to provide services to millions more patients every year in an efficacious manner. The ATA represents a broad and inclusive coalition of technology solution providers and payers, as well as partner organizations and alliances, working to advance industry adoption of telehealth, promote responsible policy, advocate for government and market normalization, and provide education and resources to help integrate virtual care into emerging, value-based modalities. Senate Bill 970 serves as an important and rational expansion of Hawaii’s state telehealth policy.
    [Show full text]
  • Legislative Oversight in Idaho
    Legislative Oversight in Idaho Capacity and Usage Assessment Oversight through Analytic Bureaucracies: Limited Oversight through the Appropriations Process: Limited Oversight through Committees: Moderate Oversight through Administrative Rule Review: Moderate Oversight through Advice and Consent: Minimal Oversight through Monitoring Contracts: Moderate Judgment of Overall Institutional Capacity for Oversight: High Judgment of Overall Use of Institutional Capacity for Oversight: Moderate Summary Assessment The Idaho Legislature has some effective oversight mechanisms at its disposal including rules review, capacity to conduct detailed performance audits and evaluations, and opportunities to engage in oversight through the appropriations process. The use of these tools, however, raises questions about the motivation for oversight, especially through administrative rules review. Special interests appear to be empowered to exert substantial influence over rules. The legislature added to its oversight capacity of contracts in 2016, but it is too soon to tell how well they are utilizing these new reports. Major Strengths Idaho has a legislative audit division within its Legislative Service Office and an award- winning program evaluation unit. The reports these agencies produce, especially the program evaluations, are notably thorough. These reports appear to trigger legislative attention, follow up reports, and the passage of needed legislation to fix the problems identified in the reports. But reviewing only three or four programs per year is limited, albeit thorough, oversight. Idaho is one of only a few states with balanced partisan membership on its oversight committee. This probably contributes to its effective use of traditional mechanisms of oversight—committee hearings on audit reports. Contract monitoring by the legislature includes an annual review of contracts at the start of the legislative session starting in 2017, but this is too soon to assess whether this yields more than other state legislatures.
    [Show full text]
  • U.S. House Report 32 for H.R. 4221 (Feb 1959)
    86TH CONoRESS L HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES REPORT 1st Session No. 32 HAWAII STATEHOOD FEBRUARY 11, 1959.-Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union and ordered to be printed Mr. AsPINALL, from the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, submitted the following REPORT [To accompany H.R. 4221] The Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, to whom was referred the bill (H.R. 4221) to provide for the admission of the State of Hawaii into the Union, having considered the same, report favorably thereon without amendment and recommend that the bill do pass. The purpose of H.R. 4221, introduced by Representative O'Brien of New York, is to provide for the admission of the State of Hawaii into the Union. This bill and its two companions-H.R. 4183 by Delegate Burns and H.R. 4228 by Representative Saylor-were introduced following the committee's consideration of 20 earlier 86th Congress bills and include all amendments adopted in connection therewith. These 20 bills are as follows: H.R. 50, introduced by Delegate Burns; H.R. 324, introduced by Representative Barrett; H.R. 801, introduced by Representative Holland; H.R. 888, introduced by Representative O'Brien of New York; H.R. 954, introduced by Representative Saylor; H.R. 959, introduced by Representative Sisk; H.R. 1106, introduced by Representative Berry; H.R. 1800, introduced by Repre- sentative Dent; H.R. 1833, introduced by Representative Libonati; H.R. 1917, introduced by Representative Green of Oregon; H.R. 1918, introduced by Representative Holt; H.R. 2004, introduced by Representative Younger; .H.R.
    [Show full text]