The structural methods used by the Rhode Island General Assembly for proposing and passing laws are chaotic and unprofessional.

Rhode Island is the smallest state in the union (US), but the legislature proposes more bills than any other state including New York and California. The legislature is the most expensive in the United States.  It is also one of the largest on a per-capita basis except for sparsely populated states such as Alaska.  Perhaps 2,200 bills per year are proposed, but only a few hundred are passed.  As a result, many bills are never even read before voting.  Hundreds more bills are lost somewhere in committees for further study.

RISK ANALYSIS OF LAWS
A number of bills are stopped cold by being declared ‘non germane’ by house and senate leaders, often for trivial or inexplicable reasons.  This can occur for bills of some importance since the method is entirely subjective and made without any formal risk or value analysis.

Barely 10% of proposed Rhode Island bills in a typical session are enacted.  Of these less than 25% are prepared in time for thoughtful analysis by representatives and senators.  At the end of a legislative session, boxes of bills are brought in for votes with barely enough time to announce their names.   Many bills that don’t get passed are recycled time and again over future sessions.  It is no wonder that bad bills and bad laws in Rhode Island outnumber good bills and good laws by more than 2 to 1.

While members of the assembly often work hard during sessions, there seems to be no effective process for creating, reviewing, and pushing bills through the legislative cycle other than for a few bills which are important to the leadership.

RISK MANAGEMENT OF LEGISLATION
During the off-session period, a careful analysis of state legislation practices should be commissioned and performed.  The study should consider the possibility of limiting the number of bills that can be proposed for each session, and including form risk analysis, value analysis, and economic modeling of all bills that affect taxes, revenues, and fiscal matters.  It might be feasible to consider:

• Establishing a firm cut-off date for proposals for each session.
• Establishing overall assembly limits on bills per session: perhaps 150.
• Surveying the 50 states for “best practices” on legislation logistics.
• Assigning a time limit to committees for bills held for “further study.’

Prior to submission, each bill should be analyzed using a basic checklist that includes topics such as:

1. Is the bill constitutional under the Rhode Island constitution?
2. Is the bill constitutional under the U.S. constitution?
3. How many citizens are likely to be affected by the bill?
4. How many citizens will benefit from the bill?
5. How many citizens will be harmed by the bill?
6. Are there possible unintended consequences from the bill?
7. Have adequate public hearings for the bill been held?
8. Have citizens groups submitted comments on the bill?
9. Is the bill discriminatory?
10. If the bill supports special interests, will there be collateral damages?
11. If the bill proposes mandates for towns, how will funds be provided?
12. Should the bill include a “sunset” clause for automatic closure?
13. If the bill concerns taxes, has a formal economic model been used?
14. If the bill concerns revenues, has a formal economic model been used?
15. If the bill concerns spending, has a formal economic model been used?
16. If the bill includes COLA, has a formal economic model been used?
17. If the bill covers financing are accepted accounting standards utilized?
18. If the bill includes numeric information, has it been checked for errors?
19. If the bill deals with contracts, is it in accord with Federal uniform codes?
20. If the bill affects interstate commerce, is it in accord with Federal codes?
21. Has the bill been circulated for review by house and senate members?
22. Are both the senate and the house aligned on the bill in question?
23. If other states have similar laws, what have been the proven results?
24. If other states have similar laws, have they been challenged in court?
25. If the bill predicts tax revenues, have results in other states been checked?
26. Are the bill sponsors involved with any conflicts of interest?
27. Will assembly members with conflicts of interest recuse themselves?
28. If the bill mandates actions by towns or school boards, who will enforce them?
29. Will there be penalties for non-compliance with the law if it is passed?
30. Does the bill include a method of appeal or modification in case of harm?

RISK CONSEQUENCES
The state cannot continue its current methods of legislation without becoming insolvent.  (It was shocking that Rhode Island’s 2010 budget was almost 13% larger than the 2009 budget because neither the house nor the senate had time to add up the totals!)  Not until the budget was passed and signed did the Rhode Island General Assembly leadership realize a massive increase in spending was embedded in the budget!  This increase was in the face of the most severe recession in history and record-breaking declines in tax revenues.

RISK ANALYSIS
In addition a really thorough analysis of Rhode Island laws would include retroactive risk studies of existing laws as well as proposed laws.  In fact repealing bad laws would probably be more helpful to the state than most new laws.  An example of a bad law is the Caruolo law which damages the state and that I believe has no value.  A formal risk analysis of Rhode Island legislation and laws would include seven major segments:

1. Laws that should not be passed because they are harmful.
(Example: the law extending teacher contracts forever)

2. Laws that should be repealed because they are harmful.
(Examples: the Caruolo law; the “Amazon” tax)

3. Laws that should be amended to remove harmful features.
(Example: the affordable housing law which undercounts houses)

4. Laws that should be passed but are being blocked by committees.
(Example: H6070 to allow the ethics commission to act effectively
In cases of assembly malfeasance and corruption.)

5. Laws that should be enforced but are not.
(Example: legal responsibilities for errors in school budgets)

6. Laws that are being enforced that should be rescinded or ignored.
(Example: unfunded state mandates for education)

7. New laws that are needed but not yet drafted.
(Example: term limits for assembly members)

iNSOLVENT STATE
Rhode Island will become insolvent by 2017 if the General Assembly continues its current method of operation.  Not only does the state risk insolvency, but the current legislative process favors special interests and harms the general polity of the state.