The Arrogance of Incumbency

The Arkansas General Assembly convenes every two years in odd numbered years for the legislative sessions. To be fair to the Legislature, it must certainly be a challenge to set spending priorities based on existing forecasts for the proceeding two years. And because so much work has to be crammed into a relatively short period of time, I am confident that the sessions involve long days and some nights. Because the Arkansas legislature only convenes every two years and for a relatively brief period, however, the people typically do not pay enough attention to what the legislature does. As a result, incumbency in this state enjoys an enormous re-election rate because the people recognize names and probably faces; we know very little about the issues especially come election time because by then the legislative session will have been long over.

How do I reach this conclusion? The staggering number of complaints from call-in TV and radio shows, letters to various editors, and general grumbling would indicate that a substantial segment of the population feels overwhelmed and more than a little overburdened by tax rates in the state. Yet each time the legislature gathers, a new tax or an increase in an existing tax is virtually imminent. These lawmakers are photographed slapping each other on the back, shaking hands, and high-fiving one another after a “successful” session in which these taxes have been increased, they are congratulated by the governor and still re-elected by the seemingly disenchanted people, the same people who complain incessantly about high taxes in a relatively low wage state.

In addition, the one who will serve as Speaker of the Arkansas House of Representatives has already been selected in 2008 for the coming 2009 legislative session. The problem with this is that this speaker-elect still must endure a re-election campaign in November. The legislature believes itself to have accomplished something substantial by having the speaker pre-selected with seemingly little thought given to the possibility that this speaker-elect could lose his re-election bid. So if this possibility actually exists, why waste the time?

I think it is because the House is pretty confident of what must surely be a better than 95% incumbency rate. Besides this inherent flaw in our system, what district in its right mind would cast aside such a prominent position for one of its own? Though Arkansas now has term limits for its state constitutional officers, it is nevertheless highly significant when a member of the legislature is elevated to such a position. There is no way anyone would even waste his or her time and resources to try and run against this particular incumbent knowing what everyone knows about Arkansas voters. This incumbent would have to burn down an orphanage to lose his seat in the legislature!

Incumbency indeed has its privileges, and Arkansas is no exception. I’m willing to bet that other states are no different, and it is sad to know that “we the people” have surrendered our right to self-governance to the few who care enough to even bother to run for public office, let alone to those few who can be bothered to vote.