From the office of

State Representative Eric Eisnaugle

September 28, 2015

A Member Driven Process: The Plan to Decentralize Power in

the Florida House of Representatives
The Problem: In the Florida House, all institutional
authority is centralized in the Speaker. No other member,
even chairmen of the most important committees, has
sufficient
authority
to
counterbalance
that
power.
Importantly, some Speakers choose to disperse power and
allow chairmen and members to act on their conscience.
However, any system that relies on the benevolence of a
single person has the potential, in any given year, to
disenfranchise members and their constituents.
The Solution: We should disperse power to elected
officers other than the Speaker, and empower policy and
budget chairmen to independently manage their committees.
These concepts present a framework from which to start a
real
and
substantive
discussion
centered
upon
decentralizing power in the Florida House. In addition,
there are many ideas not included here which could
supplement the foundational reforms discussed below.
I.

Independently elect the Speaker Pro Tempore and

Majority Leader
To disperse power in the Florida House, we must create
other leaders who, like the Speaker, are separately
elected and accountable to the members.
Thus, we
should allow the members to independently elect the
Speaker Pro Tempore and Majority Leader to provide a
meaningful counter-balance to the power of the
Speaker.

II.

Vest institutional authority with the Speaker Pro

Tempore and Majority Leader
An independently and separately elected Speaker Pro
Tempore and Majority Leader will have a limited impact
unless they are vested, by rule, with meaningful

1!

institutional authority.
For example, the Speaker
Pro Tempore could serve as Chair of a House Oversight
Committee, and propose administrative assignments like
offices, parking, etc.
The Majority Leader might serve as Vice Chair of a
House Oversight Committee, and propose committee
assignments for members of the majority.
III. Form a House Oversight Committee
The House Oversight Committee would be a standing
committee made up of the Speaker, Speaker Pro Tempore,
Majority Leader, and perhaps others appointed by them.
The House Oversight Committee would approve or amend
administrative and committee assignments proposed by
the Speaker Pro Tempore and Majority Leader, in
addition to the duties described below.
IV.

Empower committee chairmen

Currently, chairmen in the Florida House serve at the
pleasure of the Speaker.
An ever-present threat of
removal diminishes a chairmans independence and
discourages chairmen from even expressing disagreement
with the Speaker.
Chairmen should be empowered to make decisions and
manage their committees without undue influence from
the Speaker.
Therefore, once appointed by the
Speaker, policy and budget chairmen should not serve
at his pleasure. Rather, the Rules should require the
Speaker to obtain the approval of the House Oversight
Committee to remove a committee chairman.
This will insulate chairmen from the threat of
unilateral removal by one person, and will empower
them to be real chairmen.
At the same time, the
possibility of removal in a more transparent and open
process will provide accountability.
Importantly,
this process would maintain a mechanism for removal
when truly justified.
The Speaker, just like any chairman, must retain the
full ability to manage both the calendar and decorum
of the body.
Thus, in contrast to the policy and

2!

budget chairmen, the Rules Chairman is an extension of

the Speakers most critical role in the process, and
should continue to serve at the Speakers pleasure.
V.

Include a more meaningful role for the Minority Party

As Dan Webster recognized when he became Speaker in
1996, allowing the minority party to have a meaningful
role is an important part of tearing down the pyramid
of power. For instance, he specifically lamented the
unwritten rule at the time that freshmen members of
the minority party could not have their bills heard in
committee. Speaker Webster, instead, envisioned a
legislature where every member, whether Democrat,
freshman, council chairman or even the speaker, will
be on a level playing field when it comes to the
ability to pass bills.
Currently, after the Speaker has made committee
assignments, the Minority Leader recommends members of
the minority party for the position of ranking
member on each committee.
However, the final
decision is left with the Speaker.
The Minority Leader should be permitted to appoint
members of his party to the position of ranking
member without having to obtain the approval of the
Speaker.
Moreover, the Minority Leader might also propose
committee assignments for members of the minority
caucus.
Just as with the Majority Leaders proposed
assignments, the Minority Leaders assignments would
be subject to the approval of the Oversight Committee.

Conclusion: These ideas serve as a starting point for

a discussion on Rules changes that would meaningfully
disperse power in the Florida House. Anything less than
formal, Rules-based limitations on the Speakers existing
authority would be mere window dressing. True reform will
make the Florida House more responsive to the people of
Florida, and lead to a more robust and open debate of
ideas.

3!

September 6, 2015
State House must aggressively reform concentration of power
Florida deserves leadership, not an autocracy. As Congressman Dan
Webster often says, it is time to tear down the legislative pyramid
of power the system of rules, written and unwritten, that empower a
select few in legislative leadership to dictate the actions of many.
Under the rules and practices that govern the Florida House today, a
member who upsets leadership runs the risk of losing almost everything
from a chairmanship and committee assignments, to things as mundane
as an office or a parking space. Even worse, to the detriment of our
constituents, the concentration of power in the hands of a few
inevitably narrows the range of ideas and viewpoints that are even
considered.
This phenomenon isnt unique to the Florida House. It is a
characteristic of many legislative bodies, and it cannot be blamed on
any person or political party. In the era of term limits, power has
become even more centralized because members do not have as much time
to develop the experience, relationships and policy expertise that
could serve as a counterweight to the few in leadership.
To appreciate what is wrong with the status quo, we need only remind
ourselves of the wisdom of our Founders. They knew all too well that
power concentrated in one place threatens our freedom. And part of the
Founders genius was their understanding that the best ideas and the
best government come from dispersing authority and increasing the
number of people who are able to participate.
We have been blessed in recent times with many good and honest men to
lead the Florida House. It is also true that, over the years, the
Florida House has often been at the forefront of policy reform. And,
despite the structural disincentives to act independently, many
members nevertheless try to do what is right.
If all leaders were like current Speaker Steve Crisafulli, reform
would be unnecessary. Unfortunately, every time we choose new
leadership, our state gambles on the wisdom and honor of a single
person. That is a bad system.
I am convinced that the only way to fix these structural problems is
to amend Florida House and caucus rules with bold and broad changes
laser focused on aggressively decentralizing power. Only then will we
get real and lasting reform. Only then will we have a truly memberdriven process an incessantly invoked goal that too often receives
only lip service.

The rule-based reforms that I seek will free representatives to vote

their conscience, without having to constantly look over their
shoulders. Those reforms will promote a system where ideas succeed or
fail on merit, rather than on the basis of who is in leadership at any
given moment. And by dispersing power more broadly, the reforms will
necessarily empower a wider and more diverse array of our constituents
and bring greater transparency and accountability to the legislative
process.
Breaking the pyramid of power will also result in a more
deliberative speaker-selection process. Under todays winner take
all rules, some members have feared being left behind if they dont
make an early commitment. Decentralizing power will give members the
freedom to make those decisions on their own time schedule, because
speakers and speakers in waiting will no longer have the ability
unilaterally to make or break a representatives legislative career.
Predictably, powerful special interests will oppose changing the
status quo in these ways. When power is concentrated in the hands of a
few, lobbying is a much easier task. Dispersed power brings more
competition to the marketplace of ideas. For special interests, such
competition means unwelcome uncertainty; but for the people of
Florida, it means a new dawn of ideas and debate.
I know that accomplishing these reforms will not be easy but it is
worth the fight. It is past time to return power to the membership
and through the members, to the people they represent. My own
conversations with members and candidates over the past few years have
only deepened my appreciation for the need to disperse power within
the legislative process.
I look forward to continuing that discussion, and to pushing for
specific reforms that will truly challenge business as usual in the
Florida House.
Eric Eisnaugle is a Republican state representative from Orlando.