Part of the problem is that model legislation has increasingly been viewed as a means of circumventing the negative consequences of resource-limited state legis

Part of the problem is that model legislation has increasingly been viewed as a means of circumventing the negative consequences of resource-limited state legislatures. Writing legislation is a very time-intensive effort that relies heavily on expert staff. Staff budgets have stagnated or, in many cases, decreased. And they were never high to begin with. In most states, legislator pay itself is low[0] to begin with as well. Most states pay their legislators as if it's a part-time job, but when you consider the various demands on their time in addition to the need to find a way to support themselves financially as well, it's laughable to expect them to be able to compensate for staffing limitations. Assuming, of course, that they have the background to actually craft legislation themselves. Model legislation seemingly offers legislators a path out of the darkness. But it's not just about writing the legislation; model legislation often comes as a sort of turnkey solution, offering analysis as well. And that's the particularly dangerous part. Because of their limited resources, state legislators have to rely more and more on the expertise of those providing the model legislation at all steps of the process rather than their own. It's not just about outsourcing the actual writing of a bill. How legislators understand model legislation and the potentially complex and nuanced consequences of it is being shaped by those who wrote it, and often have vested interests of their own. It's not just a state problem. It's also prevalent at the federal level, where median pay for legislative staff has decreased significantly in recent decades and the number of staffers has stayed stagnant in the face of increased workloads.[1] Another source estimates that the percentage of "House personal staffers" based in DC has decreased from three-quarters in 1976 to half in 2005; the problem being that the legislative staffers re the ones working in DC. Committee staff have been especially hard hit.[2] So when someone comes in to lobby for a bill that they happen to have written out for you to consider, it's easy to fall back on the idea "well, they know their industry." Particularly because they so often don't have ready access to a comparable, independent knowledge base to help them. There was an interesting article I read a week or two ago on the subject of legislative staffing woes, but I can't seem to find it at the moment. If I do, I'll reply with a link. 0. https://www.npr.org/2017/01/09/508237086/low-pay-in-state-legislatures-means-some-cant-afford-the-job https://www.npr.org/2017/01/09/508237086/low-pay-in-state-le... 1. https://www.vox.com/polyarchy/2015/8/21/9184197/congressional-staff-salaries https://www.vox.com/polyarchy/2015/8/21/9184197/congressiona... 2. http://sunlightfoundation.com/policy/documents/keeping_congress_competent/ http://sunlightfoundation.com/policy/documents/keeping_congr...