A concurrent resolution directing the Legislative Management to consider studying personal legislative staff for the Legislative Assembly.
Summary
House Concurrent Resolution 3033 would have directed Legislative Management to study whether members of the North Dakota Legislative Assembly should be allowed to hire personal legislative staff. The resolution states that, in light of expected turnover from legislative term limits, lawmakers need additional support to carry out their duties effectively and efficiently. It also argues that personal staff could help legislators plan, prioritize, and delegate work, with the goal of improving productivity and service to constituents.
The resolution does not itself create a new staffing program or change existing staffing rules. Instead, it would have required a study of the impacts and benefits of personal legislative staff, including a review of how other states handle similar arrangements, and then a report back to the Seventieth Legislative Assembly with findings, recommendations, and any draft legislation needed to implement them.
Impact
If adopted, HCR 3033 would have affected legislative operations rather than general public law by initiating a formal study of whether individual legislators should be permitted to hire personal staff. It would not have amended any statute directly, but it could have led to future legislation changing rules governing legislative staffing, appropriations, and administrative support for lawmakers. The practical impact would have been on the structure and resources of the Legislative Assembly and potentially on state budget and personnel policies if recommendations were later enacted.
Sentiment
The resolution appears to have had some support in the House, passing second reading 67-23, suggesting a majority was open to at least studying the issue. The stated rationale reflects a forward-looking, efficiency-oriented approach tied to term limits and legislative turnover. However, the bill ultimately failed, indicating that support was not sufficient to advance the proposal through the full process or that concern remained about the need for, cost of, or appropriateness of personal legislative staff.
Contention
The main point of contention was whether legislators should have personal staff at all, and whether such a change was necessary or desirable for North Dakota’s part-time citizen legislature. Supporters emphasized productivity, delegation, and preparation for turnover caused by term limits, while opponents likely questioned the expense, fairness, and potential shift in the balance of legislative support away from centralized nonpartisan staff. Because no committee transcript is available, the specific arguments are not recorded, but the close enough division to ultimately fail suggests disagreement over both the policy merits and the implications for legislative administration.