Lawmakers have too much time for made-up work and not enough experience with the outcomes.

Last week there were hearings in the Legislature on a swine flu bill proposed by Senate President Libby Mitchell. Sen. Mitchell's bill has little to do with swine flu and a lot to do with her run for governor.

The bill actually is a mandate for business to provide three to six days of paid sick leave to all full- and even part-time employees.

In fact, it is often important and appropriate for people who are sick or whose children are sick to take time off. Many employers, certainly most large employers, provide this flexibility, often with paid sick days and sometimes with unpaid sick days.

However, adding a universal mandate with such broad coverage would again put Maine business at a disadvantage. No other state has such a law. It would send a signal to prospective employers that Maine is not a place with reasonable work-force practices.

In short, it is a sure way to hamper job creation – just at a time when job creation needs to be the state's number one priority.

All of this must be well-known to Ms. Mitchell, a self-described champion of small business. Why would she propose this? Only Ms. Mitchell knows, of course, but I suspect it has something to do with strengthening her base with organized labor. In a bruising primary fight for the Democratic nomination for governor, organized labor has lots of clout.

The more fundamental question is: Why are our legislators spending any time at all on a bill such as this?

Our Legislature seems to spend lots of time making work for itself, and it is often work that leads nowhere. Because there is no limit on the number of bills a legislator may propose and because virtually all bills that are proposed go through a full and exhaustive process of legislative hearings, the unimportant often overwhelm the important.

Over the past 20 years, sessions have gradually gotten longer, to the point that it is very difficult to hold a job and serve in the supposedly part-time Legislature. Thus the Legislature is dominated by retirees, teachers – who get a legislatively mandated leave of absence – lawyers and nonprofit employees who have flexible schedules.

This is not to say our legislators are inept. Virtually all have a sense of service that is admirable. However, the Legislature is unwieldy and not representative enough of the interests of most Mainers.

With a gubernatorial election coming, now is a good time to discuss what needs to be done to shape up Augusta. Here are five ideas:

1. Reduce the size of the House of Representatives from the current 151 to 100. This number is in line with the norm for most rural states and would lead to better candidates with a broader community perspective. It would also save money.

2. Limit the days in the term from the current 180 days in the first year to 120 days and from 120 days in the second year to 45 days. This would help focus the Legislature on important measures and also make it easier for a wider range of people to serve.

3. Develop a more effective process for legislation. Limit the number of bills that may be introduced. Add ways to sort out bills at the committee level so that not all bills get a hearing. Many states do this routinely and effectively – why not Maine?

4. Move to the open primary for state-level office. I advocated last week for open primaries for national office as a way to counter the extreme polarization that seems so pervasive in political dialogue.

An interesting question is how the outcome of the 2010 gubernatorial race would change if all the candidates had to run in one statewide primary from which the top two vote-getters would move on to the general election.

The rhetoric would surely be more tempered. I doubt we would have seen a swine flu bill. More seriously, the two candidates who emerged would be the choice of a coalition of voters in which moderates and independents would play a major role.

I'll bet that would produce better final candidates than the current process is likely to.

5. Extend term limits from the current eight years to 16 years. Current limits preclude any continuity of leadership. On balance, the state would benefit from having top leadership and committee chairs able to serve more than one term in their positions, often the case now.

These proposals would go a long way to putting Maine in a stronger position for the second decade of the 21st century. What is the position of the current gubernatorial candidates on these proposals?

I hope some of you will ask.