Partisanship in the Unicam
The Journal Star editorial board published a piece yesterday that bemoaned the disappearance of non-partisanship from Nebraska’s Unicameral. The piece struck me as being a little naive. The authors say, for example, that “the nonpartisan nature of the Legislature has endured” since the ‘30’s. Although that’s true as far as the law is concerned, I’m not so sure it’s true in reality. The statehouse “insiders”—lobbyists, pages, and so on—I’ve had the opportunity to speak with over the years have led me to believe that party affiliations are no secret in the Unicameral and that our Legislature is nonpartisan in name only.
Whether or not it is true that partisanship is edging its way into the Capitol, it should come as no surprise that nonpartisanship isn’t gaining ground. Increased partisanship is a perfectly logical side effect of term limits. Leadership, institutional knowledge, and experience have to come from someplace. Two of the most readily-available sources: lobbyists and political parties. It will be interesting to watch the party structures in Nebraska to see if they really do gain ground in the Legislature, and if the progress they make is permanent.
A question to ponder: Is partisanship in the Unicameral necessarily a bad thing?
The Comments
Fletch says I agree with all your November 18, 2008 at 10:42am
I agree with all your points. It’s not a bad thing. And for the LJS editors to think it’s not been that way for a long time is naive.
Dave K says RE: I agree with all your November 18, 2008 at 8:57pm
LJS Editorial Board naive? Noooooo ...
If nonpartisanship is what gave us the meaningless CCW law and the Safe Haven, then I’m all for partisanship. In fact, if the Unicameral was formally partisan, I may pay attention to what goes on there.
JT says Partisanship in the Unicameral is November 18, 2008 at 6:52pm
Partisanship in the Unicameral is a myth. I also agree that partisanship is desirable. People disagree on things, and that’s good.