Off the party line
Published June 5, 2014
Editorial by Greensboro News-Record, June 5, 2014.
It’s not unusual to see a bill pass by a vote of 77-39 in the N.C. House of Representatives, where Republicans hold a 77-42 majority.
But that’s not how the vote split on May 21, when the House approved the Young Offenders Rehabilitation Act. It would keep 16- and 17-year-olds charged with misdemeanors in the juvenile-justice system rather than deal with them as adults.
The measure drew 38 votes of support from Republicans and 39 from Democrats, making it a rare and remarkable example of bipartisan legislation.
The example may stop there, because the bill is being held in the Senate clerk’s office — a sign it will die in that chamber without even getting a committee hearing.
When it comes to partisanship, Senate Republicans show much more solidarity than do their counterparts in the House. They almost never break ranks.
The Energy Modernization Act — allowing natural gas development — illustrates the difference. It passed the Senate by a 33-12 vote. No Republicans voted against it; three Democrats voted for it.
The vote in the House was 64-50. Eleven Republicans voted against it, including John Blust and Jon Hardister from Greensboro. Blust said he voted no to keep his word, citing the House’s commitment last year to wait until the state’s mining commission finished drafting rules to promote safe drilling practices. Hardister said he needed more time to study the bill’s provisions. It was received from the Senate May 27 and given final approval just two days later.
Their votes took courage. Natural gas development is a high priority for legislative leaders who wanted to rush the bill through, and for Gov. Pat McCrory. In highly partisan bodies, earning favor with the leadership usually requires following the party line. That’s more strictly true in the Senate than in the House. But in either case, it’s really more important for legislators to vote in their constituents’ interests. They aren’t elected to serve party leaders but the people. Many North Carolinians have concerns about fracking, and favoring a slow-and-thorough approach demonstrates the kind of responsible representation that everyone should appreciate.
Besides, no legislator has constituents who are all Republicans or all Democrats. A legislator who follows one party’s line is always voting in opposition to the views of some of his or her constituents. A representative should listen to all sides of an issue and make decisions based on what’s best for the state and his or her district. It’s unlikely that’s always the Republican position or the Democratic position.
Party leaders promote partisan discipline among their members because that’s what keeps them in power. Some think they appear weak if they can’t keep everyone in line. Unfortunately, extreme party unity contributes to partisan division and dissatisfaction among nearly half of the public — the half whose interests are denied time after time.
Only when a legislator breaks ranks with his or her party on a key vote can the public be sure he or she is truly taking a position based on principle rather than partisan loyalty. That goes for legislators of both parties.
Of course, Republicans are Republicans and Democrats are Democrats because they share some general principles. But that should not bind them to vote a certain way on issues such as juvenile justice or safe energy development. More independent thinking and less partisan following will produce better laws.
June 5, 2014 at 7:26 pm
Norm Kelly says:
What does the average lib voter, most in the media (no longer news outlets!), and every lib pol think bipartisanship is? What does this same group of people think compromise is? In both cases, bipartisanship and compromise consists of Republicans giving up every one of their desires/goals/plans and agreeing with the demons. Even though the NC legislature is controlled by Republicans, what is it every lib believes should happen? The process should continue as it did under control of the demons. Should taxes of any variety be cut? No, cuz libs don't cut taxes. Should any spending be cut? No, cuz libs don't cut spending. Libs cut the rate of growth on spending but never actually cut spending. (though i seem to recall that one of the last efforts of the libs in the legislature was to CUT education spending!) Should any regulation on business be reduced or eliminated? No, cuz libs only increase regulation on those thieving, dishonest, greedy business types. Should government employees actually do their jobs before they get a bonus? No, cuz libs don't believe in holding anyone responsible. At least no lib is responsible. If you think government employees properly do their job, witness the DMV - they still can't get an office opened in Fayetteville after a year and millions; then theres DENR - ignored coal ash ponds for years until it blew up in their faces. Pick another government agency and you'll probably find loafers there too. Some must work or the government would come to a standstill. So I know there are honest government workers but they don't seem to be in the majority or even in positions of responsibility/authority. Do programs get cut when they fail to do their job? Nope. Libs just create another program to do a similar job. More at Four.
Represent their constituents? Does K do this? When was the last time K broke ranks with Barry? How has K responded when Barry takes dictatorial steps and then simply makes excuses as to why he did it? How has K responded to the IRS targeting of private citizens? How has K responded to her fellow demons pressuring the IRS to be a tool of the demon party and threaten their political opponents with the full force of the IRS? What has K done to get to the bottom of the Benghazi scandal where 4 Americans are dead because Billary and Barry refused to do their job? Where does K stand on socialized medicine? Does she support free market solutions so people can actually afford their insurance (and KEEP THEIR DOCTOR) or does K prefer a single payer system where the central planners control every aspect of the health care market? If it's important for elected officials to represent their constituents, does this apply only to Republicans? Sure seems like a double standard to me. Guess I just pay too much attention to what's going on. Perhaps I'll start tuning in to Duck Dynasty, Survivor, Idol, and the other mind-numbing trash that distracts so many from real life. Then I'll be as low-information as most libs (voters & pols) and this will all make sense to me too.
