GOP Senate is a sorry display of governance

Republicans in the Arizona Senate are putting on a sorry display of representative government. And in so doing, making the case for eliminating any official role for parties in state elections and governance.

In November, voters sent 16 Republicans and 14 Democrats to the state Senate.

That left Republicans in control. But with such a closely divided result, the sensible course for Republicans to follow would have been this: Agree to work toward a united caucus on a few, highly significant issues. But on most things, let the body work its will, with all legislators free to vote without taking party into consideration.

That not only would have been the sensible and practical course. It is also the only course that respects the will of the voters in electing such a closely divided Senate.

That, however, isn’t the course Senate Republicans are taking. Instead, the ethos seems to be this: Any bill any Republican wants to pass should pass. And all other Republicans are obligated to support that bill, irrespective of how much of a turkey they might think it is.

In other words, ignore the composition of the Senate as voters chose to make it.

Stick together as a party and muscle things through as though Republicans were given a mandate, even though they weren’t.

An ugly public ruction recently illustrates the existence of this ethos and why it’s an unproductive and destructive way to govern.

Sen. Michelle Ugenti-Rita has a bill that would drop from the early voter list anyone who fails to return a mail ballot in two consecutive election cycles. It failed on the floor by a 15-15 vote. Fellow Republican Paul Boyer joined the Democrats and cast the deciding vote that defeated it.

Boyer was the prime sponsor of a bill that had passed the Senate earlier, expanding vouchers that offset the cost of attending private schools.

To punish Boyer for violating the ethos, Ugenti-Rita moved to ask that the House return Boyer’s voucher bill. Five of her Republican colleagues supported the motion.

Democrats were torn. Boyer’s occasional acts of independence gives them some leverage, so they didn’t really want to join in punishing him for it. But they hate vouchers. The voucher-hating won out, Democrats supported the motion to ask for Boyer’s voucher bill back, and it passed.

Now, on the issue in dispute, the purging of the early voter list, I think Ugenti-Rita is right and Boyer is wrong.

Each election, there are hundreds of thousands of mail ballots that aren’t returned. Having that number of blank ballots floating around is an election integrity vulnerability. Reducing the number of them is a good idea. Those who aren’t using their early ballots should be removed from the list.

Ugenti-Rita’s bill gave people notice of removal and the ability to stay on. And it’s easy to rejoin the list at any time.

However, if there were a small number of highly important matters on which the Republican caucus was going to try to stay united, this one probably wouldn’t have made the grade.

Paradoxically, the bill Ugenti-Rita sought to recall, Boyer’s voucher bill, might make the cut. Expanding school choice should be a GOP priority. Democrats oppose it, so the only way to advance the cause is for Republicans to stick together.

Edmund Burke famously framed the question of how a representative should act. Should he reflect directly the views of those who elected him? Or should he act according to his conscience and let voters judge him for that at the next election? Burke sided with voting one’s conscience and then standing for judgment.

The Senate ethos, however, gives priority to neither constituents nor conscience. Instead, it gives priority, and exclusive priority, to party.

The Boyer bashing is politically shortsighted, since he holds the ultimate trump card. The biggest issue of all is the state budget.

And if Republicans want a tax cut, it will have to be passed on a party-line vote. Punishing Boyer now isn’t likely to make it easier to persuade him to be a team player then.

The voters chose a closely divided Senate. Republicans in the Senate are trying to act as though they hadn’t.

That’s possible when representatives are elected by party and legislative bodies are organized by party.

For truly representative government, Arizona needs to move into a post-partisan era.