The 103rd Michigan Legislature, whose two-year session will conclude this fall, was characterized by frustration and stubbornness, resulting in some of the least-productive years the institution has ever seen. Deadlines were ignored, private conflicts spilled into the public eye, and the health of political discourse deteriorated to near-hospice levels.
Let’s consider why, despite all that, it represents a kind of success.
To be sure, at both the national and state levels, civic disagreement has eroded in recent years. We tend to think that things would be better if politicians would “just get along.” Failing that, we might imagine that everything would be smoother if one party could just have unified power and a freer hand to implement our desired changes.
It’s important to remember, especially in this period of reflecting on the 250th anniversary of our country’s founding, that our system of representative democracy was designed to be frustrating on purpose. Congress—and by extension, our state legislatures—were never intended to eliminate conflict, but instead to channel it. When one party has unified control, there’s little conflict, and that party is able to pass sweeping changes along ideological lines. But these are short-term wins, and they’re often quickly undone the next time the opposing party is in power. This creates a pendulum effect in which we alternate jarringly between red and blue without finding a way to constructively achieve some shade of purple.
By contrast, in times of divided government, laws must earn broad support across multiple parties and interest groups. These bipartisan efforts are more likely to endure beyond the next election cycle, fostering a more stable environment in which retailers can do business. This current Legislature has been messy, but in many ways that mess has generated a period of relative stability. For retailers—and for our state—that kind of stability is worth a little frustration.