Editorial: Lawmakers compromise, but can they do it again?

Cooperation and compromise are woven through Washington state’s final $32.2 billion budget. Unlike recent years when majority Democrats authored the fiscal package while Republicans sat on the sidelines, minority viewpoints were incorporated, and Republicans voted for the final product.

Well, in the Senate anyway.

House Speaker Frank Chopp still has lessons to learn about loosening the partisan reins and inviting lawmakers outside his caucus to contribute. As a result, no House Republicans voted for the budget. But it passed 34-13 in the Senate, with many Republicans voting in favor.

Now there are reasons to believe that this will be one-time-only bipartisanship. The Democrats’ edge in the Senate had narrowed so they needed Republicans’ votes to pass a budget, and voters had restrained Democrats’ taxation impulses by passing Initiatives 1053 (two-thirds majority for tax increases) and 1107 (repealing candy and soda taxes) and rejecting Initiative 1098 (income tax on the wealthy).

But we choose to be optimistic that this budget heralds a new era in which divisiveness is relegated to the back bench and pragmatism gets a seat at the table. If so, Senate Majority Leader Lisa Brown, D-Spokane, will deserve a lot of credit.

It’s worth noting that last week’s budget wasn’t the first sign of cooperation. Back in December, lawmakers were called together when a shockingly dismal revenue forecast forced them to come up with more cuts for the 2009-’11 budget. Eight hours later, the job was done. Sen. Joe Zarelli, R-Ridgefield, noted at the time: “The Legislature is at last moving in a positive direction.”

It’s true that lawmakers couldn’t decide on a 2011-’13 budget during the normal session, but when they did finally have a package, there was Zarelli urging colleagues to fight off their political instincts. “One can always find a reason to say no,” he said just before the final vote.

Keep in mind that this budget contains something for everyone to loathe. The cuts are deep and painful. The urge to vote no must have been strong. Passage seemed grim when a logjam developed over workers compensation reform. But that problem, like the rest, was resolved when both sides gave in.

This legislative session is already being called historic, because of the scale of budget cuts and the fact that no areas went untouched, including employee compensation and pension packages. It couldn’t have been done without both sides shouldering the responsibility.

We also hope this session will become noted as the time when long-term power shifted to the pragmatists.