Finding Common Ground: The Art of Legislating in an Age of Gridlock

By Dave Bishop

Democracy has never been a quick or easy process by which to get things done. But many citizens are fed up with the current, extreme partisan gridlock at the national, state, and even local levels of government.

Dave Bishop spent most of his twenty years in the Minnesota House of Representatives as a member of the Republican minority, but that did not stop him from winning passage of legislation that benefited his district. In Finding Common Ground, he shares proven techniques and insightful examples of how minority members can gain the power to produce better laws and a healthier democracy.

Bishop reveals the inside stories of major Minnesota legislation through the 1980s and 1990s—the lottery, groundwater protection, the Living Will, the Northwest Airlines bailout, and much more—showing how real work can be done through respectful, healthy confrontation and compromise.

This concise handbook is a gift not just for policymakers but also for their constituents who are interested in effective and ethical legislating. Finding Common Ground provides a deeper understanding of the legislative process as well as greater respect for the complex work of legislators and legislatures.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Minnesota Historical Society Press
• Release date: Dec 1, 2015
• ISBN: 9780873519809

Dave Bishop

Dave Bishop served in the Minnesota House of Representatives from 1983 to 2002 as a Republican representative from Rochester.

Book preview

CHAPTER 1

The Scourge of Partisanship

I’m a pragmatist. As a lawyer in general practice for more than twenty years, my strength was in facilitating compromise and settling cases. Whether I was handling a divorce, a neighborhood dispute, or an accident, I always tried to see both sides.

I remember taking a case to a court trial. When the judge asked if the parties had exhausted all avenues for settlement, I asked for a recess. I went into a conference room with the other attorney, a well-respected man named Art Swan.

I said, Let’s trade files.

He was pretty surprised. My suggestion was just an idea that had popped into my head. It was a novel approach, possible only because I knew there was nothing confidential in my file. But by reading each other’s files we would learn just how strong the other was, and the transparency of the exchange built trust. Settlement therefore became a satisfactory compromise.

I handled many divorce cases—over a hundred, I’m sure. When no other lawyer was involved, I met with the two parties, either together or separately, to hear their stories. I listened to both sides, looking for common ground on which to mediate a solution. I had seen that by getting divorced, people often traded one misery for another. My goal in many cases was to negotiate a compromise that would allow the marriage to be restored. I loaned the couples books to read that offered suggestions for overcoming marital conflict. Unfortunately, many legislators don’t have the predisposition to seek compromise. They seem to wholeheartedly support, or completely oppose, any particular idea. More and more, their commitment to ideology overrules their commitment to solving legislative problems. As legislators they can’t be persuaded to listen and absorb, change their thinking, or alter their vote for a collaborative compromise. For these partisans, there is no middle ground. These are the conditions where gridlock becomes inevitable.

Many of these ideologues belong to the minority party, where they play an opposition role, seemingly content to attack the majority without ever accomplishing anything themselves. They don’t try to approach the majority to build relationships and bridges. This is especially true as reelection time approaches and the political environment becomes intensely partisan.

After I won my first election in 1982, I was excited to join the Minnesota House of Representatives as a Republican in the minority. I traveled to the capitol in St. Paul, eager to get busy and start legislating. I wanted to make a difference, and I immersed myself in the job. I read everything I could and sought advice from veteran legislators. I tried to gain knowledge about the process and learn fast how to get things done.

One day, I visited a senior legislator in my caucus. I noticed he had nothing on his desk, no papers anywhere.

How do you do this? I asked. I’m just swamped by everything that comes into my office.

I’m a member of the minority, the legislator said. It’s not my responsibility to carry things forward, unless I happen to be the chief author on a bill. I look things over when they come in, then I throw them out. That’s how I keep my desk clear.

I realized that the empty desktop meant this legislator wasn’t involved. He was a critic, and a capable one at that, but while he was in the minority he never took responsibility for anything.

I also realized that if I adopted this legislator’s approach as a minority member, I’d be ineffective and bored stiff. I had come to the legislature to pass laws. I had ideas for