One-party dominance grows in states

• One-party dominance is at a high-water mark
• Of the 25 legislatures with veto-proof majorities, 16 are Republican and nine are Democratic
• Perhaps the most closely watched of these is in California

WASHINGTON -- Beginning in January, 46 states will have one-party control of their legislatures, the highest number since World War II, and in many of those states the majorities are now big enough to sweep aside any objections from the other party.

In 38 of those states, the ruling party will also control the governors' mansion, creating opportunities for activists to press ambitious and highly controversial measures through the state government.

For an election year that failed to provide a sweeping mandate in Washington, 2012 did produce a state legislative map of deeper blues and richer reds. One-party dominance is at a high-water mark -- the last time parties shared power in only three state legislatures was 1944, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

"The unified government result is a significant surprise, having so many states with either a unified Republican or unified Democratic control is at an unusually high level, and not necessarily something that we saw coming," said Karl Kurtz, a NCSL political scientist. The fact that so many states now have supermajorities large enough to override a gubernatorial veto is also surprising -- but important only where the legislature and governor are of opposite parties, he said.

That's the case in three states: Missouri, Arkansas and Rhode Island (where the legislature is Democratic and Gov. Lincoln Chafee, a former Republican, is independent).

So the question for state legislative leaders now is, what will they do with their newfound power?

The power of unchecked one-party rule was on display this week in Lansing, Mich., where a Republican majority quickly passed -- and the Republican governor promptly signed -- legislation limiting the power of unions in a three-hour lame-duck session.

In Republican states like Missouri, the incoming GOP supermajority is already pushing a platform of business-friendly laws: a minimum-wage freeze, medical malpractice limits and and workers' compensation changes. Also on the agenda: A controversial rewrite of the state's anti-discrimination law, which Democratic Gov. Jay Nixon has already vetoed twice.

State Rep. Kevin Elmer of the southwestern Missouri town of Nixa was the sponsor of the last bill and plans to bring it up again in the next session. He said he only wants the standard of proof in discrimination cases to match federal law, requiring that the plaintiff show that discrimination was the motivating factor in an employment decision -- not just a contributing one.

"It's not that I want this to be draconian toward minorities or any protected class," he said. "We're trying to create a more fair environment where businesses have some protections as well as employees."

Elmer also said he expects the Republican agenda to be measured.

"We can't go out there making political statements and running over the governor, because that's not going to instill confidence in our caucus," he said. "And just because you have 110 Republicans doesn't mean you have 110 votes for every bill that every Republican files."

Of the 25 legislatures with veto-proof majorities, 16 are Republican and nine are Democratic. Perhaps the most closely watched is in California, whose patchwork of initiative-written constitutional amendments requires a two-thirds vote of the Legislature to raise taxes, override a veto, overcome procedural hurdles or pass certain types of bills.

Now that California Democrats appear to have that power -- pending the replacement of two senators who moved on to Congress -- they could overcome GOP opposition and raise taxes to close a $1.9 billion budget deficit.

Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg said last week that fellow Democrats shouldn't "come hurtling out of the gate talking about a bunch of new taxes."

"Power is by definition fleeting," he told an opening session of the now super-Democratic Senate. "Misuse it and you lose it. Fail to use it and it withers away."

It also takes two-thirds of the Legislature to propose amendments to the California constitution. So Democrats could use their new supermajority to ask voters to remove some of the supermajority requirements, such as a constitutional amendment that would allow a simple majority of the Legislature to ask voters to approve a tax increase.

Illinois, too, has a new Democratic supermajority and pressing budget issues. There, the supermajority requirement is more likely to come up in issuing bonds or passing urgent bills than on a veto override -- though the Legislature has also wrangled with the governor over casino gambling, prison funding and pension reform.

"That's where those supermajorities are going to come into play, more so than in some tussle with the governor," said Mike Lawrence, longtime newspaper reporter, governor's aide and think tank director in Illinois. Still, Democratic Gov. Pat Quinn "does not have the best possible relationship with the Legislature, and I'm putting it mildly. It's not nearly as hostile as (former governor Rod) Blagojevich. ... They would have overridden his veto just for sport."

In Georgia, Republicans are technically one vote short of a veto-proof majority in the House. But independent state Rep. Rusty Kelly is a reliably Republican vote, and the Legislature is unlikely to pick many battles with Gov. Nathan Deal, a fellow Republican.

Still, Democrats expect a more ambitious conservative agenda. "Now that they have the numbers that they have, it will be interesting to see what they do with it," said Carolyn Hughly, the No. 2 Democrat in the Georgia House. She's especially worried about Republicans pushing through vouchers for private schools.

Having a big majority can also bring challenges to a ruling party, Hughly said. "I've been in the Legislature for the 20 years, and I was here when the Democrats had a large majority. And one of our challenges was how to listen to all of the voices within the party."

Republicans, she said, now "have to deal with Tea Party issues, because they no longer have an excuse."