While it began under bizarre circumstances, the current (apparent, informal) 31-31 deadlock over who should control the New York State Senate is not unprecedented.  Elsewhere around the country, there have been 38 other instances since 1966–including 11 in this decade alone–in which election results produced partisan ties in state legislative chambers, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.  Among New York’s neighboring states, the Pennsylvania Senate was tied between Republicans and Democrats in 1992, and the New Jersey Senate was tied in 2001.

In an interesting backgrounder on the subject, the NCSL notes:

Just because a legislative chamber faces partisan stalemate … doesn’t mean the business of the state comes to a halt.  The chamber still must elect leaders, appoint committees, consider bills and continue other work.  The process just doesn’t always happen according to convention.  Legislators have figured out unique ways to break deadlock over the years.

Several states allow lieutenant governors to break organizational deadlocks in the upper house, while others have passed statutes setting out the tie-breaking rules in advance, the NCSL says.  Wyoming has even resorted to a coin toss to decide the winners of individual seats and to elect a leader in 1974.

When all else fails, lawmakers have negotiated various forms of power-sharing or co-leadership agreements.  The NCSL says such deals have generally fared “better than expected,” in the views of participants.

Cooperation rather than confrontation seems to be key to the success of shared power in a chamber, as well as good will and the personalities of the players.  They promote respect for the legislative institution and for each other’s positions.  However, no matter how smooth the process seemed to go, most legislators experienced with chamber deadlock don’t recommend that other legislatures try it.

The difference, in New York’s case, is that the Senate temporarily was not tied when the Senate’s 30 Republican members were able to reorganize their 62-member house June 8 through a surprise roll-call with “aye” votes from two Democrats.  One of those Democratic turncoats, Hiram Monserrate, has since defected back to the former majority.

Meanwhile, the Albany Senate spectacle also has highlighted a degree of civic ignorance on the part of some lawmakers.  The Senate’s newly elected president pro-tem, Pedro Espada (D-Bronx), has described his goal as “coalition government” — a phrase picked up by other senators who apparently share the mistaken impression that they belong to a Westminster-style Parliament rather than a bicameral Legislature that is one of the three branches of government in a state with a strong executive. The Senate’s function is not to “govern”–that’s what the governor is for, after all –but to legislate.

New York State’s last experience with a legislative leadership deadlock came in early 1965, when newly elected Democratic majorities were unable to agree on the selection of a new Senate majority leader or Assembly speaker for the first month of what was then only a three-month legislative session.  The ultimate winners were elected with GOP support through the intervention of a Republican governor, Nelson Rockefeller.