The legislative session that ended earlier this month was about the most lopsided example of divided government that Vermont has ever seen. Democrats controlled both houses of the legislature by huge margins while facing off against a Republican governor. How could anything be accomplished?

Predictably, news reports focused on that division and on the conflict that developed between the legislative leaders and Gov. Jim Douglas on two or three high-profile issues. There was indeed conflict, but behind the scenes a different scenario altogether was unfolding in some committee rooms and corridors. In fact, significant constructive work was accomplished during the legislative session of 2007, despite the gaping political divide.

To us, this seems a triumph of Vermont politics. Here were 151 politicians who disagreed deeply and sincerely on many major issues and political philosophy but who were nevertheless able to work well together. What a contrast to the partisanship in Washington, which has occasionally brought the national governing process to a near-standstill.

* * *

Exhibit #1 in the list of constructive legislation was the telecommunications bill, which expressed Vermont’s determination to make the technological leap to full access to the digital world throughout the state—much as the rural Electrification Act stretched wires throughout the state for an earlier generation. This was a serious program involving serious money, for which both parties share the credit.

The legislature and governor also agreed to put substantial money into a new scholarship program ($12 million) and farm relief ($3 million), and agreed on a direction for public pre-kindergarten education.

Another important collaboration helped resolve a controversy-laden topic. That was the new law for dealing with potentially dangerous sex offenders who are nearing the end of their prison terms. Gov. Douglas earlier had repeatedly called (wrongly, we thought) for continued "civil commitments" of these prisoners, and this bill enabled him to back away gracefully from that position while enabling significant steps to be taken in protecting potential victims.

A little-noted example of political cooperation, pointed out by Susan Allen in the Times Argus Tuesday, was a bill extending state protection and, when necessary, financial support of foster children to the age of 21, instead of cutting it off at age 18. This could well have become a platform for political posturing, but it didn’t. Democrats and Republicans alike crafted the bill they thought would best serve kids.

Similarly the bill to bring fresh farm foods into the schools was welcomed by both sides—and then named for Rozo McLaughlin, the South Royalton legislator who conceived of the bill originally but died at a much-too-young age last fall.

Finally, there was the state budget itself, a document hundreds of pages long that details how more than a billion dollars will be spent. The multiple decisions made within this document touch more lives in more ways than any new laws are likely to do; and in 2007, the Democratic legislature and the Republican governor’s staff moved smoothly, with few partisan dust-ups, to construct this vital machinery and bring it in at just a 1.7% increase, a notable achievement.

* * *

It is true that the two most-discussed "big bills" of the 2007 legislature are flawed. The "energy bill" will be vetoed by the governor for the lack of a fair funding mechansm, and the school financing bill is likely to be only a marginally effective response to a big problem. Other issues, like making housing more affordable, proved intractable this year.

But from another perspective, Vermont can be proud that its Democratic legislature and Republican governor could put away so many of their differences and find areas of significant agreement. The machinery of government in Vermont, under considerable political strain, creaked a bit, but it continued to hang together and serve Vermonters.