Single-party government the lesser of two evils

After dedicating more than 40 years of my life to journalism, many of them actively covering partisan politics at the state and federal levels, I finally have seen a case made against a divided government.

I had felt that having Republicans or Democrats in control of both the executive and legislative branches of government could be a serious threat to the welfare of this country. I'm not fully convinced otherwise. But, after recent conflicts without either party showing little evidence of being in control of anything, it seems that a single-party government (of whichever ideology succeeds in swaying a majority of voters) is the lesser of two evils.

Doing something to serve the needs of the people of America is better than doing nothing. And that's what our federal policymakers have been doing, without discernible sacrifice on their part.

At least under a monolithic government, a third of the registered voters should be happy. A third (the other party) will not be happy until the tables are turned. And the other third - those not aligned with either major party - probably will never be happy. Sad.

As voters, we get what we asked for. But, believe it or not, voters can make a difference. Every couple of years, we can ask for something else.

Ken Sullivan

Swisher