You may recall the unpleasant campaign tactic in 2002 by Maine Unlimited, which distributed last-minute election fliers smearing incumbent Democrats running for the 121st Legislature. You might also remember the way during the session that Dem-ocrats pointlessly slowed a sensible and needed government-oversight plan mostly by Republicans and the way Democrats cut Republicans out of the budget process. Memories of the recent past arise now that a Republican-led lawsuit accuses House and Senate Democratic leaders of unconstitutionally withholding legislative pay.

These events and many smaller ones are connected because they bracket and describe the undercurrent of this Legislature, which spent much of its time in crisis, got a surprising amount accomplished but couldn’t cooperate long enough to pass tax relief and parted as divided as ever. I don’t know whether this legislature was better or worse than previous legislatures, but I know its internal dissent kept it from accomplishing more.

The lawsuit nominally is over what Democrats must have thought was a brilliant move. Returning in January, they needed an amended 2004 budget in effect by early May so that government would be funded. They had two choices: get support from two-thirds of the lawmakers, requiring compromise with Republicans to win their votes, and have the budget take effect immediately, or pass a budget by simple majority, which they could do without a single Republican vote, but they would be forced to wait for the budget to take effect 90 days after the end of the session, which commonly adjourns in April.

They solved the problem by passing a simple-majority budget in late January and promptly calling an early end to the session, thereby starting the 90-day clock months early. Then they turned around and, with the governor’s help, brought themselves back into special session to try to get the rest of their work done. Slick, in a sad sort of way. Rather than be seen wasting the public’s money with special-session pay when they were supposed to be earning only their regular pay, they prohibited lawmakers from getting the special-session money. Or they have tried to, first through a bill that didn’t get enough votes, then a joint order of leadership, which Democratic Attorney General Steven Rowe said was a bad idea, and late in the session, by statute, which Republicans refused to support but was passed anyway.

The attorney for the plaintiffs, Dan Billings, says the statute passed to prohibit the special session does not apply because the 90-day rule means the statute has yet to go into effect. The statute, however, is retroactive to Jan. 30, which the plaintiffs, led by Sen. Tom Sawyer of Penobscot County, say is unconstitutional. Special-session pay for the 186 lawmakers at $100 a day comes to about $700,000. The lawsuit asks for triple damages, interest and attorney fees.

How weird is it that Republicans are demanding more spending while the Democrats call for fiscal restraint? What do these lawmakers think they are – Congress?

Sen. Sawyer is joined in the lawsuit by another Republican, a Dem-ocrat and an unenrolled member, but this is purely a GOP suit against Democratic leadership, specifically Senate President Beverly Daggett and Speaker Pat Colwell. Republicans have complained about the lack of special-session pay for months, and in the Senate voted unanimously against the bills that would prohibit it. It was Republicans who sought the AG’s opinion on the question. And attorney Billings, to connect one end of this Legislature to the other, was treasurer of Maine Unlimited at the time of the 2002 campaign against the incumbent Democrats.

The suit is not about money. (Mr. Billings says readily of the triple damages, “If the leadership is willing to resolve this quickly, we’re certainly not going to press for it.”) Nor is it about defending the state constitution, as the plaintiffs suggest. It is about politics and making Democrats think twice before they again end a session early, a maneuver that cripples the minority party. Even if the statute holds up – it was modeled on a description in the AG’s opinion of what likely would be allowed by a court – its use would invite more of the type of bickering mentioned above. And please don’t tell me the other one started it first.

Essential Programs and Services for schools, Dirigo health care, a closed $1 billion budget hole, racino, the beginnings of a new Department of Health and Human Services, major Medicaid reviews – legislators worked hard in the 121st and they got a lot done in part because there was a lot to do. But they messed up tax reform, fumbled bond questions and dropped the school laptop program. They’ll meet again in special session late in the summer to try to complete their work, perhaps as the lawsuit is being heard.

This is a time-consuming, expensive and needless way to run a government. James Melcher, an assistant professor of political science at the University of Maine at Farmington, observes, “In Maine, moderate politicians tend to do well, particularly in the sense of being pragmatic about getting things done.” The several lawmakers out on the edges of political reality here provide more entertainment than guiding political philosophy. There’s no reason that the two parties would fail to get along on the majority of issues – no reason other than the maintenance of the parties themselves. And that is quite a luxury in such a poor state.

So the question arising from this week’s lawsuit isn’t whether Maine can afford the special-session salaries, but whether it can afford the behavior of the political parties that may soon meet in court.

Todd Benoit is editorial page editor of the Bangor Daily News.