Early signs of independence in Senate

Sometimes it's hard to know in politics what the label “independent” means. Democrats and Republicans alike are quick to embrace the term, but all too often, their so-called independence doesn't stand up to party pressures when it counts. Or, it surfaces only when party leadership permits it because votes are so plentiful that a maverick display here and there won't affect a party-driven outcome.

Truth be told, independence can be overrated. Voters elect senators and representatives with a certain amount of faith in the positions they hold. Voters want lawmakers with passion. They want at least a fair amount of consistency. They don't want a haphazard gadfly, flitting from position to position all over the map.

But they need elected officials who do enough homework and who have the right combination of passion and backbone to let their personal insights trump party loyalty when necessary.

Barely three weeks into his tenure as a U.S. senator, it's far too early to wrap Republican Mark Kirk in that mantle, but we have to say he appears to be off to an encouraging start.

Considering the tectonic shift of his rhetoric during the primary and election campaigns, it has been hard to know just what drummer the Highland Park Republican is marching to. In the past week, he's provided some clarity where it counts most — on the Senate floor — first voting in favor of repealing the military's Don't Ask Don't Tell policy on gays and then indicating, again contrary to the dictates of leadership and the swell of his party, he would vote for the START agreement on nuclear disarmament.

On both issues, Kirk's independence carries special authority because of his own military background. Evident in stories written last weekend by Daily Herald political writer Kerry Lester was the extensive research Kirk conducted before settling on his vote regarding Don't Ask Don't Tell. He knew what questions to ask and where to go for straight answers. Then, he let those conversations, rather than partisan pressures, govern his political decision. No doubt, similar backgrounding infused his decision regarding the nuclear proliferation treaty with Russia, where again it appears the new senator relied on experience and intuition rather than simple party affiliation to form his opinions.

Kirk's Illinois colleague in the senate, Democrat Dick Durbin, is a more doctrinaire liberal, but Durbin, too, has his independent streak. His work on behalf of the tax compromise, shunning the single-minded passions of his party's doctrinal purists, helped avert a national crisis.

Bi-partisanship and political independence for their own sakes can, to be sure, do more harm than good. But it's encouraging to sense that Illinois' senators are involving those traits in their political decisions as Congress prepares to assume a very different political complexion,