The meaning of bicameralism is having two legislative chambers. This division of power within the legislative chamber is very common in the United States. Not only does our national legislature, the Congress, adopts this structure, but 49 of the 50 states also choose to use this form of legislature. Nebraska is the only state that does not have a bicameral system; it chooses to have a unicameral system, having only one chamber.

Even though bicameral legislature is commonly associated with the United States, Americans did not invent this form of legislature. The seeds for a multi-chambered legislature were planted long time ago by ancient Greek philosophers such as Aristotle. Their notion is that society is divided into well defined groups or classes who should be represented separately. This notion became deeply seeded in the medieval European society. The origins of modern bicameralism are found in division of the English Parliament into the House of Lords and House of Commons. This accounts for the characterization of one chamber as the upper house and the other the lower house.

The Texas uses as bicameral system. The upper house is the Senate and the lower house in the House of Representatives. Unlike the British system, members of both houses of the Texas legislature are elected. Following the tradition of the British system, the qualifications for Senators are more stringent than that of Representatives. Candidates for the Senate are required to be at least 26 years of age and 5 years Texas resident. Candidates of the House of Representatives are required to be 21 years of age and 2 years Texas resident. Both candidates are required to be American citizen and 1 year district resident. The size of the two houses is different too. The Texas Senate contains 31 members and the Texas House of Representatives contains 150 members. So the Senators represent a larger amount of the population. Senators also serve a longer term than Representatives. Senators serve a 4 year overlapping term; Representatives serve a 2 year term.

Although both houses are responsible for making law, some powers are granted to only one of the house. Senate has the sole power to confirm gubernatorial appointments and to convict government officials. The House of Representative has the sole authority to start any appropriation bills and to impeach government officials. The practice of financial bills originating from the lower house is based on the belief that people are only ones who can give consent to financial burdens which they have to bare. Since the lower house in the national government is elected by population, the Representatives are the ones who represent the people equally. Beside these exceptions both of the chambers have the same responsibility of law making. Any bill must pass both chambers in the same form before moving on to the governor’s office for signing.

Bicameral legislature has it pros and cons. One of the arguments for bicameralism is that it helps balance broad issues with more local issues. Since the upper chamber represents a boarder spectrum of citizens, it focuses on general problems its constituency faces. The lower house represents a narrower range of citizens. It can focus on local issues.

Another argument for bicameralism is that it can balance the interest of the majority and the rights of the minority. In essence, bicameralism prevents the tyranny of the majority. Because the lower chamber represent a narrower range of people, it is easier for minority groups to elect representatives to represent them. If there was only the upper chamber, minority groups would find it difficult to gather up enough strength to win a majority-takes-all election. In this way, representatives can specialize toward the good of their constituents. The presence of the upper chamber can help deal with broader issues faced by the general population. The lower chamber would have difficult dealing with broader issues because it is plagued by so many different special interests.

Bicameral legislature also helps to stabilize the political order. The interaction of bicameral legislature and the executive veto creates a healthy amount of check and balance between the branches of government despite the destabilizing effect of the legislative override. Having two chambers makes overriding executive veto more difficult than having only one chamber. So bicameral legislature prevents the legislative branch from accumulating excessive power.

There are also many side effects for having a bicameral legislature. One of which is inefficiency. Having two chambers agreeing on the same bill is very difficult. This makes the law making process extremely slow and laborious. A simple bill usually require months of deliberation in order to pass.

Bicameral legislature in its modern form defeats the idea of universal suffrage. In which some groups of people have more influence in the legislative process than others. Case and point, in the United States Senate, every state gets the same number of senators. However, every state does not have the same population. The citizens of more populous states such as California, New York, and Texas get less representation per capita than citizens of less populous states like Wyoming and Alaska.

Bicameral legislature is also more expensive to maintain. The second chamber significantly increases the overall expenditure of the legislature. However, for industrialized nations this cost is miniscule in comparison with the overall budget. The cost factor may not be significant for national government, but it may play a more visible role in local governments.

In my opinion, bicameral legislature is not useful for Texas. First of all, the balancing effect of majority interest and minority rights is less of a factor in Texas where district lines are drawn every 10 years. Not only that, law requires district to be drawn so that it will include minority representatives. Having two chambers in the legislature is redundant representation. The argument for stabilizing political order also does not apply to Texas very much. This is because legislative overrides are very rare, since more of the legislations passes are done in the last two weeks of the regular session.

I believe Texas would benefit by doing away with the bicameral system. First, Texas’ legislative session is very short, only 140 days. By having a unicameral legislature, efficiency can improve dramatically. More bills can be passed during the session. This also means more time can be allotted on investigating the bill, instead of on compromising the details of the bill. Texas can also benefit from the reduction the operating cost of a bicameral legislature.