Sen. Steve Erdman of Bayard appears willing to upend Nebraska’s Legislature in an attempt to preserve outsized rural representation against the reality that half of the state’s population now resides in Lancaster, Douglas and Sarpy counties.

His proposal, contained in LR2CA, would replace the state’s one-house Legislature with two houses.

One of the new bodies would be a House of Representatives, with 63 members elected by districts.

The new Senate would divide the state geographically, with its 31 senators appointed by county board members to represent three contiguous counties.

In other words, the three eastern Nebraska counties, including the cities of Omaha and Lincoln, could have, at most, three senators, or less than 10% of the body.

That fact alone makes Erdman’s efforts a non-starter. If somehow the proposed constitutional amendment got on the ballot, it would be roundly rejected by the voters in the three eastern counties, which, as Erdman realizes, make up over half of the electorate.

There’s been no appetite to increase pay for the state’s current 49 senators. Does anyone really think there’s an interest in paying for 45 more members of the legislative branch?

Even if the proposal could escape a certain filibuster, make its way onto the ballot and receive voter approval, it would likely violate U.S. Supreme Court decisions requiring equal representation for people, not territory.

And the appointment of senators would certainly be challenged as eliminating representative democracy, the cornerstone of American government.

LR2CA is almost certain to go no further than the hearing it had a couple weeks ago.

That said, there is nothing wrong with considering changes to the Legislature 86 years after the unicameral held its first session.

Defenders of the unicameral often cite Sen. George Norris, the driving force in convincing voters in 1934 to establish a nonpartisan, one-house Legislature, saying that “Norris would be rolling over in his grave” at hearing of a reversion to a two-house Legislature.

That, frankly, is irrelevant today.

What is relevant is the fact that, despite increasing rural-urban polarization and partisanship within our nonpartisan body, the one-house Legislature has served the state well.

A second house would only add polarization between the two bodies, especially if they are controlled by opposing parties, and make getting any legislation passed more cumbersome and difficult than in the single house.

That is why the Nebraska Legislature has been looked at by other states as a model to reform their systems.

Good governance requires representation of people -- even as their demographics change. Our one-house system does that through its redistricting process. LR2CA should be tossed into the ashcan of the Legislature’s history.

This editorial first appeared in the Lincoln Journal Star on March 18, 2023. It was distributed by The Associated Press.