Good government involves a lot of wasted time. There’s a school of thought that says a legislative body that takes a lot of flak for being “dysfunctional” is actually the best scenario an American could hope for — that means that the legislative body can’t really screw anything up.

With a little less sarcasm, that means when there is no dominant party, no dominant-party agenda can be passed.

The hitch, of course, comes when there is real work to be done. A single split chamber can gum up the works, as can differing opinions in each of two parts in a bicameral (literally, “possessing two cameras”) system.

Everybody crossed their fingers in January at the opening of the 2005 Iowa legislative session. A 25-25 Senate. A 51-49 House in favor of Republicans. Certainly little chance of, say, an amendment banning same-sex marriage, but the potential for flare ups over education, taxes and everything else the Legislature can’t afford to ignore in a year.

The no-brainer restrictions on pseudoephedrine sales set to go into effect statewide May 21 are a good illustration of what’s taken place to substantiate fears about the session. For weeks and weeks, lawmakers hemmed and hawed about being fair to retailers, apparently equating the dubious prospect of some lost income for stores (and their lobbyists) with definitive proof that tough laws can cause huge decreases in methamphetamine production.

But eventually, both houses passed laws experts now call the toughest in the nation. We hope the outcome for the plethora of bills left to be discussed is as positive (and as surprising).

Senators erupted at each other last week, with Democrats and Republicans blaming each other for the small amount of legislation available for debate. According to The Associated Press, the Senate routinely adjourns in early afternoon because its evenly split committees cannot bring bills to the floor. On Tuesday, Sen. Michael Gronstal’s smooth upper lip — absent mustache for the first time since 1969 — was among the top Senate news.

About at this point of our editorials, we, of course, like to start hyperventilating about education funding, something the Senate has been mostly quiet on so far.

It’s clear what we want ($40 million), and it’s clear what that will take — a bill on the floor of each house, some actual debate, some compromise, some realism from both parties (both of which have had their proposed budgets criticized by the state auditor for containing fantasy math).

In other words, pretty typical expectations. This year’s Legislature, divided as it is, can still turn it around, just as it did on pseudoephedrine.