It would be easy to righteously huff that it's time somebody in the State Senate get us all out of this despicable stalemate in which we find ourselves because of the 31-31 Republican-Democratic deadlock.

The embarrassing predicament almost cries out for someone to demand that some senator — any senator — simply vote with the other party and make it 32-30, at least for the rest of the session.

Why not Betty Little, for example, the Queensbury Republican who represents us in the 43rd Senatorial District? Every day that goes by with no relief from the paralysis sinks the state and its people further into trouble. Multi-billion-dollar deficits? Pay no attention to them until the senators have figured out who's in charge. Property-tax reform? Let's first address the crucial issue of who's majority leader.

But if anyone can finally get through to Albany with the message that the people who put the senators in office are actually more concerned about the deficit and reforms, it will be up to a brave, self-effacing senator to make a sacrifice.

But be aware that there are practical consequences to taking the singular path up that high road.

That senator will have to scorn his or her party and party leaders. If there is legislation particularly dear to that senator's constituents, it will be all but eliminated from consideration.

The senator will be ostracized from his or her party. That means that any influence that has accrued from seniority will be handed over to someone else.

If it is Sen. Little who takes that step into no man's land, it will mean downstate interests will gain predominance over the concerns of upstaters. Traditionally, New York City Democrats vie with upstate Republicans for legislation that will do them the most good. Property-tax reform, for example, has a lot less gravity in New York City than in the Adirondacks.

But if we expect Little to side with the Democrats to break this stultifying logjam, we must accept that property-tax reform will be addressed with much less urgency than we'd hope, if at all.

As a bloc, New York state voters couldn't care less who is in charge in the Senate. Those voters want laws passed that will improve their lives. They are humiliated and frustrated that their government is so famously inept. They are pleading for solutions.

But, in pragmatic terms, do they want that solution to be at their personal expense? That is the price the people in Senate districts and in regions throughout the state will have to pay to have their own senator volunteer for the slaughter. If the senator's career is ruined for switching parties, temporarily or permanently, that is not the voters' concern.

But if the senator must abandon the issues and people who put her in office, that may be a different matter.

We hope for a hero to free the bottleneck in the Senate. But we're not yet convinced that freeing it is worth turning our backs on the causes in which the North Country believes so fiercely.

We desperately want a hero. But, at this point, we're still hoping he or she comes from someplace else.