Too often the Pennsylvania General Assembly portrays itself as a swamp of partisan and obstructionist politics. That's why so much doesn't get done at the state capital — and why when things do get done, it oftentimes is only after a bill has endured prolonged inaction or excessive haggling by lawmakers.

If lawmakers could more often muster a level of bipartisanship similar to the effort behind a new state law that increases gun penalties, the state government would shed some of the bad image that currently encompasses it.

While more bipartisanship on positive measures wouldn't erase the stain of situations such as the current Bonusgate scandal, it would indicate that the General Assembly was headed in the right direction in terms of carrying out its legislative responsibilities.

That observation shouldn't be misconstrued as advocating total harmony. That never would be possible; constructive disagreement is in the state's best interests.

But excessive disagreement, with its foundation rooted simply in whether a bill has been introduced by a Democrat or Republican, no matter how good the intentions of the sponsor, often works to the commonwealth's disadvantage — and wastes valuable time that could be spent on other important issues.

The gun penalties law, which received backing from the National Rifle Association, increased the minimum sentence for anyone convicted of shooting a firearm at a police officer to 20 years from 10 years. It received unanimous approval from both the House and Senate. It was signed Friday by Gov. Ed Rendell, who pledged to embark on an effort to vigorously publicize the new law.

The governor added that the new law will assist prosecutors on a number of firearm issues, including raising the statute of limitations for prosecuting straw purchases linked to gun crimes.

At Friday's signing of the new law, Philadelphia District Attorney Lynne Abraham said, "It's a good day for Pennsylvania and a great day for law enforcement."

But the manner in which the penalties bill moved through the General Assembly can be judged as a good day for state lawmakers.

When campaigning, candidates promise to do great things on behalf of their constituents. Too often they fall short of what they promised.

Not this time.