More Common Sense raises an important question in comments…how can we improve Congress? I submit his comment here, with minimal editing, as a means of sparking a discussion both about how congress could be improved and whether it’s possible. MCS:
I believe votes like this are as a result of a very misguided conclusion on the part of the establishment Republicans. They’ve listened to the main-stream-media and analyzed the low ratings of the Congressional approval polls and have come up with the conclusion that their job is to “reach across the aisle” and compromise their values because that is what is necessary to insure voters like them. They are following the lead of the Democrats and have succumbed to the idea that it is more important to be liked and elected than it is to do the “right thing”. Doing the “right thing” is too difficult and too risky and could be spun to make them look bad in the eyes of the voters. It is sad to see that the execution of government has become a popularity contest just like elections. This is not how Congress was designed to work.
Congressional approval polls seem to be low because of a misconception on the part of the voters. They seem to think Congress is not doing their job when bills don’t get passed. They seem to think that Congress is not doing its job if they can’t come to a full agreement. This misconception seems to be fueled by the main -stream-media’s focus on controversy and their spin on the motives of the Congressmen and Congresswomen; particularly the motives of the Republicans. Congress is supposed to be confrontational. Controversial bills are supposed to be contentiously debated. Controversial bills are not supposed to be passed. Only those bills that provide enough common ground to be acceptable to majorities of both parties should be passed and made law. This is the filter that is supposed to make sure that laws are not passed that are not addressing the common good of all people in the country. It is Congresses job to modify the content of the bill until the bill is acceptable. If this cannot be accomplished the bill should “die”. Congress is doing its job when it doesn’t pass a bill just as much as when they do. They are not doing their jobs when congressional members compromise their ideals just to get a bill passed for appearance purposes or for a special deal for their constituents. When they do that we end up with bad laws! Instead they need to hold their ground. Very controversial bills should not be passed unless what makes them controversial can be removed or modified to reduce or eliminate the controversy.
A major problem with bills that are coming though congress these days is they are huge in content and not specific in focus. The bills are thousands of pages long containing provisions and riders that have nothing to do with the original bill. This practice is about as dishonest as you can get. The intent is to get a provision passed that could not pass on its own. If it is attached to a popular bill any opposition to the bill (because of the provision) can be “spun” by the provision supporters (and the media) to make it look like the opposition is not in support of the original popular bill. This practice needs to be outlawed! When the founding fathers envisioned how Congress would work I don’t think they had any idea that this would be a standard practice. Of course, back then all bills were hand written and as such were short and specific.
Here are a few ideas that I think would improve congress;
1. There should be limits on the size of a bill. If a bill cannot be written in a specific number of pages it needs to be broken up into multiple bills, or sub-bills. I realize that this is somewhat arbitrary but also I believe it would cause bill authors to partition their bills into sections based on acceptability. There would be a separate vote on each sub-bill so we the people would know where each Congress member stands on each sub-bill. The author of the bill could designate that sub-bills are dependent on each other. In other words they could designate that a sub-bill is not law even if it gets passed unless another sub-bill is also passed. This may sound like we are getting back to the huge bill issue again because it ties them together but I think this is necessary, and we would have voting records for each of the sub-bills so we know where each congress member stands. I believe this would allow for the agreeable parts of bills to be passed and eliminate bad provision and would make it so all Congress members were accountable for their votes.
2. There should be limits on the focus of a bill. There would have to be some specific thread that ties them together. If not, they cannot be part of the same bill.
3. The powers of the Speaker of the House and the Senate Majority leader to determine what bills come to a vote should be greatly reduced. The current situation gives far too much power to one man (in each house).
I could go on and on…. but I’m going to stop here. Jack, Tina, how about a discussion on how to improve Congress?
Posted this the other day on the Washington Times comment section:
Time for a Constitutional Convention. Top of the agenda – TERM LIMITS. Second on the agenda – a balanced budget requirement. Third – requirement of single-subject bills through Clowngress with a limit of 2 pages. Betcha would get ratified by States in a heartbeat!
Glad to see others are trying to make Clowngress more like what our founding fathers wanted instead of the professional political class it has become.
I’d like to add #4 to the list.
4. All bills need to be posted online for a reasonable period of time that allows them to be sufficient reviewed by the people so the people can express their opinions concerning the bill to their representatives prior to the vote. No more “we have to pass it to see what’s in it”!
Congress does not work for the people. So all this is futile unless we take the system back from the billionaire class …both parties. It is a lobbyists dream.
As long as they spend 75% of their time dialling for dollars making promises ….we will continue to loose our freedom
It amazes me you think there is a body of honest people working hard for you. There are very few….
I don’t know what Dewey means when he says we need to “take the system back” from the billionaire class. He knows he wants lobbying to end but offers no path to get us there and while he seems to focus on corporations he fails to realize the wealth and power behind other lobbying groups.
Downsizing the government and it’s bureaucracy and simplifying regulations so they are specific, reasonable, and stable would eliminate the need for corporations to pay lobbyists. Giving power back to the states and the people would put an end to lobbying at the federal level.
The problem is that the non-corporate lobbying blocks, which include the powerful and wealthy government unions, the greens, the LBGT’s, minority groups, and the various issues foundations and pacs that will never support the idea of a smaller federal government. They exist because of the power to control through the federal government.
The ideas MCS has put forward are filled with wisdom and common sense. The best interest of the people are not being served when bills are passed through intimidation, compromise of principles, and back room deals. The whole of the people are not served when companies and groups drive what becomes law. We did not send our representatives to DC to make deals for various segments of society but that is surely what is happening.
We on the conservative side have said for a long time that bills should address a specific problem and pass or fail based on the merits of the proposal. After a couple of centuries of deal making and pork the laws and regulations are so complex that even lawyers can’t make sense of them. Nobody knows for sure if they are actually following the law to the letter. Nobody knows how many laws conflict with other laws. It’s ridiculous and very expensive.
The people suffer, whether they realize it or not, because of the massive cost of the federal government. You know it has to be bad when the only people left to tax are the wealthy. We’ve reached that moment Margaret Thatcher spoke of when she said, “Sooner or later you run out of other people’s money.” The middle class is tapped out.
So it isn’t just the mechanics and performance of congress, it is the mindset of the people who have accepted, even embraced, the big government “omnibus” model. Our representatives do have the sense that we the people expect them to provide through the process. We have given them the impression that they have to deliver the goods, and not just to companies and billionaires but to all kinds of groups. Our representatives pack the budget and laws with giveaways to special interest groups.
Breitbart shares that members of congress contributed very little to the bill and most have no idea what’s in it. They found out some of what is in it by talking to lobbyists. Apparently only four members of Congress put this bill together and it was not discussed or debated with colleagues. Jeff Sessions spoke with Lars Larson today: “This kind of process is unhealthy … because in a matter of panic before Christmas we’re told ‘you either vote for this bill or shut the government down and that would be a colossal disaster.’”
We can only guess who “the four” were. Speaker Ryan, Senator McConnel, Nancy Pelosi, and Harry Reid are likely candidates. I think we deserve to know.
I also think it’s time for reasonable democrats to step up. Instead of disparaging the Tea Party, it’s time they discovered why it even exists. It exists because ordinary individuals all across the nation are fed up with how DC operates and the complex tax code. If Democrats refuse to join with Republicans to put an end to this kind of representation we’re finished as a republic and we can say good bye to the prosperity and innovation that made America a wonderful place to live and the envy of the world.
How do you dismantle a tangled and gnarled behemoth with long tentacles? How do you pressure a body to change the way they do business? We know what we want…how do we get there. I always come back to education. the people have to be schooled in the value of limited government, freedom, and personal responsibility or our representatives will continue to reflect what we have demanded, stupidly.
I think there is some real truth that both parties have allowed the lobbyists to control a majority of national policy. Reform is not easy but we have to push for some big changes to get anywhere. Much like in negotiating for a raise, you have to ask for more than what you really want.
So, first we demand immediate term limits. Everyone in Congress is now on their last term. And no more retirement pay. That will get their attention and soften them up to give us something real.
Zero based budgeting. We have to get stronger accounting of all government agency spending. The agencies have so much money that they are now their own lobby.
No more rider bills, and no more omnibus budgets. Bills have to stand on their own and not be slipped in as attachments. The budget should be broken into categories of spending that separately voted on. There won’t be a threat of shut down when we get rid of the “all or nothing” system.
And the most immediate way we can have an affect: A conservative President who is to the right of Paul Ryan and the establishment GOP. Ted Cruz is the most obvious at this point who is in the top tier.
At the local levels, we have to demand more of our congressional reps. It’s great start when they vote how we want, but more has to be done. Every last congressman has to become a part of the solution and not be afraid to risk their seat when they take on the establishment. America’s problems right now are bigger than any one individual’s love of being in Congress. If they don’t get that they really have to go.
Steve: “…we demand immediate term limits. Everyone in Congress is now on their last term. And no more retirement pay. That will get their attention and soften them up to give us something real.”
And as they have with every other demand we’ve made we will be labeled a radical fringe and dismissed. I hate to rain on your parade because your reasoning is sound and I agree that with honest, reasonable, sincere people this would be a good negotiating tactic. What I see is the elite power structure has to be broken and I don’t know how to do that unless the people who elected them throw them out.
Our friend Ted Cruz led a charge against the omibus bill but did not prevail:
Some of the 97 representatives that voted against the bill in the house have expressed the same frustrations that we feel. Never mind the content and $1.1 trillion price tag, the Congress is a fraud!
With the support of both McConnell and Reid, the omnibus bill passed 56-40. Cruz’s measure to declare the bill unconstitutional failed 22-74
“A conservative President who is to the right of Paul Ryan and the establishment GOP. Ted Cruz is the most obvious at this point who is in the top tier.”
Here, here! He may be the only one running who knows the Constitution well enough to lead a charge against fraudulent, deceitful practices in Congress.
I’m usually an optimistic person when it comes to long term possibilities. Right now it looks very dark to me.
Tina, don’t lose hope. Just a few months ago Jeb Bush was considered the natural front runner because he had the most establishment donors behind him. Say what you will about the base of the GOP, but they have rebuked the establishment. That doesn’t mean the establishment won’t fire back and pull their usual tricks. It took a lot of years for our country to get in this mess, it will take many more to get it right.
Thanks for the pep talk Steve. My problem is I can’t stand the thought that I won’t be around to see it and I love a good celebration! 😉
Re Steve : So, first we demand immediate term limits etc.
Excellent commentary. It sure beats the heck out of notion of the “overuse” of the 1st Amendment.
Re everything in More Common Sense “Congress – Can It Be Improved?”
You nailed so many issues it is hard to keep up.
“Controversial bills are supposed to be contentiously debated. Controversial bills are not supposed to be passed. Only those bills that provide enough common ground to be acceptable to majorities of both parties should be passed and made law.”
Precisely. Republicans always caving to Democrats is not my idea of a healthy process. What is the strategy of the recent omnibus package? The only thing I can fathom is that Republican legislators are afraid of rocking the boat until the presidential election is over.
Republicans that think as we do tell us they had little chance to contribute couldn’t get the votes, read or debate the bill. It was done in secret like Obamacare and “decided” by those the elite few could pressure and cajole into going along to get along.
This is so deeply unethical and outside of the intent of the founders it’s impossible to articulate my disgust.
Bring members of Clowngrss back to their home state/districts. They can vote or hold hearings electronically. Bringing them home would make them much more accessible to the folks that elected them, which is whom they are supposed to represent. Would also cut way back on the expen$es of traveling back and forth and the cost of having extra staff and offices in DC – which is paid by John/Jane Q Taxpayer.
‘Course, that might make it harder for the poor, underpaid, overworked lobbyists to have convenient access to those who vote on laws . . . . which would definitely be a good thing!
Great idea!
I live in Chico and work in my home office for a company located in Santa Clara. I interact with all the members of my project team through online audio and video conferencing with only 2 visits to Santa Clara in the last year. The technology is there and I agree it would be a very positive change.
PJ Media compares history of Tammany Hall to the situation today. Please read to the end for full understanding.
Jeff Sessions confirms that Ted Cruz stopped the Marco Rubio/Gang of Eight’s amnesty bill from passing.
Jeff Sessions: Without Ted Cruz, Amnesty Would Have Passed In 2013:
“Sen. Jeff Sessions gave a full-throated defense of Sen. Ted Cruz at an event Friday in Daphne, Alabama. Cruz is facing attacks from Marco Rubio, Rand Paul, and others over technical issues regarding amendments to a 2013 immigation reform bill which never passed.
“People need to remember this, because this election is going to decide, the crowd who pushed that bill,” Sessions said. “Will they be in the White House, and allowed to push their agenda, or will we have somebody else?”
“Remember after the 2006 battle, people started sending bricks to Congress, to build a wall with… The switchboards were shutdown, millions of Americans were calling. And when we finally had a vote, only 46 voted for it. The people spoke and the Congress, although it was dicey, they listened.”
“In 2013 they spent a billion and a half dollars to promote this legislation, the political consultants, they had pollsters hired to spin the numbers, they had special interest groups, they met for months, the gang of eight, they were determined, it was a near on thing, it was a worse bill than the 2007 bill. It gave amnesty first… We voted more than once to build a fence, do we have a fence?”
“So it came before the Senate, and the gang of eight met every day, they also had been meeting for months with the special interests and activists, the la Raza group, the ACLU, and businesses who want more and more cheap labor.”
“They had a scheme — a plan to vote down every amendment no matter what the amendment was. They did it because they said they had acheived a delegate balance between enforcement, and they had the perfect bill… Every amendment was voted down by every Democrat and a number of Republicans. it was a tense.”
“It was that close to being passed… and I think I can say this with integrity. Without the vigorous opposition of Ted Cruz, this bill likely would have passed.”
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2015/12/20/jeff_sessions_without_ted_cruz_amnesty_would_have_passed_in_2013.html#ooid=Z4NjFueTr4xmCvW7rCl9C1hAupGVRe-T