MAKING CONGRESS PRODUCTIVE AGAIN

Christopher Ebbe, Ph.D.    11-26

Our Congress has lost a great deal of its effectiveness over the last fifteen years or so for three reasons—(1) the Executive branch has taken more power to itself, (2) our two major parties are more concerned about fighting each other than they are about the country or the people, (3) Pres. Trump’s vote power together with his determination to destroy any legislators who oppose him.  Over the last thirty years, our country has slowly moved toward deification of Presidents, treating Presidents as if they are the country’s primary leaders instead of viewing the government’s division into legislative, executive, and judicial branches as essential to our democracy.  We can understand why Presidents would like more power, both because they like power and because they need power to accomplish their goals as President, but expecting them to be the pre-eminent leader will eventually destroy our form of democracy (because eventually we will have a charismatic President who will move naturally into being a dictator).

In order to restore Congress’s productivity, then, will require (1) electing legislators who are willing to oppose Presidents at the risk of losing their seats (i.e., putting the welfare of the country above their personal career hopes), (2) electing Presidents who view the Executive branch as an equal partner rather than pre-eminent. and (3) educating the public better regarding our tripartite government so that they can see the importance of all three branches having appropriate and fairly equal power.  We should reject Presidential candidates who are power-hungry and reject Presidential and legislative candidates who mainly want the office for its prestige and have no clear interest in serving the people.  It is “natural” for people who want power to gravitate toward government, at all levels, and we must temper their desires for power with the knowledge that having too much power will be destructive to the system as a whole.

Finding candidates for public office who are more concerned about the needs of all the people than they are about their longevity in office will be difficult, but perhaps the League of Women Voters could rate candidates on this factor, or perhaps communities could insist on having written or public oral declarations in this regard from all candidates.

Finding Presidential candidates who believe in the tripartite structure of our government as being essential to democracy may also be difficult, but, again, newspapers, communities, or public welfare entities such as Common Cause could insist on written or public oral statements on this factor from all candidates.  It would also help all of us if  Presidents and Presidential candidates were honest about their actual power.  Presidents have very little power to influence inflation or wages or “fix” the economy, but all candidates act like they do have.

Legislators voting on party lines has predictably led to our current Congressional situation in which individual legislator’s opinions are submerged in “the party,” which has power over legislators with money and support for re-election.  This removes creativity from the process, and we never learn how individual legislators have contributed or not contributed to the work they are supposed to be doing.  In my opinion, party caucuses can be useful for legislative planning and refinement, but legislators should be free to vote as they see fit rather than being suborned into voting with the party.

Educating voters and our children about the value of our tripartite government structure is essential to keeping our elections from becoming just about the popularity or entertainment value of candidates.  The functions and prerogatives of each branch of government must be understood and protected.  We should elect only persons who understand this and are willing to go on record as supporting it.  High schools could all include an exercise in which students are part of a process of creating a law and having it executed (and clarified by the Supreme Court), which would alert them to the value of preventing any one branch from having too much power.

If we don’t sufficiently value our system of checks and balances, we will lose it.  The fact that a majority of people cannot name the three branches of our government illustrates the need for education and making maintenance of a healthy democracy an important factor for voters’ decision-making.  It is paradoxical that we must ask people who want power to limit their power for the sake of maintaining our system of checks and balances, but that’s what we need from them!

Essays\congressionalparalysis