Here's What's Wrong With Congress
- Print print this page
- Discuss 18 comments, Blog about
Advertisement
According to the latest poll, 92 percent of the populace disapproves of the Congress' performance. The adjective most commonly applied is "dysfunctional."
Given the magnitude of congressional ineptitude, "dysfunctional" is a generous euphemism for conduct more starkly, and certainly more accurately, described as gross incompetence.
In many respects, a society is a collective of the virtues and vices, strengths and weaknesses, feats and failures of its citizenry. According to one study, there is a strong likelihood that individuals are often incompetent to recognize their incompetence. (The stupid may not realize they are stupid, the intelligent will overestimate their intelligence.)
To be charitable, one could apply this theory to the Congress and excuse its incompetence on the ground that it shares, collectively, the individual's inability to recognize incompetence when possessed by it.
But that is to let the institution off far too easily. Incompetence can be a result as well as a cause of particular actions. For example, continuing to funnel billions of taxpayer dollars in subsidy to an oil industry that annually realizes hundreds of billions of dollars in profits would strike most people as an incompetent governmental result.
But is it a result caused by incompetence? The answer is "no," it is caused by money, that overwhelming force now driving American politics.
Last May, a motion was made in the Senate to debate a bill that would have stopped the subsidy of several billion dollars a year to the five largest oil companies which, in just the first quarter of the year, had realized more than $30 billion in profits. The motion to debate the issue was defeated. Of note, the six Republican senators leading the opposition had in their careers received twice as much in oil company donations as all 50 of the senators who voted in favor of the motion.
Where incompetent results such as continued oil subsidies are not attributable to money, the cause will almost certainly rest in ideology; and, despite incompetent results, that ideology will be clung to tenaciously lest apostasy creeps into the party's caucus.
Whether lowering taxes fails to generate jobs as promised, or stimulus spending fails to create jobs as promised, chances are slim to none that the incompetent result will be linked to the incompetent premise.
Unfettered private markets cannot solve the problems of education, health, poverty or incarceration; government cannot solve the problems of efficiency, innovation and competition in a global economy. There are areas where the demarcation of roles is clear, but there are also areas in which it is equally clear that government/private cooperation is essential.
Sensible government planning and action in a largely private economy is not a contradiction, and it is certainly not socialism in any reasonable definition of that term.
I would pose this question: Since hundreds of our elected officials have signed a pledge never to raise taxes, why shouldn't they all be asked to sign a pledge consistent with their obligations under the Constitution they have sworn to uphold? Namely, if elected, they will put their political preconceptions on the shelf and commit to finding effective pathways to solutions of the problems that now threaten the continued viability of this country and its claim to exceptionalism.
The facts are clear:
- We are plagued by debt, joblessness, and a stagnate economy.
- We spend as much on defense as the rest of the world combined.
- We spend twice as much per capita on health care as the next-highest country without commensurate results.
- We have 50 million people on welfare for both structural and behavioral reasons.
- We have only 5 percent of the world's population but 25 percent of the world's prison population (for which we spend about $30,000 per inmate per year).
- In education, our 15-year-olds rank 14th in reading, 17th in science, and 25th in math among developed countries.
If members of the cognizant congressional committees were to start addressing these problems like adults, they might induce more than 8 percent of the populace to approve of their performance. Incompetence is not ordained. The continued refusal of those we elect to break out of the ideological, money-driven cocoons they presently inhabit is a plain and simple matter of choice.
J. Thomas Tidd is a retired attorney living in Pinehurst.
More like this story
Advertisement
Comments
Easygoing 1 year, 6 months ago
100% accurate analysis. When will the country wake up to the fact that big money has bought the government and will stop at nothing to make more money. Yet many hold on to the old notion that somehow these capitalists are the key to the future. This country is quickly sliding down the slope to become almost a third world country with the super rich dictators and the rest of the population just hanging on.
BigE 1 year, 6 months ago
It was a pleasure to read such intelligent, rational thoughts in our local paper. Congrats and thank you.
nothingspecial 1 year, 6 months ago
Mr. Tidd, the facts I am concerned with are that families, the institution of marriage, and individual allegiance to a clear moral (non-"relative") set of values are off kilter to an unprecedented extent. These problems and their solutions start right in our own homes. Stop allowing a minority of your party to whittle away at these three and you will do more to right our ship than a whole new crop of politicians.
snookyone 1 year, 6 months ago
justpassingby: You made some good points that I felt got lost so I hope you don't mind that I've restated them here:
**Politicians and big business have set up the perfect system - while both sides down here think they are protecting their turf, the rich democrats and rich republicans continue to line their pockets with the blessing of their own parties while the middle class gets crushed. its the perfect system, for them!
**Regarding the Penn State scandal you noted how we are calling “foul” because a community and school felt they were part of something special that was more important to preserve than protecting kids - yet we are guilty of the same thing when when we start more wars, only feed GITMO prisoners once a week, making the children in Iraq and Afghanistan 'collateral damage', and put the children of our soldiers at risk when we send both parents off to war.
You make some excellent points and this is just the sort of conversation we need to be having! When I initially read your post it was difficult to grasp what you were saying because I felt “blamed” by my personal political (party) beliefs and I had to filter out the partisanship entirely to learn that I agree with you!
Next time, leave out the “partisan triggers”!
PEACE!!!
TreadLightly 1 year, 6 months ago
RIDING A HOBBY! The "special subsidies" to the oil companies are standard business expenses allowed any business.
The pinpointing of the high dollar corruption in both congress and business are exactly right. But the solution is not more government "planning" or control of the private sector. That is exactly where the Croney Capitalism exists!
You are on the right track to divide the responsibilities of the private sector and the government. The founders did the same thing in the Constitution.
You state that "Unfettered private markets cannot solve the problems of education, health, poverty or incarceration..." You are one for three there. Protection is a federal government responsibility and the Constitution specifies those duties at the federal level. The rest, education, health and poverty are left to the state or local level, or better yet, to the private sector.
You are three for three in that "...government cannot solve the problems of "efficiency, innovation and competition in a global economy." So why insist that they keep trying to do that? All we ever get is some corrupt government agent and some Crony Capitalist figuring out how to enrich their own bank accounts from the public tax trough.
If you insist that government must have a hand in those activities, make it on the state, county or city level. If it turns out a disaster, people can move somewhere better, and a handful of crooks do not rob the treasury of a whole nation.
The present level of corruption and criminal cooperation between government and capitalists is made possible by the concentration of power and money in Washington. The founders predicted it, but current media can not even identify it when they see it. We have to get back to common sense before it destroys both government and capitalism.
When anyone rails against the system of capitalism, (as opposed to croney capitalism/government complex) I always wait for their offering a different system that will produce the prosperity to which we have become accustomed. Their answer is usually some system that has brought poverty and tyrany in every place where it is tried. (Russia and Cuba being their heros.)
snookyone 1 year, 6 months ago
Treadlightly: How can we work to get the money out of our political system? Going to the polls every few years and expressing our opinions online doesn't seem to be making much difference. Where do we go from here? Campaign finance reform?
buddysmith 1 year, 6 months ago
great letter, Mr Tidd, and 100% accurate. i would like to add that, with the help of the media, politics has become more like a sporting event than a public service. too much emphasis on winners and losers, taking over the power or relinquishing it. i would like to send potential candidates a bank statement, ask them to balance it for me, and they may get my vote. how many do you think could actually balance it?
TreadLightly 1 year, 6 months ago
snookyone: The problem is not so much the money in the "political system," if by that you mean campaign contributions. The problem is the enourmous amounts of money that Congress spends on the government's everyday business. Bail-out money goes to friends of congressmen/senators/presidents. Insider trading in stocks, bonds and real estate. The military-industrial complex, the agriculture complex, etc. Congress is spending money that the Constitution would assign to the individual states, so when all 50 (or 57) states send that money to Washington, and the amounts get large. Somehow Croneys get rich on both the government and private sides.
In short, the solution is to limit Congress to the federal duties defined in the Constitution, and let the states keep their money home and spend it themselves. North Carolina has suffered plenty of corruption with public funds, but it is easier to watch over than in Washington.
jimt 1 year, 6 months ago
There are at least three components to a comprehensive fix to our dysfunctional political system that I can think of.
Reform the process for drawing Congressional District boundaries. Most States allow the State Legislature to draft these boundaries. Others, such as Arizona, decided to try to take the politics out, or at least reduce them, by having a non-partisan Board draw them. Governor Brewer's response was to fire the Chairperson of the Board and invalidate the boundaries they had drawn-up. Hopefully her action will be nullified by the Courts. But it does point out the problem. The goal has to be to make far more, indeed a majority, of Congressional Districts competitive. This will force elected Representatives to do more than "play" to their base. They suffer no penalty for failing to compromise with other members of their own Party, let alone the other Party. The result, "compromise" the essence of a representative democracy has become a dirty word in American politics. Just how to achieve this objective, ah, there's the rub! I have some ideas, including increasing the number of Representatives to at least 625, up 190 from the current level, and add another 20-40 Senators based on the populations of the States, but would love to read the ideas of others if they concur that I identified a key problem.
Get the money OUT!!! Out of running in a primary, out of running in a general election, out of running for President. The ONLY solution is publicly financed campaigns, bans on so-called "Super-Pac's" spending, and bans on corporations and unions spending to influence voting for individuals or for a specific political party. This will almost certainly require a Constitutional Amendment given the current Supreme Court.
See #2.
jimt 1 year, 6 months ago
P.S.
TreadLightly continues to get everything exactly wrong. His nirvana is the late 18th, early 19th centuries. For him, the 10th Amendment is the be all and end all of all our problems and all the solutions to said same. Simplistic thinking from a simplistic mind and one also dominated by "fire and brimstone" old-time religion.
Treaddy, you promised us you weren't going to deign to partake in these posts anymore. And yet, here you still are. Did you too die and rise-up again?
Tatoosh 1 year, 6 months ago
The oil industry lends itself to be an easy target for discussion. It glosses over the fact that "we"collectively are responsible for the dysfunction of the Congress and the office of President. As a society, we are members of special interest. Federal Unions collectively fight unopposed for wages higher than the private sector. The automotive industry and the banking industry received favorable bailouts. We subsidize bio-fuel and failed solar companies. Hollywood favorites receive special interest for raising honeybees on their multi-million dollar estates. Retirees fight for Medicare and Social Security Benefits. Sugar cane receives a subsidy. Individuals fight for Indian Tribal status. Illegal immigrants demonstrate for access to government programs. We attempt to build bridges to 'no where'. Unemployed march for extension of unemployment benefits. Lawyers, physicians, chiropractors, dentists, nurses and pharmacists hire lobbyists through special associations. Collectively, our special interests influenced Congress to spend. We are to blame - "We the people".
"unfettered private markets cannot solve the problem of education, health, poverty or incarceration". These are perfect examples of governmental policy that has failed. Education spending is growing at twice the rate of healthcare with failed results illustrated by the author. Poverty was supposed to be cured by Lyndon B. Johnson after spending billions. This was bolstered by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac providing a home for everyone.
Despite these programs, poverty is worse. Education is worse. Poverty is higher. Joblessness is higher. Incarceration is higher. Drug abuse is higher. And still we spend expecting a different result. We have empowered Congress with an unlimited credit card to cure societal problems. It does not work!. Unlike a private sector company that strives for efficiency and profitability, our government rewards inefficiency by creating bigger and more expensive governmental programs. A CEO in the private sector would be fired for wasteful spending, inefficiency, and poor performance. Our government must be held to the same standard.
TreadLightly 1 year, 6 months ago
jimt--Don't get me started on fire and brimstone. The same crowd that says the Constitution should not affect our governance are usually the same one that say the Bible should not affect our worship and lifestyle. By the time we find our who was right, it won't really matter. In either case.
jimt 1 year, 6 months ago
"The same crowd that says the Constitution should not affect our governance are usually the same one that say the Bible should not affect our worship and lifestyle."
Whaa?
Treddy, maybe your retort makes sense to other fundamentalist religious fanatics, like yourself, but it seems to be total nonsense to me.
Those among us who believe, like you, that the Constitution was never intended to be a "living document," need to explain to those of us with M.A. & PH.D.'s in U.S. Government and U.S. History from Ivy League, or Ivy League quality universities, why the Supreme Court has the authority, since Marbury v. Madison (the import of which and Constitutional issue it raised I'm sure you can recall) to judge the constitutionality of legislation passed and of executive branch actions. Surely, I suppose you would argue, the plain text and original meaning of said text is all that is needed to determine whether legislation or an executive branch action is, or is not, Constitutional. Or is it:
"I am not an advocate for frequent changes in laws and constitutions, but laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind. As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths discovered and manners and opinions change, with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also to keep pace with the times. We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy as civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors." Thomas Jefferson, July 12, 1810.
You must also explain, it seems to me and to my peers why, if the document is hermetically sealed in linguistic cement, which you believe, there is an explicit process laid out for amending it? Does that not suggest, beyond reasonable argument, that the Framer's always intended the Constitution to be a "living document." Could you morons actually be completely WRONG!
Duh!
P.S. You still haven't explained why you're still posting. Should we assume that God told you to? Or was it the other, redder, hotter, fellow? And what's with your notion that we have 50, or perhaps, 57 states? We are still talking about the United States, not a steak sauce, right?
MikeNC 1 year, 6 months ago
Whether it's Steak sauce, the United States, Allah, the hotter fella or whatever; you'll have to ask our President....Mike
Obama Claims He's Visited 57 States by ObamaGaffe
jimt 1 year, 6 months ago
Got it. Thanks.
MikeNC 1 year, 6 months ago
You now get this, but more importantly do you understand why you did not get it yesterday? If it had been Romney, Newt, Cain, Bachmann, Perry or Ronald Reagan everyone would have gotten it repititiously to nauseum from all the news networks. It would become the single most quoted statement of a conservatives career. When will our media properly vet all candidates regardless of which party they come from? Do we as Americans not deserve that to pick and choose the very best candidate and President that truth and logic will allow us to do? I know this '57' thing to be a gaff and they all make them, but so many important negative issues are either overlooked or beaten to death by the media; only on the grounds of which political party they belong...Mike
dustyrhoades 1 year, 6 months ago
The same crowd that says the Constitution should not affect our governance are usually the same one that say the Bible should not affect our worship and lifestyle.
Except no one's saying "the Constitution should not affect our governance".
dustyrhoades 1 year, 6 months ago
I know this '57' thing to be a gaff and they all make them
And yet, you've been flogging that same dead horse every chance you get.
MikeNC 1 year, 6 months ago
Once again the meat of the matter either goes over your head or you just ignore the realities. You only comment if you can throw a barb; whether it's tue or not. Your a Hater Dusty and that cannot be fixed....Mike
jimt 1 year, 6 months ago
Dusty, unlike MkeNC, you are not a certified paranoid, therefore you can't grasp the incidious, organized, and anti-American, mind-set of the "mainstream" media. Their secret plan, destroy all Republican Presidential Candidates by deliberately finding out the objective truths about each one of them and, gasp, speaking about them on TV and writing about them for public consumption. Wake-up man before it's too late.
You remember those kids TV shows from the 50s and 60s where all the neighborhood kids were afraid of some old couple whose house sat removed from everyone else's and looked somewhat "off" somehow? The plot was who'd dare go to house to "trick or treak" because they were afraid they'd be captured and eaten. Do you think the residents' kids feel the same way about Mike and Diane?
P.S. Why won't you answer my personal emails to you?