How Congress Can Improve Its Image

HERE ARE TWO SIMPLE IDEAS FOR RAISING GOVERNMENT’S ATROCIOUS 17 PERCENT APPROVAL RATING

If only 17 percent of your customers approve of the job you’re doing, you get fired. According to Gallup, that’s Congress’ latest approval rating. Congress gets re-elected.

The truism is Americans hate Congress, but love their own representative or senator. We like our member to bring the district or state money the government doesn’t have and to help us navigate through the federal bureaucracy Congress created.

So we ignore our member’s contributions to governmental dysfunction, but reward him or her for “constituent services,” staff work any reasonably competent bureaucrat, armed with oversight and budgetary power and paid nearly $200,000, could do.

To its credit, the House passed some sensible bills addressing major national problems. These bills died in the Senate under the supine dictatorship of Harry “Mumbles” Reid.

The Senate couldn’t even be bothered to pass a budget for the Obama administration. That could create a narrative of fi scal irresponsibility the media, try as they might, couldn’t ignore.

Surprisingly, many members of Congress do work incredibly hard.

Aside from legislative responsibilities, they are constantly meeting constituents, fact-fi nding, politicking, fundraising - working on getting reelected and/or representing their constituents more faithfully. Your interpretation depends on your level of cynicism.

If activity were eff ectiveness, they’d deserveraises. And they’d give themselves one if they dared; after all, the next three generations will get the bill.

The Democrat-majority Senate and the Republicanmajority House disagree on just about everything except that the flag should have 50 stars. (Word is President Obama favors 57.)

Some pundits believe this lack of comity and legislative production is the cause for the low approval ratings. They believe citizens want a mellow Congress that mettles in our lives in ever greater detail and perversity. How else could we choose light bulbs?

That analysis is now irrelevant. By deciding to rule through executive order, bureaucratic decree and “prosecutorial discretion,” Obama has relieved the legislative branch of that pesky legislative function.

Congress can use the free time for a little introspection.

Or to react to embarrassing news. Aftera “60 Minutes” expose, Congress moved to prohibit members from using inside knowledge to profi t from stock trades. The “STOCK Act,” passed in March, is a fine idea. And it came only 79 years after Congress made the same acts illegal for everyone else.

That act aligns members’ fi nancial interests with the country’s - a key idea for fostering respect for Congress and making it representative.

The next step should be to convert congressional civil service pensions to 401k’s invested in two index mutual funds covering all U.S. stocks and U.S. bonds, no foreign holdings. All members’ and their immediate families’ securities holdings would be converted at no cost to such accounts. Then members would prosper when the country prospered, perhapsproviding needed focus on the job.

A second step to restoring respect for Congress would be to drop the silly, propagandistic names forlegislation. The title, “The Patriot Act,” attempts to paint opposition as unpatriotic. Although I support the act, most who oppose it off er reasoned and serious arguments why the act is bad for the country. Imputing disloyalty to opponents through titling is unworthy of Congress.

The other propagandistic titling practice is to name the bill for its alleged benefits, thereby painting opponents as against dreams, aff ordable care, etc.

“The Patient Protection and Aff ordable Care Act” is a job-killing, tax-raising, power-centralizing law that hardly addresses health care directly, except to empower government panels to limit its availability in the name of cost savings. My preference for the law is “The Too-Bad-for-Granny InsuranceIndustry Payoff Bill,” but really it should have been titled neutrally, say, “The Health Insurance Reform Act.” Congress ought not use titles to score cheappolitical points.

Some legislation that actually improved the country had simple, descriptive names: “The Civil Rights Bill of 1964,” “The Serviceman’s Readjustment Act of 1944” (also known as the GI Bill) and “The Banking Act of 1933” (the Glass-Steagall Act). Most had bipartisan support. Congress should forswear sophomoric titles unworthy of a sophomore marketing student.

Those two small steps - aligning members’ and citizens’ fi nancial interests and using honest titles for proposed legislation - might help restore, or create, respect for Congress. Then it could focus on ensuring Obama, Attorney General Holder, Secretary Sebelius and others actually follow the law. And maybe have time to address a few othernational problems as well. BUDDY ROGERS, A ROGERS RESIDENT, IS A RETIRED ARMY OFFICER AND FORMER FINANCIAL ADVISER.

Opinion, Pages 13 on 07/29/2012

Upcoming Events