Congress must learn to legislate again
This must be the top priority for the new Congress
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/e4b50/e4b50ba8e7714ecda5b57577e57fba5b59e89629" alt="The Capitol building."
Democrats are now the ruling party in the House of Representatives. Congratulations America, our creaking constitutional machinery hasn't completely collapsed yet!
This naturally raises the question of priorities. With a decade left to cut carbon emissions by half, the crooks in the White House, the slowly-collapsing medical system, and about a dozen other screaming emergencies, it's naturally hard to say which thing should get top billing.
But I have a different suggestion: Democrats in Congress need to figure out how to legislate and govern rapidly again. The sheer number of problems means we can't afford to spend an entire year goofing around with penny-ante reforms, as Democrats did in 2009-10 with ObamaCare. Congress once could walk and chew gum. It ought to be possible to do so again.
Subscribe to The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/26e60/26e60cb924a49f61d1c912d9db390eb10f6d3fa2" alt="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/flexiimages/jacafc5zvs1692883516.jpg"
Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
Reading historical accounts of what Congress used to be able to do seems like reading about a different country. Here is William T. Leuchtenberg on the Second 100 Days, which happened over the early summer of 1935:
Roosevelt insisted on the passage of four major pieces of legislation: the social security bill, the Wagner labor proposal, a banking bill, and a public-utility holding company measure. A few days later, he added a fifth item of "must" legislation: a "soak the rich" tax scheme. In addition, he demanded a series of minor measures, some of them highly controversial, which in any other session would have been regarded a major legislation … Over a long period Congress debated the most far-reaching reform measures it had ever considered. In the end, Roosevelt got every item of significant legislation he desired. [Franklin D. Roosevelt and the New Deal]
Of course, that was an unusually productive session. But it illustrates an important difference between modern Congress and most of previous American history: the ability to work on lots of different things at once, and get them all done quickly. It took the 111th Congress — which sat from 2009-10 and was itself the most productive in decades — more than a year to negotiate and pass just ObamaCare, which wasn't even that good. The same is true of the Dodd-Frank financial reform package on both counts. (That's still a lot better than the last Congress, which was one of the least productive in recent history despite one party controlling both houses and the presidency.)
So what needs to happen? Probably the most important thing is getting rid of the filibuster (which allows any 40 senators to block legislation and is used on almost everything these days). This was the biggest problem for the 2009-10 Congress, where decently good stuff would come out of the House, only to be badly eroded in conference because the loathsome Joe Lieberman was the Senate swing vote. Then delays would pile up from negotiations and because breaking a filibuster takes tons of Senate floor time. (And on the merits, the Senate is already a hideously undemocratic institution, and allowing senators representing as little as 11 percent of the U.S. population to stop any legislation is unjustifiable on its face.)
Of course, the Senate is still controlled outright by Republicans, which would stymie anything good even without the filibuster. (If Democrats do take control in 2021, they should immediately make D.C. and Puerto Rico states to restore democratic rights to Americans in those places and boost their Senate margin.)
But perhaps just as important is members of Congress re-building the institution's own capacity. President Roosevelt was an important part of passing sweeping reforms in 1933 and 1935, but just as important were the dozens of representatives and senators who focused on various subjects. And due to simple division of labor, things could happen much more quickly and efficiently. Sen. Robert Wagner (D-N.Y.) in particular was the key force behind the labor rights sections of the National Industrial Recovery Act, and the later National Labor Relations Act, which led to a huge surge in union organizing (and then Democratic votes).
Simple money could help a lot. Congressional committees have lost much of their institutional knowledge due to comparatively miserly staff pay and lack of funding for research and investigations. An underrated part of governing is simply finding out what is happening — which is hard to do if you don't pay top dollar for quality staff and the tools they need.
Congress also used to have much more institutional capacity, with things like the Office of Technology Assessment to provide non-partisan expertise. That agency was shut down by Newt Gingrich, and others have been gradually cored out from Republican austerity, because conservatives figure that lobotomizing Congress can only help the rich escape taxes and regulation.
Finally, there is institutional confidence. As Congress has become sclerotic, dysfunctional, and unpopular, power has flowed to the presidency. Both up-and-coming politicos and the public pay much greater attention to the presidency these days, as it seems pointless to expect anything out of the legislature. Mere three-term representatives are speculating about leapfrogging directly to the Oval Office, because why bother fiddling around in Congress for decades getting nothing done?
But Congress still has enormous constitutional authority, which could be restored with a committed effort. Being an important member of Congress used to mean something. People would make whole careers out of being on one or two committees — and satisfying ones, instead of doing a couple terms, running for president, and then cashing out to work for Raytheon or whatever.
No doubt there are a number of institutional problems I have forgotten or overlooked. But a cohort of representatives and senators dedicated to reclaiming the constitutional prerogatives of Congress could figure it out. Indeed, they must do so if America is to address all its howling emergencies in anything like a timely fashion.
In 2019 and beyond, let's make Congress work again.
Sign up for Today's Best Articles in your inbox
A free daily email with the biggest news stories of the day – and the best features from TheWeek.com
Ryan Cooper is a national correspondent at TheWeek.com. His work has appeared in the Washington Monthly, The New Republic, and the Washington Post.
-
Amazon's 'James Bond' deal could mean a new future for 007
In the Spotlight The franchise was previously owned by the Broccoli family
By Justin Klawans, The Week US Published
-
Why are Republicans suddenly panicking about DOGE?
TODAY'S BIG QUESTION As Trump and Musk take a chainsaw to the federal government, a growing number of Republicans worry that the massive cuts are hitting a little too close to home
By Rafi Schwartz, The Week US Published
-
What is JD Vance's Net Worth?
In Depth The vice president is rich. But not nearly as wealthy as his boss and many of his boss' appointees
By David Faris Published
-
'Seriously, not literally': how should the world take Donald Trump?
Today's big question White House rhetoric and reality look likely to become increasingly blurred
By Sorcha Bradley, The Week UK Published
-
Will Trump's 'madman' strategy pay off?
Today's Big Question Incoming US president likes to seem unpredictable but, this time round, world leaders could be wise to his playbook
By Sorcha Bradley, The Week UK Published
-
US election: who the billionaires are backing
The Explainer More have endorsed Kamala Harris than Donald Trump, but among the 'ultra-rich' the split is more even
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Published
-
US election: where things stand with one week to go
The Explainer Harris' lead in the polls has been narrowing in Trump's favour, but her campaign remains 'cautiously optimistic'
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Published
-
Is Trump okay?
Today's Big Question Former president's mental fitness and alleged cognitive decline firmly back in the spotlight after 'bizarre' town hall event
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Published
-
The life and times of Kamala Harris
The Explainer The vice-president is narrowly leading the race to become the next US president. How did she get to where she is now?
By The Week UK Published
-
Will 'weirdly civil' VP debate move dial in US election?
Today's Big Question 'Diametrically opposed' candidates showed 'a lot of commonality' on some issues, but offered competing visions for America's future and democracy
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Published
-
1 of 6 'Trump Train' drivers liable in Biden bus blockade
Speed Read Only one of the accused was found liable in the case concerning the deliberate slowing of a 2020 Biden campaign bus
By Peter Weber, The Week US Published