Maybe it’s the System

According to a recent poll, the United States Congress has a 13% job approval rating by the American people. Congress consistently fails to pass comprehensive reform on critical issues like tax reform and healthcare, but at the end of the day there is no one to actually blame for the gridlock.

While a specific senator, party leader, or committee head may act in a way that slows the legislative process, they are just acting in a way to please their constituents. Polls frequently show that Americans have much higher approval ratings of their own representatives than of Congress as a whole which indicates congressmen are doing what is in the interest of their constituents even if it is at the cost of other Americans. We can’t really blame a congressman for trying to stop a bill that goes against what his constituents believe in. It’s why they were elected, and loyalty to one’s district means that congressman often win reelection in their state year after year. We think it isn’t our representative that is the problem it’s another person, but if everyone thinks this and we keep electing the same people into office how can we expect change?

The Founding Fathers designed Congress in a way that makes the legislation process slow and deliberate. The passage or repeal of a bill is a long journey filled with veto points at almost every step, all the way from committee to the president. Even though we want to see change right away, the structure of our government intentionally restricts this. The separation of powers, numerous checks and balances all make passing legislation much harder for any individual or party. When we look at the small picture, it seems like Congress isn’t getting anything done at all. Issues seem to persist year to year and appears like government can’t bring itself to reform the law. However, when we look at our government from a macro lens, Congress has passed a lot of important legislation even in the last 20 years, helping grow the economy, provide for citizens, and protect the country. The government adapts and responds to the wishes of the American people but in a way that reflects the government design of the Founding Fathers.

Slow progress is frustrating, and it seems like the Congress of today will never agree on anything due to increased partisanship, but we still see some progress even if it comes at a snail’s pace. This slow progress would indicate that our government is working as the Framer’s intended. The government isn’t reacting to sudden changes in public opinion immediately because it public opinion is so unreliable and unstable, while government should be the opposite. Even though a majority of Americans might want some policy change, others will disagree and advocate against it and government needs to balance the interests. As public opinion gradually but comprehensively changes we then see responses from government, but only after time. If Americans want to see bills passed faster then they need to advocate for a change in our government structure rather than in specific congressmen.

To conclude, I would argue that faster does not necessarily mean better and I ask when you look at the big picture, do you think that it is Congress and the individuals that make it up who are the cause of the gridlock and problems we see today, or are these people the unfair targets of our frustration with the structure of our government.

http://news.gallup.com/poll/220718/congress-approval-lowest-july-2016.aspx?g_source=CONGRESS&g_medium=topic&g_campaign=tiles

6 Responses to "Maybe it’s the System"

Helen Spiller says:

November 19, 2017 at 2:33 pm

I definitely agree that our government was created to be slow and deliberate. Our government is full of checks and balances and separate branches in order to create an weak federal government. However, myself and my others, would argue that this was created to preserve that status quo and keep those who are benefiting from the system to continue to benefit. As you alluded to, the government is designed to remain the same without much change which is beginning to harm our country.
The government hasn’t recently created beneficial legislation on a budget, guns, health care, and much more. As the Washington Post article explained mass shootings are taking over the nation happening far too often than Americans want to admit and so many want stricter gun laws however our government was created to prevent sweeping legislation. So, like you said, I agree that we should get mad at the system created to not make better legislation not the actual congressmen themselves. In my opinion, this inactivity has become dangerous to our modern society in which times are much different than when our government was created in 1776. Our government needs to make changes to better our society and cannot simply maintain this status quo.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2014/05/27/after-mass-shootings-the-status-quo-reigns-supreme-in-congress/?utm_term=.ab57a3b97cb0
Daniel Bonaventura says:

November 19, 2017 at 5:29 pm

I agree with your point that this change at a snails pace for the most part is not a negative. If Congress was fully reactive to the constant changes in public opinion, they would spend to much time making changes to policy and would lack stability. Public opinion can be a mix of highs and lows and often times its hard for people to the big picture on policy. If it were easier to pass bills we would most likely see a complete reboot of policies every time power shifted from party to party in congress It is a frustrating process to change things that seem important but for the most part is an issue becomes important enough it will be addressed. There are some major drawbacks to this system though. The fact that it took almost 200 years to ensure the right to vote for all citizens is an example of a major defect in the setup of congress. Congress needs to prioritize certain issues over others and evaluate what needs to be addressed most immediately.
Alice Depasse says:

November 19, 2017 at 11:07 pm

Your point about how the Government moving slowly, is simply an indication that the system is working as the framers intended, is very interesting. It seems true that originally passing laws was supposed to be a very demanding process. Perhaps the current state of congress is what the founding fathers had intended, and congress is working perfectly for the way it was created in the last 1700s.
However, I think it is also important to acknowledge that times have changed drastically, and we are living in a world where growth and change are developing exponentially, and every country needs to be able to adapt. Several centuries ago, communication was much slower and therefore getting information took much longer. It makes sense that legislation would take a long time to pass because it was important not to make rash decision on wrong information. While, it is still very possible to be misled today and have acquire faulty information, everything is traveling much quicker now. Not least of which is the military itself. Today, it is possible to attack nearly any country in a matter of hours. This was not the case when the structure of the government was created. But today, governments need to be able to make decisions quickly, as all industries are changing so rapidly across the global and effecting all countries to some capacity.
Therefore, I agree with you that the current system may be a representation of the intentions of the founding fathers, however I would also argue that like communication, technology and military, governments need to be adaptable to the current times we are living in.
Bradley Schuermann says:

November 19, 2017 at 11:29 pm

While I agree with your major points that Congress is a slow, often frustrating mire of paperwork, and often for good reason, we also need to ask ourselves how to change it to suit our fast paced modern society. Since Congress is already as slow as it is, I don’t believe the change we’re looking for will come from them. As you said, our representatives hold true to the wants and needs of their districts and, as such, are usually reluctant to compromise; both for the citizens they represent and their own job security. As neither I, nor the people in Washington, have a definitive solution to meeting this fast moving nation’s needs within the current system, I fear this change is far from fruition.
Alexandra Friedman says:

November 21, 2017 at 5:56 pm

While I agree with your point, I think that America’s disapproval with congress has to do with more than just the slowness. Although, i do think that the point the framers intended for it to be this way is really interesting. In my opinion, the reason that they did this is because of the diversity of wants and views of Americans. Congress is supposed to represent ALL these views, and if they did not act intentionally and slowly, it would be even more likely that people’s views were represented. But, other than the slow moving process, there are also many other problems contributing to congress’ troubles. After doing some research, I found it really interesting how little congress actually works, In 2014, they worked just 113 days. These days off are supposedly spent creating policy for the people, but in fact are often spent filled with distractions and campaigning. Also, i think the election turnout also plays a role in this. Only 10% of people participate in congressional primaries, making it difficult for people to truly vote someone into office who would be best to help them. The relationship between the people and congress needs to be one consisting of trust, but this is not the case at the moment.

https://ivn.us/2014/01/10/8-reasons-just-8-americans-approve-congress/
Jackson Puckey says:

November 28, 2017 at 5:31 pm

The American government was very specifically designed to move slowly, as you point out. If we look at Federalist #10, which addresses factions, and Federalist #51, which discusses checks and balances, we learn that the founders were deeply concerned about the power of tyrannical ideologies and majorities. They address this by instituting the checks and balances which have given the power-hungry headaches for over 200 years now. The division of authority between the legislature, the executive, and the judiciary was the first of its kind when it was created at the tail end of the 18th century, during which time most countries had power centralized under a powerful monarch and varyingly powerful legislatures (who tended to be very corrupt and filled with the aristocracy). While, in the intervening centuries, many countries have had to completely throw out their constitutions to restructure the government (the French Fifth Republic is a good example of this), America has worked on the same framework document for over 200 years.
Even within the legislature there are method built in to slow the passage of regulation. The life of a bill in Congress is an extremely long one. From committee assignment to committee and subcommittee hearings to a vote in one chamber, getting a bill out of one chamber is already nearly impossible. This long process is also duplicated in the other chamber, where the political balance of power is almost certainly different. This results in conflict between the two houses, which must be resolved in yet another committee. It is only after this that a bill can actually make its way to the White House, where all that work can be thrown out with a single red stamp. Our government was intentionally designed to be deliberate and, while that has its flaws, it has led to the prevention of any horrible faction from taking control of the halls of power.

Comments are closed.