April 12, 2006
A Pox on Both Parties
Today's NY Times editorial As the Ethics Panel Ossifies calls for the Democrats to get serious and force Rep Alan Mollohan of West Virginia to resign his seat on the House ethics committee, which the editorial calls "inert and feckless".
Thinking of the general dysfunction in Congress makes me wonder if there is any achievable way to reform the system. As was mentioned in the "Little likelihood of tax system overhaul" thread below, both parties are so entrenched and vested in the status quo. There was a lot of heat and perhaps a little light as the Abramoff scandal flared up, but the furor and the feigned interest of the 535 in enacting reforms has died down. I imagine some of you would support abolishing government altogether, but I'm curious to hear your ideas on reforms that might improve the current system. A couple of examples that come to mind are the abolition of earmarks and halting the practive of bringing massive bills up for a vote when members have had little or no time to read the hundreds or thousands of pages in the legislation.
Thoughts on why these two proposals work or suck? Other proposals?
I think we're pretty close, here. If each earmark were attributed to the member who calls for it, and if bills were available 72 hours before the vote, bloggers could attack the egregious earmarks, and members could step up and explain why they support others. (My favorite Democrat, Rep. Harold Ford, has called for this as well).
The problem with a "House Ethics Panel" chaired by either party is that there is no incentive for vigorous self-policing and every incentive to use it for politics.
The best solution is to get the Spirit of '94 to prevail. I'm guessing you're not a big fan of Speaker Gingrich, but we need a party to run on the idea of serious reform.
Posted by: jk at April 12, 2006 2:35 PMWe need a party to run on the idea of serious reform AND with an intent to implement serious reform. It seems to me the biggest impediment to reform is the huge advantage of incumbency. The two major parties have gerrymandered congressional districts to the point where only 30 or 35 (I don't remember the exact figure) districts are considered to be in play this year? Arrrrrgggghhhhh!
Posted by: LatteSipper at April 12, 2006 2:50 PM | What do you think? [2]