The Chains of Change

It appears Senator Ted Stevens (R-Alaska) is the latest example of the lapse of ethics in Congress. He has not done anything technically corrupt under the Congressional rules. He has merely failed to report the value of a rebuilt house and a new car which were gifts. I am not sure the Jack Abramoff scandal has been swept under the rug, but on the precipice of the November elections it appears both Republicans and Democrats show little interest in exposing the extent of lavish lobbying in exchange for favorable legislation. William Jefferson (D-Louisiana) has given new meaning to the term “cold cash,” and legally pursuing this discovery appears to have been swept under the freezer until after the election.

 

My friends point out that the Bush administration has systematically gutted the Congressional Ethics Committee. They may be right. I wonder why an ethics committee should be necessary when, by virtue of their office, Congress should abide by the highest individual and collective moral and ethical standards. There was a time when good governance was an aspiration before it deteriorated in to a commercial enterprise for a chosen few in both political parties.

 

We continually seek honesty and competence in government and we are continually disappointed. It would seem that term limits have been long overdue but this would mean our Legislative branch would need to legislate their own demise. Tenure generates mediocrity, fosters corruption and frequently prevents more qualified candidates from attaining office. Many former congressional servants decide that a career in lobbying is even more lucrative than public service. This option is permitted after a two-year hiatus from Congress. It should be prohibited altogether as profiteering from access to government officials crosses ethical boundaries.

 

Laws should only have a life of five years, at which point they should be reviewed, tweaked and examined as to their effectiveness and their renewal open to debate. The General Accounting Office should be able to disclose the five year cost to taxpayers and the estimate for future costs. Every law has consequences, many unintended and unexpected. For example, funding provisions that lose relevance over time often remain part of the ever-expanding federal budget; temporary solutions always find their way to permanency.

 

It is no wonder congressional approval is at a lower level than our President’s. In spite of the abysmal approval numbers for Congress, sometimes in the single digits, on average 97 percent of incumbents get re-elected. Educated electorate has become an oxymoron.

 

The 110^th Congress, now in recess, passed only a minimal amount of legislation, none of which truly addressed the obvious ongoing problems in our country. Of the 260 laws that were passed, 74 were for renaming post offices.  

 

Bills that go through Congress are often not even read by our representatives. A bright young staff is always available for the grunt work of reading a piece of legislation on behalf of our congressperson. These bills are produced like sausage:  A little bit of good meat is used but most of it comprises parts that should have been thrown out. Bills have titles that are sexy and politically important, but they always include unrelated items and earmarks that are rarely challenged.

 

The noble sounding American Housing Rescue and Foreclosure Prevention Act of 2008 contains many nonrelated items. One is a provision that the federal government is to track, aggregate and report all credit card and debit card transactions to the IRS. Big brother is watching through a microscope at another excessive cost to the taxpayers.

 

Jeff Flake (R-Arizona) has been consistent in his criticism of this process and has been castigated by his own party. He finds little support on either side of the aisle in his battle against the overwhelming pork or costly items constantly hidden in legislation.

 

Lawyers account for about 70 percent of Congress, hardly a good demographic representation of our country. An affirmative action program might be considered to elect plumbers, teachers and other people who actually have had the experience of earning a living in America. Short of out-sourcing, it is difficult to envision anything better than more of the same if we continue to keep in office the identical group that has brought this country to near crisis in many areas.

 

If our new president wants to change anything, he must have the courage and tenacity to attack the system. He must be willing to appoint the best candidates for the most crucial positions in his administration and not incompetent party hacks or large donors. He must not rely on Congress to police itself, but he will need to be proactive and impose the highest ethical standards to change the mentality of feeding at the public trough.  He must be willing to impose programs that are best for our country even if they alienate a voting block. As we have seen with too many presidents, it is the system that put them in office and after elections they have little incentive or motivation to change it.

Tags: The Chains of Change, The President and Congress, Uneducated Electorate