Another Perspective
Home Sweet Home
Why must members of Congress congregate in Washington, D.C. to conduct the nation’s business?
At the time of the first Continental Congress in 1774, there wasn’t any telephone, telegraph, regular mail, Internet service or other modern method of communication, which we take for granted today. At that time Members of Congress had to congregate to communicate. There was no alternative.
Fast forward to today. We take for granted telephones (land and cell), email, televised conference calls, Internet, and a variety of other means of communicating without congregating. Times have changed. Today there is no longer a need to congregate thousands of miles from home.
Businesses have televised conference calls regularly around the nation and around the world. This is the modern way of doing business.
Why can’t Congress do the same? Why must Members of Congress congregate in Washington, D.C. to conduct the nation’s business?
The answer is there is no reason at all other than habit or the convenience of lobbyists. It’s time Congress break this expensive, time consuming, corrupting habit. It’s time and finally technologically feasible for Congress people to conduct the nation’s business from their home districts.
Today Americans give Congress an approval rating under 20%, the worst in memory. That’s right, four out of five Americans disapprove of Congress.
Congress needs to make America proud of its elected officials again. Otherwise Congress will become even more dysfunctional than it is now.
Transparency by working from home Congressional districts can improve the people’s opinion of Congress by forcing Representatives and Senators to live with their constituents rather than their lobbyists. The Congress person working out of a district office will give constituents more accessibility, more transparency and a sense that people real count again.
Modern technology permits everything from all members of Congress participating in a joint session from remote locations across the country, to simply two members engaged in a conversation, and if desired in living color. Members can spend valuable time with constituents rather than traveling back and forth between the District and Washington, D.C. Staying at home also saves taxpayer funds for the cost of what will become unnecessary trips.
If members of Congress lived and worked among the people they purport to serve instead of among the people they actually serve — the bureaucrats, national media and lobbyists in and around the District of Columbia — the entire sense and sensibility of the Congress would shift back into proper alignment with the interests of the people! Remoteness from lobbyists with Congressional representatives in home districts across the country would also mean better government more rooted in grassroots values in the end.
It’s time to bring each member of Congress home where they belong.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (42) | Leave a comment
More Articles From Another Perspective
http://spectator.org/archives/2010/04/13/home-sweet-home
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
The Spectacle Blog
Former IRS Commissioner Refused to Say That Targeting Conservative Groups is Wrong
Benjamin Brophy | 2:27PM
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Deborah D | 4.13.10 @ 6:16AM
Mr. Stockdale -- Thank you, sir. I've been saying for years that either the U.S. capital should move to the middle of the country where it rightly belongs so that the American people can get to it more easily (and they'd be away from the lefty D.C.-NYC influence sphere) and D.C. should become a tourist/historical amusement park.
Our legislators become insulated in that vicious bubble of lefty journalists, influence peddlars and politicians. My second idea was exactly as you describe: Work from home so their constituents have easy access to them.
Junior Samples| 4.13.10 @ 10:42PM
That all sounds good until you get disturbing images in your mind of Barney Frank voting on legislation while sitting at his computer in his underwear......
Deborah Leigh| 4.14.10 @ 12:55PM
(shudder) Thanks for an image I didn't need, Junior. I guess there could be a clause (I hate to use the word) "inserted" in the rules that would bar Barney from doing government business in such a state, but then there is the issue of oversight.
Ret. Marine| 4.13.10 @ 6:47AM
I for one, noticed a flaw in this argument right off the bat, they have no desire to "stay in their districts" to represent their "people", We the People are not their people. Those who make the policies, "the money changers" are not among We the People, they live and mingle close to their source in the 'District of corruption"
The idea remains the same. What makes you think they are anymore effective as a legislator living in their districts than they are living among the money changers in the district of corruption. They would not be and for one reason only, " access" to the money.
The idea remains the same, I would disagree with this for another reason. In this political inviroment, they really do fear We the People. They have no wish to be close to us, to hear our redress, or to solve any so-called problems they are largely responsible for.
I do commend you for the thought. It makes sense, again anything they do these days makes "no sense whatsoever", i.e. sign the bill before they actually read or understand it, failure to listen to their people, or show up for a discussion on the subjects.
I will leave it at that for various reasons but, remain a casual observer as to the idea of the great savings to We the People. Good day.
Harry| 4.13.10 @ 8:52AM
Senators and Representatives work for the Federal Government. It pays them and empowers them. Why would they want to stay in their state or district with the peons?
As long as this conflict of interest exists, this issue will not be resolved.
Brian Mc| 4.13.10 @ 7:13AM
Let's get the ball rolling...repeal the sixteenth and seventeenth amendments.
JP| 4.13.10 @ 7:47AM
Our lawmakers congregate in the Beltway for the simple fact that that's where the lobbyists are. We can't have large well heeled law firms setting up shop in 535 different districts, can we?
chi | 4.13.10 @ 7:57AM
In the first reporting period last year, when it appeared that the then popular governor was the best bet to hold on to the Republican Senate seat Mel Martinez resigned from last summer, Crist took in the choke-a-horse total of $4.4 million, much of it from fat cats and out-of-town donors, compared to a downright puny $340,000 by Rubio. In Q3 of last year Rubio came up with a respectable $1 million, but still behind Crist's $2.5 million.
The Bishop| 4.13.10 @ 8:07AM
This is the kind of "out-of-the-box" (read that "outside-the-Beltway") thinking that we need. Besides the tremendous overhead costs that would be eliminated, it would be a significant blow to the well-heeled lobbying law firms that populate so much of the DC landscape. This idea actually sent a tingle down my leg. Let's do it!
bringhomethepoliticians.com | 4.13.10 @ 4:47PM
We've been working on this since June'09 and welcome all the help we can get. We've already got 117 candidates who've agreed to include this idea in their platform.
Melvin| 4.13.10 @ 8:19AM
I don't think we realize in how powerful these people are.
We all speak in these lofty Constitutional ideals including myself. These people are owned by lobbyists but lobbyists is a much too generic word, too vague doesn't really mean anything. But if you put that Congressmen and Senators are owned by forieng governments such as Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Israel, China, the European Union then you start to get a mental picture of how vast the rot is, and exactly why they don't pay attention to us or the Constitution.
They are owned by Big Pharma, Big Oil, Big Agriculture, Wall Street, and George Soros.
I know I may have left out many that own a piece of Pelosi or Reid, but all them are someone's political bitch one way or another.
Jerry| 4.13.10 @ 9:04AM
This idea has been around for nearly twenty years since Ross Perot brought it up while running for president. In addition to taking congressmen away from lobbyists, they are also removed from big media. Imagine taking our representatives away from all that temptation and surrounding them with their own voters. I hope I live to see it.
Bob Cotten| 4.13.10 @ 9:26AM
The money ultimately comes from the same human corruption, whether from D.C. lawyers or Peoria lawyers or from the New York Times or the Jackson (Mississippi) Clarion-Ledger. My suggestion is to authorize each senator and representative to receive, tax free, $1 million annually plus a beach house to stay home and do nothing. Any of them who try to legislate anything will automatically lose the stipend and be permanently retired.
Motown Mike| 4.13.10 @ 10:08AM
Ever notice that when a member of Congress retires how often he or she continues to reside in the metro D.C. area instead of returning to their home state? Home is where your heart is...
Cuneo| 4.15.10 @ 1:52PM
Great point, Mike. they stay in Washington, the "Hollywood for Ugly People," for the same reason Wille Sutton conducted his "business" with banks: That's where the money is.
Ned| 4.13.10 @ 10:33AM
I like them to congregate, that way we can take them all out with one hand grenade. (Metaphorically speaking, of course)
L. E. Powers| 4.13.10 @ 10:39AM
Sorry guys, as admirable as you might think your idea, it would require a constitutional amendment. Article 1 Section 4 (and as amended by the 20th Amendment, Section 2) requires Congress to assemble (emphasis mine). It is hard to assemble without getting together.
Let's face it. People want to get around people of influence, and they will find a way, somehow. What we need to find is a way to help Americans rediscover that spirit of rugged individualism and not be seduced into giving up their rights by pols bearing gifts.
txn4ever| 4.13.10 @ 12:02PM
Lots of ways to assemble without being in physical proximity of others. In Texas our legislators assemble once every two years for a single 140 day session.
How about we take this type of model to Washington? Although, I really like the idea of governing from the home district. Probably the simplest and most effective idea to destroying the lobbyist influence.
Almeda Reams| 4.13.10 @ 1:54PM
If I read the constitution correctly, it requires the Congress to assemble ONCE A YEAR. Article 1 Section 4 set the date as the first Monday in December. The 20th amendment, section 2 sets the date as the 3rd day in January. Let them stay at home with their constituents the rest of the year!
bringhomethepoliticians.com | 4.13.10 @ 4:44PM
This issue has been worked out. Art 1, Sec 4 requires them to assemble at least ONCE per year so you have to make it where Congress securely telecommutes for no less than 75% of their terms and you avoid any Constitutional conflict.
We've also got it worked out how Art 1, Sec 5, Clause 2 & 4 make it possible to implement this idea RIGHT NOW!
Here's more info http://bringhomethepoliticians.com
Jim Feeney| 4.13.10 @ 11:17AM
Two nights ago I was doing some musing on how, even when we manage to send a decent individual to Washington there still remains the problem of how to prevent them from getting infected by the Washington elitest culture and my solution was the same as Mr. Stockdale’s
I have to disagree with Ret. Marine on this one. I don’t think they would be nor do I want them being more effective legislators I want them being less prolific legislators. As for fearing the people, I think they will fear them more if they are less insulated from them. Recall the Town Hall meetings of last summer. And the very fact that they don’t want to be close to their constituents is, it seems to me, an excellent argument for forcing them to do just that. I grant that this concept should be examined closely to prevent any unintended consequences but it is worth exploring.
Sending a decent man to Washington is much like spending years instilling good values in your children only to send them off for 4-5 years of liberal indoctrination at one of our universities. That problem needs to be solved and so does the problem of Washington’s corrupting influence.
canuckistani| 4.13.10 @ 1:10PM
I'll jump in headfirst on this one.....politicians are like lawyers (and most are), you hate them until you need them, and when you need them, you probably want one that is the most effective at making your case rather than over-valuing their decorum and geniality before the bar. That's what representational governing - and counsel - is all about. Hire the effective guy and not necessarily the nice guy.
The correction to Washington will occur with a reduction of reps from 435 to a manageable 300 (about a million heads each), ending state-run primary/caucus variances and mandating matching funds or strict campaign limits to all candidates. Their choice will be to make 3rd-party establishment easier or face a declining max for campaign coffers.
States are throwing around nullification drum beats lately, why not get out of federal politics altogether and make it a single process for all Americans? Why not rotate "first in the nation" primaries like the Super Bowl or All Star game?
The next correction is the end to senate-generated bills. HR should be the only appropriations chamber, with senate assuming their up/down advise/consent posture.
Taking the power of the treasury out of senators' hands will gut their prestige and the dirty antics we see today. When the tap runs dry, it will be like a college kegger - true friends stick around and the freeloading frat boys take off.
I have no problem with appointed senators from the states, and eliminating appropriations power will ensure undue influence from small states does not override the majority rule we have fought so long for.
Senators have the screens of 6 year terms and small constituency states to keep the gravy train going. Reps are fairly equal in constituency size and have to reinterview every two years. Give them more responsibility and the accountibility will follow.
Tod| 4.13.10 @ 11:30AM
I like the idea, but I have concerns as well. Members of Congress wield the power to vote. If they are no longer physically voting, then you run the risk of someone stealing their identity and voting in their place. You also have to worry about denial of service attacks - just prevent them from being able to connect, and you can get the outcome that you want. Imagine, for example, if just one Republican was unable to connect (it might be a system failure, not even an attack) - Republicans would not be able to stop any Democrat legislation with a filibuster threat.
txn4ever| 4.13.10 @ 12:09PM
There are lots ways to mitigate these types of failures. First legislators offices could have access to governemnt networks that would never go down unless there was some serious issue. Second, they use secure satellite phones, or even satellite networks. Third , they could institute procedures and processes that would prevent votes from taking place under a specified set of conditions.
There really is a lot to like about this idea.
canuckistani| 4.13.10 @ 1:16PM
I like the idea, but I also like knowing where these guys are when government business is going on.
Why not hold a caucus meeting on a ski-hill, or in Geneva or Hong Kong?
Changing the rules of money, length of sessions and limiting the power of the senate will accomplish more than permitting government business to be done remotely.
We still have the record to maintain, and giving a rep an out from a difficult vote due to "sun spots" or a thunderstorm knocking out communications is too easy for them.
bringhomethepoliticians.com | 4.13.10 @ 4:42PM
You're talking about "redundancy" which has been worked out by some of the early advocates of this idea. The filibuster itself is a procedural maneuver and if one line goes down, there's always a backup to maintain the connection or switch it over.
Here's an outline of the procedures from the September 14th, 2001 New America Foundation presentation to US Congress about this idea (yes, they know about this, they just hope you don't):
http://www.newamerica.net/publ.....e_congress
Charles Martel| 4.13.10 @ 1:19PM
We need them closer to us and farther from "them".
Make every day a town meeting: the only people with whom you need to consult are your constituents.
+++
David| 4.13.10 @ 2:52PM
The idea has merit.
With regard to the argument that the Constitution requires them to ASSEMBLE, I think any person or court can certainly interpret that to mean that video-conferencing among members is no different than actually being in the same room. Anyway, how many members of both Houses miss much of the debates on legislation - a bunch.
It would save close to 500 roundtrip plane tickets every weekend. They probably don't have to pay for their meals while in D.C. Let them eat at home like the rest of us.
They like being together. Being in Congress is a big boys' game. They like eating and hanging together. They like devising ways to get at the other side of the aisle. Remember, the vast majority of them are lawyers, especially the dems, and that is what attorneys do: strategize and play games with other people's money.
bringhomethepoliticians.com | 4.13.10 @ 4:20PM
Our group has been spearheading this effort since June '09
http://bringhomethepoliticians.com
fjsdk| 6.30.10 @ 11:46PM
beijing massage shanghai girl