The Prestige of the U.S. Congress

December 26, 2011

The Prestige of Congress

By T.S.Khanna, December 26, 2011.

During the last decade, Congress has suffered an unprecedented loss of prestige. The working of the party system has replaced the rational compromising members with politicians representing and promoting non-compromising diverse interests. It shows that either the interests have become too diverse to be compromised or the congress members feel no national obligation for compromises, or both.

Now, as reported by the media, approval rating of the congress is 12% or less. Sovereignty of the people is represented by the congress members as the leaders. It seems that the leaders are disconnected with the people. The nation has been going thru hard economic times and deficit problems, yet, not a single congress member has voluntarily offered to take a pay cut. Compare these leaders with those who signed the Declaration of Independence in 1776, putting their lives on the line. They were strongly connected with the cause and with their people.

Basically, it is the people’s faith and connectedness with the public officials that keeps the governments going. Break down in that linkage can be disastrous. As opposed to revolution in some other societies, we are accustomed to evolution. Our expectations make us lose the ability to see the danger that may accompany further decline in the prestige of congress.

As a starter, some suggestions are offered to improve the situation:

1. Congress members salaries and perks may not exceed the average income of the voters in his/her district. Further, the salary and perks may be adjusted according to a periodic public approval rating of the congress; periodic constituents' approval rating of the congress member; popularity rating of each member by the members of the opposite party; not passing of the budget by the deadline; and, the budget deficit;
2. Requisites may be established placing an obligation on the members to serve the national interest besides representing their districts;
3. Abolish the Senate and replace it with a 15-member non-partisan Supreme Council to be elected by the congress members. (The senate has long outlived the purpose for which it was created. Now it is an extra layer of government resulting in greater delays and expenditure in the decision process without any commensurate benefits). The Supreme Council may have full powers to overrule the congress deadlocks or gridlocks (more details discussed elsewhere); and,
4. Allow congress members only one 6-year term replacing the present 2-year terms.
5. Only those devoted to public service may seek positions of public service. For big money, private businesses may be encouraged by the government.
6. For stability of democratic governments, anti-corruption departments may be strengthened to actively keep a watch on power positions in public service.
   

At present there is no check on the performance quality or national obligation of the congress—the supreme national body. Representative democracy, with emphasis on individualism, is showing its weakness that needs attention.