Can It Work Better?

 We have spent the semester examining the policy-making process at the national level.  One lesson is obvious: it is extremely difficult to craft public policies to deal with major national problems.  Major policy needs are often not addressed or they are inadequately addressed only after protracted delays.

 In a democracy, debate and give and take are healthy components of the policy process.  However, the basic design of the American political system makes it unduly hard to pass legislation, especially major policies or major policy changes.  Separation of powers and checks and balances are designed to moderate government, but in recent history they have often paralyzed our political system.  It has long been difficult and sometimes impossible to deal with many of the most serious challenges facing America.

 Presidents often have to function with one or both branches of the Congress in the hands of the opposition party.  The party winning control of the House can be the party that received fewer votes than the losing party (this happened in 2012).  This is very different than the parliamentary systems of Europe which generally can rule, but if they are coalition governments can have their own problems.  Authoritarian governments often point to the paralysis of the American political system as a justification of their rejection of democracy.

 Of course, with authoritarian governments, any excuse will do.  China often says it is making rapid progress because the leadership can effectively make and implement policy.   In China major policy is made by the central party leadership (now 7 people) and implemented by the communist party network across the nation.  Singapore (a city nation) often brags about its ability to make science-driven policy and easily implement it to create one of the most modern nations on the planet.  The Singapore elite increasingly dismiss America as a dysfunctional, nation that cannot make policy.

 Currently it is questionable if our President and Congress can effectively address the challenges that face America—deficits, immigration, global warming, education, unemployment, etc.  It is difficult to carry out reasonable economic policies if you cannot have rational debates on taxes and spending, and if small groups within Congress can block legislation.  Cutting spending is also difficult because most members of Congress (regardless of party) focus on protecting their turf, pleasing major donors, and attracting large campaign funds.

 Improved Veto power  Insulation from pressure  A workable Congress

 Under our constitution the president does not have item or line-item veto powers.  Congress tried to give this power to Clinton by legislation and the Supreme Court overturned the law.  The court said the only way to give the president this power would be by amending the constitution.  This seems be advisable.

 At the same time, the president might need protection by being given one six year term rather than the opportunity to win two four- year terms.

 One reason for paralysis in Congress is that most members have been elected from ‘safe” districts. This creates a polarized Congress, even though the public is not polarized.  This means that the district is apportioned in such a way that only a Democrat or Republican could win it.  California recently passed a law which turns the drawing of congressional districts over to a non- partisan staff with no elected officials. Their job is to draw district lines to make as many of the House seats as possible competitive (they could be won by either a Democrat or a Republican).

 This new California law is designed to reduce the number of House members who are rigid ideologues unwilling to engage in give and take and compromise.  It is also meant to create a Congress that represents the public, not just narrow (often well funded) groups.  Competitive districts would lead to a Congress focused on solving problems rather than deadlocking government.

 The public thinks it needs a lot of “fixing.”

 A lot of ideas out there about how to fix Congress.  One group of ex-members of Congress and a few allies have founded a group they call “No-Label.”  No-Label means they are Republicans, Democrats, and Independents of various political persuasions.  There are a lot of ideas but No-Label has some recommendations that might focus a debate.

 Currently it costs far too much to be elected to Congress.  Most citizens cannot afford the costs and could not raise the money.  Money has become a barrier to public office and an easy way for well-funded groups to influence the votes of member of Congress.  Everyone in D.C. knows that if you have money, you can “buy” influence.  Publically financing elections would solve this problem.  Last, we might want to term limit members of Congress. Too many members of Congress make decisions based on getting re-elected rather than the good of the country.

 Unless we had a constitutional convention to write a new constitution, the only group that can fix the problems discuss here is Congress.  How do we get Congress to fix itself?  It could be done, but it would take a massive public outcry and real pressure.  Can that happen?