The Broken Branch Awards

Congress is in a mess. It is broken, as argued in a very good book by Mann and Ornstein, reviewed below. The Supreme Court is polarized and partisan politics drive its decisions—and it won’t get better until Congress is fixed. The executive branch can not control its spending and many policies are failures—and it won’t get better until Congress is fixed. But, some folks stand in the way. Some try to make things better. The Broken Branch award was created to recognize these creeps and helpers. The criteria used in choosing award winners are shamelessly cribbed from Mann and Ornstein. The criteria are arranged as a checklist, since to list the sins of each recipient would require hours.

The Winners:

Sen. Charles Grassley

Sen. Lindsey Graham (a helper)

Rep. Charles Rangel

former Rep. Dick Armey

the House Republican Leadership, after that shameful rally on the Capitol steps

Sen. Joe Lieberman

Rep. John Boehner

(plenty more to follow)

The Broken Branch Award is a silly application of a very good analysis of the Congress:

Thomas E. Mann and Norman J. Ornstein, The Broken Branch: How Congress Is Failing America and How to Get It Back on Track (NY: Oxford University Press, 2006).

First of all, some praise for the book. These two smart and experienced authors (Mann is at Brookings; Ornstein is at AEI, and one of my first classes in grad school, back in 1974, required the latter’s fine book, As Orange Goes) give readers a very clear picture of how Congress operates, and describe the significant changes over the last 45 years that turned it into a lamentably dysfunctional institution. (Compare it to Henry Waxman’s book, The Waxman Report, which features episodes that clarify the role of an individual like Waxman but is short on careful analysis of the institution.) Congress needs to form a book club, and this is the book they should read. All of you voters should read it, too, before the next election. It’s that good.

Here is the brief diagnosis, ‘Why is Congress Broken?’

· The two political parties became more unified and ideologically polarized, starting in the 1980s and getting much worse since. The division “borders on tribalism” and has almost completely obliterated the ‘center’ in US politics. The Republicans have “far exceeded Democratic abuses of power.” (Remember Ornstein is at AEI. Honest conservatives admit this pattern.)

· Political campaigns became permanent. The parties focus on ideological differences, and adversaries are not just on the other side of the aisle—they are enemies. With the parties so polarized more is at stake in each election, so each issue is an all-or-nothing test of purity. And, the activists in US politics are more fundamentalist.

· Fewer politicians are dedicated to compromise, producing good legislation, and the health of the institution.

· The media business has changed, catering to the fundamentalist and extremist elements of our politics.

· The public has little regard for, and weak active support for, Congress.

· Thin majorities in Congress, most notably Republicans, have violated rules of Congress to work their legislative will. Winning at all costs makes the divisions worse, and the institution unhealthy.

· In order to get members to go along with their strategies, the leadership allowed an explosion of budget earmarks. It became the coin of the institutional realm. Many earmarks have been sneaky, undiscovered until long after legislation passed.

· Redistricting back in the states has mirrored the ‘anything goes’ tactics in Washington, a particular low point being the second bite at redistricting in Texas in 2002.

· One consequence of the bitterly partisan positioning of the parties was that when George W. Bush won the presidency, his party in Congress made it their mission to advance the President’s agenda. Congress failed in its constitutional responsibilities.

· Congress has lost its ability to engage in deliberation. Its processes are not transparent or accountable.

That is quite a list. The consequences of this institutional failure are many. Fiscal irresponsibility, poorly considered and badly executed wars, greater opportunities for the influence of narrow, powerful interests, and all around bad policy. They have significantly contributed to a poorer future for all of us. They hurt America.

Mann and Ornstein, Help Us! We look at your subtitle, which ends with How to Get It Back on Track. And, there we are, a mere 17 pages from the end of the book, and we aren’t to that topic yet. Then those fateful words: “We wish we could now turn and provide a solid blueprint for recovery….” Rats, I knew it was silly to hope. They do rely on clear historical examples to tell us what to expect.

· “major change within Congress is most likely to originate outside.” Congress won’t do what is right, voters will do something that will support members of each party to disobey their leaders.

· Among Republicans, “a presidential candidate might emerge in TR (Theodore Roosevelt) fashion to try to build a political center where none now exists….” [After they wrote this, John McCain, who they mention with hope right after that sentence, chose Sarah Palin as his running mate.]

· Electoral districts need to be more competitive, nationally and in the states. More states should give redistricting authority to an independent commission that enacts a clear set of criteria. This should produce more moderate candidates. Similarly, some of the advantages of incumbency need to be addressed by giving free air time and more vigorous public financing, among other reforms, to opposition candidates.

· To encourage deliberation and a sense that rules matter and should apply to everyone, Congress should change its schedule. The authors suggest a full-week schedule, two weeks on and two weeks off.

· To open one front on the problem of special interest influence, Congress should create an office with professional staff in charge of collecting and disclosing lobbyist information, and educating members and staff of the rules. A chief ethics officer would have an independent office on the model of the comptroller general.

· They discuss several options for campaign finance reform—the point is to do something to reduce the advantages of incumbency and the power of the party leaders.

None of these ideas will be easy to enact. And, I think they are right.