Journalism providing more light than heat is less common than we'd like and positive stories are downright rare. That's why it's worth taking a look at a Washington Post profile of my onetime boss Janice Mays that meets both of these criteria.
I've long countered the seeming majority complaints about how Congress operates by suggesting that what's really surprising is how well it runs, given the ego, inflexibility and limited attention spans of many of our elected officials. It takes excellent staff to keep the trains running. Janice is a key member of that crew and she deserves recognition because she's doing a very important job very well. In her case, she's smoothly managed a key committee for more than a decade even as two powerful chairmen were forced to relinquish the gavel.
Things could have become mired or messy in both cases, but they didn't. There's a lesson there about the import of people behind the scenes and at least a hint that they have more impact on our lives than those we read about in the headlines. There's no doubt that Janice Mays has had a bigger impact on the way Americans live by the way she's influenced tax policy -- albeit at the administrative margins perhaps -- than Helen Thomas has, or perhaps even Sarah Palin.
So she's someone insiders find worth talking to or listening to and lobbyists frequently do both. She respects the role they play in the process, which isn't surprising inasmuch as more than a few of our former colleagues now lobby. "I actually believe that the lobby community serves a good purpose. I believe people have a right to petition their government," she told the Post's Mary Ann Akers in a statement that may give some goo-goos * heartburn, but makes sense to me.
That's partly because it provides useful intelligence to both sides, leaving her in a position where she warn lobbyists against trying an idea that seems improbably awful, educate legislators about challenges that are in the wind and transmute popular bad ideas into workable ones.
Those with an interest in understanding the legislative process, a small subset of those attempting to influence its product, should both appreciate Janice and her colleagues and get to know them a bit better. They're inevitably smart, loyal to their principals and principles alike and supple to enough to adopt to changing leadership styles as their environment changes.
Despite a lack of evidence, I suspect they tend not to be graduates of elite colleges. Janice is listed under the Soong sisters -- among famous graduates to Wesleyan College, the Macon, Ga., school that was the first to award degrees to women and continues the tradition of single-sex education.
We don't have access to her papers there to allow us to compare her performance with that of recent Supreme Court nominees who attended Princeton, but she's clearly proven already that she can play well in the big leagues.
That's something insiders have known for a long time. "Janice is one of the key players. She's in on virtually all the important decisions," a former colleague said in the Almanac of the Unelected that appeared in 1992. She's one of the few people profiled in that book still working on Capitol Hill. In the intervening years her power has deservedly grown while her public reputation, unfortunately for all concerned, has not.
* that's a dismissive characterization we devotees of the Chicago political organization use in referring to good government types who, to use the jargon of Congressional courtesy, we hold in minimal high regard.
The relationship between "special interest" money, and legislative votes has been studied repeatedly. Each study draws the same conclusion. A very high percentage of congressional votes.......... follows the money.
Congress denies this, but if it weren't the case, why not just rein in a practice that most Americans find suspect? Congress people are first and foremost human beings. They're your next door neighbor, or the guy down the street. They're just as corruptible as anyone. (Possibly more so, since those that desire power, know that money provides it). 44% of congress is made up by millionaires, compared to 1% of the general population. (Representative government? They represent their peers more than they do the general public.)
Most truisms stand the test of time because they are fundamentally based on reality. The fact is that "We have the best government money can buy" (Mark Twain). It was true in his day, it's more true now. It's just the price tag has gotten so high that only corporations and PAC's can afford real access.
/
I would invite you, and anyone else for that matter, to watch the Bill Moyers interview with Senator Richard Durbin
http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/05082009/profile.html
The banking industry is not held in high public esteem right now (rightfully so in my opinion) yet they still have a great deal of influence in congress. Not surprisingly, since they are also the largest lobbying group contributing to congressional coffers. http://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/top.php?indexType=c
I would invite anyone interested in this topic to research opensecrets.org maplight.org citizen.org and others for information not usually covered my the MSM.
These organizations couldn't exist without the interest (and donations) of the general public in how special interest money effects our government. From 1998 to 2008, despite the recession, lobbying congress has gone from 1.44 Billion to 3.49 Billion annually. Lobbyist generally represent business interests or similar clients. I doubt that any good businessman would continue, much less increase the monies spent on this endeavor if there wasn't a concrete "return on investment". (I wouldn't) It's not in their best interest to do so. Ergo, money talks, and Washington listens.............. intently.
(The idea is portrayed brilliantly in the old UK comedy sitcom, Yes, Minister!)
Unelected staff running Congress? Especially life-long staff? Oh, goody!
NAP
The rich (I am not one - but am part of the ever-shrinking middle class who does pay a net Federal and State income tax after refunds) get most of the benefits of living in our country, they should pay more.
The jobs of their bought & paid for politicans are to keep it that way.
When will people wake up ?
“It was a statement by the president of the New York Federal Reserve Bank in March 2008 calling for a GMA—a Global Monetary Authority—that set off the alarm bells anew.
“A GMA is essentially a global financial dictator.
“And as you likely know, The president of the New York Fed at that time was none other than Timothy “Pretty Boy” Geithner, the current U.S. Treasury Secretary. So, I started a new round of research and writing. Over the next year and a half, I wrote several articles, now chapters in the book, exposing not only what had happened but, of greater concern, why.
“I have written two new chapters for the book, one of which provides real-world suggestions on what people can do to protect themselves financially, as well as actions that can be taken to get Congress to wake up before America loses her financial sovereignty.
“You see, this financial crisis was and is a crisis by design. One of the things that I found in my recent research is that there is an organization behind the IMF and World Bank that is calling the shots, which turns out to be the key puppeteer.
“As chilling as this may sound, a global financial coup has occurred right under our noses.
“And that is the story of this book and what you can do about it.
- John Truman Wolfe
Alas - Rupert is one of us.