Congressional Duck and Cover

Congress is broken. The framers of the Constitution, building on nearly six centuries of parliamentary experience, situated Congress at the heart of the American constitutional system. Representative government was believed to be the purest, and yet workable, means of self-government. For the past twenty-five years, however, Congress has made a joke of that system, as it has trivialized and mocked any meaningful representation in the sense that the makers of the Constitution framed it.

That sense was best captured by Edmund Burke (1729-1797), the great English parliamentarian and statesman, whose work became the lodestar for the rising intellectual conservative movement fifty years ago. Burke was a contemporary of the founding fathers and a keen observer of the American scene. Today, however, he is not in fashion; in particular, when neo-conservatives and neo-liberals alike celebrate the historical expansion and maintenance of the American empire, they ignore Burke's warning that "great empires and small minds go ill together."

Burke had much to say about the role of peoples' representatives. He acknowledged that representatives owed the "strictest union . . . and the most unreserved communication" to their constituents, yet he insisted that representatives possess "independent judgment and enlightened conscience." A representative must strike a delicate balance, offering constituents "his judgment," said Burke, while bearing in mind that "he betrays, instead of serving [them], if he sacrifices it to [their] opinion." Burke recognized it is easy to "run into the perilous extremes of servile compliance or wild popularity." Instead, the interest of the whole community must be pursued, not some local, individual interest, or a "momentary enthusiasm."

In The Federalist No. 10, James Madison saw the danger of representatives pandering to "factions," or groups "actuated by some common impulse of passion, or of interest adverse to . . . the permanent and aggregate interest of the community." Burke and Madison alike would be appalled by Congress's ready acquiescence to executive power.

Congress has been a spectator to President George W. Bush's Iraq war and to the shameful use of "enhanced interrogation" and other forms of torture which were widely documented during Bush's presidency. Congressional Democrats roundly criticized the Bush administration for maintaining the prison facilities at Guantanamo. Although Bush's successor now has made pointed efforts to remove and reject such polices, Congress is once again derelict, as it refuses to take any responsibility for cleaning up after the Bush crew.

Congress's palpable fear of voters would have left Burke and framers of the Constitution aghast. "Momentary enthusiasms" dominate our political landscape, with considered judgments subordinated to emotional, partisan responses.

In our current congressional follies, both parties refuse to take responsibility for the shameful maintenance of the Guantanamo facility, where "detainees" have been tortured, abused, but not charged and tried - truly a wholesale violation of any remote understanding of the "rule of law." While Republicans predictably and dutifully defended Bush, congressional Democrats flayed him for these departures from America's stated principles.

President Barack Obama has renewed his commitment to close Guantanamo within a year, but that may be contingent upon his administration's ability to relocate prisoners. Instead of helping to find a solution, congressional Democrats, along with the usual Republican suspects, have abandoned principle in favor of popularity.

Sen. Sam Brownback (R-KS) doesn't want detainees in his backyard - presumably meaning Leavenworth, which housed many notorious criminals and provided jobs to Kansas residents until the Supermax Prison in Florence, Colorado, was built. Football star Michel Vick was one of Leavenworth's guests, and Brownback apparently had little concern for the safety of his constituents' dogs. Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) doesn't want prisoners in San Quentin.

Sen. John Thune (R-SD) summed up these senators' sentiments: "The American people don't want these men walking the streets of America's neighborhoods," he said. "Americans did not want detainees in their backyards either," he added.

Congress wants to close the Guantanamo facility, but it will not accept the responsibility that goes with that action. We cannot hold prisoners in Cuba indefinitely. Sadly, few are willing to stand for principle in the face of undoubtedly misplaced fears; instead, our representatives rant about imagined prisoners loose in some imagined backyard.

By a 90-6 vote, the Senate voted to strip money from a war supplemental bill to close Guantanamo. Those who mustered some political courage and voted in a responsible, considered way are terribly few: Richard Durbin (R-IL), Tom Harkin (D-IA), Patrick Leahy (D-VY), Carl Levin (D-MI), Jack Reed (D-RI),and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) (Byrd, Kennedy, and Rockefeller did not vote). Once again, Democrats have panicked for fear of being considered "soft" on national security.

The Gang of 90 must be oblivious to the population at the Supermax facility in Colorado. It includes Dandeny Munoz Mosquera, chief assassin for the Medllin Cartel; Theodore Kaczynski, the Unabomber; Richard Reid, the "shoe bomber;" Eric Robert Rudolph, bomber of abortion clinics and the Atlanta Olympic Park; Terry Nichols, co-conspirator of the Oklahoma City bombing, Zacarias Moussaoui, the "20th hijacker" from the 9/11 World Trade Center destruction; and Ramzi Yusef from the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. When not in solitary confinement, prisoners generally are allowed out of their windowless cells for an hour a day. None wander in our backyards; they will go nowhere.

Congress loves domino theories. Bring the "detainees" to American shores and they will unleash violence and terror on American citizens. Representatives have pounced on this popular proposition, believing it an easy path to re-election. They betray their own judgment, Burke would say. Instead, they might consider the principle President Barack Obama has laid before them: "We uphold our most cherished values not only because doing so is right, but because it strengthens and keeps us safe," he said in his National Archives speech on May 21.

While Congress plays to its home crowd, the Obama administration has brought an alleged al-Qaida militant accused in the 1998 bombings of American embassies in Tanzania and Kenya to New York, where he will be tried in a civilian court, marking a first for a Guantanamo prisoner. Even Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY), who never met a microphone or camera he did not like, has said nothing.

President Obama recently withheld releasing photos that depicted abuse and torture of prisoners by American military personnel, bowing to the Lieberman-Cheney-Gates contention that the photos would bring harm to our troops. But he also has said that he and Congress can "keep us safe" by restoring and strengthening our commitment to the rule of law. Good advice--perhaps Congress might re-assert its role as a proper representative body, reflecting real values and principles, not mere momentary enthusiasms.

Stanley Kutler is the author of "The Wars of Watergate" and other writings.

Comments

[rabrophy]

Congress is for sale. Our representatives say the appreciate sound bite for their constituency, but are really only concerned with pleasing their major contributors. Anyone can get elected with enough money and getting elected is all that counts to our "Representatives"

[dragonlady620]

Burke would despise Karl Rove.

[rabrophy]

And for once, Burke would be in the majority.

[LeonBNJ]

Over time, all governmental systems develop long term diesase from corruption and not making changes that may kill them. We all need to take a long look at our system of representive government and consider radical changes. Our Senate/Congress was originally structured to be a representative body to hold down the execess of democracy of the masses and make prudent decisions. The development of TV and the Internet, as well as the corruption from special interests influeces especially money for elections has made it impossible to make sound long-term decisions that are truly right for the people. Until we are willing to take the next big steps, we will be doomed to a collasping empire.

[dmyron]

Indeed,"Re­presentati­ve" appears to be a misnomer. It would appear most consider themselves to be better informed and more intelligent than their constituents. Sounds like a resurgent aristocracy. Term
limits and lobby reform will only be the first step. The "entitlement " mindset must also be addressed.
The American people deserve better and must take the(admitt­edly)painf­ul steps to correct the problem.

[Rog49Thomas]

It may be useful to ponder who are their real constituents.

[Rog49Thomas]

It's perhaps useful to look beyond the theory apparently advocated by our Founding Fathers and Burke to the actual reality of their day.

Under the form of government set up by our FF,

(1) The franchise was restricted to white men of property (those of a darker "hue", women and the poor need not attempt to register to vote).

(2) In order to hold office, here were generally requirements for larger property holdings than to vote.

(3) Senators were appointed/­indirectly elected

(4) The President was indirectly elected to avoid "popular" passions.

And in jolly old England - home of Burke - there were both "rotten" and "pocket" boroughs - which around these highly enlightened times referred to "elected" not just a majority of MPs in the House of Commons but something on the order of 75%. Brother Burke served with distinction in Parliament from the "rotten" borough of Malton.

In both cases the legislature was constituted to represent the interests of the economic elite and a very narrow class interest.

It seems to me that currently we are "living the vision" of both our FF and Philosopher Ed.
Of course, in contrast to those days, particularly the UK, we now represent both our commercial and agrarian interests in our legislature. A giant step forward!

[bayside]

When citizens are denied their own money but forced to pay in the lap of luxery a congress, free health care, auto. pay raises, perks and even bribes by lobbist, full retirement after 2 years when we have to work 20 for full benefits then this superior attitude of congress needs to change. This good ole boys and staying in congress forever is not good for the country. They start believing they are superior and we hired them.We need a way to fire them..The last 8 years sold, or stoled most of what we had .. We need to get our govt. back in our hands.

[Torus34]

Unfortunately, I see no way forward to 'fixing' the Congress. My belief in the power of an informed electorate has been severely eroded by listening to the comments of talk show hosts and their call-in enablers.

For those who are not yet aware of this, the caller-iners are not actors hired by the program producers. They are fellow Americans.

Small wonder that congressmen and senators, whilst fearful for their seats, are contemptuous of the public they are expected to serve.

[ReealOne]

Excellent article Professor Kutler. Maybe it's time to clean house in congress..­.. on both sides of the political spectrum, in order to effect real change. We're really starting to see the reason we can't get anything accomplished in Washington, is because of the spinless gutless wonders on both sides. It is more than enough reason why we need term limits.

What an embarrassing dissapointment.

[longtalldrink]

I remember I used to shake my head at all the other countries drowning in a sea of corruption and poverty. Never thought it could happen here, because we "elected" our officials. Well, well, well, I am no longer shaking my head at the other countries, I am shaking my head at us. The only way we can live free again is to do what our fore fathers did...figh­t the powers that be.

[jinxed]

It seems to me that the gang of 90 consists of our country's biggest cowards. It also seems to me that if they don't have any courage it is time they were sent home permanently, one election at a time. I am sick and tired of the United States of America being run by C O W A R D S and the ethically bankrupt.

[Ishmael1]

Sadly, the convergence of money, media and politics has perverted elective government from representative government to special interest government. The only solution I can see would be to make Congressional seats randomly selected from IRS tax rolls of the general populace in the state or Congressional district according to existing constitutional terms and requirements. This would, at least, allow for TRUE representative government. Turn it into the equivalent of Jury duty or National Guard service. Of course, the politerati will wail and bemoan the idea and claim we need the best and brightest to go into government service, but that merely perpetuates the political class systems that have contributed to the current state of affairs. It would be a wind that would sweep through Washington like none since the first Congresses. Since ALL offices would be for one term only, the political seniority system would also be defunct with committee assignments decided by the flip of a coin. Selected reps would have their expenses paid out of the budget while in office and return to their regular jobs and lives at the end of their terms.

[jinxed]

Sounds great to me but there should be a minimum of 3 chosen for each state to compete for the seat in an election..­.who wants to take the chance of another geo?

[iblogleft]

With an average IQ of 94, I am thinking it would be an even greater disaster then we see now.

I would be open to having 6 chosen then tested, then having an election from the top 2. Seems almost anything would be better than what we have now, but whatever the case, we need finance reform.

[humanbeinghuman]

i had the eye opening experience of being a fly on the wall at a d.c. luncheon hosted by laura bush, wow! all of the ladies were dressed in "plantation" dresses and big hats straight out of the old south, very scary. it occurred to me that removing congress from this ingrained culture of privilege in washington would do wonders for us , the people. bring our reps home and let them telecommute. that would help but, really nothing will change until we enact public financing of campaigns.

[mamalisa38]

Great post, Mr. Kutler. Our representatives have failed us in so many ways for so long. Until we get money out of the equation it will only get worse. They no longer represent the people who elect them. How sad for our country.

[jinxed]

this change in the last 25 years sure seems to coincide with the rise in power to the republicants ... surely I can't be the only one who sees this.

[Yermammy]

Thank you, Mr. Kutler. What you are asking of our "representatives" is courage and independence of thought. That's unpopular sometimes and all of our politicians are only worried about getting reelected instead of doing their job of serving their allotted constituents. Or their Country for that matter.
I'll see your responsibility and raise you patriotism. What say you about prosecuting a war on lies, illegal wiretapping and torturing people which is a war crime per our treaty agreements? Is that debatable, or is this going to remain the 800 pound gorilla in the room that so called representatives of the people continue to ignore? I've lost a lot of faith in my life in our Democracy dissolving through greed and corruption, but I never seen it accelerate as it has over the last eight years. From the actions of Congress and our new President, I've yet to see any hope for a difference. As you say, our representatives sometimes have to do what is unpopular- now is certainly one of those times. INVESTIGATIONS.