Why is Congress all talk, no action?

Lately I’ve been wondering when Congress ceased to be a functional unit of government. 

Oh, I know that Congress still exists and still passes laws, but forget about that old “checks and balances” thing. Congress doesn’t take itself seriously anymore, and based on its average approval rating of about 10 percent, neither does the American public.

Congress as a deliberative body, and as the instrument of the people’s power, has for all intents and purposes ceased to exist. The true function of the Congress today is that of the Lord High Treasurer, and Congress has turned spending money into an art form. In other sectors this is  known by names such as bribery or payoffs, but in Congress it is known as appropriations.

But other than spending money, what is Congress most known for?

In a word, talking!

In fact, you could say that Congress is all talk and no action. There doesn’t seem to be any real intention among our senators and representatives to uphold their oath of office and to “defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.” 

Otherwise, they would need to put a halt to massive amounts of unconstitutional lawmaking in their own body, unconstitutional executive overreach by the president, and unconstitutional judicial overreach by the Supreme Court.

So what exactly — and this is a question I have been pondering for quite some time — turned the Congress into so much window dressing? And when did it happen?

Let’s start with the second question first. I grew up in the 1950s and ’60s and would argue that from my youthful perspective it did seem that the Congress was engaged in serious debates about policy. The Civil Rights Act, the Voting Rights Act, the Wilderness Act, the Clean Water Act — you could put together quite a significant list of accomplishments, but even if you disagree with any of the particular bills that were passed by Congress, you can certainly concur that the august body was getting something done.

Even through the 1970s, one could make the case that Congress was engaged in a great debate about the future of the nation, but something happened in the past 30 or 40 years that has sapped the energy out of the institution, and one morning not too long ago while preparing breakfast I think I figured out what it was — television.

It was in 1979 when the House inaugurated the first live televised proceedings from the House floor, probably inspired by the success of the live Watergate hearings — not so much at rooting out evil, but at turning senators into celebrities. Forebodingly, the first member of Congress to speak before the cameras on March 19, 1979, was Rep. Al Gore Jr., who parlayed his youthful good looks and Southern charm into a successful Senate election in 1984 and then the vice presidency in 1992. Does anyone better define the empty suit of modern American politicians than Gore?

But this is an indictment not of individuals of either party, but of an institution that has been corrupted by fame. Television, in short, has sucked the soul out of the Congress. Nothing demonstrates that better than the so-called “special order” speeches in which House members rise on the floor of the House to make impassioned pleas for their pet causes before an empty House chamber but potentially an audience of millions of TV and Internet viewers. 

The premise of televising House and Senate proceedings is that members of Congress are doing the people’s business, and ought to be doing so under the spotlight. In fact, the result of these televised speeches is that our elected officials are doing their own business — getting themselves re-elected — on our time and our dime. 

I can’t prove it, but I suspect that if we removed those TV cameras from Congress, we would see a nearly immediate resurgence of collegiality in the Senate and House — with an accompanying jump in productivity and approval ratings. 

Heck, maybe we could even step back from the brink of bankruptcy and convince our legislators to do the right thing — put their interest in getting re-elected behind them and tell the ugly truth to the voters: 

“Sorry, folks. We can’t keep spending money we don’t have on programs the Constitution doesn’t permit us to create in the first place! From now on, you’ll have to rely on American ingenuity instead of congressional handouts, and if anyone doesn’t like it, let us remind you that the porous border is a two-way street!”