Really weird that DJT is always surrounded by criminal scumbags.
Also, passing legislation, without it getting too watered down or gutted.
What experienced legislators do, see, they learn how to go into that back room, and light up that cigar, and lean in real close to the greenhorn on the other side of the table who thinks they’re a hot shot because they gave some fiery speeches and got the votes of a bunch of podunk nobodies in District 11, and they say: “Now listen heah, greenhorn. You may be the king shit of the mountain in whatever bumfuck town you came from, but this heah is the YOU-nited States House a’ Represennivs. Now I’m gonna tell you what you’re gonna do for me, and you’re gonna shut up, eat shit like it’s strawberry icecream, and DO IT!”
Seriously, I kinda hope that happens in D.C. Especially if it’s Nancy Pelosi doing it.
Timex
2911
Yeah, I’m gonna need a citation that they do, because I’m not really seeing it in terms of the actual legislation being passed.
Hell, a bunch of the folks in congress aren’t even reading the bills that they vote on.
Having folks in congress for ages essentially has created a situation where the individuals have essentially become caricatures of themselves, in the public eye. Everything is being driven based on the personalities of the politicians.
I’m just not seeing what kind of magical, unique powers a bunch of fucking super old people have in terms of running the country.
They aren’t good at running the country.
I’m not sure exactly what Mitch does, but he appears to be awfully good at it. :(
He said running, not ruining.
Matt_W
2915
Really? I generally think the legislation out of Congress works except in a few contentious cases. Prove me wrong.
AOC has been in Congress for less than two years. Do you think she’s more or less of a caricature than Jan Schakowsky, who has been in Congress for 20 years? I feel like it’s being in the public eye, not length of tenure that creates this effect.
Average age of newly elected members of Congress is late 40’s. Average age of House members overall is late 50’s. Average term in office is about 9 years. Those statistics are roughly the same for CEOs of large companies. Do you think CEOs should also be required to vacate their jobs after a set term regardless of how well they perform?
In what sense?
SlyFrog
2916
Some of this is ridiculous. Each industry and regulatory area contains thousands of experts who literally spend their entire lives doing their best to just grasp regulations and factors affecting that specific area, and even they fall short (I say this as an attorney who has worked with regulations).
There are people here who literally think a Congress person is going to be a health care expert capable of hand drafting meaningful health care regulations, then switch over to being a finance expert capable of drafting meaningful finance regulations, then switch over to being an industrial safety expert capable of drafting industrial safety regulations, and on and on?
That’s just ridiculous on its face.
Timex
2917
Congress hasn’t had an approval rating over 30% in over a decade.
They aren’t good at running the country, in that Congress does not function to serve the interests of the people. The country has problems, and they aren’t fixing those problems.
I honestly don’t give a fuck how a corporation decides to man its executive team, unless I am a shareholder. That’s a private business, it’s not my government.
From this:
The average age of Members of the House at the beginning of the 115th Congress was 57.8 years;
of Senators, 61.8 years, among the oldest in U.S. history.
These old people are not uniquely qualified. If they could no longer run for office, we would find others who are just as capable of doing their job. They aren’t fucking unicorns.
Guap
2918
This thread makes me want to run for Congress. Why not?
Djscman
2919
Because hot tubs, probably.
JoshL
2920
Are you at least 25 years old? Have you been a citizen of the U.S. for at least seven years? Are you a resident of a state of the U.S.?
You’re qualified! Go for it!
It’s true that Congress isn’t popular, but aren’t most congress people popular in their own district? Aren’t they just representing the views of their heavily gerrymandered district?
You have my sword. But probably not my vote, unless you live in my district and are cooler than Ted Lieu.
Generally, people love their Congressman/woman. The problem is everyone else’s Congressman/woman.
But most individual members have approval over 50%. Congressional approval is based on the hot button issues and the most salient things the “other side” is doing to thwart the agenda you voted for. Legislating is about reflecting the will of your voters and guessing how they would like you to act; politics is trying to sell them on your decisions. Being good at the job of Congressperson is about horse trading, power brokering, and getting yourself and your allies re-elected. Lame ducks are free to buck their constituents (though they often don’t right now, it’s more a cultural norm than anything enforceable). People who have to get re-elected have to care about how their positions are received. Unfortunately, polarization and party unity means that you have to vote for your side, so most legislators are concerned about only 70% or so of their voting constituents, and are willing to do really horrible things if they don’t think a primary opponent would be able to attack them for it.
If you want to reduce the amount of time and money spent campaigning, you need to shorten the campaign season, not impose term limits.
If you want to improve the diversity of agendas and the quality of action in Congress, you need to break political parties. Perhaps RCV or universal multi-round jungle primaries could help do that (let everyone with enough signatures run, hold a vote to cull the bottom half, then another round to cull the remaining bottom half, etc., like RCV but without a fixed ranking set at the start).
Term limits simply reduce the power of voters by increasing the number of people in office who don’t need to face re-election.
I wish this was true! The personalities of the politicians, informed by the parochial concerns of their constituents would be a much better way to run a government than defending the interests of national parties driven by wedge issues.
Timex
2925
Yeah, this isn’t really that true either, although it’s often cited.
While folks are more favorable of their own representative, that’s still only an approval of around 40% (in 2013). If you limit it to folks who actually know who their representative is, then it rises, but is still only around 60%.
People are not happy with the job Congress is doing.
Because Congress is doing a bad job.
I’d have to see the source of this, because I’m not sure it’s true.
I feel like it’s a bit tricky because these days ‘getting things done’ means doing something that the other side utterly loathes (or claims to) and wants to repeal immediately.
There are some exceptions, like prison reform.
