Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

The urgent 21st century upgrades Congress needs to do its job

Sen. Rick Scott

While we heard a lot about Sen. Rick Scott's feued with Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, we have read little about his excellent constiuent service, writes Kevin Kosar.

Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images

Kosar is a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. He is the co-editor of “Congress Overwhelmed: Congressional Capacity and Prospects for Reform” (University of Chicago Press, 2020). He hosts the Understanding Congress podcast.

The public has been really down on Congress for about 20 years. A Gallup poll in September found public approval of our nation’s legislature was a mere 17 percent. The ugly fight over the speakership quite probably did not buoy Americans’ feelings.

For sure, some of this grumpy public sentiment is driven by negative media. The old saying is that in journalism, what bleeds leads. Coverage of Capitol Hill focuses heavily on conflict.

A survey conducted by Daniel Cox, my American Enterprise Institute colleague, found that “more than 8 in 10 (82 percent) Americans who say their preferred news topic is politics and government say the coverage was mostly negative.” The most outrageous partisans in Congress get a disproportionately high amount of coverage, and one finds more clips of political fighting on social media than of Democrats and Republicans working together like adults doing the public’s business.


Americans likely also are dissatisfied because they do not hear about much of what Congress does. For example, Sen. Rick Scott’s (R-Fla.) office provides superb constituent services. But I cannot recall the last time I saw a media story on that happy news. I have, however, seen plenty of coverage of Scott’s feud with Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.).

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

The work of oversight and legislation moves in fits and starts on Capitol Hill, but few people beyond the Hill hear of it. During the previous Congress, laws were passed to increase the supply of baby food, speed up payments to relatives of deceased Armed Services veterans, strengthen the nation’s cybersecurity defenses and more. Yet, public approval of the first branch remained abysmal.

Those points noted, Congress is to blame for some of its low standing. The Democratic and Republican parties’ intense battle for majority control of each chamber has led to lots of toxic behavior on the Hill. The parties feel an incentive to own high-salience issues and to use them to fundraise and campaign against the other party, rather than to solve the problems through bargaining.

This is why we do not see sober discussions on tough issues like immigration reform or reducing the nation’s sky-high deficits and debt. Lost upon these partisans is that their squabbling is making more and more voters dislike the parties and our legislature.

Congress also has made it harder for it to please the public by failing to upgrade its own capacity. Think about it; any entity can only do as much as it is capable. A charity can only feed as many people as it can afford to acquire food. A factory produces only as many cars as its assembly lines and workers can assemble.

The same holds true for Congress. Demands on Congress have been escalating for 40 years. The number of voters has gone up 45 percent since 1980, leaving the average member of the House of Representatives with 760,000 constituents to serve. The amount of federal spending recently hit $6.5 trillion, and we expect Congress to oversee how all of those dollars are spent. Interest groups have proliferated, all of whom knock on Congress’ door and shower it with communications demanding attention.

Meanwhile, Congress has not significantly upgraded its capacity since the early 1970s. Today, Congress has fewer staff (10,000) than it did in 1980 (11,000). Congressional committees, which are supposed to be the engines for policymaking and oversight, also have fewer staff (3,100 in 1980 and 2,300 today).

Everyone in Congress knows the budget process is a mess, yet they continue to refuse to replace the 1974 statute that created it. Most hearings continue to be conducted in the way they were a century ago, with Team Donkey on one side of the dais and Team Elephant on the other. Witnesses sit at tables below and read statements and respond to the questions lobbed at them.

Just about every aspect of Congress’ capacity is behind the times, from its work processes to its technology to its internal organization and staffing. Happily, the U.S. Constitution authorizes the first branch to organize itself and appropriate whatever money it needs to do its job. We voters would be wise to tell Congress to rebuild itself for the 21st century and get on with the public’s business.

This piece was first published in The Hill.

Read More

Man stepping on ripped poster

A man treads on a picture of Syria's ousted president, Bashar al-Assad, as people enter his residence in Damascus on Dec. 8.

Omar Haj Kadour/AFP via Getty Images

With Assad out, this is what we must do to help save Syria

This was a long day coming, and frankly one I never thought I’d see.

Thirteen years ago, Syria’s Bashar Assad unleashed a reign of unmitigated terror on his own people, in response to protests of his inhumane Ba’athist government.

Keep ReadingShow less
Men and a boy walking through a hallway

Vivek Ramaswamy and Elon Musk, with his son X, depart the Capitol on Dec. 5.

Craig Hudson for The Washington Post via Getty Images

Will DOGE promote efficiency for its own sake?

This is the first entry in a series on the Department of Government Efficiency, an advisory board created by President-elect Donald Trump to recommend cuts in government spending and regulations. DOGE, which is spearheaded by Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy, has generated quite a bit of discussion in recent weeks.

The goal of making government efficient is certainly an enviable one indeed. However, the potential for personal biases or political agendas to interfere with the process must be monitored.

As DOGE suggests cuts to wasteful spending and ways to streamline government operations, potentially saving billions of dollars, The Fulcrum will focus on the pros and cons.

We will not shy away from DOGE’s most controversial proposals and will call attention to dangerous thinking that threatens our democracy when we see it. However, in doing so, we are committing to not employing accusations, innuendos or misinformation. We will advocate for intellectual honesty to inform and persuade effectively.

The new Department of Government Efficiency, an advisory board to be headed by Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy, is designed to cut resources and avoid waste — indeed to save money. Few can argue this isn't a laudable goal as most Americans have experienced the inefficiencies and waste of various government agencies.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

Keep ReadingShow less
From left: Volodymyr Zelenskyy, Emmanuel Macron, Donald Trump

President-elect Donald Trump spoke with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and French President Emmanuel Macron on Dec. 7. No one will be able to restrain Trump's foreign policy efforts.

The true Trump threat

Many Americans fear what Donald Trump will do after assuming the presidency in January — and understandably so. Trump's pathological self-absorption has no place in American government, let alone at its very top.

But the specific type of threat Trump poses is often misunderstood. Like all presidents, his domestic powers are limited. He will face stiff resistance at the federal, state and local levels of government.

Keep ReadingShow less
Donald Trump and Tulsi Gabbard on stage

President-elect Donald Trump has nominated former Rep. Tulsi Gabbard to be the director of national intelligence.

Adam J. Dewey/Anadolu via Getty Images

How a director of national intelligence helps a president stay on top of threats from around the world

In all the arguments over whether President-elect Donald Trump’s choice for director of national intelligence is fit for the job, it’s easy to lose sight of why it matters.

It matters a lot. To speak of telling truth to power seems terribly old-fashioned these days, but as a veteran of White House intelligence operations, I know that is the essence of the job.

Keep ReadingShow less