No sarcasm intended, but perhaps a touch of irony. When anyone becomes a professional politician, their primary career goal must be to attain and hold on to political power. In order to fulfil that goal, they must win elections. And in both the House and the Senate, re-election rates for incumbents have averaged about 90% for the last ten cycles, with the House a bit higher and the Senate a bit lower.
So, you feel badly for the 535? You see them as sacrificing in some way? None of them ran against their wishes. None was forced into service. Oh, perhaps they're not highly paid by NY law firm standards, but, as you point out, they are not stupid and they see, no doubt, some bigger payoff and they certainly are well paid by almost any other standard. As to Congress being deadlocked, there is something to be said for your mother's POV. However, in the current circumstance, much of the deadlock can be rightly attributed to hyper-partisanship (which is bipartisan) which stems from the collective focus, as you point out, on election and reelection and not on service to the country. Perhaps if we had term limits and Congress was not such a career building opportunity, we might attract candidates whose interest was in serving the country and not just a party machine for the purpose of more politics.
I actually do think that many of them do or probably will regret going into politics. The perceived power may be alluring, but the sacrifices to family and other aspects of life may not become apparent until it's too late for them.
Certainly, I'm imposing my own values on theirs. But so many of them seem to end up with personal life messes.
As for how to prioritize service over power, I'm not sure anyone has solved that yet.
Interesting read. Reminds me when I asked Max Rose why he enlisted in the army and also why he wanted to be a Congressman. He answered “to serve my country” and I truly believed him.
So we should not complain, but instead we should be thankful for our 535? I agree with you that some of the 535 have entered politics with good intentions and they are doing the best they can in the system we have currently. For them I am thankful. You mention 4 flavors of complaint and write them off as “wearisome” and “ridiculous.” I disagree. Our country was founded by complainers. Nothing is more American than complaining. When you propose that we shouldn’t complain, you sound resigned to the fact that this situation will not change. By complaining, our founding fathers were able to inspire change.
The members of the 535 who receive the most ire are not themselves the problem, but rather a symptom of the problem. The system we have now selects the politicians best suited to succeed in an election, and once elected, it is unnecessarily difficult to unseat them. As you point out, to get elected in the first place, you need to be well connected to a party, and you have to pander to the people who donate money and vote in primaries. This selects for hyperpartisans. All it takes is a few hyperpartisans to prevent a 60% majority. (The filibuster - one of your flavors of complaints)
In the wild, animals don’t make themselves better to overcome the environment, but rather the animals are who they are, and the environment chooses the winners and losers. It is the same with our electoral system. The electoral system itself makes it more likely that the hyperpartisans will win. Once elected, they turn Darwin’s theory on its head. The animals choose the environment. Although our founding fathers weren’t able to implement the American ideal that the people should choose their government, that is an ideal that we have been trending towards. However, with gerrymandering and laws that hinder access to voting, the elected essentially choose their voters, almost guaranteeing reelection.
By having elections on Tuesday, a work day, you favor the voice of those who don’t have to work to survive. By not having ranked choice voting, you allow unpopular politicians to get elected with a minority of the vote. By using the electoral system, some votes have more weight than others. Thanks to the Citizens United decision, you adulterate the notion of a “government of the people, by the people, for the people.”, The solutions are obvious: elections should be on a weekend or should be a national paid holiday, we should implement national ranked choice voting, we should abolish the obsolete electoral system, and elections should be funded by a government election fund that is allocated by the voters thus giving everyone the freedom of political financial speech.
You spell out the job description as various hardships, such as having to commute, having to be in the public eye (and thus a target of crazies), having your work unappreciated by most of America, and receiving below average pay. Nonetheless, these elected officials are willing to endure those hardships, because they have heard the “calling” and they are responding. There is no lack of people volunteering for these positions for noble reasons, unfortunately, for the aforementioned reasons, the system favors the corrupt and entrenched. It is those of the 535 of whom we complain.
So, you feel badly for the 535? You see them as sacrificing in some way? None of them ran against their wishes. None was forced into service. Oh, perhaps they're not highly paid by NY law firm standards, but, as you point out, they are not stupid and they see, no doubt, some bigger payoff and they certainly are well paid by almost any other standard. As to Congress being deadlocked, there is something to be said for your mother's POV. However, in the current circumstance, much of the deadlock can be rightly attributed to hyper-partisanship (which is bipartisan) which stems from the collective focus, as you point out, on election and reelection and not on service to the country. Perhaps if we had term limits and Congress was not such a career building opportunity, we might attract candidates whose interest was in serving the country and not just a party machine for the purpose of more politics.
I actually do think that many of them do or probably will regret going into politics. The perceived power may be alluring, but the sacrifices to family and other aspects of life may not become apparent until it's too late for them.
Certainly, I'm imposing my own values on theirs. But so many of them seem to end up with personal life messes.
As for how to prioritize service over power, I'm not sure anyone has solved that yet.
Finally a lengthy one; you're back! (great one; i agree with all you wrote)
Interesting read. Reminds me when I asked Max Rose why he enlisted in the army and also why he wanted to be a Congressman. He answered “to serve my country” and I truly believed him.
Your mother was a very, very wise woman!
So we should not complain, but instead we should be thankful for our 535? I agree with you that some of the 535 have entered politics with good intentions and they are doing the best they can in the system we have currently. For them I am thankful. You mention 4 flavors of complaint and write them off as “wearisome” and “ridiculous.” I disagree. Our country was founded by complainers. Nothing is more American than complaining. When you propose that we shouldn’t complain, you sound resigned to the fact that this situation will not change. By complaining, our founding fathers were able to inspire change.
The members of the 535 who receive the most ire are not themselves the problem, but rather a symptom of the problem. The system we have now selects the politicians best suited to succeed in an election, and once elected, it is unnecessarily difficult to unseat them. As you point out, to get elected in the first place, you need to be well connected to a party, and you have to pander to the people who donate money and vote in primaries. This selects for hyperpartisans. All it takes is a few hyperpartisans to prevent a 60% majority. (The filibuster - one of your flavors of complaints)
In the wild, animals don’t make themselves better to overcome the environment, but rather the animals are who they are, and the environment chooses the winners and losers. It is the same with our electoral system. The electoral system itself makes it more likely that the hyperpartisans will win. Once elected, they turn Darwin’s theory on its head. The animals choose the environment. Although our founding fathers weren’t able to implement the American ideal that the people should choose their government, that is an ideal that we have been trending towards. However, with gerrymandering and laws that hinder access to voting, the elected essentially choose their voters, almost guaranteeing reelection.
By having elections on Tuesday, a work day, you favor the voice of those who don’t have to work to survive. By not having ranked choice voting, you allow unpopular politicians to get elected with a minority of the vote. By using the electoral system, some votes have more weight than others. Thanks to the Citizens United decision, you adulterate the notion of a “government of the people, by the people, for the people.”, The solutions are obvious: elections should be on a weekend or should be a national paid holiday, we should implement national ranked choice voting, we should abolish the obsolete electoral system, and elections should be funded by a government election fund that is allocated by the voters thus giving everyone the freedom of political financial speech.
You spell out the job description as various hardships, such as having to commute, having to be in the public eye (and thus a target of crazies), having your work unappreciated by most of America, and receiving below average pay. Nonetheless, these elected officials are willing to endure those hardships, because they have heard the “calling” and they are responding. There is no lack of people volunteering for these positions for noble reasons, unfortunately, for the aforementioned reasons, the system favors the corrupt and entrenched. It is those of the 535 of whom we complain.