Some tips, tricks to fix the Congress

For all the focus on this year’s presidential contest, the struggle for control of Congress could be as consequential, or more so. Much depends, too, on whether the legislative branch will be able to function and get anything done, whoever wins. You can write a list of important bills passed in the past four years, topped by the Inflation Reduction, Bipartisan Infrastructure and Chips acts. You can write a longer one, alas, of issues avoided or postponed.
Partisan conflict explains a lot of the Hill’s dysfunction, but so do relatively fixable internal rules. Getting Congress into working order, in short, is as vital as electing one. And that is what a bipartisan panel of experts, called Fixing Congress, has set out to do, producing recommendations for changes to the rules on the Hill. The goal is not the unrealistic one of eliminating the partisan frictions that paralyze Congress, but a practical one: reducing them.
The effort, organized by Ezekiel Emanuel, a bioethicist and senior fellow at the Center for American Progress, and Steven Pearlstein, a public affairs professor at George Mason Universit, brought together 15 retired senators and representatives from both parties. Their remedies are based on the former legislators’ personal experience in Congress and the pressures that prevent even well-intentioned members from doing the right thing.
Example: Congressional leaders often avoid bringing controversial measures up for debate and voting because they don’t want to risk creating discord within their own caucuses. Unfortunately, “controversial” describes most legislation more substantive than naming a post office. The report by Fixing Congress proposes a new rule guaranteeing debate and votes for relevant floor amendments that have significant support from members on both sides of the aisle.
Fixing Congress advocates a petition process for committee members to bring any bipartisan committee-approved matter to the floor, with or without approval of the House speaker, as is now required. This would empower the rank and file. Fixing Congress would also make committees smaller. In each committee, the number of Democrats and Republicans would reflect the partisan balance of the chamber as a whole.
Other proposals aim to strengthen majority rule. Some, such as simplifying and strengthening the manner in which a majority of members can bring any matter to the floor, are no-brainers. Other Fixing Congress proposals seek to modulate the working atmosphere on Capitol Hill. These begin with including five working legislative days in each week rather than the current three. Every fourth week legislators would spend in their districts. This shift would probably be easier for members who live in Washington, as they used to; the group recommends providing adequate relocation reimbursement. The point of these changes would be to improve collegiality among members. The same purpose could be fostered by nonpartisan seating in chambers and committees.
It’s easy to criticize these proposals. Almost all of Fixing Congress’s proposals would require leaders to relinquish some control. But the outcome could be beneficial both for the people who write laws and for those who must live by them. Fixing Congress has conducted a productive thought experiment, which is to say it has taken the necessary first step toward reforms that really could happen.
The Washington Post