4 ms·

Congress is becoming a non factor. The amount of pettiness and partisianship over the past few years had made Congress into the de factor weakest branch of gove

Congress is becoming a non factor. The amount of pettiness and partisianship over the past few years had made Congress into the de factor weakest branch of government. Most of Obama's legacy was executed via executive order and guidance given to executive departments, a year into the Trump administration and we are seeing the same thing. The other big decisions (gay marriage, citizens United, etc.) are being made by the courts, and despite the fact that Congress has to confirm judges (which is less daunting now that the judicial fillibuster is removed) Congress has become so partisan that you can get anyone confirmed with 50 Senators (+1 VP for a tiebreaker). We have so many pressing challenges ahead and we need new laws for this country to adapt, it's disheartening to see that Congress is not up for the task.

ISL 9y ago
We get the Congress for which we vote.
- rayiner 9y ago
  The problem isn’t Congress—most people are happy with their own representatives. The problem is us. If we took 10 random people from New York City and ten from rural Alabama, they wouldn’t be able to get anything done either. Why are we surprised that the people those people elect can’t work together?
  - wallace_f 9y ago
    I personally think we need a civil libertarian movement. The abuses of the federal government are beyond ridiculous at this point. We are fighting over political differences while everyone's liberties/rights are legitimately being eroded. Congress is subservient to the Military, the Federal Reserve, and even relatively small-time players like Healthcare/Big Pharma. How many congressman are actually crying foul that Afghanistan, etc., are unconstitutional wars that are not approved by congress--a constitutional right of congress. Congress also has the right to issue and regulate currency, but even that we leave up to a private bank that has Wall St's best interests in mind--not the taxpayers. These kinds of constitutional injustices could go on and on. But most people are bombarded with the injustices of the latest Trump tweet, or the inhumanity of mansplaining.
    - 40acres 9y ago
      Definitely agreed that Congress is not executing their congressional rights as strongly as they should. The unauthorized wars combined with the fact that it's a guarantee that AUMF will continuously be approved is just one example. Congress is simply too worried about toeing the party line and their own reelection to understand it's collective power.
  - betterunix2 9y ago
    We're surprised because in the past people in Congress have worked together, and in some cases have done good things by working together. You are also wrong about people from New York and Alabama; on some issues, Americans are mostly in agreement with each other, but that is not reflected in Congress. Net neutrality is an example of an issue the majority of Americans agree on, across all political perspectives. Social security and medicare are supported by a large majority of Americans. You would not know it from the people in Congress, who have managed to turn all the above and more into partisan issues despite the broad agreement by their own constituents.
  - justadudeama 9y ago
    Do you think it would be better to have more localized state/city governments? Couldn't that solve some of the issues of congress being in gridlock so often?
- scrollaway 9y ago
  Speaking as a non-american closely following US politics, it appears you get the Congress for which you don't vote as well. The amount of partisanship on one side of the aisle (first example that comes to mind: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/07/us/politics/syria-bombing-republicans-trump.html https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/07/us/politics/syria-bombing...) and the fact that there are very few congress members who don't fall in line to their party means that no matter which party you vote for, you're getting what you're getting now.
- kurthr 9y ago
  Well, if you can gerrymander the vote, then your vote may not count as much as others. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerrymandering https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerrymandering
  - mc32 9y ago
    Like many things in life Gerrymandering has cons and pros. We know the cons, but the pros are people who would otherwise be unrepresented (by being a minority in a majority district) get to have a voice. The major con is that it's the politicians who decide the boundaries rather than a neutral party (say semi-random boundary selection within certain bounds)
- bo1024 9y ago
  "if you don't vote for a lizard, the wrong lizard might get in" -- Douglas Adams, roughly. https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/162557-it-comes-from-a-very-ancient-democracy-you-see-you https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/162557-it-comes-from-a-very...
- colordrops 9y ago
  This statement, or variations of it, such as "We get the politicians we deserve", are trite and don't capture the complexity of our social system and the power structures that exist within. It's meaningless.

ISL 9y ago

We get the Congress for which we vote.

rayiner 9y ago
The problem isn’t Congress—most people are happy with their own representatives. The problem is us. If we took 10 random people from New York City and ten from rural Alabama, they wouldn’t be able to get anything done either. Why are we surprised that the people those people elect can’t work together?
- wallace_f 9y ago
  I personally think we need a civil libertarian movement. The abuses of the federal government are beyond ridiculous at this point. We are fighting over political differences while everyone's liberties/rights are legitimately being eroded. Congress is subservient to the Military, the Federal Reserve, and even relatively small-time players like Healthcare/Big Pharma. How many congressman are actually crying foul that Afghanistan, etc., are unconstitutional wars that are not approved by congress--a constitutional right of congress. Congress also has the right to issue and regulate currency, but even that we leave up to a private bank that has Wall St's best interests in mind--not the taxpayers. These kinds of constitutional injustices could go on and on. But most people are bombarded with the injustices of the latest Trump tweet, or the inhumanity of mansplaining.
  - 40acres 9y ago
    Definitely agreed that Congress is not executing their congressional rights as strongly as they should. The unauthorized wars combined with the fact that it's a guarantee that AUMF will continuously be approved is just one example. Congress is simply too worried about toeing the party line and their own reelection to understand it's collective power.
- betterunix2 9y ago
  We're surprised because in the past people in Congress have worked together, and in some cases have done good things by working together. You are also wrong about people from New York and Alabama; on some issues, Americans are mostly in agreement with each other, but that is not reflected in Congress. Net neutrality is an example of an issue the majority of Americans agree on, across all political perspectives. Social security and medicare are supported by a large majority of Americans. You would not know it from the people in Congress, who have managed to turn all the above and more into partisan issues despite the broad agreement by their own constituents.
- justadudeama 9y ago
  Do you think it would be better to have more localized state/city governments? Couldn't that solve some of the issues of congress being in gridlock so often?
scrollaway 9y ago
Speaking as a non-american closely following US politics, it appears you get the Congress for which you don't vote as well. The amount of partisanship on one side of the aisle (first example that comes to mind: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/07/us/politics/syria-bombing-republicans-trump.html https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/07/us/politics/syria-bombing...) and the fact that there are very few congress members who don't fall in line to their party means that no matter which party you vote for, you're getting what you're getting now.
kurthr 9y ago
Well, if you can gerrymander the vote, then your vote may not count as much as others. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerrymandering https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerrymandering
- mc32 9y ago
  Like many things in life Gerrymandering has cons and pros. We know the cons, but the pros are people who would otherwise be unrepresented (by being a minority in a majority district) get to have a voice. The major con is that it's the politicians who decide the boundaries rather than a neutral party (say semi-random boundary selection within certain bounds)
bo1024 9y ago
"if you don't vote for a lizard, the wrong lizard might get in" -- Douglas Adams, roughly. https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/162557-it-comes-from-a-very-ancient-democracy-you-see-you https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/162557-it-comes-from-a-very...
colordrops 9y ago
This statement, or variations of it, such as "We get the politicians we deserve", are trite and don't capture the complexity of our social system and the power structures that exist within. It's meaningless.