Something for the "throw the bums out"...

Something for the "throw the bums out" crowd to bear in mind, that won't get rid of the most powerful group in DC, the lobby money people. They will still be there, and the "newbies" will be even more vulnerable than the old hands.

Fascinating little result from the latest Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll: Half of Americans surveyed said they would throw out the entire Congress right now--including their own member--if they could. "The voters who supported the clean-slate approach largely didn’t care much about whether the Democrats or Republicans ended up in the majority," writes WSJ's Mary Lu Carnevale in a preview of the poll to be released later this afternoon.

The anger out there is understandable. But what's irrational is the idea that there is some sort of "permanent" Congress that needs to be replaced immediately and all at once. It's just not true.

Yes, re-election rates are higher than during earlier moments in American history. And congressional incumbents certainly have wired the system--through the use of franking privileges, earmarks, organizing the congressional calendar to allow them time to get back to their states or districts to campaign, and so on--to provide themselves many valuable electoral advantages. Campaign money flows disproportionately to them, and a self-feeding loop emerges in which invulnerable incumbents raise most of the cash, thereby deterring potential challengers, making them more untouchable, and so on. And then, every 10 years they use their political clout to carve up favorable districts that make them demographically unbeatable.

So these corpulent, corrupt and complacent reps are in office forever, growing more out of touch with real Americans every day, right? Not really.

Keep in mind that even if, say, 95 percent of House incumbents run and 95 percent of them win, that implies a net return rate every two years of about 90 percent. That's very high by historical standards, of course, but it also means that over the course of a decade only a little more than half of House members still there at the end were there at the beginning of that 10-year stretch. After all, a 90 percent return rate raised to the fifth power--i.e., after five election cycles--is about 59 percent.

And sure enough, if you look down the list of 431 current House members (there are four vacancies) sorted by seniority, only 198 of them, or 46 percent, have served in House consecutively going back to before January 2001, when the class elected in 2000 five cycles ago was inducted. Since then, 227 entered Congress by election or special election, and there are six other current incumbents who have greater total seniority but only because of interrupted service that began again at some point after January 2001. (Reps. Cooper, Harman, Lungren, Inglis, Bilbray and Rodriquez.)

But here's why the instinct to just throw all the bums out seems rational but is potentially counter-productive if not irrational: Even with significant turnover, the notion that members of Congress will be independent of the influence of special interests is a fantasy. In fact, just the reverse is likely to happen: In a Congress full of rookies, the interest group community will have greater influence because it has longer institutional memory and control over information. That's not just speculation: Studies of state interest group communities tend to show that they are more influential in so-called "citizen legislatures" where members serve part-time (see , and that states with term limits only tend to further strengthen interest groups. (bold mine)

There are no term limits on the interest group community, and no way to throw all those "bums" out at once. Sure, there are problems with having too much seniority in the legislature. It's also problematic when members become so insulated from electoral threat they lose touch. But the impulse to throw them all out of office should be tempered by consideration of the alternative.


See:

FiveThirtyEight: Politics Done Right: Throw All The Bums Out? Bad Idea.

Just a thought here guys, while the rookies are trying to find out where their office is in relation to the bathrooms in Congress, they will be persued by (guess who) special interest lobby groups with deep pockets.

 

"Pork" has been around and I believe that the general public understands the point made that one district's benefit is another's pork. The issue is not with Pork but with Congress not representing the people. For example. Kucinich was going to vote no on this healthcare bill and then at the last minute changed his vote. Reason given, it is a historical mark, he does not know what is fully in the bill but it should get a yes vote. That is what ticked off the people. Congress no longer takes calls from their constituents nor do they spend time with the people to stay in touch. They spend their time with the lobbyists. Yes, the lobbyists will still be around but if the people vote everyone of the incumbents out, a message will be sent out. Message being, we will be watching you. The rookies will not have the old dogs there to learn bad habits. I believe that rookies do have the desire to serve the people but get corrupted because of how Congress now wheels and deals vs actually serving the people. How can a rookie get a bill passed when the old dogs gang up against the 'goodie' congressmen who may rock the boat? I think that throwing them could work. The low confidence on having a whole new congress not being able to find their offices is in my opinion a way to scare the public from voting them out. Another scare tactic. Hey, as a rookie congressman, what they will fall back on is to do what they were elected to do..............serve us, the people.

 

It is really a matter of the socialists being replaced by conservatives. The country will right itself after this awful storm and America will become exceptional again. The Tea party movement will act as a conservative check to problematic RINOs like John McCain, Lindsey Graham, Kay Bailey Hutchinson, Charlie Crist, Olympia Snowe, Susan Collins and others. A good 75% of Americans are tired of socialism which doesn't work, just ask the Greeks.

 

One of the main troubles with getting newbies in is that most of them are lawyers too-and those who are in messing things up-most of them are Lawyers.

 

Probably because it costs too much money to run for office. This is where the lobbyists first make their appearance. If you are not rich, then you are force to get 'sponsorship'.....under the table of course.

 

OK. Wind back to school. The careers officer asks, 'What do you want to do when you leave school..................?'. No sane person says, 'I wanna be a Politican' or, if they do, you beat the c**p outta them.

20 years later, they run the country.

As the Yanks say...................' Go Figure!'.

 

I would like to be President with a Congress that agreed with me and a Supreme Court with more common sense judges. The world would be a better place. I would not like to be President after the pathetic mess these socialist bastards have gotten us into. I praise those conservatives who go forth and try to right the wrong doing. It is going to be a class act for anyone who can clean up this garbage given to us by Pelosi, Reid and the annoited one.

There are some new or relatively new folks, like Paul Ryan that we can count on.

Guys not all lawyers are bad but those bottom feeding few/many give the whole group a bad rep.

 

The Left is the group most resistant to change.

Enviroment and ecology: The are arrogant enough to think that they can maintain the status quo of nature. Letting anything go extinct is seen as bad. Any change to the natural enviroment is seen as evil. No use of natural resources is seen as good. They want the planet's enviroment to be frozen in time essentially.

Goverment's role in social welfare-like programs: The Left is SO 20th Century. They advocate various forms of socialism and government directed economic determinism. They are against innovation except where it fits their narrow view of the world. They have zero tolerance for those that might actually think outside THEIR box.

Warfare and violence: While they preach a good game about peace the Left has proven itself the most violent, repressive, dictatorial bunch on the planet. Actual freedom is anti-thema to their world view.

What the Left really wants in a society is safety, comfort and, order. They hate chaos. They oppose leadership and innovation. They want nothing to do with risk. They want their little piece of the planet to be filled with rainbows and fuzzy bunnies.

Luddites by today's standard were Leftist / Progressive in political thought and action.

That the Left finds resistance in America to Obamacare and the Democrat's increasing use of government to control everyone's lives should be expected. After all, their world view sees that as good. More government = better lives. Its a lie they tell themselves and tell others. It is just that they are too myopic, shallow, narrow-mined and historically illiterate to appreciate or understand opposing views.

For all that the Left stands for, they are the true regressives on this planet.

A century ago America did great things while Europe marched to socialism and war. Yes, there was much greater risk in America but there was also more freedom and potential gain too. And, most importantly... The biggest gains were not ones that particularly benefited those of the current generation but rather benefited future generations.
That is why Teddy Roosevelt failed to implement a national health care plan. That is why the US lagged far behind Europe in social welfare programs. It was too busy leading the way to a much better world for everyone based on free enterprise and self-reliance.
Today those that would mold America into what Europe is have been gaining ground. In doing so they have also steadily drug America down the path to sullen mediocrity just like Europe too.

 

Some of you are so obsessed with political threads on this forum that you aren't even aware your country is exceptionnnal and beautiful. Why don't you go fishing or spend time with your family and share some of the beauty instead of complaining about the negative aspects only. There are so many better things to do than waste time on a stump thread and playing cyber minutemen. I just don't understand why you guys get such a kick from it. I would if it would change things....
This being said I'm going to share some time with my sibblings. Have a nice day gentlemen and remember those who do not always think like you are not necesserally the antichrist, but rogues like you who registered on this forum to mainly discuss WWII matters, so I'd appreciate if you could manage to respect each other for once.

 

But you don't understand Skipper....pitching a b1tch is the American Way!!!!

 

Got a point A-58, I just don't pitch the same one over and over again.

 

Can't argue with that, but I'm sure someone will sooner or later....