Congress Is Doing Less
Bubba
20 Sep
In a new essay, political commentator Robert Tracinski argues Congress has grown too comfortable handing off its legislative responsibilities to executive branch bureaucrats. (Discourse Magazine)
Tracinski:
The recent Supreme Court ruling striking down “Chevron deference” promises to rebalance power between the legislature and the executive by giving bureaucrats in federal agencies less leeway to interpret regulations, pushing the responsibility for making these decisions back to Congress. But what if Congress doesn’t want it? What if our legislature no longer legislates—and has little interest in doing so?
A Reuters analysis from March: Congress passed only 27 bills in 2023, the lowest number on record.
Legislative productivity has declined for decades — the legislature went from passing 713 laws in 1988 to just 329 in 2016.
Experts say polarization is a factor as it’s led to a decrease in bipartisanship, which can be crucial to getting bills passed.
Large, complex bills are becoming more common, as is the use of "poison pills," divisive provisions meant to block a bill's passage.
Another contributing factor: The trend toward lawmakers being more concerned about soundbites and social media than getting laws passed.
Rep. Derek Kilmer: “[Congress is] not a place of learning or understanding. You airdrop in, you give your five minute speech for social media, you peace out.”
Rep. William Timmons: “I have somebody running against me (in the primary election) that agrees with all the votes that I make, he just doesn’t agree that I don’t scream and yell.”
Former GOP House member Madison Cawthorn once told colleagues, “I built my staff around comms rather than legislation.”
Bubba’s Two Cents
People (like me) who are sympathetic to a limited government, libertarian mindset could be thinking it might not be so bad for Congress to do less. But Tracinski has a pretty compelling rebuttal, noting how the Supreme Court’s recent Chevron deference and presidential immunity rulings interact with each other: “One ruling limits the bureaucracy, while the other removes limits on the president. This is not a pro-liberty combination of rulings. It’s a combination that expands the power of the person in the oval office by ensuring he or she is less hemmed in by government institutions.”