Congress: Lack of ability? Or diverse interests?

The article entitled “Don’t blame Congress for leaders’ faults,” written by the History and Public Affairs Professor at the University of Princeton Julian E. Zelizer, is a comment on Senator Evan Bayh’s words about the Congress. Senator Bayh said he would not run for another term because he thinks the Congress became a “dysfunctional institution.” After mentioning Bayh’s words, Zelizer affirms he is not the first one to make the complaint, but he does not mention other names, what makes it somewhat vague.

Despite agreeing with Senator Bayh’s view and even mentioning some of the difficulties in legislating, like “the use of filibusters, the power of interests groups and their lobbyists and the pressure to fundraise,” he points out to the fact that it is not fair to blame exclusively on the system, but the failures in the leadership should also be accounted. Zelizer explicitly criticizes the Democratic Party and clearly states the problems in leadership he is talking about. First, he addresses to the fact that the White House in the year of 2009 seemed to have let go of some power and let the Congress impose the “timing and substance of legislation.” Second, the Professor drew attention to the lack of ability of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid in moving important bills, like health care and climate change. Those critiques are not only fair to be made, but also well supported by his direct approach.

The main point of Zelizer’s article is to show that the gaps and difficulties of the Legislation system should not be entirely blamed and that leaders are the main responsible for failures. In order to prove that it is possible - despite all the challenges - to make major changes when enough effort is made by congressmen, Zelizer cites several historical examples, like Teddy Roosevelt and the Speaker Joe Cannon, and even the case of Judge Howard Smith of Virginia, who blocked a bill by leaving town instead of showing for the meeting. By revealing historical evidence to the readers, Zelizer gives more power to his criticism of those who blame everything on Congress and do not use their power and leadership to solve great problems of our current society.

Julian Zelizer’s text is a fair critique of the work being - or not being - done in Congress. He is very direct and objective, giving support to all of his complaints. He exercises a fair critique by pointing out that, even though Congress failed in passing big bills, it is active with smaller issues. However, I beg to disagree that “laments about congressional process are old and will always be with us.” If laments are constant and numerous, the people, the voters, ought to recognize that and demand changes.