System Failure

Mystery Shutdown Theater 2013

The political theater going on in Washington seems to be for the political elite only and is disconnected from the rest of the country.  In a recent Washington Post article Ezra Klein offers 13 reasons Washington is failing.  I offer 3.

1. Gerrymandering

Gerrymandering is a major factor because it creates safe-seats for members of Congress, thus protecting them from the public.  Some argue that this helps maintain a level of stability, but what has that stability brought us?  What is more, there is something perverse when 5% of the country "approve" of Congress, but over 90% of incumbents who run for re-election win.  Gerrymandering limits choices and it certainly does not create a more representative system.  In a political system built on competition, Congressional Districts should be competitive, at least; they should NOT be shaped like a Rorschach inkblot.  Plus, gerrymandering makes it more likely the polarization in Congress goes, while moderate elected representatives are squeezed out.  Yes, when tend to approve of our own Congressperson more than Congress as a whole, but this leads to another problem: us.

2. Public Choices of Media

We have all sorts of choices we can make.  For instances, we have all sorts of places to get news and information.  The Internet and Cable News offer more choices than a generation ago, but we are selecting news and information that re-enforce what we think it true.  Political communication research shows that given a list of headlines attached to a network logo, Conservatives and Republicans picked FOX news, while Liberals and Democrats divided themselves between CNN and NPR.  When media help shape political reality (and they do), these choices we make lead to groups of political active people that see the same issues but from conflicting perspectives. As a result, this fragmented media is facilitating polarization among those who pay attention to politics.  The political attentive public may feel that their issues are being well represented, but the rest of the public is stuck asking themselves: why bother?

3. Public Apathy 

Tied to the fragmented media problem is public apathy.  Because of all the options we have in our media, many people can opt out of political news.  They can focus on sports, cooking shows, "reality" shows, twerking, or celebrity gossip (among many others).  This public apathy has allowed representatives to become disconnected from the public.  And this disconnect is important.  In a system built on the consent of the governed, when representatives are not held accountable for political shenanigans we are giving them the green light to continue doing what they are doing.  If we want Congress to function better, than we all must pay attention to what is going on.  And, vote in the primaries in our states.  The political active, those who seem to becoming more polarized, are also most likely to show up during the primary election.

Full Circle

Gerrymandering helps perpetuate the problem.  Our media choices are leading to a polarized political class, and political apathy among a large segment of the public leaves political decision-making to those who show up.

Obama 2.0: Framing the Agenda

In the first State of the Union after his re-election, President Obama was confident and energetic as he outlined a vision that may well define his legacy.  No president is assured that Congress will follow the agenda that he articulates during the State of the Union, in part because the President does not own the agenda.  Those who occupy the Presidency are reactive creatures. 

What the President was attempting tonight was to frame many of the debates that will be, or already are, on the public agenda.

He begins by framing the duty of the representatives sitting in the room by quoting JFK: "'the Constitution makes us not rivals for power but partners for progress…It is my task to report the State of the Union – to improve it is the task of us all.'"  The President states a truism, the Constitution calls for cross institutional cooperation and collaboration.  That is often forgotten by the public, but it is critical in the game of governing because it forces Congress to take ownership of the problems and solutions; they are not bystanders.

To the policy debates, the President wants to set the terms of the debates because it can potentially give him an upper-hand in bargaining.  Framing deficit reduction he stated, "To hit the rest of our deficit reduction target, we should do what leaders in both parties have already suggested, and save hundreds of billions of dollars by getting rid of tax loopholes and deductions for the well-off and well-connected. After all, why would we choose to make deeper cuts to education and Medicare just to protect special interest tax breaks? How is that fair? How does that promote growth?"

Here the President credits Congress, and both parties, with the idea of closing loopholes which reaffirms the legitimacy of that branch of government; he then puts those opposed to the idea on defense by framing the deficit debate as an either or proposition.  Question becomes: Is it fair to give tax breaks to oil companies while Senior citizens are asked to pay more for healthcare?  Where would you want to be on that question?

To Congress the President continued to attempt to frame the debate about jobs and the economy by stating: "Every day, we should ask ourselves three questions as a nation: How do we attract more jobs to our shores? How do we equip our people with the skills needed to do those jobs? And how do we make sure that hard work leads to a decent living?"

This is indicative of the President's belief in an active government, but it also frames how to think about job creation in the United States.

Finally, in the most emotional segment of the speech, the President attempts to frame the response to gun violence and reminds the Representatives of their duty.  "Our actions will not prevent every senseless act of violence in this country. Indeed, no laws, no initiatives, no administrative acts will perfectly solve all the challenges I’ve outlined tonight. But we were never sent here to be perfect. We were sent here to make what difference we can, to secure this nation, expand opportunity, and uphold our ideals through the hard, often frustrating, but absolutely necessary work of self-government."

The President was not out to set the agenda, after all, many past presidents have tried and failed.  But what he may have success in doing is framing these policy debates that are already on the public agenda in ways that benefit him as he searches for a legacy.