Should We Worry That the 118th Congress Will Be Unproductive?

David BoazIn the Washington PostGillian Brockell explores how the House of Representatives has functioned in the past when it was very closely divided. The answer seems less encouraging than she suggests. In 1917, for instance, the Republicans had a plurality of seats, but not a majority, and third ‐​party members joined the Democrats to elect a Democratic speaker. Did that divide cause gridlock? Not enough, in my view:The 65th Congress was remarkably productive — not only did it authorize a declaration of war by a 373 –50 vote, it also passed the 18th Amendment prohibiting alcohol, which requires a two ‐​thirds majority in the House.Just possibly the two worst votes taken by Congress in the 20th century. And Brockell left out the Espionage Act, the Sedition Act, and the Selective Service Act.She also notes the great achievements of the 107th Congress in 2001 –2002:Onbig votes, like the Patriot Act, the creation of the Department of Homeland Security and the authorization for use of force in Iraq and Afghanistan, the party split didn ’t matter at all: The vote margins were overwhelming.Again not a great argument.Too many Washingtonians — politicians, pundits, and journalists — believe that passing laws is a good thing, and passing more laws is a better thing. When Congresspasses only, say, 296 laws in a two ‐​year session, journalists call it “the least productive Congress in modern history.” I ...
Source: Cato-at-liberty - Category: American Health Authors: Source Type: blogs