I’ve suggested before that change is good… as long as it’s good change. You know, if the change works for me, my family, team, bank account, interests, tribe, community, species… yeh, then it’s worth it.
According to Gallup pollsters, Congress currently has a 20% approval rating. Odd, since the same people asked if they approve of the job Congress is doing annually are often the very same people who vote bi-annually. The Congressional approval rating was 9% in November, 2013, so one could argue that Congress is now over twice as popular! But good luck changing the “system”, which has been befuddling people for years as voting numbers sag. Intransigence, tribalism, self-preservation, false bravado, you name it, we see it regularly.
It’s a bit of a different situation at the state level, as our local legislators are part-time legislators- right or wrong. While most of them do work year round, the annual legislative session lasts for just 60 working days, and in that window, some 2,500-3,000 bills are proffered, but only about 10% pass into law. There must be a smarter way, and a better use of limited time. Yet, 46 of 50 states have part-time legislatures, and some meet for only 30 days a year!
Then there’s the fact that many0 of our local legislators have “outside” jobs. While understandable from a financial standpoint, this would seem to create potential conflicts of interest among other concerns. Having outside jobs arguably keeps legislators grounded and in touch. Being in touch is a good thing; having your fingers in the pie? Not so good. Outside skills and knowledge absolutely come in handy when discussing and deciding upon major issues where inside expertise can be helpful. But how often do legislators recuse themselves when issues being voted on strike too close to home?
We do have some rules and an ethics commission, so this is not to suggest anything other than perhaps it’s time to revisit “the system”. Maybe we should pay higher salaries to full-time legislators? Might that relieve some angst about a constant crossing of a moving line as bills evolve? Maybe it’s time to revisit oft-suggested legislative term limits, though that would remove historical perspective and innate knowledge, plus limit the people’s right to choose. Many questions… perhaps it’s time to look at addressing a confounding, unwieldy, archaic, and sometimes stifling system of democracy here and elsewhere.
Think about it…