“Guests, like fish, begin to smell after three days.”
–Ben Franklin
The same is true of politicians and bureaucrats. Except it’s almost impossible to get rid of them.
If I were Dictator for a Day…
The first thing I would do is declare term limits for every politician and bureaucrat, for it is a lack of term limits that is often at the root of government expansion, self-empowerment, largesse, abuse and a raft of other issues. In short – a lack of term limits subverts the will of electorate.
Incumbent politicians are too far separated from the public they are supposed to represent. They have become an elite class of citizens that rule, without having to listen to voters because, as incumbents, they are virtually unbeatable. So, whom do incumbents listen to? They listen to those with money. Because it's money that helps incumbents remain incumbent.
By keeping the same politicians in office year after year, the legislative pool of new blood and fresh ideas for America is almost zero. The incumbency, not Democrats or Republicans, make up the true majority in Congress, and many other levels of government. No matter what each party does, no matter what each says about the other, always percolating beneath the surface is the same ulterior motive: stay in office at all costs, remain a member of the two most exclusive clubs in the world, the United States Senate and the United States House of Representatives. Salaries, pensions, travel and perks are lavish. Membership is addictive. Few members of either body are able to resist going back for more, more, more. They have bellied up to the trough and chained themselves to it.
The power of the incumbent is not a myth. It is real. Politicians depend on it. This is particularly true at the federal level. If you are a member of congress you are in a very exclusive club where members hold a near insurmountable lock on power and money that just about guarantees they can stay in office until they assume room temperature.
Politicians are elected to serve their constituents, not themselves. Most serve their constituents to some degree. But the obvious first goal of virtually all politicians I have observed is to serve themselves by staying in office. Thus it is that re-election campaigns begin on Day One in Office. Everything else is secondary to being re-elected. Because once you get in, it’s pretty easy to stay in political office. You have to screw the pooch pretty badly to get tossed out. Or you may be unlucky enough to get hosed out if you’re aligned with an extremely unpopular presidential candidate. But as a rule, voters have to be pretty pissed off to remove an incumbent.
Politicians may be re-elected because their constituents like them. Or they may be re-elected because they haven’t screwed up enough, or their screw-ups haven’t been visible enough to cause their constituents to vote them out. This type of voter apathy results in many politicians being returned to office term after term.
A big advantage for all incumbents, and often the reason for re-election, is name recognition. In the U.S. Congress, name recognition is perpetuated in part by your tax dollars.
Example: Congress has granted itself the power of “franking.” You may have learned about this in your high school civics class. It’s the ability to send mail, to you or anyone, absolutely free of charge through the US Post Office. That’s pretty cool because they can have their name all over it, control the message within it, and send it out to thousands or millions of constituents reporting on the fine job they’re doing as your elected official.
They just sign (or print their signature) instead of paying for a stamp on each envelope, and drop it in the mail. The Post Office picks up from there. Neither snow nor rain nor heat nor gloom of night stays these couriers from the swift completion of their appointed rounds, delivering the mail of the incumbents for free. If you’re running for office and you’re not an incumbent, you get to wait in line and purchase postage for your campaign materials.
Franking is just one way incumbents keep their name recognition high, to help get re-elected. And while it’s a great benefit, the reality is, franking is small potatoes.
Incumbent politicians also get re-elected because they can make things happen in their states or districts, such as sponsoring legislation to bring federal dollars into their districts for highway construction or some other federal spending projects that helps grow the local economies and, ostensibly, improve lives. When a project is secured, primarily to bring money to a representative's district, it is referred to as “pork,” or pork-barrel legislation and the act of obtaining it called “bringing home the bacon.”
“The term pork barrel politics usually refers to spending which is intended to benefit constituents of a politician in return for their political support, either in the form of campaign contributions or votes.” [1]
This is where the real bucks are spent.
Example: (1991 – 2006) The Big Dig in Boston, a project to relocate underground, a 3.5 mile section of interstate highway.
Sponsor: Rep. Tip O’Neil (D-MA).
Total cost: $14.6 billion. Yes, that’s billion with a b.
Worthwhile? At $4 billion per mile, you decide. Oh yes, you didn’t get that opportunity. Your opportunity was paying for it.
Example: (2006 – 2015) The Gravina Island Bridge (also known as the “Bridge to Nowhere”)[2] in Alaska.
Sponsor: Sen. Ted Stevens (R-AK).
Cost: $398 million to connect the island’s 50 residents and the Ketchikan international Airport to Revillagigedo Island and Ketchikan.
Worthwhile? Legislation for funding was first introduced in 2006 but controversy over it eventually killed the project in 2015.
Both the Big Dig and the Gravina Island Bridge are high profile examples of pork spending that made national news and drew great controversy. Lots of pork only makes the local news where it is viewed as a positive for the local economy.
How much pork is in the barrel? In its 2022 Congressional Pig Book, Citizens Against Government Waste reports 5,138 earmarks at a cost of $18.9 Billion. Simple math puts the average earmark cost at $3,678,474 and a touch over 11 cents. (By-the-way, Congress had enacted a moratorium on earmarks in 2011, then overturned it and formally restored them in fiscal year (FY) 2022.)
But how does one Representative get a majority of Representatives to pass this type of legislation? It’s not difficult when every member of Congress wants a piece of the Great American Pie (actually a slice of the taxpayer-funded federal budget) to bring home, pose for pictures near, send out franked newsletters about and brag over. They simply vote for each other’s pet projects. They horse-trade for them with their political opponents. Does the practice make the projects less worthy? You decide. Oh yes, that’s right, you don’t get to.
Quite often, pork projects don’t come about because an incumbent politician has been faithfully talking to voters in the district to learn what’s on their minds. The incumbent is usually much more interested in listening to lobbyists and special interest groups that can help the incumbent remain in office by helping to grow the incumbent’s re-election campaign fund.
These lobbyists and special interest groups are seeking votes and legislation favorable to their particular cause, trade association, corporation or labor union. They may also receive other favorable government treatment, including federal grants, contracts and direct payments.
Politicians pay attention to these influencers because of the money they can receive from them, often through Political Action Committees (PACs) that contribute to the candidate’s campaign fund.
Here’s an interesting tidbit: PACs and labor groups give almost all of their campaign dollars to incumbents! Why? It’s considered a sound investment to keep the same people in office. The more money given, the more beholden the politician becomes and the less likely they are to slam the door on your special interest. When was the last time a politician called you to see if you need anything or learn what you think about a particular issue? That’s what I thought.
It’s not just PACs that benefit politicians. Because members of Congress write their own rules, they can write the rules to circumvent what the rest of might consider sound ethical behavior.
In its 2019 Congressional Favor Factory Report, OpenTheBooks.com[3] reports
“Members of Congress own investment stock in, are employed by, and receive retirement pensions from federal contractors – to whom billions of taxpayer dollars flow. Moreover, Members sponsor legislation that affects these contractors. Then, the contractor’s lobbyists advocate for the legislation that helps the Member and the contractor. Oftentimes, the contractor’s lobbyist donates campaign cash to the Member, as well.”
There are lots of other questionable issues swirling around members of Congress. Elaine Chao is just one example. The former U.S. Transportation Secretary during the Trump Administration is married to Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY). She also co-owns and co-manages Foremost Maritime Corp., a major shipping company (founded by her late father) that does extensive business with China. The company has come under scrutiny with critics wondering if the firm has benefited through Chao’s government positions and her marriage to McConnell.
We’ll cover this more in future writings. For now, know that many politicians are getting rich off of you, me and their tax-paying constituencies. Not necessarily because they are stealing federal dollars, but because they are kowtowing to a small minority of moneyed interests at the expense of those they all swore to represent – the American people.
The tragedy is that it’s perfectly legal, because Congress says it is. That’s right, the very politicians taking advantage of us have set up the very system that allows them to do so.
Term limits for politicians could eliminate this type of ethical abuse by ending career politicians entrenched in the same political office, often for decades, driven by the single over-riding factor of wanting to stay in office, rather than work for the good of their constituents and the country.
How to we get to Term Limits?
You don’t need a Dictator for a Day. You need an Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Two-thirds of the U.S. House and Senate could propose and pass an Article to amend the Constitution, followed by a majority vote in 38 state legislatures. So far, neither the House nor the Senate has seen fit to pass such a bill. Gee. I wonder why? But there’s another way. Article V of the Constitution empowers state legislatures to create a convention to enact a constitutional amendment. Thirty-four state legislatures would be needed. Call your legislators!
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pork_barrel
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravina_Island_Bridge#Road_to_nowhere
[3] https://www.openthebooks.com/the-congressional-favor-factory-open-the-books-oversight-report/