Congress' dysfunctional schedule and its lack of meaningful debates
The following has been adapted from my newly revised and republished book Saving Our Democracy: Fixing the Institutions Failing the People. Saving Our Democracy analyzes the many ways our federal institutions have failed to uphold democracy and proposes solutions to fix them.
In the chapter “Broken Congress,” I take a critical look at the working schedule of our representatives and offer some ways for making the legislature more productive.
As voters become more disconnected from their representatives, the procedures and traditions of Congress further hamper its efficiency. While informal procedures and traditions can only complement structural reform, their complement can provide further success.
For most of American history, members of Congress spent most of their time in Washington, D.C. Without cars, planes, and for the earliest members even trains, to move from one state to another could take days or weeks. With modern transportation, on the other hand, representatives can easily move from the Capitol to their home state. A representative from California can fly back and forth from Washington as easy as a member from New York can ride. The irregular travel of representatives has contributed to a break down of interpersonal relationships between members and has diminished their drive to get work done.
Until the 20th century, most senators worked directly from their desks in the Senate Chamber—a feature that allowed South Carolina representative Preston Brooks to enter the Senate and brutally beat Massachusetts senator Charles Sumner as he worked at his desk in 1858. When members worked in their chamber, they knew when Congress was in session, could be present for most proceedings, and had a close working relationship with their colleagues. Even if members did not work directly at their desks, they spent most of their time in an office within walking distance of the Capitol. Without the ability to trek home every day, many members moved their families to Washington, fostering relationships between representatives beyond their political work.
Until 1940, congressional sessions would usually be five to seven months long, followed by three to four months of vacation. The schedule was adjusted for the work at hand, so sessions would sometimes run longer or shorter. The first session of the 48th Congress commenced on December 3, 1883, and adjourned on July 7, 1884. The second session began on December 1, 1884, and closed on March 3, 1885. This schedule allowed representatives to work hard for most of the year, and then have an extended break to spend time in their home districts. Representatives could work hard while balancing their time with voters.
The transportation innovations of today allow representatives to spend time with their constituents, travel to the Capitol to vote on a bill, and then go back to their home state, all within the same day. Representatives often have more than two offices across their states’ major cities and Washington. And no senator works from their small antique desk in the Senate or House chamber.
Today, the congressional schedule is bizarre and dysfunctional. Officially, Congress is never out of session. The Twentieth Amendment (ratified in 1935) requires a new Congress to start on January 3. In early January each year, both chambers are gaveled into session and never adjourn until the start of the second session the following January. Congress never has to be called into a special session, and leaders have more flexibility to put bills up for a vote. Despite Congress staying in session all 365 days of the year, members of the House work an average of 123 days and senators 144 days each year. Members of Congress make more than double the salary of the average American while working less than half the time. Votes, hearings, and other congressional activities are held Tuesday through Thursday, requiring members to travel to Washington either Monday night or early Tuesday morning. During their three working days, representatives spend long hours dealing with constituent services, press inquiries, fundraisers, administrative matters, working in committees, and voting on bills (or at least acting like they are.) Since members come to Washington on Tuesday and leave Thursday, Wednesday is their only full day at work. Too much of representatives’ short time in D.C is spent sitting in judicial or administrative hearings, which are used mostly as a media spectacle. Members need to balance a plethora of scheduling conflicts, committee assignments, and votes, leading to more than necessary chaos in the legislative process. Between 2005 and 2006, Senate committees met 252 times to consider legislation. Between 2015 and 2016, that number fell to just 69. With both chambers making their own schedule, there is no unified calendar for all of Congress, creating even more confusion and conflict in the halls of the Capitol. The incongruous workings of the House and Senate contribute to legislation being stalled and hampered. The scheduling mismatch is of particular concern during an emergency when urgent legislation has to be passed.
Most of the time members spend in the Capitol is not spent working to pass legislation. Representatives waste their time on procedural customs that don’t render any value. In the Senate, a proposed bill can take a few weeks, if not more, to even get a vote. Time is wasted on inconsequential procedures and unsubstantial votes to move legislation forward. The Senate spends more time debating whether or not to debate, than it does about actual legislation.
Comparing Congress to the legislatures around the world, most parliamentary systems have substantive and often raucous debates on the legislation they consider. The debates within the halls of the British Parliament, with legislators cheering and shouting in the crowd are starkly different from the sluggish proceedings in Congress. Congressional “debates” consist of monotone representatives groaning away to a mostly empty chamber about a bill that has its fate already decided by party leaders. While boring debates have become a symbol of the American legislature, these procedures have not always been so inefficient. Our nation was founded on disagreement, debate, and compromise. Our representatives have forgotten the art of rhetoric. Long, narrative speeches used to absorb the House and Senate as members filled their seats and reporters filled the gallery.
Congress must reform its schedule. While it is important that legislators stay in tune with their constituents, its equally important that work actually gets done. The best way to balance the need for representatives to live close to voters with the need for productive legislation is through a three-week-on, one-week-off schedule. Instead of bouncing back and forth between Washington and their home state every three days, legislators could spend three straight weeks in Washington, and then one week at home. While in Washington, representatives can work on legislation, attend committees, handle administrative needs, and meet with press. While at home, members can meet with constituents and stay in tune with the issues that are affecting their states and districts. Spending three weeks working would keep Congress in motion and provide more time for real legislating.
Spending more time in Washington would also help ease the partisan tensions within Congress. For most of history, Republican and Democrat representatives were friendly outside of work. Even during the Civil War, seceding Southern representatives bid their Northern counterparts emotional farewells. Today, Republican and Democrat members don’t want to be caught dead having dinner or being friendly with the other. Forced to spend more time together, representatives would naturally become friendlier to one another. When representatives are friends, better legislation can be produced. Friendly representatives are more likely to compromise with one another to get deals done and pass fair and beneficial laws. One of the major reasons our political culture has become so divisive and tense is because opposing politicians proclaim their rivals are “the enemies,” that they “hate the Constitution,” or that they are “communists.” Representatives are less likely to use inflammatory language if they personally know the person or group they are scolding. Adjusting the congressional schedule will be a great first step towards getting Congress back on track.
With all of the time Congress would gain with a new schedule, a huge chunk would still be wasted on pointless hearings, meaningless debates, and procedural pomp. If you turn on C-SPAN and watch whatever congressional activity is being aired, it’s clear that legislative progress is rarely made. The chambers are always mostly empty, and many representatives are absent from their committee meetings. Meetings often overlap with other business on the floor, creating dilemmas where a hearing is called to recess because members need to rush to a vote. Committee meetings should not be scheduled at the same time as floor deliberations, and leaders should work with their counterparts in the House or Senate to ensure schedules are aligned. Better time management would reduce chaos and ensure members do not have to pick and choose what business they need to attend.
There should be more real debates over substantial matters. Members should publicly challenge one another over legislation, rather than droning on about an issue to an empty chamber. A quorum should be required to hold a floor debate to ensure that most members can participate or just hear the deliberations on the bills they’ll be voting for. Representatives must be held accountable for not showing up to hearings, votes, and debates. Rules should require senators and representatives to be present for such activities. The whole purpose of debate is for deliberation, and if deliberation can not occur, the best bills will not emerge.
Lincoln Anniballi is the author of Saving Our Democracy: Fixing the Institutions Failing the People