Tweet
Fergus Falls Daily Journal, MN
Oct 19 2007
Politicians should stay home
By Dave Churchill (Contact) | The Daily Journal
It sometimes seems like there's this fever of oddness that must
permeate the halls of Congress. How else to explain the fervor with
which so many representatives were, until recently, signing on to a
resolution that would have condemned genocide?
It sounds like a worthy cause, a good stand for Congress and the
United States to take - until it becomes clear that the genocide in
question occurred in 1915. More than 90 years ago, the Ottoman Empire
slaughtered a huge number of innocent Armenians - a horrible thing.
But why, one has to wonder, was Congress debating it now?
Of course, there probably wouldn't have been any debate until the
modern Turkish government (none of whose members, it should be noted,
were even alive in 1915) got itself into a snit because it thought
the United States was about to make Turkey look bad.
It all turned into a big fur ball and, at last count, representatives
are backing away from the resolution faster than they signed on in
the first place.
I am sure that for at least a few Americans of Armenian descent, this
is a hot issue. But I couldn't help laughing out loud at one news
account that noted the resolution would have been `non-binding.'
What's next, a resolution condemning Caesar for invading Gaul? That
only happened a couple of millennia ago.
Kidding aside, how did this Armenian Ottoman thing ever get so far
down the legislative pipe? Why didn't someone pop up sooner and say,
`Hey, don't we have some actual business to attend to?' Don't we have
some issues - Iraq, budgets, global warming - on which we could take
action that is useful?
It's just one more reason that Congress - and the state legislature,
too - should adopt my keep-the-lawmakers-home plan. Despite the jokey
name, it's a serious idea, but one that is apparently before its
time.
Instead of convening hundreds of representatives and senators in
Washington, where they spend most of their time associating with each
other and with the highly paid lobbyists who are there to influence
government, why not make lawmakers work from their home communities?
With today's technology, any member of Congress could sit in a comfy
little meeting room in her or his home town, surrounded by big-screen
monitors that show all the other lawmakers with whom contact is
necessary. And there, in the office, would be a dozen or so
comfortable chairs for interested local residents to drop by and keep
an eye on things.
It means our representatives would be eating lunch at the downtown
diner, attending school concerts and shopping for groceries after
work right in the midst of even the busiest legislative periods.
Plenty of opportunity for them to hear from those they are supposed
to be representing - instead of from lobbyists.
Can you imagine the conversation at the check-out line?
`Hey, Congressman, what are you voting on today?'
`Well, we're thinking of condemning a 90-something-year-old act of
genocide in the Middle East.'
`Huh?'
This stay-at-home plan would definitely keep things focused a little
better in Washington - or, rather, in Congress, wherever it happens
to be. Wouldn't be so much fun for those who enjoy the Washington
power game, though.
I don't have any expectation this will ever happen. It makes too much
sense.
http://www.fergusfallsjournal.com/new s/2007/oct/19/politicians-should-stay-home/
Oct 19 2007
Politicians should stay home
By Dave Churchill (Contact) | The Daily Journal
It sometimes seems like there's this fever of oddness that must
permeate the halls of Congress. How else to explain the fervor with
which so many representatives were, until recently, signing on to a
resolution that would have condemned genocide?
It sounds like a worthy cause, a good stand for Congress and the
United States to take - until it becomes clear that the genocide in
question occurred in 1915. More than 90 years ago, the Ottoman Empire
slaughtered a huge number of innocent Armenians - a horrible thing.
But why, one has to wonder, was Congress debating it now?
Of course, there probably wouldn't have been any debate until the
modern Turkish government (none of whose members, it should be noted,
were even alive in 1915) got itself into a snit because it thought
the United States was about to make Turkey look bad.
It all turned into a big fur ball and, at last count, representatives
are backing away from the resolution faster than they signed on in
the first place.
I am sure that for at least a few Americans of Armenian descent, this
is a hot issue. But I couldn't help laughing out loud at one news
account that noted the resolution would have been `non-binding.'
What's next, a resolution condemning Caesar for invading Gaul? That
only happened a couple of millennia ago.
Kidding aside, how did this Armenian Ottoman thing ever get so far
down the legislative pipe? Why didn't someone pop up sooner and say,
`Hey, don't we have some actual business to attend to?' Don't we have
some issues - Iraq, budgets, global warming - on which we could take
action that is useful?
It's just one more reason that Congress - and the state legislature,
too - should adopt my keep-the-lawmakers-home plan. Despite the jokey
name, it's a serious idea, but one that is apparently before its
time.
Instead of convening hundreds of representatives and senators in
Washington, where they spend most of their time associating with each
other and with the highly paid lobbyists who are there to influence
government, why not make lawmakers work from their home communities?
With today's technology, any member of Congress could sit in a comfy
little meeting room in her or his home town, surrounded by big-screen
monitors that show all the other lawmakers with whom contact is
necessary. And there, in the office, would be a dozen or so
comfortable chairs for interested local residents to drop by and keep
an eye on things.
It means our representatives would be eating lunch at the downtown
diner, attending school concerts and shopping for groceries after
work right in the midst of even the busiest legislative periods.
Plenty of opportunity for them to hear from those they are supposed
to be representing - instead of from lobbyists.
Can you imagine the conversation at the check-out line?
`Hey, Congressman, what are you voting on today?'
`Well, we're thinking of condemning a 90-something-year-old act of
genocide in the Middle East.'
`Huh?'
This stay-at-home plan would definitely keep things focused a little
better in Washington - or, rather, in Congress, wherever it happens
to be. Wouldn't be so much fun for those who enjoy the Washington
power game, though.
I don't have any expectation this will ever happen. It makes too much
sense.
http://www.fergusfallsjournal.com/new s/2007/oct/19/politicians-should-stay-home/