Think more competitive midterms would help? They’d actually make things worse.
Via The Washington Post
Here’s the rare idea about which both Democrats and Republicans agree: Way too few members of Congress emerge from competitive House races — and it’s causing problems.
“Put congressional reform atop the national agenda,” wrote David Brooks recently. “More states could have open primaries. Nonpartisan commissions could draw district lines.” Governing magazine blamed congressional gridlock on incumbents who “don’t need to worry much about being sent back home.” And an NBC Nightly News piece during last year’s government shutdown flayed gerrymandering for causing dysfunction on Capitol Hill. Raleigh’s former mayor, Charles Meeker, added that “Unaccountable office-holders are less responsive to constituents, hold fewer district meetings and even ignore public opinion because they do not have to worry about reelection.” A Brookings Institution report tied all this to the rise of partisanship, concluding that “the country suffers as a result.” Closely-fought House races would supposedly create a more responsive, more functional, and potentially more moderate House of Representatives. No wonder job approval for lawmakers is mired near 13 percent and, according to a recent CNN poll, a majority of Americans believed this is “the worst Congress of their lifetime.”
Back