I am all for a Republican Reformation. In fact, I called for something of the sort in a column titled “Republican Reformation”. But a line from that Kansas City Star piece Rich linked to below raises one point which bothers me about the new Republican “bidding war” for reform. The Star writes: “none of Blunt’s actions appeared to cross any lines in the loose rules governing Congress, contributions or connections with lobbyists.” [italics mine]
It is worth recognizing that the rules governing Congress are about as tight as they’ve ever been — or at least almost as tight as they’ve ever been. It’s like Charlie Brown kicking the football. Every x number of years there’s a scandal. The regulations on Congress get tighter. The regulations on political speech become more undemocratic. And then, a few years later money finds its way back into the system and we talk about the pressing need to reform Congress’ “loose rules.” The real reform needed isn’t more campaign finance restrictions and denying Congressmen the ability to get a free lunch or trip (though some of those measures might make sense in the short term). And the real reform needed isn’t government financed elections — as Daniel Schorr suggested this morning on NPR. The real reform required is to trim government back, back, back. The less government picks winners and losers and the less it involves itself in a trillion decisions it should not be party to, the fewer incentives there will be for lobbyists to give a rat’s ass about Washington in the first place. I wrote about that here, if anyone’s interested.
If Shadegg’s agenda is that agenda he’s my guy. If it’s Blunt’s, he’s my guy. Ditto Boehner. If not, a pox on all of them.