The congressional session that begins in the New Year, according to the incoming leaders of both the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives, will do nothing to address anything.
Although Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the presumptive majority leader of the Senate, and John Boehner of Ohio, the Speaker of the House, did not make that promise explicitly, it is implicit in arguments each candidate articulated during the recent campaign season. In a meeting with the Cincinnati Enquirer’s editorial board in early October, Sen. McConnell was asked whether he believed climate change is real. “I’m not a scientist,” he replied. Responding to a similar question, Rep. Boehner said, “I’m not qualified to debate the science.”
The dual declarations that a lack of expertise disqualifies lawmakers from gathering facts, making informed decisions, and voting their consciences has led many Capitol Hill observers to predict an end to the era of gridlock in Washington. In its place, congressional insiders say, will be a prolonged period of inaction.
“The Speaker is right,” said one senator, who asked not to be identified. “Why should I feel qualified to vote on the Keystone XL pipeline? Do I look like some kind of geologist?”
Nonetheless, outgoing Senate majority leader Harry Reid of Nevada has scheduled a vote on the pipeline for this coming Tuesday. The vote will provide political cover for Mary Landrieu, Democrat of Louisiana, who is facing a tough runoff next month and can use her vote in favor of the pipeline as evidence of her anti-Obama bona fides. Based on the new congressional calculus, the outcome of Tuesday’s pipeline vote in the Senate is widely expected to be 1 Yea, 0 Nay, and 99 Not Voting.
But many issues that had been hotly debated throughout the recent election season will not be coming up for votes in the foreseeable future—for instance, immigration policy. Texas Republican Sen. Ted Cruz emigrated with his parents from Calgary, Alberta, Canada, to Houston in 1974, but the vast majority of the other members of Congress were born in the United States and now consider themselves ineligible to participate in any meaningful discussion of border control.
The same inadequacy principle applies to numerous other issues across the board. “Don’t expect any votes on agriculture or education,” said one House member, speaking on background. “I look around me, and I don’t see many farmers and teachers. Nowhere near enough for a majority vote one way or the other .”
Even the Affordable Care Act—a/k/a Obamacare, which Sen. McConnell this past March had said he wanted to “pull out, root and branch”—is off the table.
“Congress has no actuarial scientists,” said a McConnell aide who would speak only on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to comment. “Hence, no more votes to repeal Obamacare.”
Neither Sen. McConnell nor Rep. Boehner responded to email requests for interviews. “The Speaker is not a coder,” said a Boehner representative. “And don’t bother phoning. He’s never operated a switchboard, either.”
Not every observer, however, is predicting a prolonged absence of bills reaching the floor of the House or Senate. “Personally,” said the ghost of Helen Thomas, the longtime White House correspondent, “I wouldn’t be surprised if both houses took quick and decisive votes on the ‘La-La-La-La-La-La-La I Can’t Hear You!’ Congressional Medal of Honor Act.
“And,” she added, “I am an expert.”
* * *
Top photo: Brady-Handy Photograph Collection (Library of Congress).
What is not clear to me as someone not from the USA, whether this stance “I am not an expert on this, therefore I won’t vote” is normal? Because over here in Europe, it is the other way round – every politician has a firm opinion, quite often based entirely in ideology, on practically every potential topic. Therefore, from my perspective, it looks as if those US senators are merely bringing forth an excuse to leave the status quo on these topics untouched while simultaneously washing their hands from the responsibility if the status quo turns out to be detrimental (“I never voted for this”).
Hi, Mephane. The article was satire. U.S. politicians vote without knowing anything just as often as any other politicians.