[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 117 (Friday, August 2, 1996)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1492]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                          CONGRESSIONAL REFORM

                                 ______
                                 

                          HON. LEE H. HAMILTON

                               of indiana

                    in the house of representatives

                         Friday, August 2, 1996

  Mr. HAMILTON. Mr. Speaker, I would like to insert my Washington 
Report for Wednesday, July 31, 1996, into the Congressional Record:

                      Making Congress Work Better

       Early last year at the beginning of the 104th Congress, the 
     House passed some significant reforms of the way it does 
     business, some of which were useful and others of which were 
     not. While additional reforms and rules changes should be 
     considered now, I believe there are serious overriding 
     problems in the House that affect its effectiveness, 
     accountability, and public respect.


                             recent reforms

       Several of the reforms passed last year to make Congress 
     more open and accountable were based on the work of the 
     bipartisan Joint Committee on the Organization of Congress, 
     which I cochaired. Significant reforms included streamlining 
     the committee system, cutting staff, and opening up Congress 
     to more public scrutiny.
       One of the most significant reforms was congressional 
     compliance, which requires Congress to live under the same 
     laws we pass for everyone else, including workplace safety 
     and labor laws. It simply makes no sense for Congress to pass 
     a law and then exempt itself. In the 103rd Congress we passed 
     congressional compliance for the House, and early in the 
     104th that was extended by statute to the entire legislative 
     branch. I am concerned about some of the delays this session 
     in bringing Congress into full compliance, but overall this 
     has been a worthwhile reform.


                           additional reforms

       Certainly additional reforms are needed to address specific 
     problems. I was particularly disappointed that the House 
     leadership decided not to accept our Joint Committee 
     recommendation to have private citizens help us investigate 
     ethics complaints against Members of Congress. The 
     difficulties the Ethics Committee has had this session show 
     that the House simply cannot police itself without outside 
     help, as charges against Speaker Gingrich and others keep 
     being put off and are never resolved one way or the other. 
     The addition of ordinary citizens to the process would force 
     action on cases that could be held up indefinitely under the 
     current system. A variety of professions--from lawyers to 
     clergy--have moved away from self-regulation to involve 
     outsiders; Congress should too.
       We also need to better publicize special interest tax 
     breaks hidden away in revenue bills; reduce our reliance on 
     huge omnibus bills that allow Members only one up or down 
     vote on a package containing hundreds of provisions; make 
     sure House reform is taken up on a much more regular, ongoing 
     basis; and expand the compressed congressional schedule which 
     limits the time available for serious deliberation.


                      need for more basic changes

       But much more than this is needed. We need a serious 
     reassessment of what has happened during this Congress.
       One of the key tests of reform is whether it makes Congress 
     a more effective institution--improving our ability to 
     deliberate and pass legislation addressing our nation's 
     challenges. On that test, the reforms have not worked 
     particularly well.
       The test is not whether we get something through the House, 
     but whether we pass something that can also get through the 
     Senate and be signed into law. Most Congress-watchers would 
     say that the legislative accomplishments of the 104th 
     Congress have been fairly meager, as Congress has failed to 
     pass a balanced budget, campaign finance reform, Medicare 
     reform, and many other items considered top priorities early 
     on. This dissatisfaction with the accomplishments of the 
     104th is shared by the public. Despite reform, public 
     confidence in Congress remains low.


                           overriding factors

       So what has happened? My basic view is that although we 
     passed some significant reforms, they were simply overwhelmed 
     by two other factors: the centralization of power by Speaker 
     Gingrich and the increased partisanship of the 104th 
     Congress.


                   centralization of power by speaker

       All of us who have been active in reform over the years 
     have talked about the need to centralize more power in the 
     office of the Speaker. But I believe this has been carried 
     too far this Congress, with too many key policy decisions 
     taken away from the committees and instead made behind closed 
     doors by the leadership or by task forces set up by the 
     leadership. For example, the bill to sharply cut back 
     Medicare was basically written in the Speaker's office and 
     proposed amendments to the Constitution have suddenly 
     appeared on the House floor without any committee 
     consideration.
       This approach to the legislative process reduces 
     accountability. It is largely a closed process. Most Members, 
     and certainly most Americans, have no way of learning which 
     Members are involved, which positions are being considered, 
     and which special interests are consulted or locked out. Many 
     Members with significant expertise are simply shut out of the 
     critical formative stages of a bill. Last year's reforms to 
     open up committee deliberations make little difference if an 
     important bill simply bypasses the committee altogether or is 
     largely handled in secret by a leadership task force.


                         excessive partisanship

       Secondly, I believe many of last year's reforms have been 
     overwhelmed by the excessive partisanship of the 104th. 
     Certainly some partisanship can be expected in the House, but 
     in this Congress it has seemed excessive. As one observer put 
     it, ``Healthy competition between cohesive parties has 
     degenerated into bombastic, mean-spirited, and often ugly 
     confrontation.'' When the House becomes too negative, too 
     bitter, too contentious--and there is plenty of blame to go 
     around on both sides of the aisle--that clearly affects our 
     ability to come together to pass legislation for the good of 
     the country. Indeed it can be a much greater roadblock to 
     effective governance than many of the procedures that were 
     reformed early this Congress.
       I believe that reducing the excessive partisanship of the 
     House should be our number one priority. By every indication, 
     whichever party controls the House next session will do so by 
     a slim margin; we must learn to work together in a more 
     bipartisan way if we want to get important legislation passed 
     for the good of the country. That is something I will 
     certainly work to bring about.
       Fortunately Congress has a self-correcting mechanism for 
     excessive partisanship. In recent weeks as Members have gone 
     home to their districts and have heard from their 
     constituents that they just don't like what they are seeing, 
     the partisan tensions in Congress have been reduced. It is 
     too early to see if this will continue, but it has been a 
     positive and welcome development.

                          ____________________