For too long, Congress has refused to obey the Constitution and we “dumb” Americans have let them get away with it, in large part because both Democrats and Republicans have feared (and instilled fear about) such a convention. The same people that keep getting elected to Congress! How’s that for symmetrical infamy?
Author of Delusional Democracy - Fixing the Republic Without Overthrowing the Government; formerly a senior staffer for the U.S. Congress and the National Governors Association. Co-founder of Friends of the Article V Convention www.foavc.org.
Visit Joel S. Hirschhorn's author page — Joel S. Hirschhorn's Blog
Just How Stupid Are We?: Facing the Truth About the American Voter
Politicians tell us constantly that they trust the wisdom of "The American People." New York Times best-selling author Rick Shenkman explains why we shouldn't--at least when it comes to politics. ...
Article comments
1 - Baronius
Joel, I didn't expect a third party movement, but I thought there'd be some anti-incumbent sentiment. Instead, it's like the entire House of Representitives was rewarded for a bailout that everyone hates.
2 - Dave Nalle
Most of the incumbents who really needed to be voted out were Democrats and the failure of the Republican leadership and success of the Obama campaign worked against that happening. Plus off-year elections are a lot more realistic times to get people out of office.
But I have no explanation for why Ted Stevens won reelection.
Dave
3 - Matthew T. Sussman
But my Congresswoman isn't at fault!
4 - Dave Nalle
My congressman actually isn't at fault. He voted against the bailout twice.
Dave
5 - pleasexcusetheinterruption
Two simple reasons:
1) problems of collective action.. if no one else is going to make a concerted effort to always take out the incumbent why should anyone waste their vote doing it?
2) our constitution is designed for a two party system. If voting out the incumbent means some guy who completely misrepresents me is elected I'm going to vote for the incumbent who at least represent me somewhat.
I have a friend from Indiana who recently faced the dilemma of voting for Obama or a more liberal 3rd party candidate. Even though the more liberal 3rd party candidate represented his views more, he voted for Obama in part because I convinced him it was the practical thing to do. A movement for a third party, or to vote out all incumbents, is bound to fail unless it can guarantee its participants some tangible possibility of that there man will be elected.
6 - Dave Nalle
PETI, your last point is why these third party movements which always start out by nominating someone for president and not doing much else never work.
For a third party to be successful it needs to come from the grassroots and elect people to local office and build from there into a national movement.
Dave
7 - Dr Dreadful
Matt as usual puts his finger right on the quandary.
As I've said before, there are two important things to remember about the public's perception of Congress:
1. Ask a random person to assess the performance of Congress, and they will likely give them a low approval rating. But dig deeper, and they will very probably not be able to tell you why.
2. Although Mr/Ms Average disapproves of the performance of Congress as a whole, (s)he is far more likely to tell you that their congressperson is a good guy/gal.
8 - Baronius
I read somewhere that Ted Stevens has been an Alaskan senator for all but 9 years that Alaska has been a state. I don't care what party you are; there's something wrong with that.