Skip to main content
Part of complete coverage on
 

Can we fix a hyper-partisan Congress?

By Mickey Edwards, Special to CNN
August 16, 2012 -- Updated 1508 GMT (2308 HKT)
'It surprises me still to hear people express amazement at the hyper-partisan nature of Congress,
'It surprises me still to hear people express amazement at the hyper-partisan nature of Congress," says Mickey Edward.
STORY HIGHLIGHTS
  • Mickey Edwards: Don't be surprised at the hyper-partisan nature of Congress
  • Edwards: Congress' inability to deal with the nation's challenges can be fixed
  • He says the problem begins with how people are elected to Congress in the first place
  • Edwards: We've created a system that rewards incivility and punishes cooperation

Editor's note: Mickey Edwards, a former member of Congress for 16 years, is the author of the new book, "The Parties Versus the People: How to Turn Republicans and Democrats into Americans."

(CNN) -- Soon after I was elected to Congress, an issue came to the House floor to which I had given considerable thought and believed that my conclusions were sound, reasonable and persuasive.

At the front of the House chamber, directly in front of the elevated rostrum from which the Speaker presides, are two lecterns. One is positioned to the right of center, facing Democrats, and one to the left of center, facing Republicans. Because I felt that most of my fellow Republicans would surely share my views, I decided to present my reasoning to the Democrats, who I had hoped to impress favorably.

So, in giving my very first congressional speech I stood at the lectern facing the Democrats. I was greeted with an audible gasp from both sides of the aisle.

Mickey Edwards
Mickey Edwards

Just as Republicans must drink their coffee, read their newspapers and slurp their soup in a room off the House floor, and Democrats do their reading, drinking and eating in a different room, members of the two parties must speak from different places, using different microphones positioned as an extension of their own side of the partisan divide.

It surprises me still to hear people express amazement at the hyper-partisan nature of Congress and its resulting inability to deal collectively with the nation's problems.

In a constitutional system that places most of the federal government's real power with the peoples' representatives, that is a serious problem.

Turning GOP and Dems into Americans

But it's not an accident. It's a direct result of the systems we've created to choose those representatives and the way Congress itself has been allowed to develop not as a single body of Americans but as a pit for rival power-seeking clubs to do battle.

The leaders of the House and Senate are partisans; but they needn't be, and in other governments they aren't. The committee staffs are partisans; there's no need for that, either. Partisan leaders decide who sits on which committees, transferring enormous power over federal law to partisans who win their positions by pledging to support the party line and plowing hundreds of thousands of dollars into party treasuries (some of it raised from interest groups that are pleased to help out).

But as they say on those late-night infomercials, "Wait, there's more."

The problem doesn't begin in Congress. It begins with how men and women are elected to Congress in the first place.

To even appear on the November ballot, candidates must navigate through primaries either entirely the province of partisan activists (closed primaries) or dominated by them (so-called cross-over primaries). Most states have "sore loser" laws (supported by the parties) that then prohibit anybody who ran in a party primary and lost from appearing on the general election ballot. If 30,000 supporters secure a primary victory for one candidate, anybody who lost that primary would then be unavailable as an option for the rest of the state's voters.

In Delaware, that is precisely what happened to former governor Mike Castle. Except it didn't really happen to Mike Castle; it happened to the people of Delaware who were denied the chance to choose the person most would have wanted to represent them in the Senate. And it happened to Sen. Richard Lugar in Indiana, who, like Castle, was unacceptable to hard-line activists because he actually believed in the kinds of compromise that are necessary to govern a nation of more than 300 million people.

In most states, candidates for the U.S. House run in districts shaped by partisan leaders for party advantage, regardless of the effect on the rights of the people to be represented by somebody familiar with their concerns and interests.

That's how I, a city dweller with no rural experience, found myself representing farmers, ranchers and small-town merchants after a legislature dominated by a different party redrew my district to stretch from the middle of Oklahoma to the Kansas border and then, in an upside-down "L" halfway to Arkansas, all to strengthen their party in other districts.

Even the new infusion of big dollars into political campaigns has a distinctly partisan flavor -- the largest super PACs are not really independent; they're being run by long-time party activists.

Incentives work. We've created a system that rewards incivility and punishes cooperation. Is it any wonder that our government is a mess? Washington, Adams, Jefferson and Madison all warned us not to create political parties. We should have listened.

Follow us on Twitter @CNNOpinion

Join us on Facebook/CNNOpinion

The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Mickey Edwards.

ADVERTISEMENT
Part of complete coverage on
June 17, 2013 -- Updated 2156 GMT (0556 HKT)
Gloria Borger says the president should be leading the debate on balancing security vs. privacy.
June 17, 2013 -- Updated 2316 GMT (0716 HKT)
Alex Footman says he and a former co-worker successfully sued a movie studio over their experience as unpaid interns.
June 17, 2013 -- Updated 1729 GMT (0129 HKT)
Peter Bergen says the public record tends to cast doubt on the NSA's claim that its electronic surveillance has helped stop numerous plot.
June 17, 2013 -- Updated 1153 GMT (1953 HKT)
Fifty years ago, President Kennedy defined civil rights and equality as a moral issue. Patrick Kennedy says today's moral issue is that people with brain injuries and mental illness face stigma and inadequate treatment.
June 17, 2013 -- Updated 1947 GMT (0347 HKT)
The story of the boy bashed on social media after singing the National Anthem in mariachi costume is instructive.
June 16, 2013 -- Updated 1457 GMT (2257 HKT)
Bob Greene says the Lone Ranger rode into town, fought injustice and got out. He didn't stop to tweet that he just saved the day.
June 16, 2013 -- Updated 1625 GMT (0025 HKT)
Ruben Navarrette says that what many of us really want for Father's Day is an attitude adjustment for our kids.
June 17, 2013 -- Updated 1300 GMT (2100 HKT)
At the outset of his term, the new president of Iran, Hassan Rouhani, will confront a thicket of national and international challenges.
June 14, 2013 -- Updated 2058 GMT (0458 HKT)
Clifford Nass says talking to your car, even when you've got your hands on the wheel and eyes on the road, impairs your driving because it really confuses your brain.
June 15, 2013 -- Updated 1245 GMT (2045 HKT)
Paul Begala's not buying the argument that Gabriel Gomez represents a new version of Republicanism
June 14, 2013 -- Updated 1933 GMT (0333 HKT)
Alex Castellanos says Gabriel Gomez is an antidote to the stuffy GOP establishment that scares next-generation voters away.
June 13, 2013 -- Updated 2243 GMT (0643 HKT)
All across America, people are dying from bacterial infections that we used to be able to cure with antibiotics, says Helen Boucher.
June 14, 2013 -- Updated 1236 GMT (2036 HKT)
Nadia Bilchik writes how she grew up in a cocoon of white privilege in South Africa. But she grew to understand the horror of apartheid and the greatness of Nelson Mandela.
June 13, 2013 -- Updated 2056 GMT (0456 HKT)
Howard Dean and Christine Whitman say we must fix our pay-to-play political system by turning to public funding of elections.
June 12, 2013 -- Updated 1854 GMT (0254 HKT)
Ronald Deibert says unintended consequences of the NSA scandal will undermine U.S. foreign policy interests.
ADVERTISEMENT