Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Confessions of a Washington Reject
Gary North's Specific Answers (Remnant Review) ^ | June 11, 2011, orig. 1977. | Gary North

Posted on 6/13/2011, 4:37:03 AM by danielmryan

I wrote this for Remnant Review in 1977.

Multiply dollar figures by 4 to correct for price inflation.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * *

From about the middle of June 1976, through January 3, 1977, I was serving my country on a full-time basis, meaning that I was deep into the Federal trough, but not paying Social Security taxes. When it is all said and done, not paying Social Security taxes for seven months was probably the single most important benefit I received for my stay in government service.

This should serve as an introduction to the nature of government service. I was an employee of the sovereign state of Congress. You think I'm joking. Not a bit. It is indeed a sovereign state. First of all, it employs its very own police force, and the force is probably the fourteenth or fifteenth largest police force in the United States. Second, Congress has wisely determined that laws passed by Congress to protect this nation's citizens do not apply to Capitol Hill. That, one must admit, is a sign of sovereignty. Equal Employment Opportunities Commission bureaucrats have no authority on Capitol Hill, so the secretaries are better looking, lower paid, and work harder than in other businesses. (The good-looking ones, by the way, are not the over-worked ones, if by work you mean typing.) Nobody has to hire minority group members, except for political reasons. There are no contracts. Congressmen hire and fire at will. Or at least they think they do. (We will cover that a little later.) There is a great pension plan, assuming anyone is so stupid as to believe that any pension is great in an era of inflation. But you do not have to belong to it. The boys at OSHA do not prowl around the halls of Congress, since they would be able to shut the place down if they were allowed to apply OSHA rules on safety. There are no Nader belts on the official cars of Congress, unless the Congressman wants them. You cannot subpoena a member of Congress for anything relating even remotely to his official duties. You must subpoena the House itself, at its discretion, and the House may or may not compel the Congressman to testify. In short, the rules and regulations that are strangling the citizens of the United States do not apply on Capitol Hill. They know what they are doing at least to this extent. The pollution of legislation from Congress is matched by the pollution from Congressional furnaces and Congressional vehicles; the Environmental Protection Agency has no jurisdiction here. The Post Office on Capitol Hill is run by Congress, not the U.S. Postal Service. Congress is the 51st state. Wait! Congress is the first state; Hawaii is the 51st.

Certain other features of Washington politics are not really under- stood by the average voter. Consider the vastness of the output of activity and the minimal productivity. In any given two-year term, Congress will see the introduction of about 25,000 separate pieces of legislation. This figure includes about 1,500 resolutions. Of these 25,000, about 450 will actually survive the legislative process and be signed into law by the President. Some of these bills are virtually automatic, such as the annual raising of the Federal debt ceiling. In short, 535 legislators on both sides of Capitol Hill are able to achieve about a 1.5 percent "success rate" of proposed legislation actually enacted. This represents less than one bill per office. For this we should be thankful. It might have been two bills per office each term.

To accomplish this "vast output" of actual legislation, hundreds of millions of dollars are expended on staff salaries, office supplies, plane trips, and computer hook-ups. A Congressman receives over $260,000 for staff salaries each year. He can hire 18 people with this money. Senate staffs receive up to $650,000, in the case of the most populous states.

Then there are printing costs. The Government Printing Office produces 200 pages of the Congressional Record each day at an estimated $300 per printed page. It is sitting on each legislator's desk the day following the proceedings, waiting to be read. (No one ever reads it.) Then there is the Federal Register, another daily production of 200-plus pages, filled with new regulations from the bureaucracy, all having the force of law. For a brief example of what kinds of material appear in the Federal Register, you can call a taped message and listen to a summary of the "highlights" of tomorrow's edition: (202) 523--5022.

About 60,000 pages of these regulations are published each year, in three-column fine print, most of it incomprehensible. No one but lawyers read it. This is the law of the land. Congress proposes, but the Federal bureaucracy disposes. It is a good thing that the Congress can get only 450 laws passed every two years. If it were more, the Federal Register would have to start going to morning and evening editions.

Then there are the hearings. A few bills on each side of the Hill actually make it to the hearings stage. Experts are flown in to testify. The liberals are flown in courtesy of the majority members of the particular committee. The conservatives are allowed their witnesses--one day's worth. It does not make much difference. No one pays the least attention to the testimony. Then the testimony is printed in several thick volumes. No one reads it. Then the committee votes yes or no. If it goes to the House or Senate, the bill will then die, or be amended, or pass. Then it goes to the other branch of Congress. At this point, the whole process begins again. The witnesses are flown in to testify, very often the same witnesses. No one pays any attention. Then the hearings are printed. In one classic case, the 1976 hearings for the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee, the hearings were faked. The hearings were to have covered the $56 billion worth of appropriations for various Federal welfare agencies. Half of the scheduled twenty-four days of hearings were held "live." The other twelve days were simply reports inserted by witnesses. Yet all eight volumes of these reports were printed as if they were held "live," with greetings from the chairman, a few faked questions and answers, and a pleasant goodbye to each witness. There was no way of distinguishing "live" from "dead" testimony. Nevertheless, we have 4,500 pages of fine-printed hearings for the record. And for the record, no one will ever read them. (An account of this classic deception appeared in the Washington Star for October 4, 1976.)

[Snip.]

So it went, bill after bill. The billions flowed. The opposition capitulated. The conservatives were out-talked, outmaneuvered, outspent, and out-voted almost every time. Occasionally, we won one, like the Hyde Amendment (no Federal money for abortions), but rarely. It was one long, difficult, grinding series of defeats. It will continue to be so.

Is it any wonder that people with principles get eaten up and spit out by this system? How to manage 200 pages of Congressional Record every day, plus the hearings in committee, plus the Federal Register, plus the speeches on the road, plus the party (political organization) pressures, plus the party (riotous escape) pressures? No one can do it. No group can do it. The dreams of messianic legislation and comprehensive political predestination have not come to heavenly fruition, but they have driven mad those who had such visions. The pursuit of total planning has eaten up the legislators who assigned to themselves the role of minor gods. The work is killing, especially in the last fifteen years. They are retiring in droves. Something like 50 percent of the men in the House in 1977 weren't there in the late 1960s. The whole system is collapsing, and both the conservatives and ideological liberals know it, but the conservatives can not do anything about it, and the liberals won't do anything about it. They are caught on a sort of demonic treadmill to legislative oblivion.

The conservatives get ground down. They give up after three terms. I will not mention any names, since we can be thankful for whatever "no" votes we get, but these men have let their constituents down. One man always promised to lie low for three terms, get the ropes learned, and then really get things changed. With every term, he has voted for more and more welfare boondoggles. He chases secretaries, is not bright enough to read very much, and his staff is mediocre, meaning it is one of the better staffs. Yet he is considered one of the hard-liners. The pressure on them by their peers is enormous; indeed, this is the crucial factor in the decline of the conservative opposition. Congress views itself as a club. The Senate is notorious in this respect. They have little use for the rabble in the House. They are gentlemen. Fortunately, like gentlemen, they do not get much accomplished each day. They are the brake on government planning, not by ideology, but by inertia. Inertia grinds down the conservative opposition, too. So the booze flows, the secretaries smile, and the wives get dumped. Yes, Virginia, by conservatives, too.

[Snip.]

Seldom in the history of man have so many incompetents, cronies, idiots, goof-offs, hangers-on, and nincompoops been assembled in one geographical area. The mediocrity of the Congressional staffs is, above all, the fact that struck me hardest. Grafters are to be expected in government, but these people are yo-yos. You would not believe how second-rate these people are. I am speaking about the conservative staffers. You are fortunate to find one good, solid, competent staffer per office....

What goes wrong? It is a complicated problem. Here is my evaluation. First, Congressmen do not want to hire people smarter than they are. This reduces the level of competence to levels undreamed of. Second, they do not hire anyone anyway. Their administrative assistants do the hiring. This leads to the most insidious aspect of the Congressional bureaucracy problem: the administrative assistant. If there is a single source of the conservatives' failure, look here. Forget about the great conspiracy. Forget about pay-offs. Forget about their lack of time. Just look at the AA.

The AA is the top dog. He gets the $50,000, if anyone does. He gets the prestige. He hires and sometimes fires. And like any person in a no- contract, high-risk, high-pay job, he wants one thing above all: tenure. He can get it only in one way: be absolutely certain that no one coming in contact with the boss is more competent than he, the AA, is. This reduces the general competence of the staffs an additional notch. The AA is enormously defensive about his position. He sees to it that the level of incompetence is kept high by adhering to another unwritten rule:never hire anyone who hasn't had Hill experience. This screens out the threats to your position. Your competition is limited to the walking wounded: Hill rejects.

[Snip.]

Let me give you an example of how tight a ship the typical AA runs, as far as screening is concerned. A newly elected Congressman from a conservative Midwest district started out. For openers, he did his initial hiring through the office of House Minority Leader Rhodes, no ideologue. Applicants couldn't possibly get through this wall of resistance. (Candidates are flooded with applications, and in despair they turn the screening over to [probably] the campaign manager. So most of the staff is already hired when he arrives in Washington. He has no idea of what committee assignments he will get, or how much work needs to be done, or what kinds of skilled workers are needed. But he keeps on hiring.) The next stage was when he hit Washington--or, more accurately, brushed by Washington. He hired a "professional" AA, a mildly liberal (gray sludge) Jewish gentleman. The Congressman, predictably, is a Christian fundamentalist. This follows the usual rules of Congress: the liberals staff their offices with liberals and moderates, and the conservatives staff their offices with moderates and idiots. So an old friend of the Congressman, a nationally known and influential conservative, called him to tell him that I was available as a staffer. (A man mired in the bog sometimes will stay in the bog if the ground nearby looks a bit more firm.) Fine, he said, have him apply. His secretary called me to set up an appointment. Unfortunately, the Congressman spent only two days a week in Washington; the other five were spent back in the district. You couldn't get an appointment. So I called his office, and of course was connected to the AA. "All candidates for employment are interviewed by me first," he announced. Naturally. I explained that his boss had called me directly. I wanted my appointment. That threw him. I was told when the Congressman might be in his office. I drove in. He had left, of course. This was the week before the House convened. "We do not need any research people right now," the AA explained. "Congress doesn't begin until next week." I called a contact of mine and asked him how many bills were scheduled for introduction during the first week. "Oh, about 1,800," he replied. But our new Congressman did not need any research staff the week before. So I gave a copy of my Christian Economics book, autographed, plus a copy of my vita. The AA took them. The Congressman never called back. About a month later, after I had joined the program at Ruff Times as a consultant, I happened to call my friend, the Congressman's friend. "Why didn't he ever call me?" I asked. "That's funny," came the reply. "He asked me why you never came in for an interview. He asked his AA if you had come in, and the AA told him he had never heard of you."

This is normal on Capitol Hill. The Congressmen barely run their own offices, and the newer they are, the more dependent they are on the "professional" AA. The bureaucratization of the staffs is continual. The people back home who gave money to elect the guy, who slaved to work for him, and who now think their work is at last over, with their reward sure, now watch in horror and disbelief as his voting record sinks slowly into the sludge. They wonder how it happened. "That's politics," they say to themselves. Not quite; that's bureaucracy that has met no political resistance from the folks back home. The folks back home need to stay organized to pressure "their" man, forever. They seldom do....


TOPICS: Government; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: inertia; washington
Dr. North says at the end that the Congressman in question was none other than Dan Quayle.

It was written in 1977, but little seems to have changed since then. A worthwhile read for activists, and for any other people who (however quixotically) want something to get done in Washington D.C..

1 posted on 6/13/2011, 4:37:05 AM by danielmryan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: danielmryan

The guy left the Congress on almost the same day as Quayle was first entering (January 1977), how could he be writing about Quayle?


2 posted on 6/13/2011, 4:46:50 AM by ansel12 (Bachmann/Rollins/Romney=destruction for Bachmann, but it sure helps Romney. WHY?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ansel12
The guy left the Congress on almost the same day as Quayle was first entering (January 1977), how could he be writing about Quayle?

That job would have been his second in D.C. It fell through.

3 posted on 6/13/2011, 4:58:08 AM by danielmryan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: ansel12

He didn’t work for Quayle. He worked for Ron Paul during Ron Paul’s first stint in Congress.


4 posted on 6/13/2011, 5:20:15 AM by RecoveringPaulisto
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: RecoveringPaulisto

That is interesting.


5 posted on 6/13/2011, 5:24:57 AM by ansel12 (Bachmann/Rollins/Romney=destruction for Bachmann, but it sure helps Romney. WHY?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: ansel12

You’d be surprised how many moderately influential people worked for Ron Paul at some point. Gary North is one of the more sane ones. The by far most insane one is Lew Rockwell (Paul’s Chief of Staff ‘78-’82).


6 posted on 6/13/2011, 5:34:34 AM by RecoveringPaulisto
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: itsahoot

Ping


7 posted on 6/13/2011, 2:35:35 PM by itsahoot (We make jokes, they make progress. Progressivism, Support Palin, or get used to it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson