Last month, President Biden delivered the State of the Union address. The recurring theme of his speech was “let’s finish the job.” This sentiment applied to various policies, including reducing healthcare costs, closing tax loopholes, and strengthening antitrust laws, just to name a few. Biden concluded that the state of the union was strong, but his speech highlighted that there is still much that needs to be done. While many may disagree on what needs to be accomplished, Congress introducing at least 13,000 pieces of legislation every term since 1973 shows there is a general agreement among congressional members that there is an abundance of work to do.
It’s important to ask why such a backlog exists. Many of the items noted by Biden and in these congressional bills are not new, so why aren’t they complete or closer to completion? To better understand why our union has such a tremendous amount of items still on our to-do list, we should look to the body which creates legislation: Congress.
Within the last two years, Congress has produced some significant acts. The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), CHIPS and Science Act, and the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act were all passed, and this effort deserves recognition. But, this trio of legislation is noteworthy because few bills have been passed in recent years to address the problems they target.
In essence, these three acts will have a big effect, but this was possible largely because of how much pent-up demand there was for Congress to act. And in the interim of waiting for this legislation, America suffered because Congress was not staying up to date. Congress’ delay in needed legislation hurts Americans, even though Americans elect Congress to help us.
This slow pace of Congress and its associated pains are unfortunately not new. Congressional approval has not passed 40% since 2005 and America’s sub-par standards of living help explain this low approval. Thus, the issue is not with a specific Congress, such as the previous (117th) or current (118th), but with Congress over the years. Congress, as an institution, isn’t finishing the job.
So, what’s slowing down our elected officials?
First, legislating is complicated. Creating an effective bill and then garnering enough support is a difficult task that takes time. But, Congressional members are elected because voters believe they will be the best at getting this job done. So, why there was no infrastructure bill passed between 2015 and 2021, despite almost all Congressional members believing such was necessary may seem like a mystery, until we look at the state of our Congress.
In short, members of our Congress don’t sufficiently practice science, justice, foresight, and civility. These are the pillars of the Benjamin Franklin Party, selected for their attainment of good government. But, at the detriment of Americans and the waste of our taxpayer dollars, Congress often does not practice these principles. Previously, we’ve written entire blog posts on each one of these good government principles. Now let’s examine examples of when Congress does not practice them.
Science
Science is the foundation of effective policy. By basing policies on evidence of what works or is most likely to work, the chances of those policies succeeding greatly increase. When we don’t use science, the odds of no policies or bad policies become greater, often leaving Americans unhelped and sometimes harmed by those elected to help them.
For example, in 2022 Congress attempted to cap the price of insulin for Americans. U.S. insulin prices are the highest in the world, and often by large margins. This has caused many Americans to dangerously ration their insulin intake as insulin can cost up to $600 for a 40-day supply. Looking at solutions in other countries, it is clear the United States has the capability to limit insulin to affordable prices. But instead of basing legislation off proven-effective solutions in other countries, Congress debated various solutions which often ignored available evidence. Now, only some Americans, those on Medicare, are protected from insulin price gouging. This is an improvement over no protections, but still leaves many Americans at risk to the highest price of insulin in the world. If even most members of Congress utilized evidence to inform their decision, it’s very likely most Americans could safely afford insulin, like almost every other country in the world.
Justice
Justice is the foundation of good policy. Americans believe people should get what they deserve and that our laws should reflect this. One of the core principles of government is to act as a 3rd party to create rules that are fair and solve dilemmas of society. So, when our Congress passes laws, it is part of their responsibility to ensure the effect is just.
While there are many examples of injustice in law, one example which illustrates how a seemingly just law has unjust effects is the Electric Vehicle (EV) tax breaks of up to $7,500. The median income of households in the United States is $71,000, so this EV tax credit is substantial to many Americans. However, its design as a non-refundable tax credit (retroactively applied to taxes already owed) creates unequal opportunity dependent on wealth. As a tax credit, households that would need the $7,500 upfront to buy the EV gain no benefit from this. As a non-refundable tax credit, households with the higher taxes already owed (those making more money) benefit from this the most, whereas households that owe little in federal taxes only benefit a small amount. So, the less money you have, the less likely you are to benefit from this credit.
It’s likely Congress wrote the law this way because tax credits are a standard and easier way for the government to process. But, tradition and ease of logistics is not a sufficient reason to create a law where those that need help the most are benefited the least.
Foresight
Foresight is the foundation of cost-effective policy. Often, planning ahead to prevent or reduce a problem is cheaper than reacting to the problem. Whether this be investing in higher quality technology to decrease its frequency of failure or passing laws to reduce and prevent environmental disasters, the responsibility to look and plan ahead is Congress’.
Sometimes, the opportunity to retroactively deal with a problem can be paired with the ability to proactively prevent the next one. The U.S. criminal justice system experiences these dual opportunities every time it sentences someone for committing a crime. However, due to a focus on punishment instead of prevention of future crimes, recidivism (committing crimes after serving your sentence) is not as low as it can be in America. Restorative justice is a method some criminal justice systems use which focuses on the rehabilitation of offenders instead of purely punishing them, and studies have shown it is effective at reducing recidivism (compared to traditional criminal justice in the U.S.). Congress has the opportunity to implement this in the federal criminal justice system, but so far has not.
The normative goal of our criminal justice system should be to hold people accountable and reduce future crime. To better achieve this, Congress should utilize the wisdom of foresight and reduce the chance of crime happening in the future, instead of only dealing with it in the present.
Civility
Civility is the foundation of passing policy. With science, justice, and foresight combined, an individual has the potential to develop brilliant plans which can effect positive change. However, when working in a team to make and pass policy, as Congress does, civility becomes required. Civility is the foundation of a team’s success. The ability to work with those we disagree with, and yet trust that a good-faith effort will be made, is required for teams to succeed, and it is especially crucial to the operation of our government.
Unfortunately, there are plenty of examples of the lack of civility in Congress. From name calling, to accusations of treason, to blatant lying, the list of uncivil behavior is not small. My strongest memory of incivility begins on February 13, 2016, when Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia died. His death created a vacancy which President Obama was to fill with a nomination that the Senate would confirm, if suitable. However, the Republican-controlled Senate, led by Mitch McConnell, refused to even hear President Obama’s nominee. McConnell stated that the winner of the next presidential election, which would not take place for another nine months, should appoint Scalia’s successor.
Four years later, on September 18, 2020, Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg died. The Republican-controlled Senate, led again by Mitch McConnell, appointed President Trump’s nominee to succeed Ginsburg only weeks before the election, directly violating the logic McConnell used under President Obama.
This move eroded civility in the Senate. McConnell created contorted reasoning to justify his actions, extinguishing the hope of nonpartisanship and working together for the good of the country. While moves like these can be considered ingenious because they “win one for the team,” they should also be considered uncivil and destructive to the fabric of Congress. Very few people want to trust the health of a nation in the hands of those who will break their own rules to win a political gambit. In the long term, for Congress to consistently function, its members must learn to work with one another, including between political parties.
Like the state of our union, the state of Congress is that they need to “finish the job.” Congress has partially practiced science, justice, foresight, and civility in order to pass the legislation mentioned earlier. But, there is much more work to be done with these values for Congress to realize its full potential and best use of American taxpayer dollars. When Congress embraces these principles, our country will operate better. Americans will be protected from price-gouging, government assistance will be more fair, crime will decrease, and nonpartisanship will become the norm.
As citizens, we can help Congress make these improvements by voting for candidates who practice science, justice, foresight, and civility. And, when Congress does realize its potential, the state of our union will be strong indeed.
Yours in republic keeping,
W. Hayden Farris
Franklin Party Operations Director
Who's Poor Richard?
Benjamin Franklin, writing under the pseudonym Richard Saunders (AKA "Poor Richard"), published Poor Richard's Almanack from 1732 to 1758. The almanack provided useful information, proverbial wisdom, and humor to the American colonies.
In keeping with Franklin's legacy, Poor Richard's Blog tackles today’s complex issues and the foundations of the Franklin Party, while hopefully also dispensing some wisdom and good humor along the way.
The
Announcements
Commentary
And More
Poor Richard’s Blog
Poor Richard's Blog
Benjamin Franklin, writing under the pseudonym Richard Saunders (AKA "Poor Richard"), published Poor Richard's Almanack from 1732 to 1758. The almanack provided useful information, proverbial wisdom, and humor to the American colonies.
In keeping with Franklin's legacy, Poor Richard's Blog tackles today’s complex issues and the foundations of the Franklin Party, while hopefully also dispensing some wisdom and good humor along the way.
Welcome to the Franklin Party Newsletter!
Finish the Job
Last month, President Biden delivered the State of the Union address. The recurring theme of his speech was “let’s finish the job.” This sentiment applied to various policies, including reducing healthcare costs, closing tax loopholes, and strengthening antitrust laws, just to name a few. Biden concluded that the state of the union was strong, but his speech highlighted that there is still much that needs to be done. While many may disagree on what needs to be accomplished, Congress introducing at least 13,000 pieces of legislation every term since 1973 shows there is a general agreement among congressional members that there is an abundance of work to do.
It’s important to ask why such a backlog exists. Many of the items noted by Biden and in these congressional bills are not new, so why aren’t they complete or closer to completion? To better understand why our union has such a tremendous amount of items still on our to-do list, we should look to the body which creates legislation: Congress.
Within the last two years, Congress has produced some significant acts. The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), CHIPS and Science Act, and the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act were all passed, and this effort deserves recognition. But, this trio of legislation is noteworthy because few bills have been passed in recent years to address the problems they target.
In essence, these three acts will have a big effect, but this was possible largely because of how much pent-up demand there was for Congress to act. And in the interim of waiting for this legislation, America suffered because Congress was not staying up to date. Congress’ delay in needed legislation hurts Americans, even though Americans elect Congress to help us.
This slow pace of Congress and its associated pains are unfortunately not new. Congressional approval has not passed 40% since 2005 and America’s sub-par standards of living help explain this low approval. Thus, the issue is not with a specific Congress, such as the previous (117th) or current (118th), but with Congress over the years. Congress, as an institution, isn’t finishing the job.
So, what’s slowing down our elected officials?
First, legislating is complicated. Creating an effective bill and then garnering enough support is a difficult task that takes time. But, Congressional members are elected because voters believe they will be the best at getting this job done. So, why there was no infrastructure bill passed between 2015 and 2021, despite almost all Congressional members believing such was necessary may seem like a mystery, until we look at the state of our Congress.
In short, members of our Congress don’t sufficiently practice science, justice, foresight, and civility. These are the pillars of the Benjamin Franklin Party, selected for their attainment of good government. But, at the detriment of Americans and the waste of our taxpayer dollars, Congress often does not practice these principles. Previously, we’ve written entire blog posts on each one of these good government principles. Now let’s examine examples of when Congress does not practice them.
Science
Science is the foundation of effective policy. By basing policies on evidence of what works or is most likely to work, the chances of those policies succeeding greatly increase. When we don’t use science, the odds of no policies or bad policies become greater, often leaving Americans unhelped and sometimes harmed by those elected to help them.
For example, in 2022 Congress attempted to cap the price of insulin for Americans. U.S. insulin prices are the highest in the world, and often by large margins. This has caused many Americans to dangerously ration their insulin intake as insulin can cost up to $600 for a 40-day supply. Looking at solutions in other countries, it is clear the United States has the capability to limit insulin to affordable prices. But instead of basing legislation off proven-effective solutions in other countries, Congress debated various solutions which often ignored available evidence. Now, only some Americans, those on Medicare, are protected from insulin price gouging. This is an improvement over no protections, but still leaves many Americans at risk to the highest price of insulin in the world. If even most members of Congress utilized evidence to inform their decision, it’s very likely most Americans could safely afford insulin, like almost every other country in the world.
Justice
Justice is the foundation of good policy. Americans believe people should get what they deserve and that our laws should reflect this. One of the core principles of government is to act as a 3rd party to create rules that are fair and solve dilemmas of society. So, when our Congress passes laws, it is part of their responsibility to ensure the effect is just.
While there are many examples of injustice in law, one example which illustrates how a seemingly just law has unjust effects is the Electric Vehicle (EV) tax breaks of up to $7,500. The median income of households in the United States is $71,000, so this EV tax credit is substantial to many Americans. However, its design as a non-refundable tax credit (retroactively applied to taxes already owed) creates unequal opportunity dependent on wealth. As a tax credit, households that would need the $7,500 upfront to buy the EV gain no benefit from this. As a non-refundable tax credit, households with the higher taxes already owed (those making more money) benefit from this the most, whereas households that owe little in federal taxes only benefit a small amount. So, the less money you have, the less likely you are to benefit from this credit.
It’s likely Congress wrote the law this way because tax credits are a standard and easier way for the government to process. But, tradition and ease of logistics is not a sufficient reason to create a law where those that need help the most are benefited the least.
Foresight
Foresight is the foundation of cost-effective policy. Often, planning ahead to prevent or reduce a problem is cheaper than reacting to the problem. Whether this be investing in higher quality technology to decrease its frequency of failure or passing laws to reduce and prevent environmental disasters, the responsibility to look and plan ahead is Congress’.
Sometimes, the opportunity to retroactively deal with a problem can be paired with the ability to proactively prevent the next one. The U.S. criminal justice system experiences these dual opportunities every time it sentences someone for committing a crime. However, due to a focus on punishment instead of prevention of future crimes, recidivism (committing crimes after serving your sentence) is not as low as it can be in America. Restorative justice is a method some criminal justice systems use which focuses on the rehabilitation of offenders instead of purely punishing them, and studies have shown it is effective at reducing recidivism (compared to traditional criminal justice in the U.S.). Congress has the opportunity to implement this in the federal criminal justice system, but so far has not.
The normative goal of our criminal justice system should be to hold people accountable and reduce future crime. To better achieve this, Congress should utilize the wisdom of foresight and reduce the chance of crime happening in the future, instead of only dealing with it in the present.
Civility
Civility is the foundation of passing policy. With science, justice, and foresight combined, an individual has the potential to develop brilliant plans which can effect positive change. However, when working in a team to make and pass policy, as Congress does, civility becomes required. Civility is the foundation of a team’s success. The ability to work with those we disagree with, and yet trust that a good-faith effort will be made, is required for teams to succeed, and it is especially crucial to the operation of our government.
Unfortunately, there are plenty of examples of the lack of civility in Congress. From name calling, to accusations of treason, to blatant lying, the list of uncivil behavior is not small. My strongest memory of incivility begins on February 13, 2016, when Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia died. His death created a vacancy which President Obama was to fill with a nomination that the Senate would confirm, if suitable. However, the Republican-controlled Senate, led by Mitch McConnell, refused to even hear President Obama’s nominee. McConnell stated that the winner of the next presidential election, which would not take place for another nine months, should appoint Scalia’s successor.
Four years later, on September 18, 2020, Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg died. The Republican-controlled Senate, led again by Mitch McConnell, appointed President Trump’s nominee to succeed Ginsburg only weeks before the election, directly violating the logic McConnell used under President Obama.
This move eroded civility in the Senate. McConnell created contorted reasoning to justify his actions, extinguishing the hope of nonpartisanship and working together for the good of the country. While moves like these can be considered ingenious because they “win one for the team,” they should also be considered uncivil and destructive to the fabric of Congress. Very few people want to trust the health of a nation in the hands of those who will break their own rules to win a political gambit. In the long term, for Congress to consistently function, its members must learn to work with one another, including between political parties.
Like the state of our union, the state of Congress is that they need to “finish the job.” Congress has partially practiced science, justice, foresight, and civility in order to pass the legislation mentioned earlier. But, there is much more work to be done with these values for Congress to realize its full potential and best use of American taxpayer dollars. When Congress embraces these principles, our country will operate better. Americans will be protected from price-gouging, government assistance will be more fair, crime will decrease, and nonpartisanship will become the norm.
As citizens, we can help Congress make these improvements by voting for candidates who practice science, justice, foresight, and civility. And, when Congress does realize its potential, the state of our union will be strong indeed.
Yours in republic keeping,
W. Hayden Farris
Franklin Party Operations Director
Share to:
Subscribe to Poor Richard’s Blog
You may also enjoy:
Handcuffing the Lifeguard
This congressional appropriations season, please tell your U.S. Representative to oppose Rep. Biggs’ Appropriations Amendment #4 (homeopathy FDA exemption) to H.R. 4368.
Declarations
Let’s declare our independence from the modern adversaries that would rip us apart, and redeclare our interdependence to each other.
Respective Experts
Some legislators refuse to pass certain (or any) gun legislation, saying it is unconstitutional. But, this decision ignores the totality of our history and the design of our government. Read why legislators should pass good-faith gun laws, even if they are unsure of its constitutionality.