<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META name=GENERATOR content="MSHTML 8.00.6001.18904">
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>Congress ducks responsibility because We the People
have let them get away with it for far too long.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial><FONT size=2><FONT size=2
face=Arial></FONT></FONT></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>Has Congress Become Useless?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>by Gene Healy </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial><FONT size=2><EM><!--BIO--></EM></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>Gene Healy is a vice president at the Cato
Institute and the author of The Cult of the Presidency.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><EM><FONT size=2 face=Arial></FONT></EM> </DIV>
<DIV><EM><FONT size=2 face=Arial></FONT></EM> </DIV><!--BODY-->
<DIV class=first><FONT size=2 face=Arial>Has Congress become "a useless appendix
on the governmental structure"? That was what then-Senate Foreign Relations
Committee Chairman Sen. J. William Fulbright, D-Ark., feared in 1968, according
to newly released transcripts from the committee's closed-session debates over
Vietnam. Unless Congress was willing to assert itself on the war, he said, "I do
not see how we have any real function."</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>Last week found Congress once again doing a good
imitation of a vestigial organ, as the House forked over $37 billion more for
our endless Afghan adventure. Maybe if we called it "armed community organizing"
instead of "nation building," more Republicans would be against it.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>It's "not just the president's war," Rep. Jim
McGovern, D-Mass., protested. "It's our war too. ... We must not simply kick the
can down the road."</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>Alas, legislative can kicking is what the modern
Congress does best. Take the Dodd-Frank financial "reform" bill the president
just signed. It's a 2,300-page PR exercise that delegates everything and settles
nothing. Lenders and investors wondering what's legal will have to await some
243 rulemakings from 11 different agencies.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV class=pullquote><FONT size=2 face=Arial>The Constitution gives Congress
vast powers over war and peace, and charges it with making the laws of the land.
Yet our feckless legislators prefer to punt the hard decisions to the president
and the permanent bureaucracy, even if it leaves the rest of us mired in
uncertainty and crushing debt. What do we pay these people for?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>There's a reason the Capitol Dome dominates the
D.C. landscape, towering over the comparatively modest presidential residence
down the street. The capital's design mirrors the constitutional architecture,
in which Congress, not the executive, was supposed to be the prime mover in
setting national policy.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>The legislative branch "is by far the most
important," President James Monroe proclaimed in 1822, "the whole system of the
National Government may be said to rest on the powers granted to this branch.
They mark the limit within which, with few exceptions, all the branches must
move."</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>Some of you understandably shudder at the thought
of handing more responsibility to an institution led by the likes of Nancy
Pelosi. But our Constitution's Framers preferred to leave national policy in the
hands of bums you can vote out instead of bums you can't, like the best and
brightest White House czars and unelected bureaucrats.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>Despite decades of congressional abdication,
Congress retains every power the Constitution grants it. There's nothing
stopping legislators from drafting clear rules or taking responsibility for
ongoing wars.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>Even John Yoo, the Imperial Presidency's most
ardent fanboy, admits that Congress could legally "require scheduled troop
withdrawals" in foreign wars.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>On <EM>Meet the Press</EM> in 2007, then-Sen. Joe
Biden, D-Del., offered the typical rejoinder: Hey, don't look at us, we're just
Congress. "Why not cut off funding for the war?" host Tim Russert asked. "I've
been there, Tim," Biden replied. "You can't do it."</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>Actually, to borrow a phrase, Yes We Can. Congress
has successfully used strings attached to funding to wind down our involvements
in Vietnam, Lebanon and Somalia. But it usually takes a great waste of blood and
treasure before our representatives feel moved to do anything.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>Maybe that helps explain why Congress ranks dead
last in Gallup's recent "Confidence in Institutions" poll, finishing eight
points behind health maintenance organizations.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>But we shouldn't let ourselves off so easy. The
American voter has long played the sucker in a legislative shell game wherein
Congress cedes its constitutional responsibilities to the executive, taking
credit when policies "work," and demanding scalps when they don't.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>Congress ducks responsibility because We the People
have let them get away with it for far too long.</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>