Opinion Dysfunctional DC

The inability of the US Congress to address tough problems,both domestic and international,has serious national security consequences. It prompts both allies and adversaries to question whether a world power with a dysfunctional national legislature can continue to lead on the global stage.

Congress has failed to provide timely and adequate funding for the State Department and the US Agency for International Development,delaying programmes and hiring,thus diminishing US capacity around the world. It has not overhauled the Foreign Assistance Act since 1985,impeding a coherent approach to overseas programmes. The Senate has held nominees for ambassadorial and national security positions hostage to political interests for long periods of time,depriving the nation of adequate representation overseas and political leadership in government agencies at home. It has chosen to allow treaties — such as the 1994 Law of the Sea — to languish for years,weakening partnerships and alliances in the process.

There has been a steady and troubling erosion in the legislative branch’s performance in the national security arena over the past 20 to 30 years that is rooted in globalisation and a sharply divided US political landscape. The integration of the global economy and proliferation of security threats after 9/11 produced a more complex and challenging international environment for the United States,forcing Congress to undertake a role for which it is ill-equipped: urgently grappling with many complicated,interconnected issues. At the same time,the US political landscape has been changing since the 1970s,ushering in deep partisanship,severe polarisation,permanent campaigning,a combative 24/7 media and diminished civility.

Over time,this environment has not only pushed lawmakers towards advancing personal and partisan agendas by any means; it has also driven foreign policy and defence matters,short of crises,off the national agenda,marginalising important issues like trade and development assistance.

Congress can not turn back globalisation or change the political landscape. But it can address institutional problems.

The starting point should be to focus on the primary roles of Congress — legislating and funding the government. The legislature should return to firm adherence to the legislative process,discontinuing tactics that obstruct and delay,and limiting rules that shut out the minority.

In the Senate,this would entail changes to cloture rules that end or limit debate. In the House,it would mean a reduction in the use of closed and restricted rules. In both chambers,this would mean enforcing budget timetables and rules.

Congress should revamp its committee structures to better integrate defence,diplomacy and development activities. Lawmakers should be limited in the number of committees they sit on,thus allowing them to gain real proficiency on a few issues. And the committees should be provided with increased non-partisan staff.

Overseas travel should be encouraged,not scorned,and the Washington workweek should be increased from three to five days to give lawmakers more time to perform their legislative duties effectively.

With the midterm elections behind them,leaders of both parties in the House and Senate should take the opportunity to undertake reforms. As a start,the Senate could surprise its critics by scheduling a vote on the new strategic arms reduction treaty before the 111th Congress adjourns.

-Kay King

The writer,a former deputy assistant secretary of state for legislative affairs,is vice president of the Council on Foreign Relations,New York