Gabe's analysis of reconciliation highlights (yet again) a fundamental truth about Congress: the very people who benefit from a broken system are the ones we expect to fix it. Or maybe "expect" isn't the right word... we know it will never change. Are we supposed to just accept this as unchangeable?
It was a parenthetical note that Gabe made, but take Senator Robert Byrd's 51-year Senate career as an example. While Americans broadly agree that such lengthy tenures create problematic power dynamics and stagnation, we've somehow normalized the idea that Senators can serve unlimited terms. You'd think the same logic that created term limits for presidents would apply here. However, the only way to change this would be via Congress, also known as never going to happen. (Some history about how we almost had Congressional term limits can be read here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._Term_Limits,_Inc._v._Thornton)
Examples of Congressional perverse incentives are numerous. The rules that govern Congress are largely set by Congress itself – a clear conflict of interest that would be unacceptable in any other context. Imagine if professional athletes served as their own referees during games, or if restaurant inspectors were chosen by the restaurants they inspect. We would immediately recognize such arrangements as fundamentally flawed, yet we've accepted this exact scenario in our highest legislative body.
I mentioned this recently in a comment on one of Sharon's pieces, and I'll repeat it again here because it's relevant and important. Her proposals for improving elections, and thereby repairing the perverse incentives that Congress operates under, can be found here: https://thepreamble.com/p/my-proposal-to-improve-elections
Her call for citizen oversight groups to establish congressional rules and ethics standards addresses this exact problem. As she points out, we need external mechanisms to implement reforms that Congress will never voluntarily adopt. Term limits, age limits, campaign finance reform... these changes won't come from within the system.
I'm working to build a coalition focused on creating the external pressure needed for these reforms. Politicians are trapped in a prisoner's dilemma where they can't support reforms without risking their careers – or more accurately, they can't support reforms when the current system benefits their side, though they're quick to demand changes when the tables turn electorally. Many of them are already begging us to save them from themselves. We need to create conditions where they can collectively agree to limit their power.
If you're frustrated by these institutional failures and want to help create practical solutions, I'd love to connect. We need people who understand policy mechanics and human psychology to design reforms that can actually work in the real world... sure, that would be very helpful. But we also need people who might not understand everything, yet are passionate about fixing the problem. I'm probably closer to the latter: I am not an expert, but I can see that things need to change, and I can see that they never will change without thinking outside of the box.
Who else wants to help tackle this challenge? Reply here or shoot me a message if you'd like to join our discussion group on making these reforms reality. We're particularly interested in exploring ways to build public pressure for constitutional amendments and state-led initiatives.
Another proof point to dispute that Republicans are in any way conservative - they seem to so frequently be the party to overturn norms and precedents. It's frustrating to watch them carry the banner of conservatism while in actuality remaking American government in their desired image.
Imagine if we could feel confident that the president and Congress would just do their job and work for the people. It's so exhausting that they care more about pleasing their rich donors than taking care of us. Who needs healthcare or good schools when we could pass more tax cuts for wealthy corporations? 🫠
Timothy Patrick, you say, “ we know it will never change,” and yet you are working to make change. I am happy you are working with others to make changes that will benefit everyone. That is the American way.
Thanks, Gina! Yes, nothing will change if we treat the Constitution like a museum. It lives, breathes, and invites us to adapt it to our times. And I agree, I think it's patriotic to give it the opportunity to live up to its potential. 😌🇺🇸
Gabe's work is stellar and I look forward to more collaborations between the two of you. I am a long time book group member (almost original), but have been following Gabe even longer! I think he was a freshman in high school when I started subscribing to to WUTP.
Gabe, as a fellow Missourian, I don’t claim to be proud of my state. However, I’m proud to meet you, and maybe after learning from you, I can claim it in the future.
I read the headline and I just wanted to crawl back into bed. I’m having a hard time dealing with this reality.
Gabe's analysis of reconciliation highlights (yet again) a fundamental truth about Congress: the very people who benefit from a broken system are the ones we expect to fix it. Or maybe "expect" isn't the right word... we know it will never change. Are we supposed to just accept this as unchangeable?
It was a parenthetical note that Gabe made, but take Senator Robert Byrd's 51-year Senate career as an example. While Americans broadly agree that such lengthy tenures create problematic power dynamics and stagnation, we've somehow normalized the idea that Senators can serve unlimited terms. You'd think the same logic that created term limits for presidents would apply here. However, the only way to change this would be via Congress, also known as never going to happen. (Some history about how we almost had Congressional term limits can be read here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._Term_Limits,_Inc._v._Thornton)
Examples of Congressional perverse incentives are numerous. The rules that govern Congress are largely set by Congress itself – a clear conflict of interest that would be unacceptable in any other context. Imagine if professional athletes served as their own referees during games, or if restaurant inspectors were chosen by the restaurants they inspect. We would immediately recognize such arrangements as fundamentally flawed, yet we've accepted this exact scenario in our highest legislative body.
I mentioned this recently in a comment on one of Sharon's pieces, and I'll repeat it again here because it's relevant and important. Her proposals for improving elections, and thereby repairing the perverse incentives that Congress operates under, can be found here: https://thepreamble.com/p/my-proposal-to-improve-elections
Her call for citizen oversight groups to establish congressional rules and ethics standards addresses this exact problem. As she points out, we need external mechanisms to implement reforms that Congress will never voluntarily adopt. Term limits, age limits, campaign finance reform... these changes won't come from within the system.
I'm working to build a coalition focused on creating the external pressure needed for these reforms. Politicians are trapped in a prisoner's dilemma where they can't support reforms without risking their careers – or more accurately, they can't support reforms when the current system benefits their side, though they're quick to demand changes when the tables turn electorally. Many of them are already begging us to save them from themselves. We need to create conditions where they can collectively agree to limit their power.
If you're frustrated by these institutional failures and want to help create practical solutions, I'd love to connect. We need people who understand policy mechanics and human psychology to design reforms that can actually work in the real world... sure, that would be very helpful. But we also need people who might not understand everything, yet are passionate about fixing the problem. I'm probably closer to the latter: I am not an expert, but I can see that things need to change, and I can see that they never will change without thinking outside of the box.
Who else wants to help tackle this challenge? Reply here or shoot me a message if you'd like to join our discussion group on making these reforms reality. We're particularly interested in exploring ways to build public pressure for constitutional amendments and state-led initiatives.
I’m interested in being part of your discussion.
Another proof point to dispute that Republicans are in any way conservative - they seem to so frequently be the party to overturn norms and precedents. It's frustrating to watch them carry the banner of conservatism while in actuality remaking American government in their desired image.
Imagine if we could feel confident that the president and Congress would just do their job and work for the people. It's so exhausting that they care more about pleasing their rich donors than taking care of us. Who needs healthcare or good schools when we could pass more tax cuts for wealthy corporations? 🫠
Add to the dismay the focus of seizing power instead of creating an opportunity to serve Americans.
This!
Timothy Patrick, you say, “ we know it will never change,” and yet you are working to make change. I am happy you are working with others to make changes that will benefit everyone. That is the American way.
Thanks, Gina! Yes, nothing will change if we treat the Constitution like a museum. It lives, breathes, and invites us to adapt it to our times. And I agree, I think it's patriotic to give it the opportunity to live up to its potential. 😌🇺🇸
Love Gab’s work! It was thanks to you that I found him and he is so wise beyond his years and very thorough like you!!
Gabe's work is stellar and I look forward to more collaborations between the two of you. I am a long time book group member (almost original), but have been following Gabe even longer! I think he was a freshman in high school when I started subscribing to to WUTP.
Gabe, as a fellow Missourian, I don’t claim to be proud of my state. However, I’m proud to meet you, and maybe after learning from you, I can claim it in the future.
Yay! Gabe’s substack and the Preamble are the TWO substack I read daily! Love the crossover!
Gabe is very talented. Appreciate the history. Looking forward to seeing what happens with Trump’s next Presidency.