Prior to setting out for the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia in 1787, James Madison closeted himself in his Virginia home and undertook a broad study of the history of the republics of the world. His goal was to learn the reasons they succeeded but more importantly, why they failed.  And fail, they all, ultimately, did.  Madison took the lessons he learned from his study and drafted a plan for a national government.  On June 21, 1788, New Hampshire gave its consent to what grew out of Madison’s plan and officially ended government under the Articles of Confederation and the new United States Constitution took effect.

     The new Constitution called for three separate, distinct but equal branches, the judicial, executive and the legislative.  Of the three, it was the legislative which held center position and which Madison held most dear.  He intended the legislature to be the center of power with its primary purpose to legislate, not merely to check an over powerful executive.  In fact, both Madison and Alexander Hamilton saw the separation of powers as a way to insulate Congress from both the executive and judicial branches.  They and the other framers sought to create a body that could legislate solutions to national issues and emergencies, not just focused on executive oversight. 

     For over 225 years, the legislature has, for the most part, fulfilled their objective and has guided the United States through its formative years, a civil war and reconstruction, economic depression, two world wars and a cold war.  It has, at times, been quite effective and at other times, not so much.  But it has acted.  Until now.  Madison would not recognize the present Congress as his creation.  Its lack of fiscal discipline, its limited executive oversight and its excessive delegation to the President and the courts is not what the Framers intended.  More concerning, the once effective deliberative body has devolved into a circus with members having no interest in governing, more interested in becoming a spectacle or creating one.

     We have seen a significant number of Congressional members voting to not certify the last Presidential election not based on facts but on a lie.  We have a former football coach hold up numerous military promotions because he does not approve of the military’s position on abortion.  We have another who leads an effort to unseat the Speaker of the House not because of policy but because, well, he could.  Sadly, I could go on and on with examples of dysfunction, but the end result is not just gridlock but an inability or even an unwillingness to govern.  Meanwhile, problems fester, budgets go unpassed, and the nation and the American people suffer the consequences.

     What went wrong?  Historians and political scientists could give complex and more learned reasons, but I would like to propose something far simpler.  Maybe the reason is us, the American voter.  The approval rate for Congress has hovered around the 20% mark for several years yet we keep sending the same people to Congress. Election after election, we send the same people who make it dysfunctional back to Washington. Over and over again.  To paraphrase an editorial in the Washington Post, when you send clowns to Congress, don’t be surprised it turns into a circus.