EXAMINATION OF THE BASHING OF CONGRESS

If past election returns mean anything, Missourians seem to genuinely like and admire the representatives they send to Congress. Only one incumbent a relative newcomer and one whose short record was already blemished by unfavorable publicity was rejected in the last election, and he only lost by 54 votes, while others were being re-elected by pluralities of better than 20,000 votes. One congressman, Rep. Ike Skelton, defeated his challenger by better than 40,000 votes, a margin of 62 percent.

Why, then, are Missourians so disillusioned with the remaining 426 members of the House of Representatives and, seemingly, with the 100 members of the U.S. Senate? Polls show widespread national dissatisfaction with Congress as an institution and with its members as a whole.

What has occurred to so blemish so many members of one of the three branches of our federal government, a branch that was envisioned by the Founding Fathers to serve as the representatives of all citizens and to maintain a balance between a president who might become omnipotent and a court that could become isolated from everyday life? Why does Congress seem so anxious to fulfill the observation of another Missourian, Mark Twain, who nearly a century ago wrote ~that America had no distinctly native criminals except congressmen?

Opinion polls have repeatedly shown that while voters like their own elected representatives and senators, they are extremely critical of Congress as a whole, as an institution. The recent publicity on the so-called House bank has served to incense a large bloc of voters, even reducing the affection they hold for their own congressman in cases where it was shown his or her personal bank account was overdrawn. Kitegate appears to be one of those hot-button issues that attracts immediate public attention, even if complete understanding appears to have eluded the critics.

We're puzzled by the vicious reaction against congressmen who have difficulty keeping their personal accounting in order while there seems to be such equanimity over failures that have cost the taxpayers millions and even billions of dollars. Of course, congressmen shouldn't overdraw their own personal bank accounts, but neither should the rest of us, but placed in perspective, it is a far less crime than is committed at far too frequent intervals in our federal capital.

Bashing Congress is not a new sport in America. The famed French observer of the United States, Alexis de Tocqueville, wrote more than 150 years ago of the general contempt he found for what he called our "national parliament," wondering aloud whether our disdain for such a vital component of government would not eventually weaken the republic's foundation. He may have been overly concerned about any such erosion, yet we believe he had a point. Perhaps no one bashed the institution better than our own Harry Truman, who in 1948 won his campaign for the presidency by blaming the Republican-controlled Congress for many of the nation's post-war ills. Others, including George Bush, have found Congress to be a scapegoat for Washington's ills, and the public has often responded by throwing the rascals out. The inherent short memories of voters have worked to the advantage of candidates, who sometimes eventually became as bad as the alleged culprits.

Life in Congress is not like life in St. Louis or Hannibal or even Jefferson City. Placing an elected representative from any of these ~Missouri cities in the District of Columbia, charged with the responsibility of "delivering" for his back-home constituents, requires him to conform to an institution, which he has only temporarily joined, that is governed by rules and traditions that have been 200 years in the making. Expecting a representative or senator to change, or even impact, such a gigantic monolith is demanding more than most mere humans are able to deliver.

Most members of Congress, whether in the House or the Senate, lead more lives than a schizophrenic. After endless days, weeks and months of soliciting votes, an elected congressman then finds himself on the other end of solicitation. All kinds of people want things from Congress: lobbyists, special interests, home-district businessmen and their companies, Social Security recipients, farmers, politicians and the next-door neighbors. And the congressman, if he hopes to stay in office long enough to become effective, must respond to every solicitation as if it were not only important but the only one in front of him. His successes are taken for granted; his failures are broadcast all over the district or state.

Not only do members of Congress become involuntary errand boys for hundreds and even thousands of folks back home, but they are expected to vote as each constituent wants him to on issues that are seldom simple, more often than not extremely complicated, requiring long hours of study and research. If he's lucky, the congressman has enough free time after work on Capitol Hill to meet this requirement. After a certain amount of tenure, members of Congress are expected not only to vote correctly on each issue but begin to introduce legislation of importance to constituents. Why can't our congressmen get a multimillion-dollar demonstration project in our part of the state after all these years in Congress? Don't think that hasn't been voiced in districts across Missouri.

So you're mad at Congress? So are lots of other folks who want a change. Take a number and get in line.