EMERSON PARTICIPATION WELCOME ON COMMITTEE

Since he was first elected to Congress in 1980, Bill Emerson has sung a hymn of reform concerning the way that institution does its business. As Emerson alerted his constituents and others about the failing nature of the federal legislative enterprise, Congress continued under haphazard management and fell into broad, national disrepute. With the announcement this week of the formation of a panel to suggest changes in congressional procedures, there is the prospect that some reforms might come to pass. It is our hope that Emerson, who was named to the panel, and others who have advanced this movement will see their persistence rewarded.

No taxpayer needs a blood pressure-elevating recitation of congressional faults. From budget deficits to bounced checks to bloated staffs, from perquisite grabbing to postal improprieties to PAC pandering, Congress has thrust itself into the national eye in an unbecoming way. The American public has lost confidence in the national legislature as an institution. Forget this call for reform as an attack on constitutional checks and balances; it is not that. (The founding fathers did not envision congressmen sloughing off their tabs at a taxpayer-subsidized commissary.) The problem can be stated simply: Congress has some important business, and Congress does it badly.

In reaction to this surly national mood, congressional leaders have authorized an in-house committee (14 members each from House and Senate and an equal division of party representation) to look at the way Congress is organized, the manner in which it handles legislation and the support staff it requires. If the committee does its job, Congress could become leaner, its operation more efficient and its burden on the taxpayer less prominent.

Committees and subcommittees could be consolidated or eliminated, reducing the staff people required and the time pressures they place on elected members.

A budget cycle could be put in place that lends itself more to longer range planning and oversight functions. (There would be no more governmental shutdowns when appropriation measures aren't settled by a fiscal period's start.)

Some progress could be made (maybe more properly termed "desirable regress") in reducing the amount of time Congress is in session and shifting the role of elected representatives back to that of "citizen legislators."

We believe Bill Emerson brings to this committee the frustration of one who has witnessed the flawed workings of the institution, the ardor of one who has preached his grim sermon numerous times and a good bit of common sense. We welcome the infusion of some Southeast Missouri thinking on this important panel. Some substantial proposals from this group could go a long way toward restoring the nation's confidence in Congress.