Why do 435 members of Congress (House) even have to be in Washingto, DC? With today’s technology in communications I see no real reason that they cant be located in the “home” state they represent. You know, available to the people who actually voted them in rather than Lobbyists or special interest groups. Need to vote on something... press a button. Need to meet with someone....we have teleconferencing. No need to fly home EVERY weekend at our expense. With their $174,000 Salary & $1.5 M slush fund (for EACH member) they could rent offices & hire staff in their own districts. They would also be more accessible to those they represent & would actually live in the real world rather than the DC bubble.
21
Sen. Cory Gardner (R) Colorado is a great example of a representative that demonstrates routinely that he doen't care, really doesn't care, what the majority of his constituents want. All calls to his public office number go straight to voice mail. Every time. His tax-payer funded "news letters" are fluff pieces. If his staffers bother to respond to an email it's months later with a form letter on a different topic. Party line line rubber stamper for all Trump nominations. Lost count of the times he's voted to repeal Obamacare.
Where does Sen. Gardner spend a lot of his time? Flying around the country organizing meetings to line up the big donations to support campaigns of his fellow republicans. So not only does he not care what the majority of his constituents want. He chooses to spend his time raising big money to get other members congress elected who don't care either.
There is exactly one way to make politicians like Cory Gardner understand what the majority of their constituents want. That would be to vote them out.
12
I read this right after reading another Times opinion article about how journalism is losing to Trump because Trump threw out the rule book and journalists haven't accepted that yet, and it seems to me the people who did this study are in the same denial. At this time in history, with this self-selected group of politicians, it's wrong to assume ignorance when malice will suffice.
7
They have private polls when they are running, but basically they are bought by those with anti-democratic interests. They don’t want to know.
1
'Since most congressional offices cannot regularly field public opinion surveys of their constituents,'
So why can't they? Isn't that part of the responsibility to the electorate? Certainly we are not that broken. Hopefully not.
9
The Democratic results are a reflection of the influence of large corporations and their plutocratic owners on the the form and substance of the disseminations of the mass media. Congressional Democrats care as a group about the will of the electorate.
The Republican results are a reflection of selection bias and the effect of the Fox News echo chamber on Congressional Republicans, their aides, and their constituency.
Republican members of Congress receive financial support based on their willingness to adhere to a conservative right-wing ideology. They are rewarded for convincing making false proclamations about the state of our nation.
It’s not by happenstance that Congressional Republicans are clueless. It’s a reflection of venality and indifference.
3
Congress doesn't give a whit what Americans want.
Self-dealing, corporate toadies, every one.
2
I was reading the comments below and the cynicism against government and politicians is rife. And so it led me to the thought, my thought, "I am grateful everyday that we had Barack Obama as president for 8 years." Where would we be without him? We came out of a terrible economic situation and slowly grew the economy to a point of stability. We were finally at a point where we could start to see growth and improvement in domestic and infrastructure sectors again. But, what happened? There is a national death wish. Every time a Democratic President just about gets us dug out of the last Republican mess, the people go and elect another Republican, again. National suicide this time.
Barack Obama had a vision for the country which Mitch McConnell and his mean cohorts thwarted. We as a nation could have made giant steps to end racism, promote education, rebuild our infrastructure, reach out to the countryside with education and industry, etc, but for the pledges by Republican Nay Sayers to thwart any progress--ever. No progress. No tolerance. No, no, no, never. Just gimme the money folks, gimme all the money, kill unions, kill public education, kill the environment, kill youthful hopes, kill the future. Just put the "R" by the word death--that is what it stands for.
16
Perhaps they thought you were asking them if they knew what their political donors want...since its those people who the aides and politicians spend all of their time thinking about pleasing anyway.
Perhaps if we got money out of politics they'd start caring about what their actual constituents want. Crazy talk I know....
4
Its not just congressional aides that are jacked--this study shows that Congress doesn't care at all what voters think: SEE http://journals.cambridge.org/download.php?file=%2FPPS%2FPPS12_03%2FS1537592714001595a.pdf&code=dae978e8dacbfc3c91802b67ab63f032
But its been obvious to anyone looking at the state of this country for decades that Congress doesnt give a hoot.
The problem is not that politicians don't know what their constituents want, the problem is they listen only to the most shrill voices. On the Dem side, the shrill are screaming at other humans in elevators and restaurants, and they get attention. Claire McCaskill correctly identified them. On the Republican side, it's the gun and pro-life segments that inhabit the shrill wing. On top of the shrill are idiots who actually give cash to politicians expecting something in return. This Confederacy of Dunces is accurately reflected by its Congress. Some of us have a hope that common sense might someday raise its ugly pragmatic head, but it's alas a tiny tiny hope.
1
Congress doesn't CARE what Americans want. They think it's their job to convince us we want something else.
1
The GOP in Congress doesn't CARE what Americans want. The GOP wants money and power and that is all they care about and they are selling ignorant Americans down the river to get it, while getting rich off their lobbyist friends. Only a fool would think that the GOP is there for public service.
3
This isn’t about what Americans want, it’s about what the Americans who actually voted the politician in question into office want to keep voting that politician into office. Those that don’t vote don’t count at all, whereas someone who voted but didn’t vote for the winner counts to some degree.
Only about 54% of those eligible to vote cast a ballot in the 2016 presidential election. The vote was more or less evenly split nationally, with HRC coming out a few million ahead of Trump. That means the election was decided by 26% of all eligible voters. You can bet that many of the 30% of Americans in favor of tax cuts voted for Trump and Representatives and Senators who favored a tax cut because those voters make enough to benefit from a tax cut. Those Americans that favor universal background checks on gun sales probably voted for HRC and Congressmen who favor such background checks, but the majority in Congress still won’t vote for background checks because not enough of those who favor background checks voted. Voting is the only thing that matters. If campaign spending was determinative of who wins then HRC would be President as she far outspent Trump.
Think of politicians as trial lawyers. The lawyer representing the plaintiff only represents the plaintiff and only cares about the plaintiff, and could care less what the defendant wants.
Why would politicians really be interested in the interests of those that didn’t put them in office? Seriously.
4
Get money out of politics! That is the goal of Wolf-PAC and anyone can volunteer. Until we get rid of the corporate and billionaire campaign donors, we will continue to see politicians voting for corporate interests rather than the will of the people they are supposed to represent.
4
A modest proposal for voter equilibration: pay every voter a $20 for showing up with proper id for their district, and casting a vote. Eliminate representative interference by having direct votes on issues nationwide, not just personalities. Strict majority, no jiggery pokery to evade popular will. Our congress in a bubble government was designed to administer an agrarian horse and buggy populace; it is outmoded for the speed of twittering consciousness in our times. The $20 is a gimmick for getting the true picture of what voters want. Besides, it would stimulate the economy and get people involved. Far more than $20 per voter is being spent by conservative indoctrination mills. Then we could talk about paying kids to go to school.
1
The elected representatives may not grasp what the populace wants, but then the populace should vote. That will be a message that the representatives understand.
Here is my take: Those who have to file W2 forms and/or who earn less than 300k should vote for the Dems. Maybe the fascination with guns, abortion or race prevent them from doing so. But they really need to focus on the low salaries paid to the average worker in the US, who cannot afford more than bare necessities, decent health care, a home of their own, university education, or a secure retirement.
In addition, many of the under 50 year olds have college debt that crushes them.
These people really need to vote out ALL of the GOP representatives on Nov 6.
2
Perhaps the citizenry is not so far right as we think, but vast numbers of Americans vote for the far right party, even as it destroys their lives. It's hard to combat demagogery with reason and sound policy -- which the Republicans call Socialism to scare the people.
4
There's a mistake in the graph re: support for the repeal of the ACA. Someone apparently confused support for the ACA itself with support for its repeal. The graph itself suggests that Republicans *underestimated* support for *repeal* by 24% and that Democrats *overestimated* support for *repeal* by 10%, but the summary says the opposite:
"Americans were divided on Affordable Care Act repeal. Still, Republicans assumed that their constituents were more favorable to A.C.A. repeal than was actually the case. By contrast, Democrats underestimated their constituents' support for A.C.A. repeal."
1
Let's be serious. Legislators know what Americans want, but they also know who pays them and keeps them in office, with all the advantages of respect, privilege and perks that go with that. Their staffers know what their bosses want to hear.
5
Quelle surprise!
Congressional staffers represent the interests of interest groups who take them to lunch and hold out the promise of revolving door employment more than they do the interests of their representative's constituents, who usually only write to get an American flag which has flown at the Washington Monument.
But let's not pretend for a moment that this adverse representation is carried out in good faith.
These are intelligent and well-educated people, typically the flower of Harvard an Yale, who know better but who find it convenient for careerist motives to adopt the attitude: My boss, right or wrong!
7
The authors' research seems founded on a couple of quaintly naive assumptions:
a) Representatives support policies based on the wishes of their constituents; ergo if their policy choices don't correspond with those constituents' wishes, that must mean they are unaware of them.
b) If we ask congressional staffers what their constituents think on a given policy, they will of course answer honestly and objectively, as opposed to mirroring or favoring their bosses' position on that issue.
The piece does then touch on the weaknesses of these assumptions, namely that representatives are more responsive to the donors who support their campaigns than to the rank and file of their constituency. The more natural conclusion though is that the lack of correspondence of their policies with their constituents' wishes is more a matter of indifference than ignorance.
10
I admit the last time I worked in D.C. was several decades ago, but I never assumed Congressional staff knew anything beyond what their favorite lobbyists told them. Of course their perceptions on current issues are off. They gave up doing real research decades ago.
6
Isn't this why Americans call D.C. the Swamp? Of course all our Mr. Smiths go to Washington, D.C. saying all the right things and by the time a decade has passed their only true constituency are the lobbyists and campaign funders.
But it is much better than the gritty casino that was D.C. for the forty years before Newt Gingrich showed up on behalf of democracy in 1994. The anything-but-Obama reaction in 2010 was another righting and cleansing.
1
In my district (rural WA) about 1/3 of voters are Democrats and what they think doesn't matter one iota. The Republican that wins the primary is in whatever. So by the "public", the staffers for this district mean people who vote in the Republican primary.
It wasn't always that way, this used to often be a Democratic district. But the Democrats in those days were old fashioned in being primarily pro-little guy while Republicans represented businesses. Abortion especially, and gun control essentially eliminate Democrats from competing in rural areas. If a way could be found to get over those two issues, then voila, the voting public would shift grandly to the left since the Republicans would once again have to worry about losing the general election.
7
Yes, it’s true that our representatives at all levels (city, state, and federal) don’t always know what we want, and sometimes they don’t care. How to correct that? Interested, motivated voters who ACT on their beliefs. People talk a lot about the influence of the NRA on Republicans and occasionally Democrats. Their influence is enormous, but it’s not actually about $$. It’s about their ability to contact and organize their voters into active blocks of votes that can make or break a candidate. It’s about people like Marion Hammer in Florida. See:https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/inside-the-nras-florida-strategy-128869/
The New Yorker did a profile on Marion Hammer and it was shocking to me, her ability to turn out voters and tell them how to vote. All she had to do was tell a legislator “cross me on this and you won’t be re-elected”. They knew she could deliver and obeyed her. She never gave anyone a dime, nor did her people, but they controlled the legislature on gun issues for years.
4
Somehow, I doubt you favor direct democracy.
1
Interesting piece, but why is it in the "Opinion" section? This is factual reporting on social science.
1
They aren't out of touch; they know perfectly well what their constituents want. The trouble is, their constituents are not their voters. They're the businesses and special interest groups bankrolling them, like the NRA and the Adelsons for Republicans, the unions for Democrats. Let's not kid ourselves that they're ignorant. I've written again and again to my congressman about a variety of issues - health insurance, gun control, maybe even climate change. The only non-double-talk response I've ever gotten was he got me tickets to a White House tour. And somehow I don't think he had to think hard about his response to my request on that.
38
100% agree with @Vicky. Sorry authors but you don't need a masters in political science to understand who really makes you win elections (big donors). The play book is simple
1. raise lots of money
2. use that to conjure/run on emotional issues and lots of negative campaigning to win elections.
3. Enact policies your donors want so they will contribute more for your next election.
4. Repeat
The politics in the US has started resembling those in developing countries like India - only difference is that some of those countries are trying to get anonymous/unreported money out of politics but US is trying to get more and more anonymous/unreported money into the political system. The costliest election and a conservative supreme court means that this trend will continue at least for the foreseeable future.
12
@Vicky
I received worse. I remember writing our old deplorable Senator Santorum on women's reproductive rights, and instead of writing me back saying he disagreed, as he is completely anti-abortion, he actually had the chutzpah to write back how pleased I must be about his anti-abortion stance!
Our new deplorable Seantor Toomey just does not bother ever responding, even with a form letter. I wrote him a long letter about my opposition to the Republican's Tax Law of 2017, detailing exactly how it would hurt Pennsylvanian's and he totally ignored it.
I think many people have given up because why spend time and effort crafting a carefully worded, and fact backed letter only to know your representative will never even look at it, let alone consider your position. A waste of time.
1
Politicians vote the way they do not because they don't know what their constituents prefer but because our current political system makes constituent preferences unimportant. Politicians need enormous amounts of money to be reelected, so they take care to deliver results that please rich donors. Most people aren't paying much attention to the specifics of policy, but a highly motivated minority are. If 15% of your constituents are 2nd-amendment absolutists, who will vote against you if you support any gun control legislation, and the rest, while they may favor gun control, aren't passionate about the issue, you can't afford to support gun control--a candidate who appeals to that 15% will easily defeat you in a primary.
7
@Mark Donohue, true, true, true. The squeeky wheel gets the grease. A cohesive, highly motivated, active minority can easily dominate an election over a majority that are disjointed, blase and 1/2 of them forget to vote because they were too busy with their daily routine, or the football game, or the kids soccer match, etc, etc.
The extremists on both the right and the left are the people who dominate their political parties, determine the outcomes of primaries, and create the party platforms. The majority of us are in the center and we are, for the most part, too busy with daily life to invest huge amounts of our time and energy in politics. Even if our elected officials did know how we felt about things like gun control, they might not care, because they cannot count on us to vote for or against them. Thus, we have no real influence.
That’s the reality of the situation.
2
Fortunately, my federal representatives and I are generally on the same page. But consider the many cases where members of Congress have held Town Halls, and were roundly attacked for their votes. Did they listen to constituents, or shut down the meetings and run away?
And consider local, NYC politics. At a recent Town Hall, the Councilmember managed to let a significant part of the minority community know about the Town Hall but failed to secure attendance by the white community.
And at the meeting, he called on only one white person. But he had three questions from people asking the same question - why can't they get the same pay as licensed teachers with masters degrees.
1
All I can say is suspicions confirmed. The republicans have captured government and are working to turn us into even more of an oligopoly than we already are. They are simply not interested in providing for the general welfare, just providing for their funders.
This country has lots of problems that people want solved but are simply not addressed. It's quite a long list:
Mass shootings (arm everybody)
Climate change (doesn't exist)
Opioid crisis (their own damn fault)
Poverty (why, this is the richest country on earth; if you're poor, it's your fault)
Income inequality (forget it, the economy's booming)
Racism (they should just be quiet)
Health care (it's a product; if you can't afford it, get a better job)
Education (just take out a non-recourse loan)
Lots of people would like to blame the democrats, but let's remember that Obama ran on uniting the country and all he got for his trouble was Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan doing everything in their power to make him fail.
10
@Steve
This should be a Times Pick!
So what is new? The Wizard of Oz lives and is a Republican apparatchik/office holder. Democratic candidates are as deer in Republican headlights. Or as Truman stated: "Run two Republicans and you will elect a Republican every time."
4
Four words sufficiently describe why Congress members, their staffers, the mainstream press and their editorial staffers are disconnected from what the people want: Versailles, Versailles, Versailles and Versailles.
1
Clearly, those polls show that the GOP "leaders" simply don't want to believe or admit that their constituents aren't so on board with their continuing agenda to gut the middle class to benefit the wealthy.
6
This is a powerful and important piece of scientific research. As a research scientist for my entire career, I appreciate and applaud their work.
The elephant in the room, which no doub the authors are well aware of, is that another scientific study about ten years ago showed that average constituents are about nine times LESS likely to be recognized/heard/acknowledged/listened to than wealthy donors. The correletion coefficient is about 0.98. Until big money is eliminated from elections, that won’t change.
I’m surprised the authors didn’t also look into asking the simplest of questions of Congressional aides, and that is, “What was the average amount of money donated to your boss’ campaign by the constituents you actually met with?” And also, a public poll of how many people would like to have big money out of politics. My hunch is, the answer to the first question is exactly the inverse of the second question; i.e., the average amount of money donated by someone they actually talked to was in the 98th percentile, and the percentage of Americans who want big money out of politics is also about 98%.
8
As a former staffer, my boss (the senator) expected us to have our hands on the pulse of his constituents’ needs. We read local papers in the state everyday, met with hundreds of constituents every year, and reached out to professional, grassroots and grasstips groups on all the important issues and every vote. If staffers aren’t doing this then they are not doing their jobs nor helping their boss represent the people.
Vote in elected officials who will do this. The job is representational, not paternalistic.
4
Congress knows exactly what Americans want. They just don't care.
Why? Because our elections have become so rigged, officials in both parties need to play to their "base." Until that changes (and good luck with that), Congress won't represent the people. they will represent their own electoral interests.
10
I don't know who the pollsters are talking too, but for me I like the tax cuts and all of the people I know here in middle America do too. This piece is by someone who doesn't know what is going on in the country....another liberal hack.
1
@Tony J Mann
Out here on the fringes we "like" the tax cuts too. Who wouldn't like about another $200 a month in take home pay?
But we know that goes away in another two years, it disables the federal government to goose the economy when it inevitably goes into recession, all while growing the federal deficit by nearly $2 trillion dollars. That's real debt, and it will cripple Medicare and Social Security, things which all of us have paid into over a life time.
So, hurray. Enjoy your bit of extra take home pay for the next year and a half!
10
@Tony J Mann
$50 per month doesn't even make a dent. Sorry. But it does add to the federal budget problems. Bigtime. I'm not happy with the Republican goal of "privatizing" Social Security and Medicare out of existence, which they will do when they go, "Whoops! What happened here? Looks like the rich guys got cha money!"
5
Okay, so the point is that we all bear some of the responsibility for the disconnect between congress and their constituents, but REALLY, many of us call, write and email into congressional vacuums where people like Ted Cruz and John Cornyn have made up our minds for us. My text or my email - or even snail mail just open up a faucet of emails back touting their accomplishments and plans. They don't care what I think! They just want to collect their unofficial bribes from the special interest troughs at which they feed! I believe I am like many Americans on both sides of the political divide. My so-called representatives, represent nothing but their own interests - which include sucking up to the power brokers and large donors. Maybe this great experiment has failed because it surely feels like failure out here in common woman and man land!
While these spoiled manipulators play their games in DC, the rest of us are driving on dangerous bridges, declaring bankruptcy because of medical bills and burying the latest guns-at-all-cost victims. I'm angry and disappointed at our so-called government "of the people, by the people and for the people," because it no longer exists. Now it is of the incompetent, by the oligarchs and for the 1%."
2
It would help if the Republican Party was not run like the Mafia. Party purity, pledges to never raise taxes, abortion stance, gun control.....anyone who deviates from the bosses is rebuked and run out of town in the next election. Representatives can no longer be individuals with their own opinions, and certainly are not allowed to be responsive to their own constituents.
26
@Louisa Glasson, Democrats do the exact same thing. It’s how political parties work. The party big wigs develop a “platform”, their official position on a range of issues, and good luck getting nominated for anything important if you don’t toe the line.
If you can put yourself on a ballot without the party ok, then the way you are punished for stepping out of line is the party HQ donation machine sees to it that you’re campaign is not funded. Or they just give tons of $$ to a same party opponent who agrees with HQ. If you don’t think the Democrats play that same game, you’re naive.
5
@Ann, that is not how the Democrats work. You must not know what Will Rogers said.
1
@Ann
You are wrong about Democrats who have a wide spectrum of stances. Look at Manuchin of West Virginia.
1
Here is an article about an academic study done by two scholars (at Princeton and Northwestern) demonstrating that the US is not actually a democracy, but an oligarchy:
https://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-echochambers-27074746
1
@MAL
We need the emoji with tears for this one. Heartbreaking.
What's interesting here is the underlying presumption - almost laughable in its way - that Congress actually cares what Americans want. What Congress consistently demonstrates is that its members wants what keeps them in power, not what is healthy for America or reflective of what their constituents may want. I do not agree with the overused statement that "America is more polarized than ever." I think Americans are being played by the politicians who frame the questions of the day in a most extreme fashion to paint their opposition in the worst possible light. None of this seems to be about trying to advance an agenda that Americans may want or need. It seems very simply about staying in power.
10
The biggest reason that the politicians don't know what the people want is that the majority do not express those preferences in the only way they understand - by voting.
While an elected representative may well represent all the people in his district, he only has the vote count to tell him how they want to be represented.
If you want a politician to do what you prefer, get out there and vote for one who will. Otherwise, your opinions are worth as much as the vote you did not cast.
3
It is difficult to get a man to understand something if his salary depends on his not understanding it. - Upton Sinclair
That explains why staffers "can't say" what their constituents really want -- if a staffer said something different from what the wealthy donors want, he wouldn't have a job much longer.
4
See NY Magazine “The Radical Left’s Agenda Is More Popular Than the Mainstream GOP’s
By Eric Levitz
(or at least what’s termed “radical left” in our distorted political spectrum, but is actually centrist in other modern democracies. We’re generations behind the advanced world in health care for all, as 1 example.)
Says "political scientists are debating how thoroughly rich people dominate our policy-making. "
But this isn’t making it into the media. What’s the media afraid of? “All the news fit to print”?
"Gilens and Page published a study showing that “economic elites” and “business interests” enjoy such disproportionate influence over which policies the federal government enacts, America scarcely qualifies as a popular democracy."
In polling, a problem is “the role elite influence plays in determining what policy positions are deemed serious enough to ask voters about, let alone, to write into congressional legislation.”
Our elites set norms. And how do they set the limits on what topics even get discussed on TV cable news panels and op ed columns? And define what's 'left wing'?
Polls show most citizens and some politicians want to reverse Citizens United that defined money as protected speech per 1st amendment---a whopping lie worthy of Trump, undermining our democracy.
This is never debated in our media, yet is the underlying blockage to the needed reforms most citizens want.
If these reforms don't happen---are there more Trumps in our future?
6
America: Love it or run it.
4
"We found two key factors that explain why members of Congress are so ignorant of public preferences: their staffs’ own beliefs and congressional offices’ relationships with interest groups" ...shocking
5
While I agree with most commenters on the deceit of Congress, especially Republican leadership I think it is equally true that the voting public don't really know what they want and are also misinformed and easily mislead.
How, for example, is a congressperson supposed to deal with a large cross-section of the populace that denies basic science or wants "government to keep its hands of my Medicare?"
Mass propaganda to the masses is as important as donor money in ensuring that our government doesn't work properly.
5
Some of this is just common sense: Yes, most Americans support background checks and gun registration. This is the sensible position. We register our pets, our cars, our bikes, why not our guns. One doesn't think they should have to call their representative about this.
But yet again a group of social scientists tell us what we already know: That big money buys legislation and kills it, no matter what the popular will.
4
This would be an eye-opener for congress if they were intent on representing the will of the people; but it should be obvious by now that who they really represent is the donor class.
2
No taxation without representation. We have a Congress that does not respond, over and over again, to the real problems facing AMericans. Not only that, but most of them are millionaires and have never even done their own laundry, pumped their own gas, or raked their own lawns. No wonder they don't know what we need and want - they don't even know who we are.
And corporate cash and personhood has got to go. There should be no campaign contributions from corporations - the reason we have not acted to address climate change and a host of other problems is because corporate interests profit off of the status quo - and that status quo is for us citizens to be ignored. The federal government does not look after the common welfare. This is the bottom line and a big part of why Trump got elected. When people feel ignored and powerless, they will vote for the forces of destruction because since my house is burning to the ground, let me burn yours down too.
3
"Americans who consistently support raising the minimum wage, background checks for gun sales and taking action on the climate crisis"--more self-serving cultural Marxism from the NYT, but, strangely, left out open-borders.
None of that put Trump in the White House.
So where'd that 70% come from--left over from the 93% chance for Hillary to take the election?
Seems Americans do know what they want--Trump is making it happen.
1
It is not that our "representatives" misperceive what the public wants - they do not care what we want. The notion that we have a representative democracy that inevitably bends to the will of the majority is a myth. Instead, we live in a corporatocracy with a government currently headed by a narcissitic crackpot who nontheless primarily serves the interests of the corporations. This also happens to serve his personal interests since he is a corporate bigwig himself and it allows him to use his office to line his pockets and those of his cronies.
6
About half of Congress doesn't care what Americans want. They have an ideological agenda, just like Lenin did.
3
These are all interesting comments, many indicating that their representatives don't care what the average citizen wants. And they are probably true. Ironically, what astonishes me more is that some people, many in fact, believed Donald Trump was the answer. Trump is what happens when big money takes over Congress. Our Congress exists to serve the donors that help get them reelected. Both parties are guilty. Citizens United opened the floodgates and by all appearances I'm not sure our "democracy" will continue to exist.
5
As many readers have remarked, the message in this column is not surprising but is very depressing. It makes you wonder how democracy can survive in this form.
This is why many voters supported Trump. They are desperate for a change. They know that the government has not represented their interests for a long time.
This is the reason that so many voters don't bother to vote. They see no purpose in voting. The people they would vote for will not represent them.
The big question is, how can the system be improved? Certainly campaign finance reform would be a good starting place but don't hold your breath.
1
It is not easy to get elected. One needs to serve the interest of the donors while pretending to care about the interest of the voters. Those that can do this game best, get elected.
3
I think there is another element beyond politicians misunderstanding what people want. For decades the right wing in this country has become expert at demonizing things. A lot of people have been hearing every day for ten years, from people they like and trust that the ACA (or Hillary, Pelosi, Benghazi . . .) are terrible. Of course they are against it. But the "it" they are ag against is really just another name for as pl their gates and fears.
1
Both parties don't really care what the people think, want or need. Our 2 Party system only exists to serve the interests of corporations and the rich.
Want real change? Revolution
1
Under our election finance system, what’s important is what their corporate mega donors want.
Our lawmaking isn't responding to citizens, who aren't getting what they want and deserve--- health care for all, fair taxes, better wages/job security, low cost college and training, infrastructure, green energy----and even gun owners want gun safety laws.
Princeton's Gilens and Page's famous study in lawmaking records showed that citizens preferences in policy are a much lower priority than mega donor preferences.
We turn over our elections to the rich, unlike other democracies who use more public funding and limit private donations, plus they ban the campaign ads that flood our media paid by mega donors.
Jimmy Carter said the US is becoming an oligarchy, since it costs so many millions to run for any office compared to his time. Carter's statement was hardly discussed on the main media, which gets profits from campaign ads, the biggest expense in elections.
We need continual op eds and TV discussion to devoted to what’s cited in 1 line here:
Re “campaign contributions: The more that offices get support from fossil fuel over environmental groups, the more they underestimate state- or district-level support for climate action.” Apply that for most policies.
New trend---a few candidates now are rejecting super PACS,taking only citizen small donations. A healthy development if it spreads. Where's media coverage on that?
7
Congress doesn't know or care what America wants. It only cares what its large donors want and what Donald Trump wants. The desires of the average American be damned. What this country and world needs is a paradigm shift in human thought unlike we've ever seen - and this may yet come. In the near future, we will program the human mind in the computer based on a "survival" algorithm, which will provide irrefutable proof of how we have tricked the mind with our ridiculous beliefs about just what is supposed to survive - producing minds programmed de facto for destruction. When we understand this, we will begin the long trek back to reason and sanity.
See RevolutionOfReason.com
1
"Congress doesn’t know what policies Americans support."
The truth is, neither party cares what the public wants - until election time, and then, once elected, they don't care anymore.
The reason for this is simple, the wants, views and needs of the general public are at odds with those of the wealthy on a long list of economic issues: Medicare for all, increased social program spending including increased Social Security benefits/increased FICA cap, decreased military spending, increased taxation of wealth (beyond the the paltry 3 or 4 percentage point increases the Dems occasionally enact, expecting much adulation), a financial transaction tax, student loan debt forgiveness, decreased or free public university tuition.
Even the Democratic Party - the so-called party of the people - doesn't back these proposals beyond the level of rhetoric.
4
In 2017 the GOP Congress decided to repeal the ACA. They went home to their constituents and held town halls expecting to be applauded and cheered. Instead they heard, "You're killing my spouse, my children, my parents, me." Some of them ran out the back door. Did they learn that they should not destroy peoples' health care? That , at least maybe, they should leave the ACA alone? No, they learned not to hold town halls with the people they are suposed to listen to.
Vote them out and call your new representative often with your opinions.
4
"Congress Has No Clue What Americans Want"
True. What WE want is found in para 3:
- Minimum wage that is a living wage;
- Universal background checks on gun sales;
- Work to reduce the calamity of climate change.
But all 3 areas run head-on into extremely strong special interest lobbies that own congress, especially the GOP side.
- Businesses want cheap labor to keep profits fat;
- NRA wants zero limits on all weapons;
- Fossil fuel industry wants no controls on pollution or profits.
The execrable Citizens United ruling by the SCOTUS allows these industries to simply buy congress out from under us, as we've seen with the Koch brothers and their network. Until this status quo changes, we'll continue to be ignored by congress.
5
Actually, I think your headline should be Congress "Doesn't Care" what Americans want. Crucial votes in the past year have demonstrated the dirty, historic fact of Congress: politicians vote their ego, their party, their big-money donors--especially if they are GOP. Look at health care: overwhelmingly, Republican and Democratic voters favor the ACA now, but it's narrowly been protected by a few votes. More recently, the Kavanaugh nomination, ditto.
2
Trump however knows what he wants. More power and wealth. And he lies to us that he cares about our wants. He and Congress make great bedfellows.
1
It's not that Congress has no clue what Americans want. It's that Republicans in Congress don't care. Their feigned ignorance is willful. They don't work for their constituents. They work for their donors.
4
I appreciate the article and the research but this is not that complicated. The current GOP leadership and representation simply does not care what the constituents want. McConnell knows that most people benefit from the ACCA. He understands that major cuts to social security and Medicare will seriously undermine the futures of most Americans. They simply don’t care. They are locust who have flown in to pick the bones of the American peoples and our national resources all in an effort to enlarge the benefits of a small minority who are already well protected and cared for.
All Americans hold some measure of responsibility for this cynical state. People accept arguments from leaders that are clearly proven wrong by both demonstrable facts and available research. As our world becomes more complex we disengage from the work necessary to be informed voters. That is completely understandable given the magnitude of information at our disposal. But ultimately there is little excuse for willful ignorance that jeopardizes our own futures and that of our progeny.
2
Progressive thinkers in NC, who are mostly in metro areas call and write our Republican Senators and get canned responses. As one writer mentioned, they and their staff listen to who donates the most, not who is morally or ethically right. Tillis and Burr are part of the old, white male Republican guard that refuses to change. They really could care less about the poor since the poor don't donate. They support nationalists, religious fundamentalists, AR-15 owners, pro-lifers, and capitalist health care for all. It's very frustrating. We are a purple state in that our metro areas lean heavily Blue and our rural areas lean heavily Red. The two drivers of true Congressional change involve 1) getting more than a miserable 55% of Democrats here to vote actually versus stating they will and 2) abolishing the Electoral College. And here's an incentive for Congress to pay down the debt--any registered voter who doesn't vote without a verifiable, bona fide excuse gets fined $100.
1
I think the views held by the various Representatives and their staffs DO mirror the preferences of the one relevant group they care about -- primary voters in their party.
Given the lack of real competition in gerrymandered districts, the relevant election for many is the primary election. Turnout for these is low. I bet if you surveyed the views of primary voters, they would in fact be representing that constituency.
1
When Obama won, I filled out a poll by the DNC that asked for legislative priorities in order of urgency, as a member of the Democratic Party. I distinctly remember checking health insurance reform and climate change legislation as my top two. I was very happy that they fought for both.
In general, it is public interest groups funded by individual citizens (the Sierra Club, the ACLU, etc) that lobby Democrats, while only industry leaders lobby Republicans. So it is not surprising that theirs is less accurate.
1
@Susan Kraemer "I distinctly remember checking health insurance reform and climate change legislation as my top two"
So it doesn't bother you that the Dems gave us corporatized health care reform (much of ACA legislation was written by insurance industry lobbyists).
"The number of lobbyists working Congress on health reform more than doubled throughout 2009 from more than 1,400 in the first three months of the year to nearly 3,700 in the final quarter, when attention focused on the Senate bill.
“They cut it. They chopped it. They reconstructed it,” Julian Zelizer, a Princeton University professor of public affairs, said about health reform lobbying. “They didn’t bury it. I don’t think they wanted to.”
https://khn.org/news/cpi-health-lobbying/
On the topic of the environment, does it bother you that Obama brags about all of the oil and gas that was extracted during his presidency?
Read Obama's words:
"I’ve directed my administration to open up millions of acres for gas and oil exploration across 23 different states. We’ve quadrupled the number of operating rigs to a record high. We’ve added enough new oil and gas pipeline to encircle the Earth, and then some. . . . In fact, the problem . . . is that we’re actually producing so much oil and gas . . . that we don’t have enough pipeline capacity to transport all of it where it needs to go.”
https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/obama-and-climate-change-the-real-story-104491/
1
@Ed Watters
We have health care--not perfect health care, but health care--for many millions more thanks to the ACA. Insurance industry was involved, but many others were as well:
"Health Care for America Now (HCAN) played a central role in leading that effort. HCAN brought together a wide array of organizations, from AFSCME, AFL-CIO and SEIU to the NAACP, MoveOn, ACORN, the Center for American Progress, the National Council of La Raza, Campaign for America’s Future and more." https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2014/01/05/the-group-that-got-health-reform-passed-is-declaring-victory-and-going-home/?utm_term=.2b8adced6611
On the environment, Obama signed the Paris Accords, among taking other strong steps: https://www.edf.org/blog/2017/01/12/ready-defend-obamas-environmental-legacy-top-10-accomplishments-focus
@ERISA lawyer The best you can say about Obama's climate policy is that it was a mixed bag of good policies and awful ones. BTW, the Paris Accords were never any more than promises of future action. A Lawyer should be able to understand that.
Many commenters have justly noted that what the congress cares about is only what concerns their wealthy donors. That's true, as far as it goes, but there's a far deeper and more frightening aspect to this. The power of our nation is coalescing around a small group of oligarchs who, as we know, control the vast majority of our wealth. They don't care about you and me, and they also don't care about the thousands of garden varieties millionaires who vote for them.
So, what's the end game? It's always the same, the highest concentration of wealth amongst the fewest individuals. The concentration of wealth and power that these people envision is staggering. The Aristocracy of France is as good an example as any. Versailles housed 4000 people on its grounds, nearly all of them serving a tight group of hereditary aristos. Serfs were no better off than slaves and could be bought, sold and terminated (with extreme prejudice). Meritocracy was not part of their world view The Monarchs were known for their greed, their selfishness, and their vanity. And many were buffoons. Sound familiar?
There's revolution in the air. This system will not be repaired from the inside, those days are long gone. But, let's make sure our's a peaceful one.
2
Congress has long been bought and paid for by the big corporations and at least one foreign government. The House of Representatives no longer “represents” the American people . Lobbyists draft the laws then pay for them to be passed in the House.
There is nolonger democracy in the USA. It has been highjacked.
4
People in Congress, democrats but especially republicans ONLY listen and respond to their big corporate donors. I have called and emailed my Republican congressman, Tom McClintock, numerous times, I was treated like an insignificant peon, when I could even get a staffer. Most times - chirp chirp. If I were a Koch funded attorney/lobbyists I'm sure my call would have been answered. Get money out of politics and go Jessica Morse.
4
Like most academics, the authors’ heads are in the clouds. In reality, politicians know exactly what their “constituents want, and the legislate accordingly. The real estate moguls and Wall Street fat cats want tax cuts and loopholes, and they are accommodated. The fossil fuel barons want to emit their pollutants with impunity,and thus environmental regulations are eliminated. The steel industry wants to increase its profits, tariffs can insure that. The military industrial complex wants warmongering, and our generals and President given them the reason. Our government , to paraphrase Lincoln, is by the special interests and for the special interests. As to the unspecial ...Fox News will tell them what they want.
1
Not wanting to know what the public thinks goes a long way toward not knowing what the public thinks. Add to that the possibility that the public is perceived by those in power as the enemy makes it more likely that not knowing springs from not caring. Self-deceit afflicts all of us; self-serving politicians make it a self-serving, virtuous, art form. A self-deceiving public that refuses to take the common good seriously by, e.g., engaging our public servants regularly, by voting regularly, gets what it deserves.
Pat Toomey and most of the representatives in my state, PA, actively avoid hearing from constituents, hang up on them, respond to their concerns with doublespeak emails.
It would be an easy thing to listen, but unless they think you voted for them, they're not interested. Time to vote them out.
The disconnect between voters and members of Congress is easy to explain. The cost of protracted campaigns means our elected officials need to spend most of their time raising money from wealthy donors who expect the best possible return on their investment. The need to satisfy those donors so they'll continue to fund their campaigns means they have little time for or interest in the majority of their constituents who don't write large checks. If we still have a democracy, it now means "one dollar, one vote."
Arguably, our republican democracy has been supplanted with a plutocracy that exclusively represents wealthy donors. Those donors include the NRA, which wants unlimited unrestricted gun sales; oil and automobile companies that don't want restrictions on carbon emissions; corporations that regard every penny paid to workers as money stolen from shareholders' pockets; billionaires like the Kochs who are furious about having their entitled wealth confiscated as taxes and redistributed to worthless "takers"; and of course the medical-industrial complex, whose executives seek to preserve our unique capitalist system that provides the best wealth care for themselves and their shareholders.
Thus, the real disconnect is between the interests of donors and those of voters. The need for enormous campaign funding means our elected officials pay attention to donors rather than voters. It takes a lot of money to convince people to vote against their own interests.
5
Here is your answer. Only about 30 percent of Americans supported the new tax bill — unlike the well over 70 percent of Americans who consistently support raising the minimum wage, background checks for gun sales and taking action on the climate crisis.
The GOP is not going to be a party to any of the three items most people support due to donor distaste for them. Likewise, they want to destroy Obamacare which is overwhelmingly supported nationally. The GOP does not support the idea of a national safety net that is government sponsored. They cannot do a safety net and cut taxes for the wealthy.
4
As Upton Sinclair said, it is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it.
So why do we, the voters, keep electing these so-called representatives? De we not know the difference between what we want and what they do? Or do we sacrifice our true interests on the economy, the climate, health care, and gun safety because we are distracted by emotional appeals about race and threats to the power of white, Christian men?
3
Two points. 1) I served as the Legislative Aide to a local councilman for several years, hired with no previous political experience or work on his campaign. My qualifications were living in his district, service on my neighborhood association, and professional experience working with difficult people. I was a lefty, living in a center/left district and always knew my politics were more socially and economically too the left of our constituents. As a result, I had good relationships in our community and was able to get stuff done, including with staff of conservative leaning offices. 2) I remain politically engaged, calling and writing my representatives at every level. They don't care about my opinion. A heartfelt letter to Flake reflecting how lax gun control has affected my life was met with a return letter articulating his position while ignoring my experience. They get away with this because of low voter turnout. Not enough of us really care enough. Why do we expect our "electeds" to care more than we do?
4
On the other hand, when it comes to foreign affairs, where the public has no direct experience, what the public thinks is largely shaped by what their politicians tell them.
It's a little preposterous to think that some academics know how to get elected better than the politicians who actually get elected in their own districts. But if Democratic politicians want to take the professors' advice and go full socialist we'll see how that works out for them.
The whole piece is obviously intended not as sincere political advice but as a marketing tool for their upcoming book.
1
@Wiener Dog Are these positions full socialist, or are they simply social insurance and modifications of capitalism that have been with us since the West emerged from feudalism? Capitalism as a theory is great. But business is what people actually do with the theory. And nobody, especially capitalists, have any interest at all in pure capitalism.
@Andy Makar
Fair enough. The "full socialist" line was a bit of hyperbole.
There are really two or more Americas at this point. Coastal and urban Americans live a different life from suburban, small city, and rural Americans. They have different priorities and needs. This is why Republicans tend to represent the rural Americans and Democrats tend to represent the Urban Americans. What Americans want is a complicated matter because it depends on factors like where you live, what you do for a living, etc.
2
How did we get here?
The only thing I can think of is that our elected officials are much more responsive to their donors than they are to the citizens they represent.
Campaign finance reform would help change this. Alas, that is nowhere on the horizon either.
5
This analysis does not account for the strengths of people's preferences. For example, on background checks, a small proportion of the populace is very strongly against background checks, and fewer people are very strongly for background checks. Plus the people who are very strongly against them are willing to contribute to campaigns to a greater extent than those that are for them.
This is also true for raising the minimum wage. Many more people are for raising it than against, but small and medium-sized business owners are very strongly against it, and are willing to spend money in support of their positions.
2
You've missed the point. The problem isn't that they are unable to divine constituents' political desires, it is that they are uninterested. More and more of their daily attention span must be directed toward the concentrated sources of campaign funds so responsiveness to individual constituents and concern about their opinions are in sharp decline. Of course there is lip service, but most real work is to keep the money flowing
10
Unfortunately, I have met with my District's entrenched, gerrymandered congressional representative and he doesn't care what I think. I'm a Democrat and he doesn't have to listen, hold a town hall meeting, or listen to his constituents.
10
@Kelli Hoover That has been mine (our) experience here in District 19 in NY, now a hotly contested congressional district, because John Faso hasn't been interested in talking to anyone who disagrees with his positions -- And his positions seem cemented in place by the donations to his campaign by, among others, the petroleum industry (fracking) and the gun lobby. For the past 2 years, he has refused to hold a public town hall, and has only agreed to meet with people in small groups (where we have to submit our names and towns ahead of time) under very controlled circumstances. His opponent, Antonio Delgado, is out there every day talking to people, wherever they are and whatever they think, and he's already had public town halls in all 11 counties that make up NY19. I strongly, deeply hope that he wins. He has shown that he is not afraid of us, and that he's willing to listen to all of us.
4
On January 20, 2009, I stood on the Mall with my son and hundreds of thousands (I hesitate to estimate the total for obvious reasons) of people from all over the country for Barack Obama's inauguration. More specifically we stood with a group from an African-American church in Detroit who had driven all night for the event and were leaving for home directly after the swearing in. As I scanned the crowd, I told my son that I thought President Obama would be able to do anything - because he had the backing of the people. But then everyone went home and got busy with their own lives. For whatever reasons, they didn't engage, didn't write/call/vote. And now, sadly, we are here. Democracy takes work and can't be taken for granted - from the biggest elections to the smallest public policy issues. We have to be dedicated to it and work to get our fellow Americans dedicated, as well.
8
Every weekend for months we have been canvassing in New Hampshire, asking citizens what they think about the very questions you mention: gun control, the ACA, climate change, minimal wage and most look at us like deer in the headlights. They usually stammer they'll vote for the "person not the party" or they will make up their minds later.
If Congress doesn't know where voters stand on "the issues" is it not possible this is because the voters do not know where they stand on "the issues?"
2
@JM re texting, call, email : I have done ALL that. I got nothing but canned responses, if any response at all. Many times when phoning I could not reach a person, had to leave a message. Emails just got the party line with NO actual analysis or response to what I said. Asked for a return call, never happened. When I did reach an actual person in my republican congressman's office in D.C. about the repeal of the ACA, and noted to him that EVERY health professional group which had expressed an opinion was against the repeal attempt, he replied with hostility, "That's because they're all making money from it." His palpable hostility to me, as a constituent who disagreed with my congressman's republican policy position, was offensive. I asked to have my congressman or his chief of staff call me to discuss this, and never received a reply. IMHO (based on my experience in dealing only with my republican representatives in Congress), they tout only the party line and will not listen to constituents who disagree or ask questions. This year I am voting a straight democratic ticket. Honestly, I don't even CARE about the quality of individual democrats on the ballot at this point - I am that disgusted with my republican (total lack of ) representation in Congress
14
@Independent Voter
I've had the same experiences myself in contacting my US representatives' offices, and it's very discouraging. I think individual voters are often viewed with disdain, while their attention goes to the groups with the money. Another reason we need campaign finance reform.
3
none of this is rocket science
take the money out of politics, pass strict common sense campaign reform & term limits, make it easy for everyone to vote (no Gerrymandering or voter suppression laws )corporate influence etc and this would be a non issue
Our system has been corrupted by money and special interests so the voice of the people is not worth as much.
11
Congress knows exactly what the American people want. But they also know what their big donors want and that always takes precedence.
9
If Congress doesn’t know what constituents tell pollsters they want, that’s because such information is irrelevant.
If next week’s midterms follow precedent, 70% of eligible voters will stay home; their opinions don’t matter. What do matter are the views of base voters who drive primaries and special interests who fund campaigns designed to increase turnout for candidates that the base support and dampen turnout by everybody else.
And Congressional staffers know just what the people who get their bosses elected want down to the finest detail.
4
@Unbalanced
Can the media and others please stop using "stay home" as a euphemism for not voting. In my state, ALL vote is by mail. so many of us actually vote from home and not on election day. Many others don't vote because they can't get away from work, so they are at work, not at home. Just say that "70% of eligible voters 'won't vote'". That's what you mean. Just say it!
My experience, in Arkansas, is that politicians make it very hard for the public, including their constituents to contact them. Effectively, they hide. They don't want to hear from ordinary voters. They only listen to those who make substantial campaign contributions. Representative democracy has become a joke. They don't conduct town halls, they don't offer email/newsletter subscriptions and when they do send emails, they make it impossible to reply by sending from do-not-reply addresses. The thrust of those emails is to solicit campaign contributions, not to solicit constituent opinion. I recently discovered that all house members have email addresses that conform to a naming pattern, such that, if one follows that pattern, it is possible to guess the actual email address. However, I got better response from congresspersons in states other than my own: for example, a Florida representative, a Republican, no less, to whom I made it clear that I supported his opponent in the upcoming midterms. We had a somewhat useful discussion about gun control and an assault weapons ban. Where we differed was in a buy-back program: I am in favor, he is not, which makes me wonder how sincere he really is. He took NRA money. My own representative ignores all of the correspondence I have sent him. He may, in fact, have a filter that sends emails such as mine to trash. I voted early and voted against him, but in this state, that's pretty much a lost cause.
5
In a world of gerrymandered Congressional districts, the relevant constituencies for many Representatives are the primary voters in their party. Everyone else is incidental to the election process for many Representatives.
I'd be curious if the views of the senior staff members DO represent the views of the small minority that actually participates in the primary process for each party.
3
They are out of touch with the people because what we want doesn't matter to them. Not enough of us vote. Thanks to gerrymandering and gluts of money our voices just don't count like they should.
5
January 21, 2010 was Independence Day for corporations.
It was also the day that the United Corporations of America was established.
6
Sorry, but the assistant professors are naive.
The reaction of the Congressional aids is reminiscent of Captain Renault's exclamation to Rick in the movie "Casablanca:"
"I'm shocked, shocked to find that gambling is going on here."
To paraphrase for the professors, the congressional aid now exclaims:
"I'm shocked, shocked to find that our constituents have different priorities than the congressman."
In the world of campaign donors and revolving doors to lobbyist lucre, neither the congressmen nor their aids could give whit about the priorities of the electorate. Fortunately for the politicos, the electorate mimics the Bell Curve of IQ among other phenomena.
6
Are there no citizen-group lobbyists?
3
Congress has no clue what Americans want because we don't tell them.
Write, call, email, text, tweet, morse code them of you have to but TELL your congressional reps what you WANT.
And always copy & paste your same message to the Senate Majority Leader, Mitch McConnell and the House Speaker, Paul Ryan (for now).
Ryan and McConnell.
They are actually the MOST POWERFUL AND MOST IMPORTANT....They are the ONLY TWO REPS who can STOP the President and allow legislation to be introduced on the floor of their chambers.
3
@JM
I have done ALL that. I got nothing but canned responses, if any response at all. Many times when phoning I could not reach a person, had to leave a message. Emails just got the party line with NO actual analysis or response to what I said. Asked for a return call, never happened. When I did reach an actual person in my republican congressman's office in D.C. about the repeal of the ACA, and noted to hime that EVERY health professional group which had expressed an opinion was against the repeal attempt, he replied with hostility, "That's because they're all making money from it." His palpable hostility to me, as a constituent who disagreed with my congressman's republican policy position, was offensive. I asked to have my congressman or his chief of staff call me to discuss this, and never received a reply. IMHO (based on my experience in dealing only with my republican representatives in Congress), they tout only the party line and will not listen to constituents who disagree or ask questions. This year I am voting a straight democratic ticket. Honestly, I don't even CARE about the quality of individual democrats on the ballot at this point - I am that disgusted with my republican (total lack of ) representation in Congress
2
"Hardly anyone" = "30%".
As an example, do democrat leaders really believe we support and enjoy extreme PC in thought, word and deed?
The fact is the vast majority do not, and yet it was central to the last democratic campaign with Clinton, and nothing much has changed.
2
Wow! So, I will right to the members of Congress, absolutely and now! Absolutely, they will stop angry-dubious men from becoming members of the Supreme Court, or stop the tax cut for the rich, wow! I do really need specialists for these kind of analyses! Wow! OK, now, sorry I have to go and write to my representatives! Wow!
2
Congressional members who only meet with special interest groups, and accept large campaign donations from them, receive a skewed worldview from monied lobbyists.
Worse, thanks to the fact that U.S. campaigns are financed privately--not by the government--encourages electeds to follow the money, not the people they're supposed to represent.
Both Republican and Democrat voicemail boxes are eternally full. You can call back, but will get the same "our mailbox is full now" message. E-mails generate no response. They evince zero interest in constituents.
Staff and Congress focus on wealthy donors and lobbyists. They don't even have to write bills--lobbyists do that for them.
That unelected staffers are calling the shots, and deliberately ignoring constituents, to the point where their voices are never heard, is abysmal.
Campaign finance reform is needed, so that the government pays for campaigns, not rich donors.
We need electeds who like to talk to constituents, are not afraid of them and will represent them.
There's the rub. How to make government employees--our employees--actually want to serve all the people.
2
This is such important research. In the early 1990s, I was a 20-something working in Washington DC, and I remember how shocked I was to what extent congress was being run by other 20-somethings.
Is that still the case? I would like this research to report on other characteristics of congressional staff. How many are men or women? What are their ages, racial affiliations, income and educational backgrounds? In which parts of the country did they grow up? How long have they lived in Washington DC (and presumably have less contact with representatives' districts)?
The discretionary authority staffers have over the day-to-day operations of Congress is considerable enough, we should be thinking about who is doing the government's work when representatives are, inevitably, out fundraising or making media appearances.
6
There is a basic flaw in you study.
You are assuming their constituents are the people actually living in the area respective to the one the politicians represent.
They are not. They are the big money donors. And the percent they are wrong about what the people who live in the areas the represent is in direct correlation to how deeply in the pocket of those big donors, said politician is.
3
“Since most congressional offices cannot regularly field public opinion surveys of their constituents...”. Why can’t they? I get survey requests all the time; way more often than I’d like. And I’d be much more likely to respond to one from my representatives in government than from, say, my bank about how I rate its service.
8
When I worked for the Navajo Nation one of my tasks was to provide support to the President and Council on certain issues. They would take me with them lobbying, I must have gone to Washington 12 or 13 times. I sat in many, many meetings, attended hearings and kept my mouth shut unless asked a question. One thing that I was told, that stays with me: a senior Congressional staff person told me this:
"If we get fifty letters on an issue we put a staff member on it to follow up." I think he meant real, handwritten letters from real constituents, not "grassroots" identical mass mailings or, by extension, probably their successor, internet petitions and identical emails.
One reason staff may be out of touch is that, ever since the anthrax mailings, Congressional mail goes into limbo in some screening office and may not reach its destination timely, if at all. Lobbyists on the other hand can set up a meeting and get a respectful hearing tout suite.
One way to make yourself heard is to send letters to your representatives' local office, or to meet with staff there. It works.
3
Aside from a certain evident bias, this op-ed misses a basic point: If you ask people their preference, they don't tell you how strongly they hold that opinion. Most of the issues studied have a small group of fervent believers who are likely to contact their representatives or join organizations that lobby, and a general public who have the opposite opinion, but don't hold to it strongly and therefore don't make their opinions heard. Of course they are ignored.
For example, 2nd Amendment absolutists hire the NRA to lobby against background checks, while the general public is silent until asked, and don't vote on the basis of their representatives' votes on that issue.
2
Lawmakers do a very fine job of representing those whom they serve: the existing ruling class. Ordinary citizens should content themselves with scrambling to inherit the few crumbs of power left behind.
4
At one time I thought that national and state-wide referenda would be a solution, but the opportunities for corruption via lobbyists for particular proposals to be included in a referendum seem to be too great, and I am again at square one.
1
We have a similar problem with the Democratic Party in California. Maybe if our elected officials (state and federal) would spend a little more time in their districts, actually meeting with and discussing issues with their constituents, not simply the ones who donate to their campaigns, they might actually learn something.
I'm not holding my breath waiting.
I know that advocating the violent overthrow of the Government is a crime. What about the peaceful overthrow of the Government by voting?
3
This is news?
They don't know what Americans want because they don't care what Americans want. They only know what their large donors/paymasters tell them to know.
Money out of politics now!
4
They don’t care- they think of themselves as being in business for the interests of those who give them money, the voters are an audience to manipulate, this is not my cynicism, but theirs. Have to prioritize taking money out of politics.
2
We national political campaigns to be limited in time and money; 9- months or less... under 5-million dollars. No campaign slush funds!
1
“It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it!” Upton Sinclair
3
When I saw Pruitt basically just 'forward' the fossil fuel industry's proposals as environmental regulation, all of this was quite apparent. We don't live in America anymore, we live in Trump Corp. LLC.
1
Why would congressional aides be out of touch with their constituents? Hmmm.... that's a hard one. Could it be lobbyists from the fossil fuel industry and the NRA? Could it be Fox News, and Hate Radio? Could it be that people's opinion generally correlates with the opinions of those who pay their salaries? One of the unsolved mysteries of the universe I guess.
2
@Charles Justice
Is it any different in Canada (where this commenter lives)?
@Jonathan Katz, it most surely is different in Canada. In my Federal and Provincial ridings I know both my MP and my MLA. They are great people, who really care about their constituents. We have universal medicare, which means people are not in danger of losing their homes or going bankrupt because of medical bills. It also means that insurance companies have much less traction in our governing system.
3
@Jonathan Katz
The reality is because of the long and drawn out process of the primaries and elections in America, large sums of money (and the "strings attached" that go along with it) have to be raised to even get into the process, hence, I am sure for that reason alone, many qualified and committed candidates never choose to run for office. Citizens United made it worse by, in essence, taking the gloves off and making bribery of politicians legal. This is the situation Americans find themselves in now and the question is because these enormous sums of money are poisoning the process and most Americans feel they no longer have a say in the outcome, how can that be changed?
Elections in Canada(both Federal and Provincial) and the actual electioneering that goes along with it can only commence within 31 days of the actual voting day, hence, the preamble leading up to the election is relatively short.
Certainly, money is raised by all the parties involved, yet, because of the shortness of the election cycle the amounts are a "pittance" compared to the American system and is reasonably transparent as from whom the money originated.
In America, for once, in order to change this corrupt process, you MUST start electing politicians who are unencumbered by the influence of lobbyists and their money and who are committed to actual doing something about it instead of continually electing the same old politicians who won't!
2
NOOOOOOO! (...really?) So, Congress has no clue what Americans want? With McConnell and Ryan as the respective majority leaders, putting partisan politics ahead of any greater good, the NYT has (even though it's an Op-Ed piece) overstated the obvious.
Even if the Democrats win back the House, don't hold your breath waiting for anything else to change; other than, maybe upsetting Trump's apple cart.
Trump knows exactly what his supporters- uneducated white voters, farmers and businesses want. A strong dose of hatred towards immigrants and the media and unending tax cuts
2
In Charlie Wilson´s War, a film made in 2007 about the 80s, the eponymous Congressman explains that ' Congressmen aren't elected by voters, they're elected by contributors'. I'm guessing members of Congress are perfectly aware what their 'contibutors' want.
6
Excellent article. But about the failure of citizens to communicate their views: Isn't it likely that most citizens just attempts to communicate to be a waste of time? I am a loyal Democrat but I don't think my representatives have any interest in my views. They just want my vote and my donations.
2
Phil S is mostly right, donors and interest groups make up most of their "constituency" But don't forget that media are also part of their constituency - Fox & Talk Radio for Republicans and the Establishment Media for Democrats.
Point #2 - Framing Healthcare as strictly a Repeal the ACA issue is a problem. For most Americans it is pre-existing conditions coverage AND the rising cost of healthcare (premiums, meds, deductibles, etc). A middle class family ($95K with 2 kids) will spend at least $1500 month for Marketplace Insurance. That is more than their mortgage payment for most people Plus they must pay $6k in deductibles before they get any benefit - not exactly affordable.
2
@MikeS
It is always important to remember, that despite what readers read in an opinion column, who are the owners of these publications and ultimately, what is THEIR agenda. They are as much a contributor to the problem of money in politics as any other lobbyist or corporation, hence, not much talk or discussion about the poison of money in American politics and how it has made the average citizen feel that the system is totally rigged in favor of the wealthy.
Over 90% of what Americans read, hear and see is controlled by FIVE major media outlets thus, they can control the agenda of what is and what is not exposed to the public(you can thank Bill Clinton for that). Criticism and stories that could be regularly directed towards corporations and their lobbyists is rarely done because they represent millions in advertising dollars for these media outlets. Why would CNN criticize the wars in the Middle East and the waste of trillions of dollars, if Raytheon is one of their biggest advertisers?
Regular discussions about getting money out of politics are largely sidestepped because if this happened and either strict controls OR a public form of election financing was enacted, it would represent the loss of BILLIONS of dollars in campaign ads. After all, "one doesn't want to bite the hand that feeds them".
The sad fact is, because of this attitude, Trump is now the President and much of the media is scrambling to try to undo what they believed could never happen.
There's another issue at play here - lobbyists and the one per centers obviously buy the legislation they want with campaign contributions, allowing politicians to buy the advertising they need to get elected. But why do people respond to the ads?
We have been trained like Pavlov's dogs to be swayed by advertising. If politicians lie, well, ads lie even more successfully. Yet we unthinkingly respond to these ads and vote for the one with the best ads, not the best policies to help us build the kind of world we want.
That's why we need government-funded campaigns and strong limits on advertising - both on the amount of money and the veracity of the content. This is not censorship any more then the restriction that we don't have the "right" to falsely yell "fire" in a crowded room.
Right now we have all the democracy money can buy. It's the perennial weakness of democracy. We all need to recognize this and change it.
2
This research confirms what we already knew - the citizens have no representation in this country.
Everyone must immediately stop paying taxes.
1
No one here seems to ask where constituents, the voters in general, not just the large donors and special interest groups, get their information and by what means. How much of that information, whatever and from wherever it is obtained, has been sifted, slanted, and selected by news sources that themselves are shaped, and thus shape the information they collect and choose to disseminate, by political bias?
This seems to be true of all major, mainstream news sources, TV networks and newspapers included. Facebook, Google, Twitter, and so on seem not to be far behind in these regards So what good would it do to be more inquisitive about what non-powerful, individual low-donating constituents think and want if those thoughts and wants have been warped and precooked, as it were, by politically motivated and biased information sources?
Is there a solution to this? If so, what is it? Or are we just to say contentedly, if more were done to find out what individual constituents out there think and want, "Well, now we've heard from The People," who, it turns out, haven't really learned or processed anything but politically biased input?
2
Where Congress passes a "signature accomplishment," a "tax-cut bill that hardly anyone likes or asked for," well, just know their prime constituency isn't human. Congress, both houses, work for corporate campaign dollars, regardless of party. This article says everything except that notion.
It is a grand snow job. We, the people, get snowed by everyone, by Trump, by media, by congressional representatives of either house. We are trumped by corporate America.
We need real reform through honest legislation, but it won't happen in our near-term future. We are more likely to experience a global financial collapse, ending in global conflict.
8
It's the money.
Obvious and not so obvious.
Obvious:
When you get a check from a guy who says a carbon tax would not be good for me, you probably won't support a carbon tax.
Not so Obvious: Campaigning now is a form of Jiu Jitzu. You met with your wealthy donors and find out what they want. (We can't afford these $250 a plate dinners...Oops 2,500 or more.) Then they manipulate their positions to look like they are supporting their constituents.
But what they no longer do Listen to their constituents. If they hold a town hall meeting, its more of a Potemkin Village to reinforce the predetermined view. Rump is a perfect example he does not interact with the "commoners" ugh! He only seeks their adulation and he's gone to the next event.
If politicians needed the money from the "common man" they just might listen.
Over turn Citizens United.
Limit hard and soft money, especially from All PACs.
Limit money from non constituents especially from those outside the district or state. If you can't vote in that district, stay out, its not your business.
4
Congress and the American people are out-of-touch because the "rule book" (the constitution) is outdated and does not address the world we now live in. The very way we go about electing our national public officials is outmoded and creates the very chasm between citizens and their (so called) representatives.
Congress represents only the ruling/wealthy class today because their main constituents are wealthy and influence how members of congress vote.
Unless and until there are serious changes to the constitution that empower regular, working folk in the political process, our society will continue to be ruled by a small percentage of people.
5
Congressional Representatives do not know what their constituents want because they are not listening to their constituents. They spend the bulk of their time outside of congress at fund raising activities. The people they listen to are the people giving them money, not voters.
Before Al Franken was scandalized out of the Senate, he was promoting a book that discussed how much time he spent on the phone with campaign donors and indicated his activity was the norm. If half their time is spent on fundraising, how can they become informed about what is important to the residents of their districts and states?
Recently, this publication had stories about Steve King of Iowa and Devin Nunez in California spending very little time in the districts they represent, nor staffing the local offices. Steve King has been in Austria meeting with far right nationalists. Devin Nunez is concentrating his time on defending the President. Of course they don’t know what their constituents want, they are not available to them, nor do they listen to them!
We need to take money out of politics, and all voters need to give feedback to their representatives. Call them, write them, let them know your priorities. And Vote.
17
Get the money out of politics, overturn Citizens United, initiate term limits, and bar any congressional representative and senator from working for lobbyist firms for life. Public service should not be a career! Of course the people in congress will not go anywhere near this because it’s a sweetheart deal they have. There should be national referendums on these issues including health care and infrastructure. Let the people vote and decide!
4
@Bob
A noble idea, yet, under the current circumstances, the only way this is going to happen is IF, people actually take to the streets in numbers and on a regular basis.
1
The US Congress indeed does not have a clue what the average American wants. They surround themselves with constituents who back up their own personal beliefs while the majority is ignored. The other issue of course is lobbyists. What chance does an average citizen have against the army of wealthy lobbyists in Washington? It really is a very serious problem that not one single representative seems to care about. That’s because money talks and the lobbyists have millions of dollars from their corporate patrons. It is a terrible situation. How many category 4 hurricanes do we have to go through before our government gets realistic about climate change? The climate is the most serious issue of all and yet it is barely mentioned or dealt with by the US Congress. That’s abominable! Especially considering that America is the single most responsible country for the climate change crisis in the first place. Capitalism doesn’t work do maybe it is time for social democracy.
7
@Mike L
Congress does not have climate change discussion because the party in power gets huge sume of money from the prime offenders, then the Republicans act as if they are in denial that it even exists, and lies that there is nothing that can be done about it.
If you want mature, fruitful, congressional discourse on climate change, VOTE DEMs on Nov. 6
1
Voters and constituents are not the same thing. Yes, our civics classes tell us that our reps are for everyone in the district, but that's hooey. The campaign managers care about the base until the election. Look at Trump as an extreme example, he doesn't care what Americans want, he cares only what a small percentage of Americans want. And from that base you later build a winning strategy every 2 or 4 years. Constituents might be your customers, but your base are your shareholders. Congressional aids look at their base as the only ones to concern themselves with until the election. Seems to work.
4
Congress does not work for the voters, they work for the people who pay them, the multi-national corporations, achieving their record tax cuts. The corporations pay to sell the candidates to the voters like the latest pair of sneakers. The voters have little to do with it, just as Citizen's United was intended.
13
This is an interesting and important article that suffers from a deeply-flawed assumption: That the constituents of elected representatives are the people in their district or state. The real constituents are the wealthy who fund campaigns and set the policy agenda in Washington. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Investment_theory_of_party_competition
7
@Red Valhalla
But these young scholars are asserting that true constituents--those who reside and vote in the Congressional districts or states--have two definite modes of exerting their status as constituents: by writing and calling and making their presence felt, and most importantly, by voting.
Until the Supreme Court's pro-business conservative majority grants voting rights to all corporate "persons," in an extension of the outrageous Citizens United ruling that defined corporate money as speech speech, the voters, acting together, can outvote them.
1
If they simply didn't know, they would be willing to change their stance once they found out the truth.
But they don't do that.
Therefore, they clearly don't want to know, and/or simply don't care.
And they do so fearlessly because they know they can get away with it.
The way to fix this madness is for everyone to vote. Whatever it takes, vote!
7
Congress will only hear us when it looks like "us".
4
Beto does- he has talked to thousands of Texans in a very short amount of time. The only politician on all my 50 years i have ever seen do that.
4
This article seems to be making the (unstated) assumption that these "senior staff members in Congress" are telling the truth. They aren't.
They probably know what "the public ... actually wants", but they don't care. The desires of their corporate masters is what counts. They know better than to say so. And since, using various deceptive means, their bosses can still get re-elected, why should they bother about their constituents' desires?
11
It's not it's job - it's job is to keep campaign money flowing
1
Congress knows. They have made it abundantly clear, they are in Congress only for themselves, their donor and the cameras ( when it suits them or captured in an elevator). There is plenty of valuable reporting needed on Congress's $ driven agenda, without writing an article that they are essentially clueless. There is a difference between not knowing and not caring.
9
"[I]f [congressional] offices hear from only deep-pocketed interest groups, they are likely to miss out on the opinions of ordinary Americans." No kidding. Representatives spend half their time raising money for re-election.
It's also true that 'ordinary Americans" don't understand policy, how it affects them, to whom to complain or what rights they have. They don't contact congress.
So. Campaign finance reform and civics classes.
7
The astounding facts relayed in this piece demonstrate why democracy is so fragile -- because in order to function properly it requires an informed electorate.
Like anyone, Congress members want to keep their jobs, and they have discovered that the easiest way to do this is to take the money of the oligarchs, vote the interests of the oligarchs and then, when election time comes, simply lie about how much they value to priorities of the citizenry. Anyone who doesn't do this see their oligarchic funding disappear and go to some other candidate willing to participate in this unofficial "quid pro quo" racket.
The only protection against is an informed citizenry willing to dominate the public opinion space as much as the oligarchs chosen representatives are willing to lie about it.
Obama, Clinton, Trump, Bush -- they're all tools of the oligarchy, all the way from Obama's refusal to consider Medicare for All from the very beginning of his presidency to Trump and his enrichment of the super-rich with his reduction in their taxes.
It would be interesting to know which of these staffers knew the public's preferences and purposefully lied about it in the survey, and those that knew yet didn't. The third group is those that really *don't know* what the public wants and my guess is this is the smallest group of all.
3
When the approval rating for Congress has remained in the single digits for years, is it really news that Congress doesn't know what the public wants?
But the article does underscore how destructive our "pay for access" political system is. On the surface lobbyists run the agenda, but more destructive is that it's the deep pockets of a relative few people who actually control things. We have effectively lost our democracy without a shot being fired, and it's been replaced by an oligarchy, more akin to Russia than the Republic our Founders envisioned.
We need to get money - both campaign contributions and lobbyists/donors - out of the system. Campaigns should be funded by public money so that everyone has an equal footing. Overturn the Orwellian ruling that money = free speech. Outlaw lobbying - if elected officials need "expertise", the ruse under which they're allowed to be lobbied and coddled by special interests, then let them pay for that expertise, the same way that private businesses do.
Of course, with both parties sucking from the same trough, there is no chance any of this will happen. It will take an upheaval that will cause much damage and disruption, an "American Spring" before our public servants remember who they're supposed to serve.
7
Yes, I take issue with your analysis that Congress doesn't know what its constituents want-- they do not care. The individual no longer has the power of the corporate interests, lobbies and money afforded those in Congress who now go to Washington to become wealthy rather than serve the interests of their constituents. Never was a Congressional member's job was to serve his own personal opinion, nor his aides-- but to serve the constituents of his state. As repeatedly seen with Mitch McConnell or Paul Ryan-- refusal to even bring bills before the floor for consideration as they are not in their individual, power interest but are of the people, purposely obstructing justice, the will of the people and unconstitutionally abusing a power not granted by the Constitution, which needs to become impeachable acts This is why nothing gets done and amendments are required to the Constitution requiring more checks and balances on Congress and the President----which is showing why this democracy is not working.
7
I'd have a lot more respect for this analysis if it compared staffers' views with the views of their party's primary voters in their districts.
Staffers' job is to get their boss reelected. Thus, for 95% knowing what the majority of their primary voters want is all that counts.
3
Hmm. I find it hard to believe that congressional staffs are not aware of the cultural zeitgeist. Pick up most any newspaper. Visit Pew Research Center. Polls are ubiquitous. It's not that Congress doesn't know what the public wants. They don't care. They work for "deep-pocketed" interest groups - not their constituents. (PS, don't put the blame on lack of voter participation. Good luck getting any response beyond a form letter from your congress person.)
3
"Congress Has No Clue What Americans Want"? Yeah think?
These results have been showing up in poll after poll for years now and it was just further confirmed in a highly biased poll completed by the arm of the Koch Bros. so how much more confirmation does one need?
Of course, it has been stated over and over that the majority of politicians of BOTH parties answer primarily to their donors, NOT their constituents and have not done so for years.
My question is for the American voters who must ultimately take responsibility for their own actions all because their voting decisions are a contradiction, especially, regarding the government currently in power. If you want meaningful change in these areas why do you keep electing people that are acting contrary to your wishes?? It makes no sense!
2
In response to a comment I wrote this earlier: We don't need opinion polls on abortion since we have actual statistics. One in four women of childbearing age will have an abortion in their lifetime. This is the rate from 2008 to 2016. It went down each year while Obama was in office and when the ACA went into effect giving women access to reliable contraceptives. Still, most abortions are for poor women who have limited access to contraceptives. New rules by Trumpsters will reduce access to contraceptives making abortion rates go up higher, instead of down. You don't need to ask what people think about abortion, ask what they do. Women in health challenging, drastic economic and/or emotionally stressed situations, where they cannot bear a pregnancy, will have an abortion. Abortions are caused most of the time by lack of access to reliable contraceptives. We can blame Hobby Lobby and those super conservative nuns, and now the Trumpsters, for many abortions. If so called Christian conservatives really wanted to prevent abortion and balance the budget they would vote Democratic. The abortion rate always goes down during a Democratic President and the budget balance act gets way better. Which proves that people who yammer about the budget and abortion don't really care about either. They just want power. The way to get power is to create a one issue base that reacts to scare tactics, not reason and statistics.
6
I am a former state legislative staffer with an advanced legal education in health care. I was in government when the ACA was passed and am familiar with its provisions and its shortcomings. What I find alarming is that members of Congress are either very ill-informed about the ACA or flat out lying about its provisions. The public is also easily misled about the ACA and doesn't seem to appreciate the role that Congress played in failing to fix things that needed to be fixed. No legislation of this magnitude is perfect the first time out. Who benefits most by tossing out the ACA? The health insurance companies and big pharma. There are also lots of administrative players, cottage industries that handle aspects of health care, all that have nothing to do with direct patient care or making things easier or less expensive for patients. Single payer is labelled and vilified as socialism. Medicare is single payer and I don't know anyone who isn't happy to have it. Medicare's administrative expenses are far lower than those of private insurers. Follow the money. Congress doesn't really care about what is best for the people. Doing away with the ACA doesn't give people more choice in health care. It reinstates health insurance that excludes pre-existing conditions and has high deductibles. This just helps the insurance companies, not patients.
12
When you say congress you must mean the culture of corruption Republicans don't know what Americans want . The Dems know we want no one to be homeless , affordable health care most important save our climate from toxic coal and fossil fuels. So don't be saying all of congress don't know the GOP are out of touch.
2
Thank you, Mr. Hertel-Fernandez, Mr. Mildenberger and Ms. Stokes for this eye-opening article.
Here is the bottom line, "Since most congressional offices cannot regularly field public opinion surveys of their constituents, staff members depend heavily on meetings and relationships with interest groups to piece together a picture of what their constituents want. And if offices hear from only deep-pocketed interest groups, they are likely to miss out on the opinions of ordinary Americans."
WE THE PEOPLE must DEMAND that OUR priorities become those of OUR hired/elected officials and their staff.
There has been a groundswell of grassroots activism since The Con Don and his Robber Baron brethren took over OUR United States government. Once we hire/elect Socially Conscious Women and men WE must form our own "special interest" groups and force lawmakers and their staff to put OUR grassroots priorities first.
Democracy is not a spectator sport. WE each must take an active part in creating the kind of country/world WE want to live in.
1
The first step to solving this problem is an Amendment to the Constitution that makes clear to the Supreme Court that
Corporations are Not People and
Money is Not Speech.
As long as the Supreme Court keeps ruling that corporations are people with all of the rights of a human, and that unlimited money can be funneled to political candidates, secret dark money donations and super pacs will have more influence on policy than public opinion.
As the data shows, the Republicans are worse than Democrats, but the Democrats have the same predilection for putting cash over constituents. That is your precious "center."
The good news is that this Amendment also has a 90% approval rating across party affiliations, and over 700 local governments from towns and counties to cities and states have already endorsed the passage of such an Amendment.
Numerous groups are out there trying to use this Amendment to take our government back from global billionaires and their corporations, many of whom don't live in the USA.
By the way, corporations are chartered by state governments, while governments were established by, for, and of humans. Making corporations into people makes them citizens of the state that chartered them. That is a logical contradiction, like being your own father. We the People establish governments and governments establish corporations. Corporations are supposed to be at the bottom of the hierarchy, not the top.
Get big money out of government if you want a say.
7
But they do know how their donors expect to be repaid.
2
No idea what the public wants? You'd have to live under a rock not to have some idea what Americans want - security, affordable health care, less violence in words and on the streets, improved (or rescued?) infrastructure, etc. Congress knows this. It's just that in playing the political game in which power is the only goal - they just don't care.
That said, the Democratic platform is fundamentally one of caring and sharing burdens, while the Republican platform is retention of power to the benefit of the wealthy.
5
The problem isn't that Congress doesn't know what their constituents want, it's that their definition of "constituents" is wealthy donors, not American citizens. If nobody wants the policies they are pushing, then why are they pushing them? Simple: they are being paid handsomely by those that benefit most from weapons, fossil fuels, etc.
21
Politicians and lobbyists will study this article to find out how successful they have been in favoring their donors over their voters.
In a good district, it seems, you can push the dissonance to fifty percent or more.
5
All of what you write makes great sense, unless they don’t care about the voters’ actual preferences. Follow the money. Parties and donors know they can often get enough votes while pulling everything rightward toward donors’ preferences.
6
The real question is: does Congress not know what Americans want, or do they not want to know?
For generations, Republicans have been performing a sort of bait-and-switch whereby they talk up their anti-abortion and pro-gun stance, then go on to enact policies for their richest donors so they can go on to a lucrative lobbying job later. Until we stop enabling this behavior, it will continue.
8
There are many fresh Democratic candidates this year. Let's vote them in and see how they do. My guess: couldn't be worse than the bloviating do-nothing Republicans there now.
7
McSally is massively, willfully clueless. She roped me like a dope into one of her teletown halls claiming not to have heard a question about Russian interference, but still managed to score a hit from the Dems need to get over it playlist. When it was my turn to participate after a 45 minute no follow up farce, I asked her to answer the unheard question. They dropped my connection. Understand, they called me to participate as this was dropping live. So she held me hostage to her lies and then cut me off like she's Putin.
But her biggest mistake was claiming she did not vote at every opportunity to take away pre-existing condition coverage while offering instead a sick pool for the poor folks who really need health insurance to manage life threatening diseases like mine destine to collapse from willfully crooked financing.
My insurer overspent the 80/20% limit on administration, so they had to refund me that same percentage of premiums. Because they cut the check later than the deadline, I also got interest on that balance. That means that refund paid my last three months of premiums and still coughed up $200 bucks in refund.
Thanks, Obamacare! Don't you wish everybody did?
2
Once again, Academics don't know how to think.
Congress is out of touch on issues like Guns, Healthcare and Climate because it is PAID to be out of touch, because being out-of-touch and wrong is rewarded by the donor class an the billionaire zealots who demand extreme positions in exchange for extraordinary money. And while the Democrats are less out of touch, they're just as well-paid.
This entire article could have been -- should have been -- called "Your Democracy has Already Sold to the Highest Bidder," and failing to mention the role of money as a factor here is sloppy, disingenuous and so counter to a real discussion of real issues it feels like a waste of precious space in the paper of record.
15
One third of all Americans still don't know that Obamacare and the Affordable Care Act are the same thing. Was that figured into your questioning? Because if it wasn't these results are distorted.
3
While Congress seems to have no idea of what Americans want, three assistant professors at left wing liberal colleges writing an opinion piece for the NYT sure do. Granted it is an opinion piece but why then does it smack of fact with graphs? Is it because of the lack of supporting evidence on which these graphs are made and a left wing perspective that we should consider this gospel lock, stock and barrel?
2
Who ate their “constituents”? I’m guessing their responses line up much better with what their biggest donors and PACs want.
2
They know. There is political profit to be had in UNDERKNOWING disagreements and OVERKNOWING agreements with constituents.
Ignorance is just another political ploy.
I’d point out that what people wupport if you ask them and what they’ll show up and vote for are two radically different things. It wteikes me that maybe the aides are really talking about votes, not views.
1
If one accepts that elected Congressional policymakers and their selected aides, of both parties, and "independents," representing a range of views on all issues actually don't know the "wants," "needs," and relevant points of view of their constituents about many/most issues. Choosing not to consider that they do know, but pose as being ignorant of because... An immediate implication is that under these conditions they can not be doing what they were hired to do when they were elected. Which is to represent the needs-objectives-goals-aspirations of the majority of those people who got them elected. That many of the elected continue to operate as if political-ideology, party, big donors, other known as well as hidden stakeholders are their primary "bosses" is one of the outcomes of a political culture which enables personal unaccountable behavior to begin. To continue. To become anchored. Such a state of affairs is "fed" by many complicit-"others." In the politician' hometown. In DC. Financially supported by lobbyists, and other individual and systemic stakeholders. In addition by almost spending 3 out of every 4 hours, daily, gathering funds for their party as well as their own re-election.An average of only 1 hour for what they were elected/hired to do! It can be reasonably assumed/considered that if they were working in a for-profit, market economy model job they would be fired. With or without previous warning(s). The complacency of many enables this article's findings.
1
To the authors, your piece is disheartening but explains much. On one point I disagree, however. Contacting one's representative as an individual is meaningless in my experience, and even lobbying groups representing ordinary Americans are ignored. Early on during his tenure I wrote to my Congressman regarding the ACA and funding for Planned Parenthood. He responded that he understood my concerns, realized the importance of affordable health care in the district, and voted anyway to repeal the ACA and defund PP. I am sure that several other individuals shared my concerns and contacted his office. The AARP has been lobbying Congress for years about the continued stability of Medicare and Social Security. Is Congress listening? It does not seem so. You mention the Sierra Club. Is Congress listening to worries about climate change? No. It is money that seems to count with these politicians, not opinions of their constituents, who keep voting for them regardless.
5
What an amazing opportunity for a digitally-savvy elected representative to set up a way to poll and seek frequent feedback from their constituents in a broad and transparent way.
Imagine if you could weigh in before every vote your rep makes on your behalf and also see what the rest of your neighbors think. Sure would be a great way to keep elected reps accountable.
2
"unlike the well over 70 percent of Americans who consistently support raising the minimum wage, background checks for gun sales and taking action on the climate crisis. "
It seems the Dems do indeed align with the voters wishes. Even your chart shows that the Ds are much closer on these issues.
BTW, the last item, 'Repeal the ACA' puts a weird negative flip on the other criteria. Shouldn't you have simply shown the difference of recognition of support for the ACA?
What we seem to be seeing here is the epidemic 'false equivalence' paradigm.
2
Interesting. THE central premise of a representative democracy is that the elected representatives will be better informed than the general electorate. That premise is obviously wrong.
It might be time work toward a more direct form of democracy. Every state, for example, should be expected to make provisions to allow ballot initiatives or referenda at all levels of government.
2
Check out the Break the Gridlock rules reform proposed by the Problem Solvers Caucus. It has promise to open up the process in the House. Also, take a look at www.nolabels.org.
1
Our reps mostly do know what people want. They accept money to ignore those views. The media contributes by limiting discussion to the range tolerated by advertisers.
23
As an American of 54 years, son of an American for 95 years who was a hero in ww2, who was the son of an immigrant, this is what I want.
1. It begins with Universal health care. Only in the United States is medicine a for profit enterprise. This is the shame of our country. Every other western democracy insures health care as both a birth right and a human right. When you get sick you are in the battle for your life and economics should have nothing to do with it.
2. Wages that keep up with inflation. In my last CWA contract, any raise was eaten up by higher medical deductions. Once again health care comes front and center as a problem that Congress must address, as medical expenses continue to escalate without any let up in the future.
3. More intelligent ways to pay for a college education. The two areas of American life that are escalating way above inflation are medicine and college. I think a program should be put in place that help the most gifted students. There should be a reward for being a great student with great grades. Hard work should be rewarded with lower tuitions.
4. I would like to see a return to mandatory service after high school, every American rich or poor must give one year of service to their country. Building road, planting trees etc, it would be good for them and good for the country.
there are many more ways our country can be improved, but space is limited here. We can in fact be the worlds greatest country.. it's time to try.
20
But they know what their financial supporters want. That is the American Way. The hoi polloi get dragged out every now and then to listen to focus group approved lies and spin. Many go through the ordeal of voting even knowing that their votes mean next to nothing - but hoping that might be marginally better than absolutely nothing.
Popular democracy has settled for a few scraps, e.g., a minimum "welfare state" provided by liberal capitalism, and a "safety net" for the lucky who don't fall through the holes. People won't take the time and effort to become informed, preferring to avail themselves of media chatter that supports emotionally driven biases. The "I'm alright, Jack/Jill" attitude means that scraps from the table are fine, although those at the table get the goodies. Plutocracy rules - because "the people" find that ruling imposes burdens.
4
Americans don’t even understand what they want. They are being sold a bill of goods that says you can have free healthcare, a jobs program for everyone, a high minimum wage, free college, etc and it can all be paid for by increasing taxes to the rich. That’s not the reality though. If we model our programs after Sweden, Norway, etc then everyone will pay a high tax rate. The percentage taxes paid by lower income people in these countries is staggering compared to what the equivalent people pay here.
1
Obamacare was funded entirely by taxing the rich. That’s why Republicans detest it. Not for any principled reason.
Social security is funded by not taxing the rich. It’s the single most popular federal program. On the evidence, people don’t mind paying taxes and getting something in return.
Universal healthcare would, absolutely, mean higher taxes. It would also mean lower costs. Nine in 10 would pay less overall, even if their taxes would be higher.
No one pretends we can have something for nothing. We can have more, though. And it would be better if the rich had less.
13
This is an academic article that makes a conclusion based on research, which is not how the GOP operates.
The GOP is not there to govern.
It now exists to serve the interests of donors.
The skewing of interest groups is mentioned, but the authors are assuming that the GOP would want to correct this and that is not the case.
13
Great article - thank you to both authors for providing insight on the issues and how Congress ignores what Americans want and more importantly, what's best for America.
The infighting helps to distract American's attention from the serious issues facing our Country - most importantly, the debt. At $21 trillion and growing, it could lead us to a crisis of untold proportion.
Congress will never address it- why? Because do try and balance the budget means cutbacks - cutbacks do not get votes - spending gets votes.
Congressmen and Congresswomen truly have only 1 priority...to get re-elected. They're destroying the fabric of America...one vote at a time.
3
@JMS
the increase in the debt is directly related to the tax cuts for the rich. Now that the rich have pocketed their tax cuts we should cut services to the rest of us to reduce the debt - good plan?!
The Republican Congress runs by its motto: You must pay to play. Pay up, special interests, and we'll see what we can do for you.
3
Congressional representatives may not know what their voting constituents want but they sure know what their fat-cat donors want.
5
It's not that they don't know what we want, it's that they don't care. Many of our congress critters are beholden only to lobbyists and rich donors - rest assured they know what those people want.
I have never once seen my 16th Illinois Congressman, Adam Kinzinger (R), come anywhere near my small town. He stays away precisely because he does not want to know what his constituents think of him or his pro-Trump policies. He does, however, send automated form letter replies to my entreaties. These letters restate his position with no reference to anything I said. He is impervious to input from the very people he is supposed to represent.
Dick Durbin, on the other hand, always replies thoughfully and carefully to my queries. Dick Durbin listens and responds. He represents my interests because he knows what they are. See a pattern here? I'll wager many people get similar results from their efforts to communicate with their representatives.
7
What makes Alexander Hertel-Fernandez think he knows what Americans want? He may know what "progressives" want, but they are just a small percentages of the population.
3
@jacoThe article says
"In a research paper, we compared their [congressional aides] responses with our best guesses of what the public in their districts or states actually wanted using large-scale public opinion surveys and standard models."
It'd be good to see what "large-scale public opinion surveys" were used.
Having said that, lot of citizens - the vast majority of citizens - live in fairly densely populated areas, and I find most people in those areas hold "progressive" views on what the government should be working on.
Some people seem not to know how research works. Not everyone lives their lives coasting on their own opinions, reinforcing them daily as they look in the mirror. They depend on, wait for it, science, to help us better understand a wider swath of what others in our world believe.
Books, based on scientific research, are another way to expand knowledge and better understand how others outside of a personal bubble perceive the world.
I wonder what our country would be like if more people read books, listened to a wide variety of information sources, and took time to critically think about what they heard? One can only dream.
They are paid not to know what Americans want. They are paid to know what their true constituents, their funders, want. After all, "Americans" aren't in a position to provide a sinecure when this whole politics thing goes south for them. Their funders are. And money is speech, corporations are people.
6
Correction: Congress does not care, at all, about the citizens of this country. They understand, in theory, that they are supposedly elected to serve the American people. Alas, their true masters are the billionaires and big businesses that line their wallets and fill their campaign coffers.
13
This is hardly shocking or even surprising. These are very intelligent people (the staffers not the pols, I mean) so the wishes of their constituents are clearly not particularly important to them. Their financial supporters on the other hand .......
4
I see the disarray of our country as a mirror of the same negative, fatalistic anti-democratic energy circliing the globe.
What still shocks me is that, despite the educational advances in the last fifty years, American voting age adults are abdicating their agency and their freedoms to a snake oil salesman and his lying thieving henchmen. I still cannot fathom how many otherwise good people can sell their childrens' and grandchildrens' future to these thieves who are stealing our future.
A temporary high from a campaign rally won't stop the hurricanes, the fires, the floods, the droughts and the widespread famine that will surely follow. That high people get from a Trump rally won't stop the mass shootings by homegrown terrorists either.
At this moment all I want is for the fever to break and our countrymen and women to roll up our sleeves and do the work necessary to save our planet for our children. If your congressperson cannot hear you, get arid of 'em and find someone who can hear you and will work for you.
3
Nonsensical gibberish.
I don't even know why i bothered to look into this article. Oh, yes, that was Krugman's assertion it was a good work on social science.
So, it's not social science, it's political science. And it's based on poll numbers, and i quote from the article:
In a research paper, we compared their responses with our best guesses of what the public in their districts or states actually wanted using large-scale public opinion surveys and standard models."
When i get to this point i knew this article was hard biased. How do i? Because it's forcing a LARGE-SCALE survey on a small-scale (congressional district) entity.
They estrapolated and inferred their results, that is where the devil-in-the-details stands
Nowithstanding, they also called for a survey on congress politician staff, as if they were actually the elected persons, or as if their opinion will trump that of the elected person ( and Supreme court justice equivalent attempt by their clerks to modify a justice's view nudging and through open discussions led to nowhere ).
But the most glaring error is the presumption that an elected person will not listen to their constituency during the campaign ( sounds like campaigns were running under strict and severe rule of speech and they are not that vocal open discussion they are ), and the worst possible presumption was that the authors think people are stupid: they want the opposite the candidates are offering and they still vote for them.
3
@Alex p
"the worst possible presumption was that the authors think people are stupid: they want the opposite the candidates are offering and they still vote for them."
Presumptions don't stand up to study, and what I got from the article and the due-diligence the authors put into their research is.... people don't vote on the issues when they elect a representative. People vote on personality and those rosy promises the candidates dangle during the campaign.
And when they dive into the vortex of Washington D.C. politics, those personalities and their rosy promises are absorbed into party projects and they lose themselves. They react to what's in front of them - and it ain't the needs of their district.
What's in front of them is money - paid-lobbyists, business propositions and donors willing to finance their re-election campaign in return for some special consideration. The loudest voices get to them and use up all the air.
No mention of immigration? Congress has it nailed?
Yes, the will of the people! You betcha!
1
publicans don't care what people want. They only care about power and the rich.
4
Proving once again that money is the mother's milk of politics and the public good be dammed.
3
People in Congress on both sides are no different than you and me in one respect. Their job is to keep their job. For them though, that normally means kissing up to their donors and that's the main problem with our system. We need campaign finance laws and possibly term limits to fix it.
3
I think they know but do not care and feigning cluelessness is better PR.
Better to look stupid than evil.
7
Assuming that online petitions and emails to our representatives have much less impact than actual visits to their offices, it all boils down to which interest groups spend the most on lobbying. The NRA, for example, pays professional lobbyists to swarm the capital while I am busy making a living. Big money wins out again.
The authors of this piece claim that "most congressional offices cannot regularly field public opinion surveys of their constituents ..." To that I say, "Why the H... not?"
3
This is why:
1. Most people don't vote.
2. Everyone is mad.
And it is not because Congress has no clue. It is because Congress performs according to what the plutocrats want, despite what the people want.
6
This is silly. When it comes to taxes and economic regulation in general the Republicans reflect well the only public that matters to them: the top 1% of the income distribution and corporations. On those issues, Republicans are in touch with the only "public" they care about. Are you really that clueless?
2
I can’t believe this, someone at the NYT writing an opinion that actually makes sense. What a simple revelation.
Pelosi?
No opinion here, why is this not on the front page where it belongs? So tired of the New York Times information gate keepers. More to the point, am I the only one who sees the deterioration of the paper? The running of the same articles and columns repeatedly over days, weeks, even months. Little original reporting, more internet based reporting. An op-ed page based on guest contributors often offering click bait views. Op-ed is where we see the most stale pieces. Again, here we have a piece reporting on our clueless congress based on solid reporting and so where do we find it? Here in opinion.
Think how much more informed members of congress could be (and how many fewer idiotic attack ads we'd be subjected to) if true campaign finance were enacted. Instead of spending a third to half their time raising money, congress people could be in touch with their districts. Sure, we all have our biases. But money is the root of this evil and government without true representation is the result. History tells us that this, eventually, does not end quietly.
3
Just another data point that Democrats live in the real world and the GOP lives in a fantasy world created by FOX News.
No clue, and no interest to learn. Not doing their job !
1
So, why isn't this on the front page?
More news in the op-ed section, more opinion and speculation on the front page.
Members of Congress are not oblivious to their constituents desires, but just have a very different view of who their constituents are than do the naive authors of this article.
Their constituents are their large contibuters.
All of which totally refutes the Supreme Court's so called free speech rulings that money does not corrupt.
this study provides graphic proof that shows that Roberts and all are not champions of speech but the arch defenders of raw corruption eating away at America, bottom scum in the temple of democracy.
4
My Republican Congressman constantly sends out e-mail surveys asking the people in the district whether they oppose or are for bills appearing in committee. I like that, even though I am a voice not in the majority. If the congressmen really wanted to vote with their district, that would be the best grass roots effort to try to vote their will.
Unfortunately, even though he has a lot of good qualities, I voted for his opponent
Vote Straight D
3
It is not just that money is speech, it is the only speech that is heard.
6
Congress DOESN'T CARE what Americans want.
Huge difference.
7
Congress has become a protective bubble of white men, who make it their life's work that guarantees self enrichment. Too few refuse to do the hard work of legislating, writing laws that are needed by the citizens. Consider immigration solely, everyone is afraid to write this long overdue legislation, that might incur a negative sound byte. They also work truly less than any other Americans and have the best healthcare that the American public can buy, for life.
Since Gingrich, they march-in lockstep to adhere to the party dogma, compromise is evil. The party line must win at all costs, power is everything. McConnell has honed this to a treasonous elevation. Which is this current Republican Congress, they will not govern and refuse to perform the checks and balances of this run away presidency. What could possibly go wrong?
2
While I respect the time and effort that the good doctors have put into their researchers, are their results really any surprise? And is it shocking that Republicans are even more clueless than their Democratic peers. One need only read the newspaper or watch the news to know that.
It's too easy to say that big money controls our democracy. While that's definitely true, the real culprit is our largely apathetic (and, IMHO, ill-informed) electorate. We won't get better government until we get better voters.
2
I would disagree. Congress KNOWS what Americans want. They just don't care. They haven't for a very long time. VOTE. And this time, vote for people who represent YOU instead of big money interests.
12
The assumption here seems to be that if elected politicians were more aware of what their constituents really wanted .. .they would act accordingly. At least … on the Republican side of the aisle, that assumption is manifestly wrong. Starting at the oval office … and down to the rank and file Republican congressional staff …. want the American public wants is completely irrelevant. At best … those politicians merely pretend to respect their constituents. The bloc they actually respect is deep pocketed Republicans who keep them in office.
4
Gives some meaning to that silly old song "My Boomerang Won't Come Back", we used to have to listen to on the radio.
1
You are missing the target. Congress members get elected so that they can enact those laws that they want, or choose to do nothing. Election promises are a joke on the public. They never had the electorate in mind. This time we have a Congress and a president who only cares about themselves. Tell them anything regardless of the lies and gross exaggerations. So at this point we have no representation in Congress. If you are a Trump supporter, anything he does is fine because you have little interest in anything but the destruction of our government. Lobbyists only make matters worse, because we are again dealing with myopic self interests again. No representation.
3
The survey is biased. Motivational issues like religious conformity, abortion, race hatred, fear of immigration, general taxation, contempt for educated elites drive votes.
While constituents might want less Carbon they do not want to have to sacrifice anything for that or put aside any of their fears and hatred.
1
This interesting research is, alas, slightly beside the point. Other research shows that Congress enacts or rebuffs legislation with virtually 0 correlation to what constituents say they want. The correlation is with what the @150,000 significant political donors want (the .05%). Even worse, what the public thinks about issues has little correlation with actual information or knowledge. As Harvard Law prof. Lawrence Lessig demonstrates in a forthcoming book, we have morphed into an extremely ignorant populace, for reasons that reach back at least a few decades. Sic transit gloria democracy.
1
Our outgoing Republican Congressman, Steve Pearce -- who's hoping to bring his practices to the New Mexico governor's mansion -- is notorious for his scorn for his constituents. He never holds town halls and never even acknowledges, let alone answers, mail. Unless you are a rich oil-and-gas producer you may as well not exist. We can write and call all we want, but unless we have representatives who care what we think, we may as well be throwing our missives out into the desert.
4
Congress may not know what Americans want but they sure know what their corporate masters want, and they vote accordingly.
3
I do not know if Congres knows what the majority of people want and even if they do they disregard it and follow the dictates of big business, Wall Street, lobbyists and the 1%. We really don't matter to them.
3
Congress know what they want. Congress wants to make the Americans and others who give them money what these donors want. If the desires of the money givers coincides with those of the Americans shut out of the party hurray.
“We found two key factors that explain why members of Congress are so ignorant of public preferences: their staffs’ own beliefs and congressional offices’ relationships with interest groups.”
Ok, so it’s NOT the voters fault that democracy doesn’t work but special interest favoritism does. Phew!
2
If what you claim is true, Democrats would have won the presidency and both houses of Congress. They didn’t.
Our so-called leaders know exactly what the American people want, but as almost all the other commenters have said, they only care what big money wants.
My biggest argument is with my fellow Americans. Why do people vote for the same people over and over again even though they don't deliver? A good example is the representative of my congressional district, Steven Palazzo. His nickname is No-show Palazzo because he has never held a town hall and never shows up when constituents have invited him to any kind of political event. Most of the time his office phone doesn't even get answered. However, he keeps getting re-elected.
The voters hold all the cards. No matter how much money the special interests give them we are the ones who say who should get elected and who shouldn't. Out of ignorance or laziness we don't use that power. People are always saying, "Throw the bums out," but they go ahead and vote the same bums into office again and again.
2
I contacted my congressman often, as a blue boy in a red state I can tell you they never agreed with me this country is all about money, power and greed! Rome comes to mind a great society but in the end you know how it ended.
1
I question the credibility of this article. At the club this morning we all agreed that true Americans want to empower our nation’s job creators through lower taxes and less regulation. Freedom!!!
2
Taking this article one step further, the ignorance of Congress members about the interests of their constituents is a clear sign of their real priorities. These are very pragmatic people, and if they thought their continued political survival depended on voting in close accordance with their constituents' interests, then they would find ways to accurately assess our priorities. In these days of easy internet polling, it's neither difficult nor prohibitively expensive to send out online questionnaires to randomly chosen sets of district/state residents. Or how about actually holding public townhall listening sessions? My senators and Congressional rep. rarely or never hold open meetings with constituents, nor contact us for our opinions on how to prioritize different issues. When I contact them to urge support for issues like stronger gun control, months to years go by before I receive a perfunctory, boilerplate reply. All this tells us that our interests are largely irrelevant to members of Congress; the ignorance reported by these investigators therefore really isn't any surprise. Members of Congress prioritize the interests of large donors and monied lobby groups, and only them. They can only sustain this disconnect with constituents because of the power of incumbancy. If we voters tossed out politicians who don't vote our interests, then they likely would become better informed.
4
Why does almost every single commentor on this article get what the fundamental problem with the article is (headlining that congress has no clue, instead of saying they don't care, because of Citizens United, etc..) yet the editor at the NYT could not ask the writers to clarify their piece? Don't the editors get to question the basis of op-ed's that are so obviously flawed? Why print a piece that has such a stark staring flaw to it, that EVERY SINGLE COMMENTOR gets it right..Why?
6
If turnout consistently topped, say, 75 percent, I suspect that might start to change. Otherwise, as many commenters have already said, why should they even care what we want if we won't do a thing to hold them accountable?
Think about it. Then go vote.
Big problem with this research. The researchers measure what people 'say' they want. Their view that the results of 'large-scale surveys and standard models' (what, exactly, is a standard model?) represent 'truth' is dangerously naive. Congress, on the other hand, is elected actual policies, that is, to respond to what people actually, really want. These are not the same thing - which is probably exactly what the authors have 'discovered'.
@David G: correct. That is why legislators are re-elected for many terms. It is peculiar that American fear of executive power has led to the imposition of term limits, but not for legislators.
The problem or gap between congressional perceptions and the their districts is not as surprising as your article proposes.
Not everyone votes. Pure and simple. You can survey everyone but not everyone votes and congress is representative of voters...NOT the population at large.
2
The conclusion, that Congress has little idea of what voters want, has a simple cause: Congress doesn’t care what voters want. Why is that?
Simply, the reason is that their election does not depend upon what voters want.
In the case of the GOP re-election is largely in the hands of a very successful and widespread billionaire-owned brainwashing machine that controls reality for about 40% of the electorate and about double that for Republicans. It finances talk radio, Fox News, Sinclair media, disinformation sites on Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, etc., inflammatory Google search results, extreme evangelists, and scurrilous ads. As a result it now controls the GOP Congress, the White House, a majority on the Supreme Court, and a majority of State Legislatures.
For the Dems, billionaire donors and corporate lobbyists also are a strong influence, but the Dems are a disorganized mob by comparison to the GOP machine. Despite their weakness, a vote for Dems is to be preferred over a vote further advancing control by the sanctimonious Oligarchs running the GOP.
23
duh -- congress is bought and paid for by the corporations and wealthy individuals who benefit from policies most people reject.
in this instance, not knowing and not caring are really the same thing.
6
@stephen eisenman: "Duh" applies to these academic wonks who can't get good answers because they can't ask the right questions. They must be Clinton advisors.
“Since most congressional offices cannot regularly field public opinion surveys of their constituents”. Really? I would presume this would be done routinely. Why can’t they do this? Or do they prefer not to know?
@Bob McLaughlin Polls are really expensive. When you get into CD-level polling, even more so.
2
@Sassachusetts - On-line poll on the politician’s own website. Doesn’t cost them.
@Bob McLaughlin
Should be paid for by the government. What better use of our money?
One suspects that most Republican Senators and many Democratic Senators actually DO know what their constituents want, but disregard the information, to suit themselves. They hire senior staff members whose thinking aligns with their interests, not those of the people. In this age of abundantly available information, that a majority of the people actively want gun safety laws, actively want big money out of politics, actively want to help protect the environment etc.. can only be explained by WILLFUL IGNORANCE on the part of the Republican controlled Congress.
12
This is important academic research that must be sent to every single member of Congress.
To summarize, the only Democrats and Republicans are in the Congress. Everyone not in Congress is a Progressive.
This research also tells every candidate exactly how to get votes - no political consultants needed. Furthermore, if all the candidates made this their platform, there would be a national consensus.
1
In recent years I have made it a practice to communicate with my two senators and my representative. I have called and written both email and hard letters. It makes absolutely no difference.
From all three, that would be Pat Roberts, Jerry Moran, and currently Ron Estes, I get boiler plate talking point responses that frankly insult my intelligence. I might as well just read an ALEC position paper on the subject of my concern. Frequently Roberts doesn't even bother to reply.
They don't care what I think. They don't care what we think. They care about pleasing the big donors and getting reelected. That's it. Money equals power,
The ruling class doesn't want you to realize it, but we still do have the power to have the last word. It requires a minimal effort to exercise it. We still have the vote, and I am hopeful that we are about to use it.
20
OK, that tells me that more people need to contact their congressional offices and give their input. I belong to 2 groups who meet about once a month and write postcards to congress. It is simple. Make it a time to talk, have munchies, drinks, postcards and short write-ups on bills or issues. 2 or 3 people bring in something they think is important. Use the petitions that everyone seems to get and copy them off, find out a little more to make sure it really is the way the petition says, find out the name and bill number. Write up whether it is a Senate, House or state bill, put down a few talking points and share.
A postcard can contain whether to support or oppose and one of the compelling (to you) reasons.
No time to get together with others? Take a minute and call the local office of your legislators.
It is our government, act like it!
4
@tms: If you think it is "your" government, you truly live in La La Land.
What people want in theory and in practice are different. How questions are handled also make a difference. A majority of people say they want single payer healthcare until a follow up question asks if they support increases in taxes to fund it. Then the support falls to just under a majority. It’s all in what the actual proposals look like. People want climate change regulations in theory but wait until their electric bills go up and the cost to fill their vehicles with gas goes up. When Americans standard of living goes down, as it would, people are going to revolt.The poorest and lower middle class will be the ones that can’t afford a new electric vehicle, more energy efficient appliances, etc. They will need the Democrats increase in minimum wage just to try and maintain their current lifestyle.
2
@John
I don't recall anyone asking me how I wanted to fund all the stupid wars we wage, or to fund a ginormous tax cut for rich people. But we get those anyway.
1
@Madeline Conant You are proving my point. After 9/11, the war in Iraq and Afghanistan were popular and even a number of Democrats supported it. Now those wars are not looked upon fondly. Just because people want something in theory doesn’t mean they will like the reality that follows.
16
Democrats need to look at these results and show that many of their politicians are taking the side of Republicans and their mega rich donors over public opinion.
The strategy of ignoring what We the People need works for Republicans because they are the party of the rich. That is their function.
Democrats are supposed to be the party for the rest of us.
Ever since Democrats became the other partyof the rich, also ignoring what most people need, turnout is down and you are losing 2/3 of all elections. This is working great for tree mega rich donors, but it is not working for the People or the Democratic politicians and their party.
Democrats will never compete with Republicans on their turf. Stop trying to win back Reagan Democrats who haven't voted for you for forty years.
Start trying to get non voters interested in governance and voting. If Democrats actually tried to understand their constituents rather than the Trump base, they would increase turnout enough that the electoral college would be irrelevant.
Experience doesn't mean anything if you don't learn from it. The Democratic Party has a lot of experience following Republicans to the right and losing elections. Einstein has shortened his defining of insanity to "centrist Democrat."
Change your strategy to fighting for the workers that make up 60% of the population plus their families to win elections and promote the general welfare as our says in the Constitution.
4
@McGloin If Republicans are truly the party of the rich then why did so many working class individuals support Republicans in 2016?
1
@John
Because they drank the Kool Aid while watching Fox News.
Congress Has No Clue What Americans Want
To get elected you need money.
Hence
Congress Has Every Clue What Campaign Donors Want
To get to Congress you need to please your donors. The richer, the more power you can acquire
Charles E Schumer, Top Contributors
Campaign Committee Fundraising, 1989 - 2018
Goldman Sachs
Citigroup Inc
Paul, Weiss et al
JPMorgan Chase & Co
Credit Suisse Group
The Democratic Party, once the party of working Americans, is now is being led by a professional politician financed by Wall Street
=====
https://www.opensecrets.org/members-of-congress/summary/charles-schumer?cid=N00001093&cycle=CAREER&type=I
10
@Woof
The reality is that the Democratic Party is secretly the Republican Party. The Democratic Leadership has secretly acquiesced in everything their friends across the aisle have done to us. This makes sense when you realize they're all on the same team. They're all paid from the same corporate payroll.
1
Thanks for putting research behind a phenomenon that many Americans have long suspected but couldn’t quantify. Sadly, as long as politicians are beholden to corporate interests and voter turnout is depressed through gerrymandering, suppression, and apathy, their unresponsiveness to constituents’ interests is unlikely to change.
4
Simply lumping Democrats and Republicans together is unacceptable. And asking staff members? Those who have to shepherd the business of the day and not of the term? I don't need a research project to understand the right-ward march of American politics or the role of wealthy contributors, like the Koch Bros, Sheldon Adelson, or the Mercers, in determining the GOP agenda. Nor do I need this research to tell me that the aims of some big donors are not simply to reduce their own taxes but to reduce the role of the federal government to a small remnant encompassing defense and law and order. On the other hand, we can look at FDR's Social Security, LBJ's Medicare and Medicaid, and BHO's ACA. Governing is about leading and not just about responding to the latest poll. How many executive orders has Trump written to help the people? How many to enrich the wealthy? How many just to destroy Obama's legacy?
6
Could it be that the reason Congressmen and Senators are so out of touch with what their constituents really want is due to the fact that the people they spend most of their time talking to are large campaign donors?
1
Yes, money creates policy. That said, there is a very vocal minority that supports the policies that the majority abhors. Here's a long-term solution: get involved with the local schools. Work on improving public education to improve critical thinking so fewer future voters are vulnerable to populist hyperbole, whether from the left or the right. Volunteer to tutor kids so our reading levels improve. Insist on expanded civics curriculum so voters understand the workings of government, including the separate authorities of federal, state, and local governments. The local GOP groups began the assault on education 30 years ago, and 2016 was the result.
3
My Congresswoman Jackie Speier has a good understanding of what her district wants. She comes home regularly to meet with us. During the 2008 recession she held job fairs to help her constituents that were laid off. She understands about gun control and she herself still has a bullet lodged in her body after Jonestown.
On the other side of the aisle, Devin Nunes while aiding trump's agenda seems to be missing from his home district in Sacramento and surrounding areas.
There is a difference in the doing the bidding of the President and representing your district. Let's all vote for people who will represent us.
13
This study shows why the American electorate is not being represented by Congress.
Congressional members who only meet with special interest groups, and accept large campaign donations from them, receive a skewed worldview from monied lobbyists. Worse, they care more about the money than the people they're supposed to represent.
Good luck contacting your representatives. I have e-mailed and telephoned both sides of the aisle.
Republicans evidently haven't cleared out their voicemail boxes in 2 years, as a phone call to them elicits, "this mailbox is full. please try again at a later time." Trying again only gives the same message. If you e-mail Republicans, they never write back.
The Democrats are a hair's breadth better. Their voicemail boxes are always full, too. An e-mail will elicit an acknowledgement that they received your e-mail, and no follow up.
On top of it, Congressional choices are ruled by staffers. Staffers who are not elected,and who are deliberately ignoring constituents, to the point where their voices are never heard.
Few in the U.S. are rich enough to attract any elected's attention. Campaign finance reform is needed, so that the government pays for campaigns, not rich donors.
Then we need electeds who like to talk to constituents, are not afraid of them and will represent them.
Now there's the rub. How to make government employees--our employees--actually want to serve all the people.
5
There is a very big difference between constituents and people who vote in elections. If we established a national automatic voter registration and a requirement to vote in order to be a citizen, we'd see a dramatic shift in American politics. The right and the establishment left have long conspired to suppress voting by the the poor and the marginalized.
1
Money talks, which is why most politicians only listen to the big spenders . This in on a State level as well as the National level.
Having Citizens United overturned is a big step in the right direction.
Having ordinary citizens structure a phone tree, an email tree, twitter tree or anything else to make sure that we badger elected officials until they care enough to list might help as well.
In addition, the media can do their part by continually covering all of the issues that matter to ordinary citizens and putting forthright information out there and calling out politicians who don't vote the way the voters want them to do.
Billboards, yard signs and postcards are an old fashioned method that works wonders for people who have short attention spans. You can't ignore the issues when they are brought to you this way. It might be enough to get voters to take action
And vote out any politician who does not vote for the issues that are important to you. Like Health Care, Voting Rights, sensible Gun Reform, for starters. Without these protections we will be a less safe and healthy country. Which is precisely why the Republicans can not be in charge any more.
The have had their chance and they have blown it, bigly.
4
Congress doesn't know because the voters don't tell them. Almost a majority of citizens, and almost all young people (under 30) don't vote. Many citizens do so automatically, without thinking, as if voting for a particular party was a tradition one simply didn't question. That leaves the single issue voters. Trump's support is a minority after all. He and they are fiddling while Rome burns, or counting angels on a pinhead, or otherwise leading this Country by the nose into craziness.
It's interesting how Prohibition was passed with a minority of backing. Congress knows it's the single issue voters they need to please.
3
It's true that the members of Congress do not know what their constituents want, but then again, lazy voters keep them in office, either by not voting at all or by voting on the basis of vague "liking" or mere name recognition. If there are no electoral consequences and plenty of big bucks for those who flout their constituents' opinions, why should they change?
In the case of the Democrats, the party has been known to sabotage primary candidates who are seen as "too far left," i.e. likely to scare the corporate contributors.
Whatever you think of Bernie Sanders, his campaign showed that a politician who speaks to the actual needs of the people can go a long way with very little media coverage initially and no corporate support. (Disclosure: I voted for Hillary Clinton in the general election, but I hope that neither Sanders nor Clinton runs in 2020.)
Successful Democratic candidates need to know their potential constituents, understand their real needs, and propose workable solutions instead of following some cookie-cutter script provided by the DNC.
Instead of going for the PACs and billionaires, they need to inspire potential voters to hold coffee and cookie fundraisers for their neighbors. $100,000 raised from a PAC guarantees no votes, but $100,000 raised by ordinary people each chipping in $10 each almost guarantees 10,000 votes, because while PACs play both sides of the aisle, ordinary people don't contribute to candidates they don't believe in.
9
But here is the other side of the coin. The American public doesn’t know how to translate what it wants into the appropriate choice on Election Day. Rare is the voter, who makes a list of his or her policy preferences, weighs them for their importance, and then rationally decides, which candidate and party best aligns with those. Many Americans are one-issue voters or vote primarily on emotions. Politicians and lobbyists understand that perfectly well and know how to manipulate the public to vote against their preferences.
5
We shouldn't forget the White House's duplicitous populism, a campaign rhetoric based on concern for the little guy's economic and health care anxiety but policy focused on cutting taxes for the donor class, gutting regulations fossil fuel and other industries don't like (remember Murray Energy's wish list), creating cheaper health insurance policies that leave the vulnerable at risk. We are doing a poor job, indeed, of holding political leaders accountable.
2
Agree with many others. Congress does not pass laws based on wishes of constituents. Laws are passed based on contributors' interests. Supreme Court rarely rules in favor of individuals but supports corporate interests. I fear the article is based on a false premise.
9
I have to give a perverse chuckle, it being Halloween, that there is even a perception that what is important to American’s matters to those in the legislative branch of gov’t. They are all stamped with a USDA Prime label, bought and paid for by special interests. Only the money matters. I’d like to see a presentation of our senator’s and rep’s net worth over the time they...serve?
12
When I do searches online to see the polls for individual races, I find that competitiveness is more often measured by how many dollars have been raised by each candidate. Clearly a candidates success is driven by money as will be his/her performance and loyalties in Congress. We will never make the public's influence on Congress more balanced until we revise our election campaign spending laws. The decision in Citizen's United was demonstrably wrong and has damaged our Democracy.
10
Dispensing with cynical/sarcastic remarks, I urge readers to put your representatives office numbers on your cell phone contact list and call them regularly to remind them of your interests and priorities and what you want to have done.
Using my phone to explain what this constituent wants (in hands-free mode during Atlanta traffic) helps me feel a bit more productive during traffic jams.
Bookmark their Congressional website addresses and send email to follow up.
It can take a lot of pestering and complaining to get the level of attention a single lobbyist campaign contribution produces, so it's important to call often.
6
It is a time honored answer. Follow the money. Until such time as there are publicly financed elections and we cut off the faucet of corporate lobbyist and PAC money the people's wishes will be ignored. How else can you justify a tax cut bill that gives 80% of the benefit to corporations and the 1%.
If the government cared about our wishes the tax bill equation would have been reversed. Less and less people bother to vote because in reality what is the point. The game is fixed and we know it, with no end in sight.
7
My Congressional Representative, David Rouzer, held one public forum in the most-populated area of this Congressional district in the prior 2 years. Despite it being a mid-day, mid-week affair, it was well-attended with a standing room only crown in an 800-seat auditorium. To his credit, he did dispense with his prepared remarks and spent 2-hours answering questions.
It was quickly apparent how out-of-touch Rouzer was with the majority of engaged voters who made the effort to attend. Rouzer spent 2-hours promoting his GOP talking points to every question, even when these talking points did not address the questions asked. A paper cut-out with a recorded tape spouting Fox-endorsed "messaging" would have been as enlightening as listening Rouzer's responses.
15
Congress not only hasn't a clue of what Americans want, they have no interest in making an effort to find out.
That's what happens when the sole goal of a political party is to gain and maintain control over all three branches of government, while holding themselves only accountable to a president who is only accountable to himself.
Are "we winning" yet?
13
Nice, but hardly necessary, to have one more study documentinhg what has been crystal-clear for decades or more. (most) Members of Congress view their job not as representing "what their constituents want," but rather getting re-elected. They are interested in gaming the system, not changing it to work better for those "constituents." And looking at how many of them do get re-elected, they are very good at their jobs. Survival of the fittest works in the toxic swamp of US politics.
That they hire aides who help them in this is even less of a surprise.
End gerrymandering, end our primary system which as currently operated favors extreme views rather than any middle ground, and we just might see an improvement. Kill the zombie Electoral College while we're at it and maybe we won't have more Ws and more Trumps. Fix the system and all of a sudden our representatives will care more about "what we really want."
8
Washington, D.C. has become such an insular place that none of this research really matters.
The fact is, to get elected and to stay there requires massive amounts of money. Obtaining that money means lies, obfuscation and dancing around issues in order to make promises that will never be kept.
Meanwhile, politicians are desperate to keep these jobs because they love feeling important while they reap fortunes without actually having to do much of anything. In other words, they could care less what their constituents want.
6
Good research on a representative sample of Americans. But, the article contrasts a representative view with the view from "the Hill" and fails to make a distinction between the House and Senate.
The Senate has become less and less representative of Americans. It gives greatly disproportionate voice to a declining minority of Americans who live in mostly Red states. With the exception of a few Red states whose economies are propped up with Social Security and Medicare dollars by attracting snowbirds, our population has been moving from mostly failing Red state economies to more prosperous, more likely to be Blue states.
The Electoral College never was and the Senate and Senators are less and less an arm of a democracy. They are the voice of Fox, Breitbart, etc.
3
Because it's not about what voters and citizens want... It's what the billionaires and corporations that have bought their representatives want.
25
No surprises here. The most disappointing thing is that no one explained that the reason they were uninformed about their constituents’ wishes is that they were too busy doing their jobs in Washington. And the GOP has consistently proven that they don’t care what the American people want or think. There have been no significant consequences for Republicans at the ballot box or in their wallets, so they are free to condescendingly TELL us what’s best for us as a nation, and despise us when we don’t agree and aren’t suitable grateful for the miseries they inflict.
5
My senators apparently only know what they are told in committee meetings... they don't actively solicit input from their constituents and can be a bit surprised that their constituents have different views than their donors.
We must contact them and let them know our concerns. They need to realize we can't just run up to DC to testify about our concerns in a committee meeting to which we were not invited.
1
I once worked for one of the largest magazines in the US. We were well aware that the people who wrote in criticizing articles and editorial positions were likely from the fringe, not the middle. It is not only large corporate donors who Congressional offices listen to. It is also the squeaky wheels who make it a hobby to write and call them.
4
I think the "fringe" has been over taken by the mainstream now that we're all used to electronic forums and social media. I don't think I'm "fringe".
1
We are an Oligopoly, the ones with money have a much greater power over congress than the 'vote'. I will vote and continue to vote on local, state and federal elections; but until money is out of politics, e.g. Citizens United, this is a very steep climb to
a government that is of, by and for people. As far as the individual states, there are even more vulnerable to bend to the will of national and international corporations.
2
Excellent article. I am disappointed, however, that the authors chose to characterize their conclusions as guesses when in fact they were based on "large scale opinion surveys and standard models." The term guesses implies something far less substantial.
4
Congressman Chris Collins, he of insider trading indictment fame, was quoted, before the tax bill passed, as saying that his donors wanted the bill passed or they shouldn't be called again.
His "donors" not his constituents. Says it all right there. Why people would continue to vote for someone who puts donors above constituents baffles me. But that helps explain the results of this piece.
44
If you don't know, ask? Seems like a simple solution no? Perhaps members of Congress should stop hiding. Town halls which invite questions and answers or some form of internet dialogue between representative and constituents?
Congress members seem to close the doors once elected to their constituencies and come out only when the voting booth calls. And in the actual halls of Congress it's mostly the lobbyists and interest groups prowling so no wonder they don't hear from regular folk.
Voters should at a minimum demand the town halls and if their Congress person doesn't show up or won't, vote them out.
6
Town Halls where questions are selected in advance are still suspect in my view. There are definitely topics some of the more cowardly representatives will not address in their town hall meetings.
The concluding paragraph said it all and explains why these professors, like almost all Americans, totally missed the real problem they cannot fix.
Voting is not going to clean up the mess. Democracy as performed in USA, Italy, Brazil, Hungary, Philippines, Canada, etc is just a reality show of popularity contest to elect any Joe or Jane. Too many of the elected officials these days have no experience, knowledge or proven track record running complex business of government. But they are good at talking, lies and spins.
3
You presume that Congress intends to fulfill America's wishes. That is not the way politics and government work in America. Congress intends to fulfill the wishes of the small number of Americans wealthy & powerful enough to matter, while keeping the rest of the country fighting about other issues.
11
My district is so comfortable for our congressman, Kenny Marchant, that he’s not held a Town Hall since 2009. Alas, this study comes as no surprise to me since elected officials live in an echo chamber and don’t meet with their constituency.
9
Why is this discrepancy made in to a mystery? Isn't the explanation rather simple? The Elected Representatives that we have in Congress today are mostly Republican, and they drive policies for the wealthy the overwhelming majority of the time. If anything should also benefit the middle class it is by coincidence, not design. If the wealthy do not support it, it doesn't even come up for a vote. Congress knows what the wealthy want, but you didn't ask them that.
If you don't say what Representatives you are talking about and what states and what districts, the article fails on several different levels. Of all the major studies done, it is shown over and over that the wealthy determine the policies, just as they determine who is elected.
As for the Democrats, they have a different speak, but their business connections are only a little bit different. However, the difference is enough to make a difference. Rather than the kind of corruption we are witnessing at the hands of the Republicans, we would see more honest dealings for sure if Democrats were elected. Are they pure as snow? No. Do they have a better connection with their constituents, I would think so based on my reading of the people who represent me.
7
Of course not. They're not there to serve others, they're there to serve themselves. We need to rethink the constitution that never anticipated this level of selfishness.
7
Term limits would make a huge difference in the level of selfishness.
The next set of questions should be what their donors want. Republicans in Congress would be correct over 90% of the time. The 1% and the rest of us want something very different from our country. Which group is getting what they desire from government?
8
With almost everyone now connected to the internet why is there such a large discrepancy between what constituents want and what their Congressional representatives think they want?
2
"The GOP Congress has no clue what America wants (and doesn't care)" There, fixed it for you.
13
Where was the original research published?
3
Note to Congress:
Health care; strong public elementary, secondary and post secondary education; remove crushing financial burden of college tuition; restore infrastructure; get rid of electoral college; make election day a national holiday; protect Robert Mueller.
Oh and get the damn Russians out of our elections!
This is what Americans want, just for starters. Do it!
191
@Ambimom
"Health care; strong public elementary, secondary and post secondary education; remove crushing financial burden of college tuition; restore infrastructure; get rid of electoral college; make election day a national holiday; protect Robert Mueller."
That is a description of the Progressive platform.
Plus: "to dissolve the unholy alliance between corrupt business and corrupt politics is the first task of the statesmanship of the day".
Only a corporate person would vote against that.
12
@Ambimom
I totally agree.
8
@Ambimom Do you think anyone in Congress bothers to read the NY Times comments?
They barely acknowledge their constitutents until it is time for reelection and then the lies spew forth from their mouths. I would rather havew my daughter marry a used car salesman.
3
Congress seems to understand what corporate donors want from them and has no problem delivering.
18
This article should be titled "Congress does not care what Americans want."
23
Follow the money! This is how Congress makes decisions.
17
Columbia, The Nation and the University of California? That's one helluva cross-section of American thought, isn't it? But one that would be perfectly at home in the Times. The thing that got me most about this article wasn't its direction, but its somewhat condescending attitude towards its readers, the voters and the politicians. I would have understood what they were trying to say when I was about 12, but I could have done a more persuasive job of pleading my cause in writing by that age as well, so one has to wonder about the level of education these days in our prime institutions.
Congressional Aids may come in all ages and ethnicities, but most are youngsters compared to the rest of the general population. They are just out of college, have their first real job, work for peanuts, work endless hours, have no personal life yet, and think they are living the glamorous life in Washington, D.C.
They obviously have little life experience. There is no surprise they haven't a clue what the constituents are thinking back home, so they believe what their bosses want them to believe.
5
They know what citizens want, they just don't care. They just want to keep taking their bribes and live off the public forever.
7
I do communicate with my politicians on public issues. I'm routinely dismissed and ignored. My federal House representative in particular is not only dismissive, he's rude and verbally abusive to constituents who don't support his policy positions. You should see his town halls. More frequently though, the representative won't even conduct town halls in areas he knows are hostile to his positions.
The point being: Many politicians don't care what their constituents think or want. That's not what got them elected and it's not what is going to keep them elected. They are there to vote a party line and support their special interest donor class. The aides are along for the ride. At least in the Republican case, representative democracy is not only ignored but actively attacked.
The study is interesting but sadly irrelevant. Unapologetic minority rule is an objective reality in large portions of the United States. They aren't sorry; they're proud.
328
@Andy
Thank you Andy . This sums how I feel about the column.
8
Who is your representative?
5
@Andy So will your congressman get reelected? If so, and his opinions are so very contrary to his constituents, it will be interesting to try to explain.
4
Does anybody remember the Congressmen who sent special stamps to his big donors so that his staff could tell the "important" letters apart from the letters that were just from his constituents? What happened to him after this news came out?
1
Sure they know what Americans want, they had to promise it to them to get elected. What they are clueless about is the true nature of what they have gotten themselves into.
1
Congress and their agents know what the public wants. However they know what their big contributors want. They know with enough money they can keep getting elected and can safely ignore what the public wants.
2
Oh, I think Congress knows what we want but they are working for the one percent only and don't intend to work for the rest of us and act on existing bills for the benefit of the majority of Americans or begin drafting new ones.
I am not surprised their aides are as self-interested and self-absorbed as their bosses. This is the 'it's all about me' presidency and Congress.
Personally, I have been completing political surveys by the dozens monthly throughout 2017 and 2018 so both parties know exactly where I stand on all the issues and what my priorities are.
Putin probably knows as well by now.
6
How many in public opinion polls would have picked the two candidates for president ?Also there is gross misconception of statistics. By quantifying a number from a poll you have a static statistic. After the introduction of the iPhone a poll of the general public would say "I won't spend that much money on a cell phone", how relevant was that statistic ? Background checks are not the problem, gun violence is. Climate change is an undisputed concern, what can we do about it is the question. The Democrats and Republicans are out of touch with their constituents. Taking polls is easy producing results not so easy. As Leo Deroucher explained "Statistics are for Losers".
3
No, they know quite well what we want. The faulty assumption is yours: you expect them to actually try to enact what we want, rather than what they selfishly desire.
5
Three thoughts:
(1) What you say is oh! so true. We are all prone to think large blocks of people agree with us on this or that.
Take Lincoln during the Civil War. All too prone to think: that talk of secession was contrived by a few southern "fire-eaters." Those angry flames were fanned by a handful of self-interested politicians.
WRONG, MR. PRESIDENT!
After (I believe) the battle of Shiloh, the painful realization dawned. No. These guys are fighting for keeps.
It's gonna be a long war, folks. Very long. Very bloody.
(2) Read about Britain's first reform bill. In 1832.
The government was so UTTERLY out of touch with the misery--anger--frustration--poverty of their own citizens--
--there was widespread fear of armed and bloody revolution. Just as in France. In 1789.
The bill passed. That fear of armed revolution subsided.
(3) I genuinely fear the prospects for another civil war in this country.
You speak of Congressmen--and their staffs--being "out of touch" with the feelings of their constituents.
Two groups of people they're NOT out of touch with:
Ever-watchful donors.
Special interest groups. Like the NRA.
Is it possible the GOP becomes so utterly clueless--
--to the expressed wishes of the American people--
--and (faced with widespread electoral revolt)--
--resolves to seize and hold power by any means possible--
--that large numbers of our citizenry take up arms?
I believe it could happen.
And it scares me.
5
Congress has been bought and paid for by special interests. Also, the old fossils that stand in for representative government — Grassley or Hatch are will past their sell by date. They demonstrated on live TV recently that they completely out of touch with needs and wants of every day people. The 8% congressional approval rating and even the election of lunatic Trump, are signs that they need to go.
To restore ‘government for and by the people’. They people need to get informed and vote— full stop.
8
It's hardly surprising that (mostly Republican) members of Congress who refuse to hold town hall meetings with their constituents would be clueless about what the American public really wants. It's also no surprise that people who have been extremely well rewarded by special interest groups, individual plutocrats and apparently even in some cases hostile foreign entities would have no interest in discovering what we actually want and need. And it's also not surprising that many members of Congress have been specifically recruited for their ignorance, rigid ideology, willingness to be bought and either their utter shamelessness or vulnerability to compromise. Vote them out!
5
A simple term to describe this situation: willful ignorance.
3
We must protect our democratic institutions in these dark times. Freedom of the press ensures news organizations will analyze and critique government function. However, it must be said that to report on a study such as this that doesn't mention the effect of Citizens United on representative government is a banal attempt at exercising that function.
2
I don’t buy this. If it were really true, people could easily run according to the supposed public preferences and defeat the out-of-touch congresspeople. Yet the vast majority of congresspeople are re-elected time and time again.
It is much more likely that opinion polls on issues can get wildly different results depending on how they are worded, cannot distinguish between a public preference that is strongly held versus one that is a mile wide and an inch deep, and cannot capture the full complexity of issues in real life.
To take one recent example, many issue polls show strong public support for single-payer in the abstract. Yet when Colorado put single-payer on the ballot, 80% voted no. Clearly the issue poll was not an accurate guide to the voters’ actual preferences.
4
@G.K Thank you for a voice of sanity. As we should know after 2016, polls are not reliable measure of what people really want. I think politicians have a better idea of what constituents really want--after all, they got elected by the constituents. I'm sick of hearing people blame politicians. It's the voters who are the problem. And by the way, corporations don't buy elections; they buy advertising, which people are stupid enough to believe.
This is the problem of allowing lobbyists and their big money to have more access than constituents. Some time ago I heard a member of congress state that they needed Lobbyist to tell them how to vote.
His rationale was that the Lobbyists knew more about the issue than they did and they should, therefore, follow that lead. They will only know how much a constituent knows if we tell them. Unfortunately, most of us can't show up at their offices bearing gifts. My current MOC has refused to see a constituent more than once during a term, as in, "I saw you in my office (local) and so I won't make an appointment with you again."
Members of Congress can't reasonably be expected to read all they need on all issues but, I assume, perhaps erroneously, that this is why there are committees interviewing experts and staff members doing research for them. That is, of course, an ideal.
Much easier to have lunch with a lobbyist and let them tell you how to vote.
Bottom line: Write and call your Congress Member often. Sadly, my MOC consistently offers to email his "newsletter" as if that is a substitute to personally discussing issues. Another reason I'm hoping he will be replaced on Nov. 6.
3
Truth is our representatives represent themselves, not their constituents. With technology, it is easier than ever to compile the positions of constituents on all major issues. Posting or emailing surveys to gather opinion is an easy task today. However, our representatives do not attempt to ask our opinions. They just assume all dems feel one way and all republicans feel the opposite. The system needs to be updated. It is stuck and the paralysis needs to be fixed.
4
Fascinating. So - is Congress principle centered? It appears so. At first glance I consider this positive. The guiding Republican principle - "Reduce Power of Democracy; Increase Power of Capitalism". Seems a pretty accurate assessment to me. It is a principle that we should honestly debate.
Then the big unanswerable question: Why do people vote for principles that are not representing what they want? Alexander, can I ask you to address this question in a future Opinion?
4
This article seems to contain two glaring inaccuracies. First, there is an assumption that all of the people living in a Congressperson's district are what said Congressperson considers "their constituents", and that each constituent is considered equally important. As several others here have pointed out, the appointment of Gorsuch and Kavanaugh should ensure that rulings such as Citizens United will be enhanced rather than corrected, probably for decades.
Along the same lines, the statistics given here make no allowance for how strongly a constituent feels about a topic.
The second problem is that the actual numbers for how skewed the aides' perceptions are don't even remotely support the notion that Republicans and Democrats are equally out of touch. In fact, given that not all constituents are equally counted (the first problem cited here), the Democratic estimations are even more in touch than the numbers show. The skew for the Republicans, however, is very large on most issues. So, this article is one more in the endless litany of false equivalences.
5
This is not a mystery. Politicians listen to the interests of their actual constituents: their funders. Since most legislators are funded by large-monied interests, they accurately reflect those groups' priorities. I suspect that legislators who don't accept PAC money know exactly what their state's voters want, because that's who's funding their campaigns. We get the results that our systems are designed to produce.
8
Capitalism works, but it must be rationally regulated. Bring back the good old days of banks managing the loans they sell. Give me back our EPA, reform campaign finance laws and allow people to buy into Medicare. That would be a good start. And no one is going to take your guns away, so let that be known.
10
Congress may know or not know what Americans want, but they know what they want – to get reelected. They have been bought by the donor class and they do what the donors want.
This isn’t a question of being out of touch; this is willful self-interest. The days of the mythical public servant are over. Politicians don’t even try to fake it anymore.
But politicians are not the cause of this situation, but merely a symptom of our national malaise. Our bedrock American values privilege winners, power and wealth aka the American Dream. We glorify it in the media. Our system ignites the worst of our human inclinations and releases them into a Darwinistic pressure cooker.
Our system encourages our Hobbesian instincts of self-interest and elevates the individual over the collective. Our definition of freedom is centered on the individual, on individual rights, rather than as a force to reinforce the collective with equal rights and opportunity for all.
We treat corporations as individuals and allow them to plunder unfettered across our economy. Listen: we think healthcare is a function of the marketplace rather than a human right. That’s how much we think of each other.
We know less about creating a society than living as a vast collection of disparate individuals, each clinging uncompromisingly to his or her own agenda.
So how can we blame politicians for not knowing what we want? They know. They’re just pursuing their God-given right to the American Dream.
14
Complacency has allowed us to assume that the country will be more or less functional regardless of what we do.
Despair has allowed us to assume that nothing we do will change the course of the country.
Both are convenient excuses allowing us to do nothing.
It's time we stopped being lazy, or fearful, and started taking back control of our country. As with everything else that our government does -- the ultimate responsibility for this is OURS. Let's own it, and create the change we want.
8
The "both sides" framing in this article is frustratingly misleading. No, neither party knows with exactitude how their constituents feel on a given issue. However, as the article itself states:
"Across the five issues, Democratic staff members tended to be more accurate than Republicans. Democrats guessed about 13 points closer to the truth on average than Republicans."
The lesson seems clear. If you want a Congress that comes closer to what the public actually wants, vote for the Democrats.
31
@Jason
And if Democrats stopped compromising with those that are not listening to the voters they would be even closer to public opinion, and start winning elections.
2
As long as the people keep electing the same politicians without knowing or caring where they stand on issues important to them, or worse, not even voting at all, we will never have the government that truly represents us. We hold the key; we vote. We CAN hold politicians responsible. We choose not to in our voting behavior.
9
Republicans serving in Congress have access to the latest science on global warming if they want to see it. They can call in real experts to help them understand the consequences of continued inaction. The science we already know entirely justifies meaningful legislation that will impose carbon taxes, encourage the expansion of commercial and domestic-sourced wind and solar power, and thus help accelerate the shift away from our current reliance on fossil fuels.
13
@Don Blume
Once the wind/solar industry starts making the appropriate campaign contributions I'm sure our elected lawmakers will enthusiastically climb aboard the green-energy bandwagon.
4
I find this effort admirable, but misguided, as it assumes that politicians are concerned about their constituents' opinions other than their overall inclination to vote for one or the other party.
Within that context, I'm not surprised that the Democrats are slightly more attuned to the public than the GOP, as their platform naturally conforms more to the actual concerns of the voters. However, and I say this as a Democrat, there are other factors at play, including coincidence and the reality that those on the outside, like "servants"(the public) observing their "masters"(the public), tend to have a better idea of what lies beneath the surface.
Where this op ed is timely is that it accurately describes the current climate where adherence to rigid dogma and clan behavior leave policies in the dust when it comes to elections. What's really sad is that when queried the majority of Americans repeatedly say that they wish their representatives would talk to each other and negotiate policy, a novel idea practiced by the Founders.
5
@pixilated
"What's really sad is that when queried the majority of Americans repeatedly say that they wish their representatives would talk to each other and negotiate policy, a novel idea practiced by the Founders."
But, based on these findings, if policies were negotiated between the two parties, the end results would be less related to what American citizens actually want than if Democrats alone were to make decisions about policy.
2
That's true, but it would still be preferable to complete stagnation, growing cynicism and overall dysfunction. For instance, had the House taken up the bipartisan immigration bill that passed in the Senate, whatever quibbles one might have had with the original bill or what would have resulted with the input of a GOP led congress, it would certainly be preferable to the execrable policies that have been dictated by this diabolical president and his henchmen that err solely on the punitive and have not done anything positive for anyone, nonetheless the victims of a haphazard and cruel non-solution. @Percy
1
I agree with the article's conclusion. Supporters of deplorable policies are the ones more likely to vote. But I would also blame the Democrat leadership for not coming out with rebuttals. For example, are Democrats in favor of opening the doors to anyone who wants to come into the country including the Central American caravan - NO. So how come I don't hear them saying that. The Dem's are letting Trumpists frame the debates.
35
@Horace
The Media is too focused on everything said by Trump and his minions. Wouldn't it be nice if there was at least a little box on the front page of the NYTimes, The Washington Post, etc. stating the Democratic position on things like border control or whatever policy that Trump is spouting about? Do reporters bother asking? I'm really tired or Republicans calling anyone with a different opinion "a hater." Or that we want "open borders." But it is time for those with the microphone of printed page access to point out that many of Trumps own employees are here on work visas, that his MAGA hats are made in China, etc. And it isn't just Trump. Go to any country club or resort area restaurants and hotels and survey how many of the employees are temporary imports. My sister lives in a coastal Maine resort town. Even earlier this month, most of the restaurant employees were from eastern Europe! Even Moldova of all places! And they all spoke pretty good English which is interesting since we in our arrogance discourage multi-linguality in our own country.
5
People would like compact district boundaries that would allow voters in a area to choose representatives. The gerrymandering we have now allows representatives to choose voters.
Such a law would cause many incumbents pain, so it will leave committee.
18
Poll questions tend to be simple and simplistic: Should we limit carbon emissions? Yes. Question not asked: if it eliminates a million jobs? Well, let's give the matter more thought. People also give different answers depending on who they think they're talking to: Should there be more minority rights? To the pollster: Yes. To a close friend: No. Multiply examples ad infinitum. Maybe legislators know more than pollsters think they do; they then combine that with their knowledge of what it takes to get any bill passed. We all like to make fun of congress, but maybe it works better than we think it does.
3
@Ronald B. Duke
If legislators tell their constituents climate change is a hoax, their constituents will believe them. Why shouldn't they? Our leaders are supposed to tell us the truth, right?
If legislators would tell their constituents that climate change is real, but the state will lose a million jobs, then the constituents have a chance to ask--can you bring some other industry here? As things stand now, there's no chance of that. Donors won't allow it.
Let's take Medicare for All. Every American knows about Medicare--because most of us have aging parents. Most Americans strongly approve of Medicare--and, frankly, I find it doubtful that they're telling the pollsters they love Medicare but are telling their friends they do not. Many people are asking a simple question--why can't we have something like Medicare that applies to everyone? They're getting a completely different answer from their politicians in red states than we are in blue states. You may not want to believe this, but many Americans in red states liked Obamacare just fine when they only knew it as the Affordable Care Act.
Background checks? Most members of the NRA, repeat, the NRA, are not opposed to background checks. You'd never know that listening to red state politicians.
I could go on. The simple truth is that politicians, especially in red states as this article clearly shows, peddle "truth" based on what their donors want, not what their constituents need or want.
3
@Ronald B. Duke
More smoke and mirrors. Great job trying to muddy the waters.
Glaringly absent is popular opinion on trade and immigration. The Times loves public opinion when they agree with it. Another aspect is leadership. Gay marriage was unpopular until it wasn't. Courageous activist and leaders guided the public in the right direction. They appealed to our better instincts with moral and logical arguments. Now there's broad consensus on the matter and gay people have more freedom.
9
@Brian
Only until Trump's executive orders take it away!
1
@Brian: people are STILL opposed to gay marriage but it was FORCED ON US by social engineering courts and legislatures!
Sorry for US
Compare America to Sweden. The Swedes have it made, free health care, free college, students receive money to stay in college, Swedish workers receive much more vacation days than their American counterparts, and this is just some of the things that Swedish society insures for every citizen. The question is why, why America the economic powerhouse, the envy of the world, is last on the list in terms of western countries in many categories. Swedes don't work any less hard at their jobs than Americans but they are much happier, and have a much better quality of life than Americans. Do street gangs even exist in Sweden? The Swedes are evolving while America devolves. But why? Why do our political leaders care so little about our quality of life? The answer is simple, America is controlled by big business, because big business has access to Senators, Congressman and Presidents, and big business wants Americans just the way they have them, they love that they can keep American chained to health care plans that allow them to control them, and treat them like economic slaves. It's very sad, quality of life continues to diminish in America, and our Swedish cousins, who still have respect for America and all it has done in the past, our Swedish cousins feel sorry for US.
46
@artfuldodger This is why it is critical to get money out of politics.Some newer Democratic candidates (e.g., Justice Democrats) are campaigning without taking any corporate PAC money, only individual donations, and are out-raising their opponents, showing that the Bernie model can be replicated for candidates that DO listen to the American public. Sadly, establishment Democrats are often the first to run smear campaigns against populist candidates like Bernie; their donors' worst fears are ridding the corrupting influence of money on politics.
8
@artfuldodger Not just Sweden but many other westernized countries including the one I am a citizen of - Canada. Studies have shown that your northern neighbour (the correct spelling) across the board has immensely better health care for all, a higher standard of living for all, better protection under the law for all, longer life expectancy for all etc. But then Canada also has a better form of government than the USA. The parliamentary system of government represents citizens much better than does your republican system. And we, like the Swedes, feel very sorry for what is happening in your country today.
10
@artfuldodger
Yes, a governments that is 'of, by and for people'--what a concept. The Swedes practice what we had preached. They won't 'perish', but we might.
6
The first question to be asked of Congress how many of them meet with their constituents to find out what their needs are. How many listen to their constituents. Most likely many cannot name their constituents top ten concerns and they probably are very similar.
15
Congressional representatives know perfectly well what Americans want. They just have no intention of providing it. They are far more concerned with what their donors want. When you ask congressional aides what constituents think, they simply tell you that constituents think what their boss thinks, because that's what they are paid to say.
27
You fail to bring up the elephant in the room that pretty much ended any hope for voters at large to be able to have their voices not only heard, but acted upon.
Citizens United
And the billions in campaign dollars they are now *legally* allowed to shower like ticker tape confetti on their beholden political besties to gain first in line favor and influence over us lowly solitary voters. Only in America, not England, not Canada, not Germany, is the stench of corporate ownership of our government so powerful and now fully entrenched.
117
But, they don't work for us. They work for the oligarchs, like the Koch Brothers. They work for the donor class. That's the only way they could pass a tax break that doesn't increase jobs but does assure dividends to the rich.
We can thank the Supreme Court for that one.
152
There is an interesting assumption that our representatives would care about what our views are. Since Citizens United I would call that a faulty assumption.
Money buys the votes of the voters, money buys the votes of the representatives.
61
@Joan
Corporate Democrats have been selling the idea that money was not corrupting covenant until citizens untied. You can tell because most Democratic commentaries repeat the talking point.
But citizens untied would don't have passed of the system wasn't already corrupt.
The Supreme Court has been twisting the meaning of the 14th Amendment to make corporations into pseudo citizens for over a hundred years.
We need an Amendment to the Constitution that makes clear to the Supreme Court that
Corporations are Not People and Money is Not Speech.
Anything less will not be enough.
1
People not voting does create the illusion that there is more support for certain items than may truly exist. But the other issues are that some of the aides our senators and representatives hire are incompetent or so overwhelmed with work that they don't understand what we're asking for. I had the unfortunate experience of dealing with Nita Lowey's office. Not one person understood what I was asking. When I tried to clarify it I was sent a rude email telling me to leave them alone. Do you think I'm going to bother to contact her office again even if her district was shifted back to our area?
The public statements our legislators make, whether they are Democrats or Republicans, do not always reflect their knowledge of the situation. Hearing them make statements about unemployment benefits and their effects that were completely removed from reality is disturbing to unemployed everywhere. Listening to them say that there are plenty of jobs out there if only Americans would look is to realize that they have no clue what the job market is like for the average American.
They have no clue because they are whined and dined and courted and feted by the monied of our country. As long as they have enough campaign money coming in from rich donors they aren't going to listen to us or pay us the courtesy of pretending to listen. But they will decide what average Americans who are struggling want without understanding the consequences of such ill considered actions.
11
@hen3ry
"whined and dined" is right!
1
My initial, very strong reaction, was disbelief. As a rule, congressmen and their staffs are intelligent, well educated people who are in the business of knowing what their constituents want. How could the assertions of these authors possibly be true?
And then I thought of Donald Trump.
Donald Trump thought he could be president by saying and doing what the people really want, especially on certain key issues, like immigration. He was right.
The mystery is that there are not more Donald Trumps. Perhaps, another way to put it is this: expect more Donald Trumps.
Unless the establishment politicians catch a clue.
1
We're getting the best democracy money can buy ;)
63
A friend of mine is a legislative aide to one of our state senators. She says the way they gauge public interest in an issue is by keeping track of the correspondence they receive from constituents. They disregard any emails or letters or phone calls that various interest groups organize (so always write to your representative in your own words). They disregard any correspondence from people who live outside the senator's district. Each senator sits on various committees, and this particular senator disregards any correspondence that deals with matters outside her committee assignments. The list goes on. It is finally narrowed down to a very few issues that this particular senator will deal with, and amounts to issues that are of particular interest to the senator and not the constituents. Nevertheless, this state senator has been in office many years and has been reelected many, many times.
17
If the elected politicians don’t know what the American public wants then they shouldn’t be in office. It’s really pretty simple. The basic wants of all Americans whether you are Republican, Democrat or Independent is to be safe in your country and home. The ability to get a good job and make enough to have a somewhat comfortable living and retirement, afford to put your kids through college and have affordable healthcare that a major illness won’t put you into bankruptcy. If they can provide at least these objective then they have done their job.
The problem is that they get pigeon holed into a specific topic such as abortion on, for or against, immigration or some other area of specific interest and then they take their eyes off the ball and forget about what we all really need.
This problem starts at the top. We need a president that inspires and leads not one that divides and cares only about his power and money. We need a Congress that really cares about the public and not their own self-aggrandizement, but this is all wishful thinking. All we can do is chose a candidate that seems to have promise and hope for the best. Vote November 6th!
112
@VMG No, the problem starts with you and me - the individual voters. We get the representation we vote for. So we all need to look in the mirror and make sure we vote, our friends and relatives vote, our neighbors vote. This is the message of 2018 campaigns where the incumbents have unexpectedly lost. Are you listening.
3
@VMG
The problem starts at the bottom.
We the People are Sovereign. Together, we are the King. Government is Our representatives who are supposed to be doing our business
We have a responsibility to govern, through our representatives.
That takes work. We have a responsibility to research issues, keep track of how our representatives vote, and correct them when they mess up.
You wouldn't hire a manager for your business, then come back in two years to see how they did. You have to manage the manager.
But, most Americans have convinced themselves they are too busy to manage and too stupid to understand governance.
They are wrong on both counts. The less you govern, the more hours you have to work to stay afloat. It doesn't take a genius to do your civic duty. It takes time.
Make time to save your country.
4
@McGloin
So let's elect a Democratic Congress, impeach Trump and remove him from office. That's about as proactive as we can get. Vote Nov. 6th!
4
Let's see if a Blue house will introduce a bill or amendment repealing "Citizens United" on day one.
That is what the citizenry wants.
Any thing less is furthering insanity.
It's a litmus test easily administered.
116
A “blue wave” is not going to happen as liberals are great at righteous outrage but horrible at voting. Moreover, what are we going ro get CU repealed with Nancy Pelosi types even with a blue wave? Dream on.
1
I predict a blue congress would do no such thing.
1
@Lawrence- Indeed. We are naive to continue thinking, believing that we the voters have *our* legislators attention. Until Citizens U. is decidedly repealed, which we all know will never happen, there will be no single payer healthcare, no meaningful climate change policy, and it will be the corporations who determine our social, cultural financial fate. A sad state of affairs.
2
No, you miss the point... they only care about their billion dollar donors and getting their support... it’s 1932 Germany all over again.
12
They all can read polls. They all know. It is the money from the donor class that clouds their vision and judgement. NRA, ALEC, Koch Bros, Financial sector, big pharma, etc. THAT's who opposes the minimum wage, carbon capture/management/any rational gun control. Duh!
97
Term limits!+
11
Congress doesn't want to know what ordinary people want. They want to know what DONORS want. Donors are the ones who bankroll their reelection campaigns. Cynical. Nope, I'm just a realist.
74
This condition will continue until the priority of every politician in Washington shifts from getting re-elected to serving the constituency from which the power of their office is derived.
In short, never......
8
Congress knows just enough of Americans' need to seem to agree and do nothing about them.
6
Bottom line is they just don’t care. It’s their own personal agendas not the People’s agenda that they push.
7
Excellent information for canvassing! I've shared with my groups - please share with yours. We are hearing healthcare is the number one issue here in Ohio, after jobs.
10
It's a shame that those elected to office don't know what their constituents want. Who were they talking to (when they should have been listening) while running for office? It's a crime that they aren't telling their aides, once elected, what issues they want to work on but are letting their aides tell them.
1
This article is entirely too generous in its explanations for politicians’ lack of understanding of what the public wants.
The explanation is simple and straightforward: politicians are delivering the policies demanded by the corporations that fund their campaigns. As long as there are no limits on the sources of funding for political campaigns and the laws that enable manipulation of the vote by gerrymandering, voter suppression and disenfranchisement, that will continue to be the case. They don't care what the public wants because they know how to prevent the public from exercising their will.
The article was written by academics, who are speaking from their ivory tower. Too much nuance. Not enough straight talk.
52
@Yellow Dog
They don't want to be accused of overreaching, or reaching conclusions not supported entirely by their data.
It takes citizens like you and me to put that research into the context of massive campaign donations (which this study did not address) and reach bigger conclusions.
4
If policy was decided like these researchers conducted polls, single issue by single issue, we would have twice the spending and little or no tax collection. Women would have complete control over their bodies, but abortions would be illegal after 20 weeks. Everyone could buy guns, but nobody could use them. Every woman would claims to be a victim of sexual assault would be believed and the perpetrator punished, but every man would be given due process and the full presumption of innocence. There would be no taxes paid, no deficit spending, no inflation, and mortgages would charge no interest.
.
Members of Congress and their staffs need to construct a full package that adds up. They usually fudge the numbers, and often legislate contradictions, but not nearly as much as the public would if legislation was decided by opinion polls.
3
Congress is paid to know what it knows by (or should it be 'buy') all the deep pocketed interests in our system.
5
The entire premise of this piece is mistaken. First of all, we all know that if you ask congressional staffers what the people want you're not going to get an honest answer, you'll get a political answer.
Second, we all know generally what a majority of the people want; a majority of Americans want universal health coverage at an affordable cost, a majority want reasonable gun regulation, a majority want reasonable regulation on the financial sector, a majority want environmental protections, etc. The polling is available for anyone who cares to look. Regrettably, we also know that a sizeable minority of Americans wish the country were whiter, they believe in a White Christian country.
What we have are two political parties, and I don't even need to tell anyone which is which, one party seeks to be responsive to the public, the other doesn't care what the public wants and seeks to rule by force for the minority and exploits the ugly racist instinct of some in order to so rule.
12
There is no US public office that represents all of the people equally. That is why its politics is so parochial and juvenile.
1
Many members of Congress know exactly what their constituents want. The problem is that they no longer represent the average voter, but the lobbyists who arrive at their offices with fat checks for their campaign committees. At election time, members of Congress expect our votes. For the rest of their terms, they largely ignore us unless we have the resources to pay big time for representation. American “democracy” is a sham.
308
@LIChef
After the Great depression, millions of people got involved in protesting and education of fellow citizens on policy and and how to affect their government. The government responded with policies that greatly reduced poverty for the elderly, the poor, and workers alike. Poverty was cut in half, growing the economy by raising demand, and millions of people went to school for almost nothing, increasing productivity.
Then Americans got comfortable and lazy and were too busy shipping to protest and educate each other. The global rich seized the opportunity to sell us corrupt policies, and then to use the resulting corruption to tell us government is bad.
Government is Our Republic, established under the Constitution. There may be good and bad policies, but anyone that tells you "government is the enemy," (whether Republicans of "centrist" Democrats) is not a patriot. They are actually trying to overthrow the Constitution to replace our Republic with oligarchy, rule by the few thousand people that own half of the world's wealth and use that wealth to steal more. They are not afraid government, but democracy. They use government to impose their will, just like three King we rebelled against.
A few thousand people did not create half of everything on the planet. The workers create the wealth, but bankers and extractors of natural resources keep taking a piece of everything that goes by, even though it belongs to us.
We all have a responsibility to govern.
7
@McGloin, you know why Americans got lazy about politics (anti-communist propaganda and hysteria) and went shopping (bread and circuses for the masses).
2
"Since most congressional offices cannot regularly field public opinion surveys of their constituents, staff members depend heavily on meetings and relationships with interest groups to piece together a picture of what their constituents want. " Thank you for shaking me awake in regards to this gap in service to the people of this country. "We The People" deserve to be heard. Our representatives should be ashamed of themselves for not assuring that they know what the people want. Special interests have the financial means to get their opinions to our reps but there is no supported mechanism to get the common persons interests/opinions in front of our reps? This is the peoples government as paid for through our taxes. I will be writing my reps to demand that laws passed that include mandatory funding for public surveys regarding policy. In all honesty, I have personally taken my rights for granted. No more.
7
I disagree that "congress has no clue what Americans want". Congressional republicans know, but don't care. They are pushing through the policies of their wealthy benefactors in direct conflict with the interests of their rank and file supporters, attempted repeal of the ACA, tax cuts for the rich, hard right supreme court judges, anti labor policies, who don't seem to notice or care that these policies are hurting them.
121
@Jim Tagley. And the Democrats do the same. In this sense there really is no difference between parties.
3
@TW Smith that is just complete garbage. The dems proposed ACA, environmental protections and solutions for global warming. None of this is paid for by donors. The repubs propose increased oil exploration, less taxes on the rich, decreased environmental regs - I mean the list is endless. To say the two parties are equal just means you are not paying attention to anything at all.
16
@Grace Thorsen The ACA is nothing but a giant shovel full of welfare to the medical/insurance/pharma industries. The insurance industry lobbyists wrote it.
3
How can people keep being surprised that Congress is out of sync with what people want? After Citizen’s United made it possible to outright buy government (read Jane Mayer’s Dark Money), the only interest the Republican Party has in public opinion is how to manipulate it. Trump has been a great front who delivered the tax plan.
Citizen’s United was an intentional coup d’etat. Unless something gets done about campaign financing we will remain guests of the billionaires’ club.
174
@Jerryg: I agree with what you say except I do not consider myself and never will consider myself as a guest at the billionaire boys club. They are the 100% and we allow them to in power, but as all civilizations throughout history have fallen when the majority have had enough from the amoral, the craven, and the greedy, our current crop will fall when we take back our democracy from them (think French and Russian revolutions). I just hope that it's peaceful and the transition improves our lives and not take down our democracy.
7
@Jerryg
Citizens United was actually once in a long list of Supreme Court decisions that make corruptions into people and money into speech. See for example McCutcheon v. FEC.
Overturning Citizens Untied is not enough. We need an Amendment to the Constitution that makes clear to the Supreme Court that
Corporations are Not People and Money is Not Speech.
See for example, MoveToAmend.org
6
@Jerryg
Citizens United and McCucheon made a very seriously bad problem worse, but big money controlled most politicians long before the gang of five on the Supreme Court solidified and amplified its scope.
Senators like McCain and Feingold who actually made some progress on campaign finance were swatted back by a long series of Supreme Court decisions which ended with the evisceration of their efforts in Citizens United, the most misleadingly named famous Supreme Court casd I can think of.
2
To the authors:
Are you saying that Democratic staff members underestimated support in their district for repealing the ACA by 24%? Meaning, at least 24% of Democrats support repealing it? That can't be right.
Or are you saying that at least 24% of constituents support repealing it, regardless of the party of the constituents? That's slightly less shocking, but still inconsistent with what is generally reported in the media, which is that far fewer people want to repeal it, even Republicans and Tea Partiers, once they learn that this means loss of coverage for pre-existing conditions.
I think the piece would be clearer if, instead of showing graphics on the difference between the estimate and the actual, you showed the estimate and the actual along with the difference. Was the estimate 10% support, and the actual 34%? or was the estimate 0% and the actual 24%? Or was the estimate 76% and the actual 100%? All of these have the reported 24% underestimation but present very different situations.
8
@Mr. Mark The graphic is confusing. The answer to your question is that, in your example, if they underestimated support by 24%, that is the *deviation* from the actual support among constituents; so, while actual support may poll at around 75%, the staff members estimate public support at only 50%.
1
Elected officials for the most part have one goal to consider before others, getting re elected. Campaign money matters. Also single issue voters matter though to a lesser degree. What I want is less important than what someone who donates wants. Donations come in small multiple amounts or one big amount. Until we take all money out of politics, we get corrupted legislators.
11
You say that "Congress doesn’t know what policies Americans support." Nope, I think it's different from that; Congress may or may not know. our Representatives pay close attention to polls.
Whatever they know, or not, they simply don't care about the things America supports. What they care about is what their donors tell them to care about. Hence, the outside power of the NRA.
45
This study partially explains the Trump election---the public is screaming at Washington to pass legislation that addresses the problems they care most about---not what the lobbyists drop into Congressional in-boxes. Trump promised to drain the in-box swamp---with legislation that we all care about---of course, Trump like his GOP counterparts in Congress could has little understanding or even proclivity to address what we care about in our jobs and in our homes.
5
The professors have their own biases. For example, some polls show support in the range of 60% for a partial ban on abortions after 20 weeks. Given how divisive an issue abortion is, the fact that a moderate position has great support is something politicians should know. But evidently it was not on the professors’ radar.
3
@Cynical Jack
We don't need opinion polls on abortion since we have actual statistics. One in four women of childbearing age will have an abortion in their lifetime. This is the rate from 2008 to 2016. It has gone down each year since Obama was in office and since the ACA went into effect giving women access to reliable contraceptives. New rules by Trumpsters may change access to contraceptives making abortion rates go up again instead of down. You don't need to ask what people think about abortion, ask what they do. Women in health challenging, drastic economic and/or emotionally stressed situations, where they cannot bear a pregnancy, will have an abortion. Abortions are caused most of the time by lack of access to reliable contraceptives. We can blame Hobby Lobby and those super conservative nuns, and now the Trumpsters, for many abortions. If so called Christian conservatives really wanted to prevent abortion and balance the budget they would vote Democratic. The abortion rate always goes down during a Democratic President and the budget balance act gets way better. Which proves that people who yammer about the budget and abortion don't really care about either. They just want power. The way to get power is to create a one issue base that reacts to scare tactics, not reason and statistics.
4
It’s quite possible that Congress doesn’t know what the American people want because they don’t care, not that they don’t know. Money talks, nobody walks. We need to repeal Citizens’ United, or the state of our Union will continue to deteriorate at the same rate as our infrastructure!
32
This study is so flawed as to be useless. People often respond in the abstract that they support a policy, such as fighting climate change. But when an actual policy is presented to them, such as whether they are willing to pay more to achieve it, the polling flips. The congressional aides are obviously far more sophisticated and in tune than these authors.
9
That is because Congress lives in a country called “inside the beltway.” Living in that country are politicians, lobbyists, contractors, and lawyers. Congress is very faithful to the constituency. Those who live outside “inside the beltway” only matter at most every other year when they must demean themselves by huddling with the unwashed masses and pander for votes with promises soon forgotten.
Of course this is a broad brush view of Congress, and there are a few outstanding members who listen to the citizens of “outside the beltway.” As No Party Affiliation becomes the majority party in “outside the beltway,” and party line repeating drones are all that remains of the two party structure, I am afraid that members of Congress will strengthen their ties with the citizens of “inside the beltway,” as they will be the only sure source of the drug that they crave—money to fund the next reelection effort. For it is this drug that allows them to maintain the buzz of an in power high.
4
The country is divided. Does anyone actually know what Americans want?
Exactly what are our opinions and preferences? They vary from region to region, state to state, city to city and even within families.
Oh and congress doesn't really want to know.
3
@esp
Opinions vary depending on which TV channel they watch and whether or not they listen to "talk" (aka christian) radio.
2
@chichimax Thanks for the added comment. I forgot about the media.
I find it hard to believe these senior staff members don't have access or the ability to understand the same broad surveys the authors refer to, if Congress *really* wanted to represent all its constituents.
14
In summary, buying access to elected officials through campaign donations is money well spent for those who wish to affect legislation. It takes thousands of citizen casting ballots to equal the attention a congressman gives to one donor with a thousand dollar check. VOTE!
55
@Stephen Swanson
And those that wish to affect legislation sometimes don`t stop at just affecting. Some like ALEC actually write the legislation. Our Congress is run by the workers and not the people we elect. The people we elect are to busy kneeling and begging to be hands on legislators.
1
The tenure of this article, at least for me, is filling a piece of the puzzle. Good!
2
I disagree with the authors of this piece. Of course Congress knows what Americans want; it just doesn't care.
Why doesn't it care? Because money is the only thing that talks on Capitol Hill, and that money comes from the 1% and corporations. Those are the masters Congress serves. We are no longer a democratic republic; we are an oligarchy.
The simple remedy is for regular Americans to vote out those who do not represent their interests, but so many Americans don't bother to inform themselves that they don't even know their Congressional representatives are ignoring them.
A democratic republic can only function properly if all voters are informed and involved. The United States is nowhere near that.
352
I think politicians are pretty well aware of what their constituents want but they are not interested in that. They are interested in the concerns of wealthy donors and that's about it.
189
Seems to me that these politicians do know who their constituents are, especially republicans, and they represent them perfectly well. It's the rest of us who mistakenly confuse ourselves for "constituents". Perhaps if more of us actually stayed informed and voted things would be different.
18
Polls before the passage of the Affordable Care Act indicated that Americans were opposed to its passage. Now polls indicate that Americans are not in favor of the repeal of the ACA. So, where does that leave us?
3
@William. It appears to me the coverage for pre-existing conditions is what drives this belated popularity. I am a conservative and, despite that, feel a single-payer system is probably the only long term solution to healthcare.
44
Thank you for demonstrating the ability to think outside party lines about a complex problem.
2
@William
Polls before ACA were based on insurance company ads am he Republican lies admit death panels.
Polls taken now reflect people's actual experience with the program.
Polls taken now reflect far more information.
4
This article makes the mistake of believing that republicans in the House or Senate (and the President) care what people want. They will do what their donors want until money is removed as the motivator for public service.
415
@Charles Pack
It's not just the Republicans. If it was, the House, Senate, and Presidency would be blue. The Dems are as donor beholden as the Repubs, but a small handful of candidates this time around (powered primarily by small donors) seem to have gotten the memo.
39
@Charles Pack. You seem to limit your comment to Republicans. Clearly the issue you raise is applicable to both parties. Neither party is populated with saints,
17
I think you are contradicting the data presented in this article. the authors clearly show that the GOP was substantially worse at estimating the views of the people in their districts. Indeed, the GOPer's were sufficiently worse that it is incorrect to say that the GOP & Dems are the same in this regard.
41
Out of touch or under the influence of high-end donors and the Federalist / Heritage foundations who are mapping out legislation? Citizens United. NRA.
With powerful lobbyists holding the money strings, there is no reason for congressional offices to give any care for what us lowly voters think/want.
209
You make the bald assertion that almost no one likes the tax cuts. I can only assume you are perhaps as out of touch as Congress. Where is your proof this is the case? Everyone I know is pleased with the cut, but then all of them are working, income earning citizens who would prefer to spend money the way they want rather than give it to the government.
4
@TW Smith
I live in a high tax state and none of the working, income-earning citizens I know are seeing a tax cut. Ending the SALT and mortgage deductions bites hard for the higher income-earners and the tax cut doesn't make much of a difference for the lower wage earners. In the mean time, the tax cut is creating a huge deficit, making the GOP make noises about cutting Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.
My state has plenty of poverty, one of the oldest populations in the country and the towns with any real economic activity have housing that is unaffordable to many. So when Social Security gets cut, we'll have a lot of suffering seniors and a bigger burden on already high taxes that barely cover basic services.
16
Both my wife and I work. Neither of us like the tax cuts.
Question for you, if they are so universally popular, why aren't the GOPer's running on them in this upcoming election all across the US?
16
@TW Smith
But when hurricanes flood areas of Texas, you rush to the Federal government for help. And a huge percentage of income in the state of Texas comes from military bases and money spent on control of your very long border. And those of us who are actually paying the taxes just got shafted by the limitations of the SALT deductions.
9