More Presidential Leadership Needed

Mark Tapscott’s editorial at the Examiner, “Cut their pay and send them home,” condemns the “legislative sleight-of-hand” and “three-card Monte” of loopholes that Congress plays to keep its thumbs in the federal spending pie.

True.

There’s also this.

President Bush has excessively deferred to the “wisdom” of our legislators, and especially to the Republican majority, to craft legislation out of the principles Bush sets forth. Examples, Social Security, immigration.

Instead, we get legislation by committee, an unwieldy large one.

So, all sorts of compromises of principle occur, and what emerges satisfies few.

Congressmen and Senators have different, local constituencies than the President. That means they are usually more accountable to bringing home the bacon, for their own re-election, even more than to the national interest or to principle.

To expect otherwise is to ignore the structure, wise as it is, of our governing.

President Bush then takes the hit for the feeble bills and “sleight-of-hand” that emerges from Congress.

Along with not using the veto, meeting his responsibility, which Bush has not, his biggest failure of leadership has been to not send to Congress specific legislation on too many specific issues. Then, at least, we the people would not be confused at who is failing their responsibilities for worthwhile legislation and for integrity.

And, Congress, Republican and Democrat sides of the aisle, would be held more accountable, and act more accordingly, rather than over-emphasis on politics as local.