I would disagree with this observation.hanelyp wrote:50 years ago congress critters had good reason to gather in one place for a short time each year. With modern electronic communications that is no longer necessary. As an additional benefit, a congress critter working out of an office in his district while congress is in session is, in principle, more accessible to his own constituents. Add in that the existing capitol building would be impossibly cramped if we had as many congress critters as I think would be proper, and a telecommute congress becomes a solid win.Diogenes wrote:I ponder the effect lobbying has on our system, and so far I and others think that perhaps the simplest effort to remedy the problem could be made by making congressmen stay home in their districts and vote from there rather than concentrate in Washington where they can be wined and dined by Lobbyists and Liberals.
Some things can surely be done via telepresence or telecommute. However, others truly require direct human interactions. There is so much more to things done person to person, and especially in a group format. The dynamics can never be understated. And our technology base as it exists today can not support these deep dynamics.
I would propose a more measured approach. More district time, but still mandate gatherings.
The other drama introduced for congress would be not the voting sessions, but all the commitee interactions. They are so ridiculous that even now members of Congress only attend a few due to schedule demands. Most are attended by young staffers and interns. (when I say young, I mean 20 somethings.).