There are really only two factors that are important to a member of Congress when they make decisions. You can phrase them differently depending on your point of view, but the political science literature can be reduced to these. First, what is good for my chances of getting reelected? Second, what is good for my constituents? The first factor is about the member. The second factor is about the good of the country, "doing the right thing," or adhering to some moral or ideological imperative.
There's an old saying in politics that the first job of any elected official is to get elected, and the second job is to get reelected. If a member of Congress makes too many decisions their constituents don't like, or if they break the rules or the law, their chances of getting reelected go way down. So they've always got an eye on the odds of winning their next election, whatever else they do. That's different than doing what their constituents want or what the member thinks is good for them. Savvy members of Congress can do what they need to do to get reelected and sell this to their constituents as something that's good for them, too.
A good representative in any government will give something back to their constituents. This could be money in the form of a budget allocation to build a factory or military base in their state or district. It could be a tax break targeted at the most common demographic in the district, or it could be a spending increase on a program that benefits most constituents. It could also be a vote in Congress that's meant to make a point, like voting for a program that's very popular in their district, even though there's no chance of the vote succeeding.
It's possible to be a member of Congress who is self-interested and good to constituents. The ones who keep getting reelected are the ones who have reconciled the two factors above.
There are several factors that a member of Congress should consider when making a decision regarding any issue that Congress faces. The first factor should be what his or her constituents want the elected official to do. In the United States, there is a system of representative democracy. The people elect representatives to Congress, and the elected official should make decisions based on what his or her constituents want that person to do.
Another factor that should be considered is what is best for the common good of the country. There are times when a decision needs to be made that might not benefit the people that the elected person represents. However, the decision might be beneficial for the country as a whole. In these cases, the elected official needs to consider the effects on the country as a whole. The same would be true if the decision was good for his or her constituents but bad for the country as a whole.
The elected official should try to consider the unintended consequences of a decision. For example, when the No Child Left Behind Act was passed, it led to a decrease in Social Studies classes being taught because Social Studies was not a subject being tested. As a result, school districts focused on the subjects that were tested such as math and reading. The unintended consequences can be harsh at times.
A member of Congress should also consider the cost of voting to do or not to do something. With the huge debt that the United States faces, an elected official needs to determine what impact a decision will have on the debt. Then, he or she must decide if the cost is worth adding to the debt.
https://hobnobblog.com/2011/02/how-legislators-make-decisions/
https://www.edweek.org/ew/section/multimedia/no-child-left-behind-overview-definition-summary.html?override=web
No comments:
Post a Comment