A way out of congressional gridlock: Change the conversation, change the outcome

There is no easy road to exit the current cul-de-sac Congress finds itself on regarding a number of the bigger ticket policy issues. Institutional rules requiring 60 votes in the Senate – with just a few exceptions – make partisan lawmaking impossible. So talk about one party “controlling all the levers of power” in Washington fundamentally misunderstands our system of government.

And bipartisanship, especially on issues hotly debated in recent years, seems like a bridge too far as well. 

{mosads}So is there no way out of the impasse? Here’s an idea that could help to modernize the debate: Give the issue set a tune up.

Congressional issue discussions can be organized into two broad buckets. One pail is filled with highly charged policy battles where both sides have well-rehearsed, highly predictable scripts and well-trained political stagecraft. Think ObamaCare, changing Dodd-Frank financial sector rules, climate change, tax cuts or finding the right balance between social vs. defense spending. All these issues have long histories and send congressional mixed martial artists into to their respective corners long before the negotiating bell even rings. And when the process does start, all the combatants want to do is rhetorically punch each other out and draw political blood. 

The other bucket contains newer, emerging issues on which neither party has staked out a firm position. As a result, these policy ideas have yet to establish a strong partisan pedigree or ownership by one team or another. Here I would include some emerging technology issues like, protecting against data theft, cyber security and the future of e-commerce and Internet sales including driverless cars and drones. Promoting electronic health records, fighting or new ways to address the scourge of opioids ravaging our communities are additional examples. And maybe throw in some targeted infrastructure ideas, and a few must-pass bills like National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) or reauthorizing user fees for the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to speed the drug and device approval process. These measures have not yet been engulfed with partisan smog.

If congressional leaders continue to slug it out on issues in bucket one, we’ll hear lots of talk, but little action. Don’t get me wrong. The parties still need to do some of that in order to continue to define themselves and satisfy their respective bases. That’s politics.

Moreover, in today’s more partisan age, the president-led model of policy formation may relegate White House initiatives into bucket number one and make finding bipartisan consensus unlikely.

So addressing some of the issues less polluted by partisan histories needs to start in Congress. Therefore, lawmakers interested in putting points on the board and making improvements for the country need to get smart about institutional and political realities. The requirement to get 60 votes in the Senate, for everything except a narrow set of issues governed by special procedures like budget reconciliation, is an institutional reality too often denied by what ever party controls the majority. They think they can do big things on their own. That’s usually wishful thinking and political hubris. 

But fortunately not every issue wears the same partisan pants. Creative lawmakers need to recognize the differences. There are newer, less tainted areas of policy not yet infected by years of partisan wrangling.

At times, Congress may be even able to put old wine in new bottles (e.g., legislation that doesn’t address climate change, but instead focuses on resiliency from severe weather). These should be the targets of legislators interested in getting things done.

Yet they need to strike fast and perhaps even in a stealth-like manner initially. Identify and work on these issues now, before one side or the other claims ownership and uses it for political purposes, is critical. As an illustration that the détente may not last forever, one person told me recently after the passage of legislation in one of these areas through a congressional committee on a unanimous vote, “I guess they haven’t figured out how to fight about that one yet.”

Thinking creatively about identifying emerging issues and policies not yet poisoned by endless partisan wrangling, might be the way out of the current cul-de-sac. Modernizing the issue set lawmakers address will put resourceful legislators in the driver’s seat and point Congress away from it’s current dead end.

Gary Andres was the Majority Staff Director for the House Energy and Commerce Committee from 2011-2017. He also worked in the Office of Legislative Affairs for Presidents George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush. He is currently the Senior Executive Vice President for Public Affairs at the Biotechnology Innovation Association. The view expressed are his own. 

The views expressed by this author are their own and are not the views of The Hill.