In part 1, we learned that our elected representatives represented many more people than they did in the past.  This had harmful consequences, as explained in parts 3 and 4.  In this part, we look at a different harmful consequence occurring at all levels—local, state, and federal—because there is an “overpopulation” of constituents at all levels. 

Have you heard about the “U.S. Public-Service Academy”?  Two former “Teach for America” teachers came up with the idea and they have received much support.  The purpose is to provide a four-year college which emphasizes public service. 

The teachers behind the academy want the federal government to underwrite much of the budget, which means that there is a bill in Congress.  For the bill to make progress, the teachers need as many co-sponsors as they can get. 

From the July, 2007, academy newsletter:  

Hello Academy friends,

June was a big month for the Public Service Academy Capitol Hill.  As you will read, we doubled the number of representatives who are co-sponsors of our bill!  We need to keep that momentum going by continuing to put pressure on those representatives and senators who have not made a decision on the bill yet.  That's where you can help - read on to find out how.   

June 1: 26 Co-Sponsors

July 1: 54 Co-Sponsors  

In June, almost thirty more representatives signed on to the House version of the U.S. Public Service Academy Act (H.R. 1671 in the House, S. 960 in the Senate). Our new co-sponsors come from all across the country, from California (Anna  Eshoo, right) to Colorado (Ed Perlmutter) to Ohio (Marcy Kaptur) to Georgia (Sanford Bishop).  For a list of our co-sponsors, click here http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?t=zjwtzbcab.0.nrwdtacab.
n4l5f5bab.3705&ts=S0256&p=http%3A%2F%2
Fuspublicserviceacademy.org%2Fin-congress%2F  

Let us now jump to another matter, the Armenian Genocide Resolution, against which President Bush argued last month in a news conference.  Advocates for the resolution from the Armenian-American community had amassed, in favor of the resolution, at least two hundred eighteen co-sponsors, a majority, in the House of Representatives. 

The point?  Collecting co-sponsors for a bill is important, as it is a way to gauge, albeit imprecisely, support before a vote on a bill.  Also, co-sponsorship by a House member makes her aware of the issue addressed by a bill and, thereby, makes it less difficult to bring the bill out of committee and to the House floor for a vote.  

Two things are happening here. 

First, a member of Congress is making a decision based on lobbyists’ presentations.  This is not to say that the lobbyists are misrepresenting anything, but, rather, this is to say that the role of committees and floor debates is reduced. 

Second, having many co-sponsors for a bill gives it priority.  The bill enters the “radar screen” of a large number of members of Congress.  Why is this important?  Read slowly:  too many constituents, too many issues.  Too many issues, no way for Congress to timely consider them all.  Even bills which, on their merits, would pass through committees, floor votes, and the White House may die in committee simply for the lack of time to consider them.  The solution?  Give the bills priority, that is, collect a large number of co-sponsors. 

And the dependence on co-sponsors is but one unwanted consequence of an overpopulation of constituents. 

November 8, 2007