Could Hill Staffers Be Stifling the Super Committee?

As its becoming more and more clear that the Joint Committee on Deficit Reduction (aka the “Super committee”) will not be reaching a $1.2 trillion deal anytime soon, people are looking around to apportion blame.

Perhaps they ought look no further past Nancy, Mitch, John, Harry and the Congressional leaders of both party  who decided it was a great idea to pick party loyalists from each side.  These are folks less likely to go rogue and negotiate away any of their respective party’s ideological sticking points.

On the GOP side, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) and House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) appointed Senate whip Jon Kyl (R-AZ), conservative freshman Sen. Rob Portman (R-OH), uber conservative Sen. Pat Toomey (R-PA), GOP conference chair Rep. Jeb Hensarling (R-TX),  chief caucus messenger Dave Camp (R-MI), chair of the Ways and Means Committee, which controls tax revenue; and Fred Upton (R-MI), whose powerful Energy and Commerce Committee has broad jurisdiction over just about everything other than taxes, but particularly health care.

Likewise, the Dems opted for their standard bearers as well: highest ranking woman in the Senate Patty Murray (D-WA), chair of the Senate Finance Committee who was instrumental in passing the Affordable Care act Max Baucus (D-Mont.) and lifer Democrat John Kerry (D-Mass.), Hispanic Caucus leader Xavier Becerra (D-CA), former Whip, current leader Jim Cylburn (D-SC) and former chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Chris Van Hollen (D-MD).

Like we said: party loyalists.

By design, stacking this fragile house of cards with idealists on the extreme ends of the spectrum sort of automatically created a formula for failure.

And while true the congressmen and women on the Super committee are under immense pressure to come up with a solution in the next few days, and rightfully so, the problem may be not who are the faces of the committee, but rather who is standing to the left or right of the them: the staffers.

Hill staffers are notorious among lobbyists and constituents as being arrogant, abrasive and even outright abusive.  And they run things on Capitol Hill. Few dare to consider them as a problem since they are woefully underpaid and equate power with salary.  On the Hill, it’s all about the Member’s seniority and title.  These young guns – and many old, too – have been accused of having too much power too soon and of being comfortable in their knowledge that they have the power of access and control to their Representative or Senator. Part idealistic and part ideologue, what makes up for the traditional low pay is the perk of being stubborn if you want and to present all information to your boss as a way to convince him or her to stay true to the party line and bury or obscure all the benefits of compromising for the larger good.

Whether stubbornness or a perceived reluctance to acknowledge the big picture, as Congress sways from the center and operates more in ideological silos, it becomes less likely that a compromise will actually be reached over the next hundred hours or so.

Staffers are a major part of the problem on Capitol Hill, let it be told.  And maybe it’s high time Members consider hiring objective, unbiased and independent-minded staffers who can make clear-headed judgments that aren’t clouded by party loyalty.

Put aside the fact that all the GOP members of the committee have signed Americans for Tax Reform Grover Norquist’s pledge not to increase taxes and there have been moves towards compromise. But the miles in between meeting at the center are still far and wide.  At this point, the likelihood of the committee coming up with a deal is slim to none.  Slim was seen riding on Air Force One heading to Hawaii.

Jeneba Jalloh Ghatt represents small, women, and minority owned business and technology companies at The Ghatt Law Group LLC, the nations’ first communications law firm owned by women and minorities. She's won landmark cases on behalf of her clients which include national civil rights and public interest organizations. In addition to actively authoring several blogs, being a radio show host and sitting on the boards of three non-profits, she is a tech junkie who has been developing online web content since the very early years of the Internet, 1991 to be precise! Follow her on Twitter at @Jenebaspeaks, on her blog, Jenebaspeaks, which covers the intersection of politics and technology or on her Politics of Raising Children blog at The Washington Times Communities section.

More on Politic365

• After All That, Sen. Currie Acquitted on All Charges
• Donald Trump is Back - Sort of ...
• Inception or Stalking? TPM’s Josh Marshall is Sweating Me

5 Responses to Could Hill Staffers Be Stifling the Super Committee?

1. Pingback: Hill Staffers are the Problem on Capitol Hill – Politic365 | Capitol Hill Today

2. jmac says:

   4:27pm November 21, 2011 at 4:27 pm

   I know a few Hill hikers who would not agree with the assertion that they are the problem, or that staffers should be hired who are "objective, unbiased and independent-minded …who can make clear-headed judgments that aren’t clouded by party loyalty." That's a broadly painted picture, and doesn't take into consideration the many different roles of Staffer life. For example, while an LA or LD may be expected to be more objective, a Press Secretary is picked for their dogged loyalty to person and party.

   In addition, Member 's Office Staffers are retained precisely because of their loyalty, to the Member's legislative agenda, the Member as a person, and the party's agenda. Committee Staffers are likely graduated Office staffers, and party loyalty is a given (unless you speak of the Ethics Committee, which is arguably biased in a different sense).

   And to call Staffers abusive may be disingenuous, let's not forget about the abuse they often face themselves (ahem, Tiger costumes, twitpics, and ranting epithets). Let's give credit where credit is due; without Congressional staffers, deadlock would extend to each and every initiative, including the much maligned postal bill.

   Reply
3. Jin Mugen says:

   5:01pm November 21, 2011 at 5:01 pm

   hey jmac,

   So what you're saying is that the party line takes priority over the business of the taxpayer? Why is it all about loyalty to the member of Congress and not about loyalty to the constituents in that member's district? Don't Hill staffers take a Constitutional oath when they're hired?

   That's very interesting. I didn't see anything in your comment about the constituents. The people who pay for your salaries and expect you to go to bat for them. Isn't that what it's all about? That really sucks.

   Reply
4. jmac says:

   5:47pm November 21, 2011 at 5:47 pm

   Jin,

   I agree with your comments regarding loyalty to District/State the Member represents. In the best case, the interests of the boss reflect the desires of the constituents. That's why most staffers hoping to work in a certain office have to have ties to the home district, as in that common understanding and compassion to work for the people back home.

   My comments were more towards the assertions against Staffers themselves as being arrogant and abusive, when in fact, true constituent meetings ( i.e. not corporate lobbyists) are the highlight of many staffer's days.

   Reply

5. Pingback: A Super Committee Failure: Does it Matter? – Seeking Alpha | moneybusinessblog.info