I
Page Six
TH£ SAL€MIT£
Monday, February
Von Nicolai Examines Drawbacks
of Wader'j Congress Report
A political scientist at Salem
College takes issue with the Na
der report on Congress.
Prof, von Nicolai, a native of
Germany, studied at the Univer
sity of Hamburg and at two
American universities. He taught
at Moravian College in Pennsyl
vania before joining the Salem
faeulty in September 19 71.
His specialty is political theo
ry' and philosophy.
by Bernhard von Nicolai
At first sight Ralph Nader’s
recent raid on Congress looks
intriguing. To ask “Who Runs
Congress?” is like probing the
question, “Who makes the laws
for the lawmakers?”
From the outset Nader’s raid
ers paint a bleak picture of the
typical congressman, heavily sup
ported by special interests in
return for legislative favors. No
longer is direct bribery used, we
are told; campaign contributions
have taken the place of earlier
forms of buying congressional
votes with money “going into
the congressman’s pockets.”
With the soaring costs of elec
tion campaigns, we are told,
congressmen are ever more tied
up with ever bigger money from
business, from labor, and from
whatever organized special in
terests there may be. In a shock
ing way congressmen are com
pared with meat (“U.S.-Prime,”
to be sure) whose price has
risen as a result of inflation.
We hear also of the honest
few like the House speaker, Carl
Albert, who refuses “campaign
contributions if they are too
big,” and the former senator
from Illinois, Paul Douglas, who
“turned down any gift worth
more than five dollars. (For less,
he jokingly said, he just couldn’t
be bought.)”
Another gloomy (or “greasy”)
tale is that of the “pork bar
rel” conspiracy between the
WTiite House and certain con
gressmen who help the President
carry out his legislative program.
“Even if the decisions are already
made” to allocate certain appro
priations to a specific area, they
can be used “as bargaining tools
by making them appear to be the
product of a diligent congress
man.”
But why would legislators
make false claims as to achieve
ments in favor of their home
districts? The simple answer is
that they are constantly under
pressure to prove to their special
local constituency that they are
serving its special interests - a
defense contract here, a new
post office there - and all of this
with an eye to the next election.
When it’s time for re-election,
pork barrel benefits may be re
membered by local voters and
repaid in kind - by ballots in
favor of the incumbent. And
with incumbency emerging as
the best insurance for success at
the polls, the other barrel opens
up: campaign contributions by
those other, non-geographical
special interests pouring those
ever increasing amounts of mon
ey into re-election campaigns.
Better Chance
This “investment” in can'^i-
dates with the better statistical
chance for victory evokes the
unusually generous remark from
the Nader raiders that “no rea
sonably self-interested campaign
contributor wants to throw good
money into a losing cause.”
But here is the crux of the
whole matter: What is the rela
tionship of both local electoral
support and campaign contribu
tions, on the one hand, to the
role of an elected congressman
as lawmaker for the whole na
tion on the other?
The Nader report makes no
attempt to resolve this central
question. What a promising start
when two of the profiles on
congressmen from North Caro
lina accuse the incumbents of
“not living up to the ideal of the
‘concerned, innovative represen
tative who seeks to solve nation
al problems through appropriate
legislation!’ ”
nation’s policies than did presi
dents ...”
Whole U.S.
Central Question
We read that, “instead of
spending his time working out
solutions to the country’s prob
lems,” a certain congressman
“concentrates on serving his con
stituents in order to assure re-
election ...” Another legislator
is to be defeated at the polls be
cause the voters “need a repre
sentative in Washington who will
be a more active legislator and
be more involved with national
concerns,” while the incumbent
■ nas been more interested in
listening to his constituents and
solving their personal problems.’.
We hear the applause for con
gressmen of yesteryear, “men
like Daniel Webster, Henry Clay,
John C. Calhoun - (who) had
more to do with directing the
All of this indicates that con
gressmen should serve the nation
whose lawmakers they are, the
whole United States, whether
this be at the expense of cam
paign contributors, or in defi
ance of local voters who helped
to put them into Congress. This
logic would require that any and
all national (federal) legislation
be based on the judgement of
those who have dedicated them
selves (and have been voted into
Congress) to serve the good of
the whole nation.
Obviously this is in direct con
tradiction to the traditional
“rules of the game” in which
congressmen have been cast as
agents for their geographically
delimited constituencies both at
the district (House of Represen
tatives) and at the state (Senate)
levels.
Unless we assume that these
interests are never at variance
when national legislation is un
der consideration, we can see
how local pressures would act
Uke special interests against the
national interest which the con
gressmen should judge. Yet look
ing after constituency interests
has been the most pervading as
pect in the work of congressmen.
Do Nader’s raiders tell us of
the need for independence of
congressmen from limited, local,
and sometimes loco pressures?
Yes and no. But the yes affects
only large money contributors.
Small contributors and organ
ized wielders of the ballot are
BOBBITT'S PHARMACIES
First union Bldg Reynolds bldg
Corn. S. Hawthorne Rd. at lockland
PRESCRIPTIONS COSMETICS
We DELIVER
Sundries
A FUN PLACE TO GO
Old Salem Reception Center
COME SEE US
GIFTS — POSTERS — INCENSE — NOVELTIES
encouraged not only to keep up
the pressure, but to increase it.
And so we learn in “Who Runs
Congress?” that “election years
and campaign months are the
best times to press your issue
upon the congressmen, who seem
coincidentally more interested in
their constituents at these
times.” The sarcasm of the latter
half of this statement should be
measured against the fact that
even the ablest and most honest
of legislators get exposed period
ically to stunts of narrowest lo
cal blackmail, in the course of
which the loss of personal dig
nity appears to be the least of
evils. How much public office
as such suffers, including the
trust in its incumbents after e-
lection, is best seen in the very
attitude toward them pervading
the Nader report.
It is one thing to criticize
“corruption” (or applaud the ab
sence of it), and quite another
thing to define it and then be
able to advise constructively on
why and how to avoid it. Unless
we are to assume that congress
men are a negative selection from
society, or, if typical, that peo
ple are just evil, we must find
institutional problems under,
lying any behavior we deplore
and perhaps take a new approach
from there.
To sum up:
Two mutually contradictory
points stand out in Nader’s re-
port on the Congress: (1) the
demand for increased local pop.
ular pressure on congressmen
(including a frequent turnover
in incumbencies through defeat
at the polls), and (2) the demand
for increased national leadership
by Congress as a whole. These
points remain unresolved by the
report, but they are worth every
effort at solution.
The inability to make Con
gress a national legislative insti
tution in the true sense has led,
and will always lead, to a trans
fer of national decision-making
to a different locus, the White
House, or occasionally the Su
preme Court.
To criticize this development
without changing current de
mands on the time and efforts
of congressmen is to ignore the
needs of modern government-
and plain logic.
Ws been
Reznick’s for Records
For Years
TAPES - SHEET MUSIC - RECORDS
DOWNTOWN
440 N. LIBERTY
THRUWAY SHOPPING CENTER
OPEN NITES 'TIL 9:00
OUR THRUWAY STORE HAS A COMPLETE STOCK OF
POSTERS, BLACK LITES, and PATCHES
Moravian Book Room
500 South Church Street
(Corner of Church and Bank)
Hours-Mon. - Fri. 9:00 - 5:00
Phone 722-6120