A shorter workweek
November 3rd 2007 04:32
Just eleven months ago, I wrote about how the newly-elected Democrats were bringing back the five-day workweek. There was some bellyaching at the time from some of the Representatives, but I had little pity for the naysayers. While I wasn't thrilled with a Democratic takeover in Congress, I did respect them for at least acknowledging the perception that our elected officials weren't earning their pay. I actually had some hope that this Congress would be different and would really work to do the people's business. Last week, however, I saw that the shorter workweek is back:
I wish I could say that the longer workweeks were good while they lasted. Sadly, I can't. Last year, the Republican-led Congress employed shorter workweeks and approval ratings for Congress were very low. Since coming into office, the Democrats have instituted the longer workweek. What has been the result? Well, a recent Reuters/Zogby poll showed that Congress now has a record-low 11% approval rating. It seems that the "represented" just can't stand the "representatives" -- regardless of who is leading or how long they work. It's sad, really. The whole concept of government for the people and by the people just doesn't seem to be panning out, does it?
Well, I'm going to try to look at it from a positive viewpoint. If the work being done in Washington is unpopular regardless of how long they work each week, then maybe it's good that they work less. If they aren't there as much, they can't pass legislation that works against the people, right? Maybe we should accept the shorter workweek and count our blessings. As Ronald Reagan once said:
But 10 months into the session, with their legislative agenda often in gridlock with the Bush administration and a big election year looming, the Democrats are now planning a lighter schedule when the 110th Congress begins its second year in mid-January.
The House majority leader, Representative Steny H. Hoyer of Maryland, told fellow Democrats this week that the House would not be in session next year on Fridays, except in June for work on appropriations bills.
Explaining that decision to reporters, Mr. Hoyer said, “I do intend to have more time for members to work in their districts and to be close to their families.”
The House majority leader, Representative Steny H. Hoyer of Maryland, told fellow Democrats this week that the House would not be in session next year on Fridays, except in June for work on appropriations bills.
Explaining that decision to reporters, Mr. Hoyer said, “I do intend to have more time for members to work in their districts and to be close to their families.”
I wish I could say that the longer workweeks were good while they lasted. Sadly, I can't. Last year, the Republican-led Congress employed shorter workweeks and approval ratings for Congress were very low. Since coming into office, the Democrats have instituted the longer workweek. What has been the result? Well, a recent Reuters/Zogby poll showed that Congress now has a record-low 11% approval rating. It seems that the "represented" just can't stand the "representatives" -- regardless of who is leading or how long they work. It's sad, really. The whole concept of government for the people and by the people just doesn't seem to be panning out, does it?
Well, I'm going to try to look at it from a positive viewpoint. If the work being done in Washington is unpopular regardless of how long they work each week, then maybe it's good that they work less. If they aren't there as much, they can't pass legislation that works against the people, right? Maybe we should accept the shorter workweek and count our blessings. As Ronald Reagan once said:
"The most terrifying words in the English language are: I'm from the government and I'm here to help."
| 45 |
| Vote |
subscribe to this blog