Taylor J. Swift: Congress must get serious about its capacity or cede power to courts

posted in: News | 0

The Supreme Court’s recent decision to strike down a cornerstone of administrative law known as the Chevron doctrine represents a seismic shift in the balance of power between the three branches of government.

After 40 years of relying on federal agencies to interpret legislative ambiguities when implementing regulations, it’s now up to courts to discern congressional intent. The Supreme Court did not “return” power to Congress, but it did put the onus on an under-resourced legislative branch to be much more clear in writing laws. If Congress fails to exercise its lawmaking power, it will cede power to the judiciary.

As the “first branch,” Congress must now reassess its ability to fulfill this increased responsibility effectively. A recent House hearing highlighted the urgency of this issue: Witnesses called for Congress to increase its resources to ensure that lawmakers can respond to the needs of constituents, engage in effective lawmaking and maintain robust oversight.

Even with a spotlight on its diminished capacity, the House began summer recess early after failing to pass its latest legislative branch appropriations bill, underscoring the difficulty in securing the necessary funding to strengthen congressional operations. Provisions to increase funding for member and staff salaries should not be controversial, but are typically dead on arrival, leading to chronic underfunding and a congressional “brain drain” that has crippled the institution.

After decades of underinvestment, Congress must rebuild its workforce and equip its employees with the tools they need. The legislative branch operates with roughly 1/120th of the resources of the executive branch. The legislative branch has only 31,000 employees across the House, Senate and support agencies with an annual budget of $7 billion, while the executive branch employs 2.97 million individuals and operates with trillions of dollars annually. Funding for congressional operations has not kept pace with other increases in government spending, causing further imbalances and resource constraints.

Legislative branch appropriations have increased only 50 percent from fiscal 2001 to fiscal 2022 while non-defense discretionary spending grew by over 90% in the same period. And most increases in the legislative branch budget went to maintaining buildings and policing the Capitol rather than enhancing legislative capacity.

This constrained funding has taken a toll on the institution and its capacity. From 2011 to 2021, House staff salaries were effectively cut 20% when adjusting for inflation while the cost of living in the nation’s capital significantly increased. And since the original Chevron decision in the 1980s, Congress has seen a 41% reduction in House committee staff and a 25% downsizing in critical support offices like the Congressional Research Service and the Government Accountability Office.

This decades-long lack of investment has also coincided with an increase in legislative activity and oversight. The number of legislative drafting requests to the House Office of Legislative Counsel has surged by 76% since the 115th Congress, while the number of proposed amendments has increased by 39%. Despite this growing workload, the Office of Legislative Counsel’s operating budget has increased by only 17% when adjusted for inflation.

Congress must build on recent modernization efforts to enhance its capacity and reassert its legislative authority. To provide stability, Congress could mandate that annual legislative branch appropriations increase proportionally with non-defense discretionary spending each fiscal year. Implementing this policy beginning in fiscal 2025 would tie legislative funding growth to the overall growth in federal discretionary budgets. Excluding the Capitol Police funding from this proportional growth policy would account for its unique budget needs.

This approach would prevent legislative capacity from lagging and enable investments in staff, technology, operations and infrastructure to support congressional duties. Stable funding would allow congressional offices and agencies to better project budgets over the long term and — most importantly — fortify the first branch of government’s ability to fulfill its constitutional responsibilities.

The overturning of Chevron is a wake-up call for a Congress that has often found it difficult to invest in itself or hold its constitutional ground. The ball is on Congress’ court, but if lawmakers don’t step up, it will be the courts that run the game.

Taylor J. Swift is director of government capacity at POPVOX Foundation. Prior to joining POPVOX Foundation, he was a senior policy advisor at Demand Progress, focusing on Congressional transparency, efficiency, capacity, and modernization. He wrote this column for The Fulcrum,  nonprofit, nonpartisan news platform covering efforts to fix our governing systems.

Related Articles

Opinion |


Zeynep Tufekci: Don’t call the Telegram CEO’s arrest a free-speech infringement — yet

Opinion |


Serge Schmemann: Putin is getting rattled

Opinion |


Ivan Eland: Solutions to the Supreme Court’s presidential immunity disaster

Opinion |


Galvao, Klutsey: Teaching civil discourse — a classroom blueprint for America

Opinion |


Jackie Payne: Undecided moderate women could be the tipping point this November

Matthew Yglesias: The breakout star of the Democratic Convention was … YIMBY

posted in: Politics | 0

Barack Obama’s speech at last week’s Democratic National Convention marks what is almost certainly the high-water mark for the political visibility of the YIMBY movement.

Taking a cue from one of the main themes of the week — “We’re not going back” — the former president noted that the nation needs “to chart a new way forward to meet the challenges of today.”

For example, he noted, “if we want to make it easier for young people to buy a home, we need to build more units and clear away some of the outdated laws and regulations that have made it harder to build homes for working people in this country.”

For us veterans of the land-use reform movement, it was a thrilling moment. Not that these ideas are brand new to Obama. His administration embraced the basic analytic viewpoint of YIMBYism during his second term, most clearly in its 2016 Housing Supply Toolkit but also in various budget requests and remarks by administration officials over the years. President Joe Biden’s administration has similarly been officially YIMBY in a low-key way.

What we never got from either president, however, was the kind of high-profile endorsement that Obama delivered last week. Under the circumstances, it would be extremely churlish to offer any reaction other than a simple, “Thank you.”

And yet here I am.

While tackling regulatory barriers to housing construction in high-demand areas is absolutely an important long-term issue for the U.S. economy, in the short term federal policymakers have more powerful tools.

For better or worse, the U.S. is currently building dense housing at the highest rate since the mid-1980s. It’s true that anti-density rules are still too strict, and that rolling them back would have large economic benefits. But restrictions on apartments don’t explain very much about why housing-cost pressures are so much more severe today than they were a decade ago. What’s happened instead is that construction of single-family homes is running at a dramatically slower rate than in the 1990s, to say nothing of the aughts.

In 2010 or 2014, nobody found the low rate of housebuilding remarkable. There had just been an enormous housing market crash, after all, and homebuilding was recovering from a low level. But the slow recovery has basically plateaued since the pandemic, even though demand keeps rising. What gives?

Some analysts, such as Kevin Erdmann at the Mercatus Center, point the finger at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac noting that tighter lending standards adopted after the financial crisis mean that mortgage lending to lower-income families has dried up.

Without any eligible purchasers of cheap starter homes, it doesn’t really make sense to build them. Despite the hype around private equity funds investing in single-family homes as rental properties, single-family rentals are a very small and unproven business. The majority of investment in purpose-built rental housing is multifamily apartments, just as it’s always been.

Investment in this sector is in fact up in response to the rise in demand, but it is running into the regulatory constraints Obama is talking about. Lifting these constraints is important and useful, but a series of state-by-state, city-by-city, zoning-board-by-zoning-board battles is a generational struggle — it’s not a quick fix for suffering families. Mortgage lending standards, by contrast, are set nationally by the Federal Housing Finance Agency (and to an extent the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau) and could simply be made more lax.

Would this be courting another financial catastrophe?

I’m skeptical. For starters, the rules can be altered without going all the way back to the “liar loans” of yesteryear — there’s such a thing as an overreaction to a real problem. More to the point, trying to avoid financial crises at that end of the funnel is just a slightly odd idea. The federal government regulates the overall riskiness of banks’ loan portfolios with regulations on stuff like capital and liquidity. The recent trend at the Federal Reserve has been toward weakening these rules in pursuit of economic growth. It would make more sense to be lax on mortgage lending and strict on bank capital, letting investors risk their money on loans if that’s what they want to do.

There is also the construction market, which is significantly influenced by the interest-rate environment. Democrats are aware of this when they talk about their hope that the Fed will cut rates this fall. But they are less aware that the capacity of long-term rates to fall — unless unemployment surges — is limited by the size of the budget deficit.

Fiscal discipline and bank deregulation was the housing-policy formula of another former Democratic president who spoke last week: Bill Clinton. But ever since the financial crisis, he hasn’t liked to talk about it so much — even though, as housing policy, it worked pretty well.

America’s current home dearth is a reminder that every choice in life comes with trade-offs. There are downsides to getting too lax with mortgage origination rules, and downsides to getting too strict. And over time, the U.S. does really need to address zoning and other land-use practices that block apartment construction from too many communities.

But America suffers from a housing shortage right now, and if Democrats want to fulfill Kamala Harris’ pledge to end it, then they will need some powerful, fast-acting tools. That means making use of the federal government’s vast power over home financing instead of its limited influence over local building regulations.

Matthew Yglesias is a columnist for Bloomberg Opinion. A co-founder of and former columnist for Vox, he writes the Slow Boring blog and newsletter. He is the author of “One Billion Americans.”

Related Articles

Opinion |


Zeynep Tufekci: Don’t call the Telegram CEO’s arrest a free-speech infringement — yet

Opinion |


Serge Schmemann: Putin is getting rattled

Opinion |


Ivan Eland: Solutions to the Supreme Court’s presidential immunity disaster

Opinion |


Galvao, Klutsey: Teaching civil discourse — a classroom blueprint for America

Opinion |


Jackie Payne: Undecided moderate women could be the tipping point this November

Zeynep Tufekci: Don’t call the Telegram CEO’s arrest a free-speech infringement — yet

posted in: News | 0

The detention in France of Pavel Durov, founder and CEO of the messaging app Telegram, has sparked a loud outcry about free speech. Elon Musk has portrayed the arrest on his X account as an ominous threat to free speech, and Robert F. Kennedy Jr. referred to the app as an “encrypted, uncensored” platform and said “the need to protect free speech has never been more urgent.”

It’s a curious case, and the French government hasn’t helped matters by releasing information in dribs and drabs. While it is possible that there are free-speech issues entangled here, some early details suggest the issue may be one of criminal activity.

On Monday, the French prosecutor said in a statement that Durov — who is a citizen of France, Russia, St. Kitts and Nevis and the United Arab Emirates — was being held for questioning in connection with an investigation into criminal activities on the app, including the trading of child sexual abuse material as well as drug trafficking, fraud and money laundering. Notably, Telegram explicitly boasts that it has never disclosed user data to any government, ever.

Questions have long swirled around Telegram. Contrary to widespread belief, Telegram is not encrypted in any meaningful sense. That would be “end to end” encryption, so that even the company couldn’t read users’ messages. Telegram — and anyone it chooses — can read all group chats, and there is no way to fully encrypt them. Those very large groups are the main attraction of the platform.

Related Articles

Opinion |


Serge Schmemann: Putin is getting rattled

Opinion |


Ivan Eland: Solutions to the Supreme Court’s presidential immunity disaster

Opinion |


Sunday Bulletin Board: A box in the closet reveals a world gone, but not forgotten

Opinion |


Chad Kulas: The potential of St. Paul’s Midway soars

Opinion |


Galvao, Klutsey: Teaching civil discourse — a classroom blueprint for America

Private chats on Telegram also lack end-to-end encryption by default. Here, though, users can undergo an onerous process to turn on end-to-end encryption, which then applies only to that conversation. Even the protection provided to private chats is murky: Cryptography experts have long questioned whether Telegram’s limited encryption actually meets security standards.

Durov was born in Russia, where Telegram is used widely. The Kremlin has Durov’s back: It issued a statement that unless more evidence is provided, Durov’s detention may be “a direct attempt to limit freedom of communication.” Russian anti-war activists have long wondered how the Kremlin seems to know so much about their activities on Telegram. (Good question.)

Free speech is an important value, but protecting it does not mean absolving anyone of responsibility for all criminal activity. Ironically, Telegram’s shortage of end-to-end encryption means the company is likely to be more liable simply because CAN see the criminal activity happening on its platform. If, for example, Telegram did not cooperate with authorities at all after receiving legal warrants for information about criminal activities, that would mean trouble even in the United States, with its sweeping free speech protections.

Zeynep Tufekci writes for the New York Times.

Related Articles

Opinion |


Serge Schmemann: Putin is getting rattled

Opinion |


Ivan Eland: Solutions to the Supreme Court’s presidential immunity disaster

Opinion |


Sunday Bulletin Board: A box in the closet reveals a world gone, but not forgotten

Opinion |


Chad Kulas: The potential of St. Paul’s Midway soars

Opinion |


Galvao, Klutsey: Teaching civil discourse — a classroom blueprint for America

Today in History: August 28, Martin Luther King, Jr. delivers “I Have a Dream” speech

posted in: News | 0

Today is Wednesday, Aug. 28, the 241st day of 2024. There are 125 days left in the year.

Today in history:

On Aug. 28, 1963, during the March on Washington, the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. delivered his “I Have a Dream” speech before an estimated 250,000 people in front of the Lincoln Memorial in Washington, D.C.

Also on this date:

In 1845, the first issue of “Scientific American” magazine was published; it remains the oldest continuously published magazine in the United States.

Related Articles


Today in History: August 27, Krakatoa erupts, causing tsunamis


Today in History: August 26, French general leads victory march through Paris


Today in History: August 25, National Park Service created


Today in History: August 24, Earhart becomes first woman accomplish flight feat


Today in History: August 23, the largest farm worker strike in U.S.

In 1862, the Second Battle of Bull Run began in Prince William County, Virginia, during the Civil War; the Union army retreated two days later after suffering 14,000 casualties.

In 1898, pharmacist Caleb Bradham of New Bern, North Carolina changed the name of the carbonated beverage he’d created five years earlier from “Brad’s Drink” to “Pepsi-Cola.”

In 1955, Emmett Till, a Black teenager from Chicago, was abducted from his uncle’s home in Money, Mississippi, by two white men after he had allegedly whistled at a white woman four days prior; he was found brutally slain three days later.

In 1957, U.S. Senator Strom Thurmond (D-S.C.) began what remains the longest speaking filibuster in Senate history (24 hours and 18 minutes) in an effort to stall the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1957.

In 1968, police and anti-war demonstrators clashed in the streets of Chicago as the Democratic National Convention nominated Hubert H. Humphrey for president.

In 1988, 70 people were killed when three Italian Air Force stunt planes collided during an air show at the U.S. Air Base in Ramstein (RAHM’-shtyn), West Germany.

In 2005, New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin ordered a mandatory evacuation as Hurricane Katrina approached the city.

In 2013, a military jury sentenced Maj. Nidal Hasan to death for the 2009 shooting rampage at Fort Hood that claimed 13 lives and left 30 people injured.

In 2016, six scientists completed a yearlong Mars simulation on the big island of Hawaii, where they emerged after living in a dome in near isolation on Mauna Loa.

Today’s Birthdays:

Former Defense Secretary William S. Cohen is 84.
Actor Ken Jenkins (TV: “Scrubs”) is 84.
Former MLB manager and player Lou Piniella (pih-NEHL’-uh) is 81.
Former MLB pitcher Ron Guidry (GIH’-dree) is 74.
Former U.S. Poet Laureate Rita Dove is 72.
Artist Ai Weiwei is 67.
Actor Daniel Stern is 67.
Olympic gold medal figure skater Scott Hamilton is 66.
Actor Jennifer Coolidge is 63.
Film director David Fincher is 62.
Country singer Shania (shah-NY’-uh) Twain is 59.
“Pokemon” creator Satoshi Tajiri is 59.
Actor Billy Boyd is 56.
Actor Jack Black is 55.
Hockey Hall of Famer Pierre Turgeon is 55.
Actor Jason Priestley is 55.
Technology executive Sheryl Sandberg is 55.
Olympic gold medal swimmer Janet Evans is 53.
Actor Carly Pope is 43.
Country singer Jake Owen is 43.
Country singer LeAnn Rimes is 42.
Rock singer Florence Welch (Florence and the Machine) is 38.
Actor Quvenzhane (kwuh-VEHN’-zhah-nay) Wallis is 21.