Every two years is too much

With the election now behind us, much of the attention that has been spent talking about local, state and national elections has turned to coverage of President-elect Barack Obama as he puts together his team of aids that will help him launch his presidency.

But as I talked with a friend the other day, I was reminded that it won’t be long until members of the U.S. House of Representatives are pushing to get back into the spotlight as they are forced to gear up for another campaign.

To be honest, I could live for another four years or more without seeing another political campaign after the presidential marathon we just finished in a manner that left many of us dizzy and out of breath.

So then, why are we forced to undertake another election campaign before we have a chance to recover from this last painful episode?

Point blank, that’s the way the U.S. Constitution was written.

Members of the U.S. House of Representatives face re-election every two years, while members of the U.S. Senate are re-elected every six years. That means members of the House have only a few months to concentrate on their jobs before they have to worry about keeping their jobs.

I think this structure needs modified.

This may have worked fine when there were only 65 members of the House when it first convened in 1789, even into the 20th Century.

But I think two years doesn’t give members of the House time to get settled into their jobs before they have to divide their time and energies between doing their jobs and campaigning for re-election, even if it isn’t officially a campaign.

That creates a bit of dysfunction in a now 435-member governing body.

Consider this.

Here in Fremont, Dodge County and Nebraska, we elect our government officials to four years terms, from the city council to the county supervisors to the state legislators. Electing every member of these bodies every two years would potentially create situations where public mood could completely turn over any of these bodies.

We saw the effects of public mood in the U.S. House of Representatives in 1994 elections when the Republicans took control and again in 2006 elections when the Democrats took control.

Public mood is not a solid foundation to build any governing body. But that’s what has happened lately.

The elections for the U.S. House need to be broken up, much like the U.S. Senate elections, the Nebraska legislature elections and even the Fremont City Council elections.

We need to give our representatives in the House a chance to concentrate of their jobs at hand before they have to worry about trying to get re-elected.

Here’s my thought: Elect members of the U.S. House to four-year terms with half being elected during each two-year election cycle. I know 435 isn’t divisible by 2, but I think the concept is plain and works well at every other level of government. It would work at the federal level.

Of course, that would require a change to the U.S. Constitution, which can be as simple a task as trying to pull a tooth from a grizzly bear while he’s awake. But I think it would add a little more stability to the legislative branch of our government. It may even add a little public confidence that our representatives would have enough time in office to actually get some work done.

Like many things that were built in the late 18th Century, once in a while our Constitution needs to be upgraded. I think this is one area that needs serious consideration.

Don Bowen covers city and county government for the Tribune. He can be reached at (402) 721-5000, Ext. 1427, or via e-mail at don.bowen@lee.net.