The sudden rise of Rep. Bart Stupak in the health-reform debate, and the national role he has played, spotlights a dilemma of democratic representation that has been under-appreciated in the current debate. That dilemma concerns whether members of Congress are servants of their voting constituencies or of the broader public good, the national constituency, if you will.
In his pep talk to House Democrats yesterday, President Obama tried to make the case that, really, there was no trade-off or tension between these two visions. Good policy makes for good politics, he argued. What's good for the nation is good for your district. In a lot of policy debates, that is probably true.
Yet, the case of Bart Stupak (D-MI) suggests that, contrary to President Obama's effort to reconcile the constituency dilemma, elected officials may find it expedient to play them off against each other. Let me explain.
For months, Rep. Stupak has led a group of like-minded House members to get stricter antiabortion provisions into the bill, at times threatening to derail the most significant piece of health-care legislation in two generations. Although his district is conservative, Rep. Stupak has never claimed that he is simply representing the views of his voting constituency. Rather, he has signaled through word and deed that he is representing his own Catholic conscience and the values of abortion foes nationwide.
Such is his prerogative, and there is no doubt that his motives are sincere. What is troubling, however, is that while he purports to represent a national constituency, not simply a district-based one, he has effectively shut out the members of that national constituency, both prolife and prochoice, from communicating their views to him by the only practical means: email.
Go to Rep. Stupak's website (http://www.house.gov/stupak/) and try to send a letter by pressing the "Email Congressman Stupak" link. You will find that you are required to fill in your address. When you get to the state box, you will find that Michigan is the only state listed in the pull-down menu. If you enter a zip code other than one in Rep. Stupak's district, and then attempt to send your letter, your letter will evaporate, and in its place you will be greeted with the following message from the Congressman: "Your zip code indicates that you are outside of the 1st District of Michigan. Regrettably, I am unable to reply to any email from constituents outside of the 1st District of Michigan."
By all accounts, Rep. Stupak is a principled leader, and his efforts are part of the democratic process. However, by seeking to represent a national constituency, but not allowing communication from the citizenry at large, he has left himself vulnerable to the perception that he is hiding behind his district. He is, in effect, trying to have it both ways: purporting to represent a national constituency but holding himself accountable only to a local one. To a citizen outside the 1st District of Michigan who would be deeply affected by his efforts, this seems to violate the spirit of the First Amendment, which accords us the right to petition our government.
Elected officials who aspire to represent national constituencies must be prepared to listen to voices, both friendly and unfriendly, from outside their districts.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment