Hearings of the
House Committee on Rules
Legislating in the Information Age
Ranking Member, Committee on Rules
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
As one who is still wondering how the crystal radio works, there are some days the technology revolution makes me just shake my head in amazement at what people can bring to life these days with a computer and a satellite and a little jolt of electricity.
Technology saves us time, it saves us money, it makes us more efficient, but it also has the potential to separate us from one another.
In terms of the congress, it gives us information at the touch of a button that we used to have to dig through dusty congressional records to find. It enables us to admire david dreier's state-of-the-art web page with just a point of the mouse. It enables members to speak on cell phones while on the house floor. And it enables the american public, at least those with access to a computer, to get copies of rules from the rules committee web site just minutes after we've reported them out.
But, all of the miraculous developments aside, technology has its down side. It speeds up the pace of day to day business to the point that people feel obliged to work as quickly as they can reload a web page. And, most importantly, it separates us from our neighbors and it depersonalizes american life.
That is where I believe technology's greatest limits lie, particularly as they pertain to the institution of congress. 200 years ago the founding fathers created the congress to be the ultimate in deliberative democracy. In fact, of the 3 nationally elective branches, only the house was directly elected by the people, at least at first.
James madison, in federalist #10, said, "this house, in its legislative capacity, must exercise its reason; it must deliberate; for deliberation is implied in legislation."
The house was created to bring together representatives of the people to deliberate. No where else in the country can you see so many individuals meet in one place who simultaneously maintain their geographic identity to another place.
It is that face-to-face interaction that makes the united states house of representatives unique, that enables us to work together for the betterment of the entire country, that softens the too-often harsh edge of partisan, rancorous debate.
Webster's ninth new collegiate dictionary defines congress as: the act or action of coming together and meeting.
I would submit that, as marvelous as technology is, something is lost over the wires that cannot be regained without some good, old fashioned coming together and meeting.
As much as I hate to admit it, I was here before the house proceedings were televised. And I can tell you, speaker o'neill wanted to make sure we thought long and hard about the ramifications before we made such a huge, but bi-partisan change to the institution. And despite the hours and hours we spent discussing televised proceedings, we still didn't predict some of the huge changes that took place here in the capitol.
But one thing is for sure, we will never go back. Even though the quality of house deliberations declined somewhat as members addressed their comments more to the television audience and less to each other, the televised house floor is here to stay.
The institution of congress is more than just these walls that surround us. It is a human institution made up of 435 very different individuals with very different opinions getting together to convince one another that their way is right.
So, I would say to my colleagues as we begin these deliberations on the integration of technology into the congress as we know it: tread lightly, 200 years of the greatest legislative body in the world rests on your shoulders.
Thank you.
