Part-time Congress may be a good thing

With the Democrats firmly in charge of the United States Congress, look for a number of changes. When the Republicans regained control back in 1995 after 40 years of being in the minority, there were countless changes as well. The controlling party has the last word on when, where and how legislation is discussed or enacted. But the truth is, the more things change, the more they stay the same.

First order of business for the Democrats was to change the hours that Congress was in session. The new Democratic leaders pledged to have a - hold your breath - five day work week just like most other Americans. Though it's still early, to this point the five-day work week has yet to materialize.

Back when the GOP was in control, they decided that it was better for Congress to spend more time back in their home districts talking with their constituents. So under the Republicans, no votes were cast until 6:30 p.m. on Tuesday and no later than Thursday afternoon. That two-day work week translated into a total of 102 days of actual work for Congress last year. Not in our lifetime has a Congress worked less hours.

So the Democrats have now pledged to change that policy and start voting Monday afternoon until Friday. Trouble is, something is always coming up to change that policy. Two days after the Democratic Senate leader announced the new schedule, Congress took Friday off. And then they took off last Monday for the national football championship. This week Monday was a national holiday. In two weeks, the Republicans take off for two days for their annual retreat. The Democrats follow suit the next week and recess for two days of party gathering.

With holidays and other events, it's doubtful if Congress puts in a half-dozen five day weeks this year, despite the promises.

I for one am not opposed to Congress spending less time in Washington. As a firm believer in less and smaller government, the less time spent in session, the greater chance Congress won't approve some stupid legislation that makes no sense.

But if Congress is just going to work part-time then perhaps their pay should reflect those lesser hours. I recognize that politicians work endless hours when they are in their home districts but if they are paid to be in session then they should forfeit some pay when not in session. Then again, many of the millionaires in Congress wouldn't exactly miss their paycheck.

More often than not, politicians begin with lofty promises and end with confusing explanations. In the end, however, our lives are better off the less Congress spends tinkering with our money and our wishes.