Is there a clash between the high minded academic and the everyday person that expects action that is not forthcoming?

Discussion Question: ( Please write the assignment one place only thank you)

Let’s continue with gridlock, and the public’s perception of Congresses inability to get much done.  In American Government:Power and Purpose, Theodore Lowi say “The supporters of legislative proposals often feel that the formal rules of the congressional process are deliberately designed to prevent their own deserving proposals from ever seeing the light of day.  But these rules allow Congress to play an important role in lawmaking.  If it wants to be more than a rubber stamp for the executive branch, like so many other representative assemblies around the world, a national legislature such as Congress must develop a division of labor,  set an agenda, maintain order through rules and procedures, and place limits on discussion.  If it wants to accomplish these things in a representative setting in which a veritable diversity of political preferences exists, then it must find the ways and means to allow cooperation despite the variety of interests and coalitions and to make compromises despite conflicts.”

Lowi’s comment is the lingo of the political scientist — thinking and sounding like a political scientist.  But how does that square with the citizen who is frustrated by the inaction of Congress — the idea that they get paid $174,000 per year, are in recess most of the summer, plus Christmas, Easter, and every other holiday under the sun, and they accomplish very little.  Is there a clash between the high minded academic and the everyday person that expects action that is not forthcoming?