Republic, Lost_ How Money Corrupts Congress--And a Plan to Stop It - Lawrence Lessig [132]
Again, if this candidate can make a respectable showing in a primary, all bets are off. The race would quickly be recast as not the familiar battle among familiar politicians, all arguing the same, inherently unbelievable blather. It would instead be a battle between the reformers, Republican and Democrat, and the candidates of the status quo. Those status quo politicians will, Lucy-like, insist that they really, really, really will make “change” their mission this time. But in the face of a real alternative, it will be very easy to undermine that argument.
As such a campaign moves toward the conventions, both parties will face a difficult choice. They could each decide to rebuff the reform movement, by rejecting the change candidate and nominating a normal candidate who tries to make the promise of reform believable. But they each recognize that if they do that, the other party can grab the mantle of reform by embracing the reform candidate. And of all the years when it would not make sense to be on the side of the status quo, I suggest, 2012 (like 1912 before it) is high on that list.
The alternative both parties face is to embrace the reform candidate, and make the difference in the ticket hang upon the vice-presidential candidate. For, of course, when the reform president resigns, it will be the vice president who takes over. The choice between the parties will then be the choice between these two vice presidents. Or again, once the reform of this fundamentally corrupt system has been enacted, we turn the business back to the normal politicians.
That’s the strategy. Assuming (big assumption) it worked (as in it got a reform president elected), how could it work (as in change the system)? How exactly could a president hold a government hostage?
My assumption is that going into the election, both reform candidates, the Republican and the Democrat, have agreed on a package of reform. And on the same package of reform. This bit is critical, because constitutional reform—which, even if we don’t touch the Constitution, this, in effect, is—is precisely the sort of change that must cut across a wide range of America. A single package promoted by both candidates would provide that sort of credibility. And when either candidate wins (as, of course, one is guaranteed to win), that candidate will be able to say with authority that America has spoken and these are the reforms that she demands.
That fact alone, I suggest, would have enormous power in Congress. I can’t imagine any member with the courage to stand up against the results of such an election. I can’t imagine the body growing the backbone necessary for it to defend continuing its corrupt ways. My sense is that both parties would be keen to get this reform president out of the way. And the cheapest, simplest way to do that would be to enact the package on the first day of the new Congress. Deny the new president the privilege even of moving into the White House, by delivering on Inauguration Day the package the people have demanded.
Imagine, however, that Congress is more resistant. Imagine it refuses to pass the package. What could the president do then?
Ordinarily, a president is radically constrained in what he or she can do. That constraint comes from the recognition that at some point she will need Congress. The single most important mistake in George W. Bush’s administration was failing to recognize the need to work with Congress. Recognizing that need limits the freedom that a president would otherwise have.
In our scenario, that constraint is relaxed. The president needs Congress to do just one thing: pass this bill. Tradition has collected within the reach of the president an enormous array of power that she could deploy for the purpose of coercing a reticent Congress. The president has the power to impound spending—why not the salaries of Congress? He has the power to veto any bill—why not every bill until Congress relents? And while the costs of shutting down the government are huge, and borne by many who can’t bear them, both candidates