[Disclaimer: This post is much longer than I intended it to be… but, hey, I had fun.]
When I’m not living at Muhlenberg, I reside in the
‘unincorporated community’ (read: middle of nowhere) of Hosensack,
Pennsylvania. Situated within
Lower Milford Township and, more largely, Lehigh County, my hometown features a
variety of trees, fields, livestock, and a sparse peppering of people. So few people that we don’t even have
our own zip code. But, despite its
seeming unimportance, Hosensack, like any other area of the United States, is
proudly represented by members of the U.S. Congress. You may wonder: who are these lucky Congressmen? Well, let me enlighten you.
My home falls into Pennsylvania’s 15th
Congressional District, and thus I am represented in the U.S. House of
Representatives by Charles “Charlie” Dent (R-PA). Dent’s first taste of public office came in 1991, after he
was elected to the Pennsylvania House of Representatives and subsequently
stayed there until 1999. From 1999
until 2005, he served in the Pennsylvania Senate before being elected to the
U.S. House of Representatives, the position he has held consecutively since
2005. He is now in the midst of
his sixth term representing PA-15 and is a member of the Appropriations
committee and chairman of the Ethics committee (Roll Call).
When thinking about the concept of our “two Congresses,”
Dent’s emphasis seems slightly biased toward representing his constituents as
opposed to focusing on lawmaking. During
the 113th Congress (2013-14), for example, he was ranked the 89th
lowest in the entire House for bill co-sponsorship and 119th lowest
for bill introduction (GovTrack).
Many of the bills Dent has sponsored have dealt with issues of public
welfare, with a specific focus on veterans of the armed forces and policies to
protect citizens’ the health and safety.
Consider that, since being elected in 2005, Dent has only sponsored
three bills that have successfully been enacted by the President—two of these
bills were to rename local post offices (one in Allentown, one in Bethlehem) to
honor important persons (GovTrack), thus further demonstrating Dent’s focus on
his local community. According to
his website, “While in Washington,
Charlie's focus is always on the 15th District of Pennsylvania”
(dent.house.gov).
Pennsylvania’s 15th District encompasses a large
portion of the Lehigh Valley, including Allentown and Bethlehem, as well as
extending narrowly to the west, almost as far as Harrisburg. Due to the district’s mix of large
swathes of rural/suburban areas with two major cities, it is not surprising
that Dent’s constituency is comprised of similar proportions of liberals and
conservatives. According to the
Cook Political Report’s Partisan Voting Index, the district most had a PVI of
R+2 during the 2012 Presidential Election, indicating a slight Republican lean
in the area (Cook Political Report).
Dent’s record of [co]sponsorship reflects his moderately conservative
constituency, as shown in the following figure from GovTrack:
[image from https://www.govtrack.us/congress/members/charles_dent/400648]
As a representative of his constituents, Dent has maintained
an active presence in his district.
He makes routine appearances at local events and provides
services/benefits to local citizens.
Just a few weeks ago, Dent appeared at the ground breaking for the
expansion of local company FreshPet in Bethlehem (Morning Call). He has also recently made available to
his constituents a handful of tickets to attend the Pope’s visit to Congress
later this month (including giving a prime seat to the president of DeSales
University), thus using his influence in Washington to provide for the citizens
of his district. Even I have
benefited from Dent’s commitment to the community—during my senior year of high
school I received the Congressional Citizenship Award for PA-15, signed by none
other than Charlie Dent himself.
Even small gestures like these, completely insignificant in the scope of
Congress as a lawmaking body, demonstrate to his constituents that he at least
seems to care about them. The photo below is of the award I received from Dent, because blogs are more fun with photos:
[Image from… my house]
Once again considering Dent’s role in ‘both’ Congresses,
perhaps his strong presence in PA-15 and his focus on constituents while in
Washington have been key to his multiple reelections. Dent has won by a margin of at least 5% in each election,
and most recently in 2014 he ran entirely
unopposed (Roll Call). As
previously mentioned, Dent spent much of August serving his community (as
Congress was not in session), and is currently visiting the Normandy American
Cemetery Memorial in France. He
will be back in Washington D.C. next week when Congress is back in session.
---
Because I live in Pennsylvania, my two U.S. Senators are
Patrick “Pat” Toomey (R-PA, junior) and Robert “Bob” Casey, Jr. (D-PA, senior). I have decided to highlight and analyze
them concurrently, seeing as they both serve the same general function. Casey was elected to the U.S. Senate in
2006 after years serving as PA Auditor General and PA Treasurer, as well as an
unsuccessful run for PA Governor.
Toomey, on the other hand, served in both the PA House of
Representatives (1994-1996) and the PA Senate (1999-2005) before being elected
to the U.S. Senate in 2010. Toomey
ran unsuccessfully for U.S. Senate in 2004 (Roll Call).
Pennsylvania is an interesting mix of political ideology,
with sizeable pockets of liberals in the major metropolitan areas
(Philadelphia, Pittsburgh) and large numbers of conservatives in the mostly
rural center area of the state.
Because of this, PA is has historically functioned as a swing state—thus,
it is quite fitting that we have Senatorial representation from both
parties. Casey has proven himself
as a rather moderate Democrat—he is pro-life on abortion and a supporter of gun
owners and second amendment rights (Roll Call & GovTrack). Toomey is more of a mainline Republican
and supports conservative positions on issues such as birth control, abortion,
etc. While much of Casey’s
expertise lies in healthcare policy, Toomey has focused largely on
budget/fiscal policy as well as veterans’ rights (GovTrack).
Right now, the Iran nuclear agreement is a hot-button issue
in the Senate; Casey, among other Democrats, came out in support of this deal
just a few days ago. By pledging
support to vote against blocking the
deal, he contributes to the 34 senators necessary to continue discussion on the
agreement (by preventing an override of President Obama’s predicted veto on the
block). Recent polling has shown
that 60% of PA voters seem to be wary of the agreement (The Morning Call), and
thus Casey’s position runs the risk of alienating some of his constituents. Many Republicans in Congress are
calling for a ‘stronger’ agreement with Iran, and Toomey has held true to his
party by saying that he will vote against the deal (Morning Call). It is interesting here to think about
whether the two Senators’ decisions about the deal stem from their own ideology
and party alignment or from the views of the constituents. For Toomey (and Dent, who also does not
support the agreement), this point is moot as his decision reflects the
opinions of Pennsylvanians as noted in the aforementioned poll; for Casey, it
could present problems. Casey has
been active in defending his tough stance on Iran despite his support of the
agreement, citing his multiple past instances of supporting tougher sanctions
for the nation (Morning Call).
Perhaps due to the nature of the Senate as opposed to the
House, both Toomey and Casey both rank among the highest 15% of Senators in
their respective parties for bills introduced during the 113th
Congress (GovTrack). They do not
have ‘districts’ to represent as do the House members, and thus they are able
to focus more on the lawmaking process than trying to remain as present in the
entire state. This is interesting
when compared to Rep. Dent, who quite necessarily, spends much of his time
visibly in his community. His
community, though, is much smaller than having to represent the entire state of
Pennsylvania. What does this say,
then, about the intersection of the two chambers and the two Congresses? Perhaps House members are held to a
higher scrutiny as representatives of their districts, whereas Senators have
more ability to focus on lawmaking in Washington (due to longer terms and
larger areas of representation).
As an ending note to this ridiculously long blog post, I
would like to provide a quick anecdote regarding my non-experience with Sen.
Toomey. Back in 2011, some friends
from high school and I did some grassroots ‘lobbying’ with our government
teacher on behalf of the American Cancer Society. When we arrived at Senator Toomey’s Lehigh Valley office,
we, as bright-eyed 17-year-olds, were slightly disappointed that we didn’t
actually get to meet Toomey. I remember
our teacher explaining that, as a Senator, he was busy in Washington and had
did not have the time to be in all areas of the state as often as we would
like. This highlights, yet again,
the tension of the ‘two congresses’.
Here’s a photo of my friends and I at Sen. Toomey’s office:
[Photo from 2011… I'm on the far right in this photo, not so much in real life]
---------------
Sources for this post:
http://www.mcall.com/news/local/mc-pictures-freshpet-kitchens-expands-20150807-005-photo.html
http://www.mcall.com/news/nationworld/pennsylvania/capitol-ideas/mc-want-to-see-the-pope-call-your-congressman-20150818-story.html
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/members/patrick_toomey/400408
3 comments:
Jeff,
I found your analysis of your representatives and the roll of the "Two Congresses" really interesting. On one hand, Representative Dent is always working for "the people" of his district yet you hardly see your Senators (specifically with your experience with Senator Toomey) helping you. Which is where I think the role of bicameralism comes in, with representation based on population in the House and an even number of representatives in the Senate.
My question is do you think this split of Representatives spending more time back home and Senators spending more time in DC is adequate or should it be more equal for both branches? (I hope that question made sense!)
Yes, your question made sense! :) Because this disparity in time spent with constituents is part of the design of our Congress, I do not feel that the Senators are unsatisfactorily doing their job. Perhaps this belief also stems from the fact that I have the privilege of having taken classes in PoliSci, because I realize that I would rather have the people representing me spend time on lawmaking. Sure, it's great to mingle with your constituents, but I am also not as easily won over just because my Rep. shows up at the county fair. Also, because the Senators act as representatives of the entire state, I could not possibly expect them to be visibly present in my district, because then they would have to spend that much time in other districts as well… and then, honestly, who would have time for lawmaking?
First I'd like to say that your title made chuckle a little which was part of the reason I chose to read this blog and the other reason was to get a better understanding of other states and their representative. I could tell that you had a very deep understanding about your representatives and your opinion of Dent was the same with my congressman Jim Hines in that both focused more on one half of representation more so than the other only Dent had the exact opposite mindset.
So I guess my question is how would you want your representatives intrest be in favor of? Would you want a leader who looks out for the best interest of his constituents or for the best interest of all Americans?
Post a Comment