CONGRESS AND THE PEOPLE| 267brought shame on the House when his steamy e-mails to 16-year-old House
pages were revealed. Foley quickly resigned when his inappropriate behavior
was exposed. Other sex scandals involved Senator Larry Craig (R-Ida.), who pled
guilty to a “disorderly conduct” charge for an apparent attempt to solicit sex in a
men’s bathroom in the Minneapolis airport, and Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-N.Y.),
who resigned after sending lewd pictures of himself on Twitter. Yet, despite such
scandals, most members of Congress are dedicated public servants who work
hard for their constituents.MEDIA INFLUENCES
Politicians traditionally blame the media for their poor standing in the polls, and
there is some basis for the complaints. One study examined stories on Congress in
various national newspapers and magazines during 10 political periods between
1946 and 1992 and concluded that “press coverage of Congress focuses on scan-
dal, partisan rivalry, and interbranch confl ict rather than the more complex sub-
jects such as policy, process, and institutional concerns.”^9 From this perspective
the professional context of journalism, with its short news cycle and the need to
produce a salable product, creates pressure for superfi cial coverage that perpetu-
ates Congress’s image problem. However, a recent study using more than 8,000
newspaper stories on members of Congress over a two-year period found that 70
percent of news stories were neutral; and of the 30 percent that had some spin,
positive stories outnumbered negative stories fi ve to one.^10THE RESPONSIBILITY–RESPONSIVENESS DILEMMA
Congress’s image problem isn’t simply a matter of negative media coverage or a cyni-
cal public. It is rooted in the basic representational confl icts that arise from Con-
gress’s dual roles: responsibility for national policy making and responsiveness to
local constituencies.^11 Part of the national frustration with Congress arises because
we want our representatives to be both responsible and responsive; we want them to
be great national leaders and take care of our local and, at times, personal concerns.
But often it is impossible to satisfy both of these demands at the same time.
Rather than understanding these issues as inherent in the legislative process,
we often accuse members of gridlock and partisan bickering when our confl ict-
ing demands are not met. For example, public opinion polls routinely show that
the public wants lower taxes; more spending in education, the environment, and
health care; and balanced budgets—but those three things cannot happen simul-
taneously. We often expect the impossible from Congress and then are frustrated
when it doesn’t happen.
The responsibility–responsiveness dilemma brings us back to the puzzle we
posed at the beginning of this section: Why is there a persistent 30 to 40 percent
gap between approval ratings for individual members and for the institution? The
a n s wer m ay si mply b e t h at memb er s of C on g re s s t end t o re s p ond more t o t hei r c on-
stituents’ demands than take on the responsibility of solving national problems.
And when Congress becomes embroiled in debates about constituencies’ confl ict-
ing demands, the institution may appear ineff ectual. But as long as members keep
the “folks back home” happy, their individual popularity will remain high. In the
next section we describe how members use this and other techniques to cultivate
an incumbency advantage.
gridlock An inability to enact
legislation because of partisan
confl ict within Congress or between
Congress and the president.UNFORTUNATELY, MEMBERS OF
Congress do include some of the
“criminal class” noted by Mark
Twain. Former representatives
Randy “Duke” Cunningham
(R-Calif.), shown with his wife
Nancy (top), and William Jefferson
(D-La.) are both serving time in
federal prison.