REPRESENTATIVE: "a: Standing or acting for another through delegated authority;" "b: ...(c)onstituting a government in which the many are represented by persons chosen...by election"
It's no secret some members of the U.S. Congress are "un-representative;" they don't give two hoots in Hell about what the constituency thinks or expects from their Potomac residency. Despite what the good folks at Merriam-Webster have to say.
That comes as no surprise. But, never has it been so brazenly and gutlessly demonstrated as it has in the last few years.
Even the most unbiased observer would have to admit the more egregious examples of un-representative votes come from Republicans far more than Democrats. In overwhelming numbers, folks at home - voters who elected those "un-representatives" - told them how they felt on one issue after another. But, with a consistency rarely found in politics, the "un-representatives" - Republicans mostly - ignored them.
It's widely accepted, when considering a new President's appointees, a lot of latitude is given to the Chief Executive to have the crew he wants. Often, this means swallowing hard because of a nominee's tenuous talents to serve in a particular post. But this batch! Front to back - top to bottom - monied fools whose "leadership" abilities stopped far short of the vaguest qualifications. One, in fact, didn't know for two days after confirmation what his new job would be - believing it was to travel the world to promoting this country's oil and gas industries. A reporter had to "'splain it" to the energy secretary.
"Un-representative" members of the Senate bellied up to the bar to approve nearly everyone that reached the Senate floor.
Idaho had to look no further than Sens. Risch and Crapo to find what voters wanted them to do didn't matter. Neither would meet with constituents - wouldn't talk to them at district offices - wouldn't come to the phone or return emails. In fact, neither would even make public what the public said about the list of unqualified nominees. Finally, one clerk in Crapo's employ let slip that opposition to the Dept. Of Education chief was over 95%! Still, you know who ol' Mike confirmed. Yep, he went with the 5%.
In state after state - district after district - across the nation, members of Congress "holed up." Wouldn't meet - wouldn't talk - wouldn't be interviewed - wouldn't answer mail or phones. Some locked office doors - doors voters paid for in federal buildings we own. It was in your face. Our face. Locked doors and unanswered phones.
One flat out lie came from un-Rep. Cathy McMorriss Rogers, the highest ranking woman in the GOP in the House, whose home office is in Spokane. She told voters she'd meet but only two at a time since "the fire marshal had written her that was the most people that could be in her office at once." "Safety," you know. Except he didn't write. In fact, he said her office could "safely" handle 30 people.
Two reasons for this chicken-heartedness, I think. First, lobbyists with pockets full of money. Oil and gas people turned on all the money spigots for the EPA chief, for example. Big bucks flooded in to D.C.. Textbook publishers and private charter school companies trucked in loads of greenbacks for the most unqualified billionaire ever to buy the Secretary of Education's job. And so it went. Voices of greed outweighed voices of voters and filthy lucre supplanted "the right thing to do."
Second, our un-representatives - mostly Republican - are scared to death of Trump. Terrified of retribution - of having a primary opponent at home - of having continued employment ended. They lack guts to do their jobs for fear they'll be violently ripped from the public trough in an act of Trump pique.
It's doubtful the dollars will stop rolling in. So, there'll likely be that obstacle between voters and members of Congress until that Citizens United decision is eventually overturned. But, the fear factor may soon strike the Senate. If six or eight Republican members - enough to sway the balance of voting - decide to do what's right, Trump will cease to be an employment or career threat. Then we may begin to see some semblance of independence.
However all that may turn out, there's a lesson here we voters must not forget. While November is a ways off - and some members won't be up for re-election even then - we must remember who the "un-representatives" are. We need to clearly recall, when we needed them to do the job we gave them, they didn't show up. When we, in large numbers, needed to talk to them about what we wanted, they locked their doors and took their phones off the hook.
When we were paying them to do their jobs, others were paying them not to.