In these pages, I’ve occasionally griped about how Congress has lost its nerve. I don’t just mean that in a partisan sense — though I mean that, too — but more in the way of Congress’s failure to act as a co-equal branch of government intended to check the abuses of the other branches, specifically the executive. In short, Congress has responsibilities and powers that it should guard jealously, regardless of partisan politics.

To my amazement and pleasure, ten members of congress have taken up the cause and produced an impressive — and surprisingly readable — manifesto that admirably describes the problem and sketches some possible fixes. Do read the whole thing, but what follows is an abridged version.  From the introduction:

Though all three branches of the federal government have contributed to this toxic state of affairs, Congress bears primary responsibility, both for the problem and its solution. In many ways, the federal government is a mess today because Congress allows it to be.

Congress’s constitutional powers – not just the power to legislate, but specifically the powers of taxation, spending, advice and consent and impeachment – are, by the Founders’ design, orders of magnitude stronger than those of the Executive or Judicial Branches. Congress – not coincidentally authorized in Article I of the Constitution – was meant to be first among co-equal branches of government.

On reclaiming Congress’s power of the purse:

More and more of the budget has been put on autopilot, while the remaining “discretionary” spending is often appropriated without sufficient debate, amendment, or scrutiny. Congress passes continuing resolutions or omnibus appropriations bills that lump together all or most line-items in the federal government’s multi-trillion dollar budget together into one “all-or-nothing” vote. What little actual deliberation there is on funding bills is done behind closed doors, by a handful of Senators and Representatives. This process invariably advantages well-connected special interests whose lobbyists and contacts can influence these secret talks, while the hundreds of millions of ordinary Americans not represented in that select group are cut out of the process altogether.

…

[We] will recommend reforms to:

• Modernize the federal budget process for a post-earmark Congress;
• Bring federal entitlement programs “on budget” to restore fiscal integrity to the process;
• Make self-funding agencies subject to congressional appropriations;
• Reform the Congressional Budget Office and Joint Committee on Taxation procedures to allow for greater transparency in Congress’s official fiscal analysis.

On legislative cliffs and budgeting:

Now that reluctant Senators and Representatives cannot be enticed with earmarks [thanks to reforms in 2011], they are instead threatened with “cliffs.” Congressional leaders often delay consideration of controversial legislation like the debt limit and spending bills until right before the current authorizations expire, when the costs of inaction are highest. Even if both Houses begin working to move legislation in a timely fashion, the Executive Branch has no incentive to not drag out the process until the 11th hour in order to preserve the leverage that cliffs hand to the presidency. Up against these manufactured crises, members face a political shake-down – Vote for an important, expensive bill of the president’s liking, with little debate or amendment, possibly without even reading it, or be blamed for the harmful consequences of going over the cliff – even if it is a presidential veto that forces us over.

[…]

Therefore, A1P members will recommend reforms to:

• Prevent government shutdowns and incentivize Congress and the president to act on crucial fiscal bills well before statutory deadlines;
• Eliminate the risk of default and prioritize spending to end debt- limit brinksmanship.

On regulatory reform:

Most of the federal government’s involvement in Americans’ lives – laws that say “do this” or “don’t do that” – are not passed by Congress anymore at all. They are imposed unilaterally by the Executive Branch through the regulatory process …

This is a constitutional disaster, effectively subjecting the American people to government without consent. It’s also an economic disaster. Federal regulations are estimated to cost the American people between $1 trillion and $2 trillion per year. And that money doesn’t just disappear. Those trillions in regulatory costs are transferred – redistributed up the economic scale – from consumers who pay artificially inflated prices for goods and services to all the lawyers, consultants, and special- interest middle-men who get rich off the red tape …

[All of this] occurs, ultimately, with Congress’s passive consent. Therefore A1P members will develop and recommend structural reforms that force Congress to assume its exclusive Article I power to make laws and regulate interstate commerce, including:

• Establishing a congressional regulatory budget that caps the permissible economic impact of regulations under each federal agency;
• Modernizing the Administrative Procedure Act to put regulatory agencies under closer congressional supervision;
• Requiring new major regulations to be affirmatively approved by votes in the House and Senate before implementation;
• Modernizing the civil service system and clarifying the status of agency Inspectors General.

On reforming executive discretion:

One of the main obstacles to checking the regulatory state is the legal principle of “administrative deference,” which was established in its current form in the 1984 Supreme Court case Chevron U.S.A. v. Natural Resources Defense Council. The ruling in the case held that federal courts must accept an agency’s interpretation of any federal law so long as the agency’s opinion is “reasonable.”

Under this “Chevron deference” standard, Executive Branch agencies can do almost anything they want, without congressional approval, so long as they have a clever enough justification …The Constitution was designed specifically to protect the American people from such arbitrary governance.

[…]

Therefore, A1P members will offer policy reforms to:

• Clarify the deference courts should give to executive agencies’ interpretation of congressional statutes as well as their own regulations;
• End the abuse of “guidance,” “dear colleague” letters, and other regulatory “dark matter” that agencies use to bring about preferred outcomes without issuing formal rules;
• Balance the scales to ensure a fair process to citizens, communities, and businesses targeted by federal regulators.

Now, a few caveats. First, it’s just a manifesto and, therefore, meaningless unless things actually happen. Second, all of the project’s members are Republicans — with some of the brainwork coming from folks associated with NR — and this will only succeed if the matter becomes supra-partisan. Third, such a project should contain at least some mention of war powers, even if it recommends that that institutional failure be dealt with separately.

Still, it’s a wonderful start and kudos to senators Mike Lee and Jeff Flake and representatives Jeb Hensarling, Cynthia Lummis, Dave Brat, Barry Loudermilk, Gary Palmer, Mia Love, John Ratcliffe, and Mark Walker for getting the ball rolling.