GROUP PROJECT GOES AWRY IN HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Written by Jamie Silva
Originally penned in July 2013.
WASHINGTON D.C. – An atmosphere of defiant stupor pervaded the chambers of Rep. Andrew Connors (R-MI), as a group of four congressmen sat in silence around a table, just hours away from a looming deadline. A few scantily outlined pages lay here and there, but much more space was occupied by several mostly empty pizza boxes, the limp and lukewarm contents of which gave off an odor of approaching and unavoidable failure. Tired and disheveled, the honorable representatives slumped sullenly in their high-backed armchairs, darting accusatory glances at whoever had the temerity to make eye contact. Meanwhile, a small alarm clock on the corner of the mahogany advanced ponderously yet steadily toward the 5 PM cutoff for turning in the legislation.
The predicament in which they now found themselves was by no means a foregone conclusion, but neither was it all that difficult to see coming. Two weeks ago, following a national outcry over revelations that the National Security Agency allegedly engages in unprecedented levels of surveillance of the activities and communications of civilians who have not been charged with a crime, House Majority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) and his counterpart Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) determined that a bipartisan effort to address the excesses of the NSA and assuage the fears of a dissatisfied populace would be just the thing to boost Congress’s subterranean approval ratings, while perhaps allaying concerns regarding its own purported complicity in the NSA’s controversial programs.
Thus, the pair assigned four congressmen to “put together a piece of legislation, at least 50 but no more than 55 pages in length (MLA, of course) that includes 2 or more of the following components: congressional oversight, judicial constraints, administrative guidelines, and/or regulatory restrictions that curb the authority and activities of the NSA. Creative methods of permitting the same through other means are encouraged, though not required. You will present your material on the House floor at 5 PM on July 22, and submit a copy to the office of the Majority Leader no later than 7:30. If you have questions, check with one of our staffers; we both will be out fundraising on the West Coast for the foreseeable future. You have plenty of time, so we expect a thorough effort – no excuses. Late legislation, as you know, carries penalties: you will find that your other bills remain stuck in committee for several weeks, if they get out at all. And remember! Work together, please, and release photos of you doing so to the press.”
The selected representatives were the aforementioned Connors, Edith Hunter (R-FL), Marcus Jackson (D-MA) and Charlie Harks (D-MS). The project started off relatively smoothly: Hunter created and shared a Google document entitled “The Safe, Accessible and Free Electronic Transmissions Act, or SAFETA: Brainstorming Ideas,” and inserted the helpful observation that “SAFETA is good, but does anyone know how we could end that with a Y instead? I look forward to hearing your guys’ ideas!”
According to an edit history we received (we’re not sure from whom, actually), no additions were made for eleven days. At that point, under pressure from Boehner and Pelosi to demonstrate real and substantive progress, the group held a press conference to announce that, and we quote, “real, substantive progress has been made” on the bill. With just three days remaining before their presentation, Hunter and Jackson were becoming agitated. Connors and Harks, on the other hand, were undisturbed; as the latter assured them on the google document, “we’re fine you guys. This is gonna be a breeze. Also, what about this: Safe, Accessible, and Free Electronic Transmissions Y’all. Very friendly, don’t you think?”
On Friday night, the group convened for their first in-person meeting, which we have tapes of for some reason. Progress was slow and scattered: Connors offered to take notes, but appeared to have little to contribute to them himself. Hunter spent most of the time considering the most appealing way to present their findings, “perhaps on a powerpoint? or maybe we could have like an easel with hip dry-erase drawings, or we could do some sort of funny skit about someone getting convicted based on illegally obtained evidence.” Harks arrived late and was content to sip his Mountain Dew moodily, while Connors repeatedly asked what the required reading was, and if anyone had read any books, case law, or existing legislation concerning the NSA. Material was added to the google document, but it was mostly composed of half-remembered notes from hearings on the subject, as well as assorted Reddit links. Thanks to a motion by Connors to visit a local brewery, however, spirits were high as the group returned to their homes at approximately 2:30 AM Saturday morning.
Another gathering was arranged for that night, and according to texts sent out by Jackson (how we got them is anyone’s guess), “this time we’ll get serious, and I’m serious about that. Seriously you guys. John [Boehner]’s a monster about late bills.” For a while, this plan seemed to work: Ideas flew back and forth, notes were taken furiously, and Hunter drafted several versions of an NSA-focused skit, including full-length parodies of three of the day’s chart-topping pop sensations. “We’re really looking to bolster turnout amongst the young, you know,” she said. “They love this stuff.” By 1:00 AM, the end looked to be in sight, depending on your definition of “the end,” looked to be,” and “in sight”: The group had four and a half pages of bullet pointed ideas for the bill, most of them vague and platitudinous, but ideas nonetheless. “All we have to do now is just flesh these bad boys out a bit,” said Harks, with the optimism of one who is supremely confident in the unsurpassed productivity of his future self. “It’s a slam dunk. Also, get someone to spellcheck it.”
But Sunday did not progress as planned. The four loaded and reloaded the Google document, waiting and hoping for others to make salient and insightful edits. Finally, Hunter demanded a final meeting, “just to tie these loose ends together. My skit is totally done by the way, but if none of you rehearse then I guess you won’t know the lines. Look forward to getting embarrassed on CSPAN for all the world to see.”
This brings us to the scene described above, which we heard about from a guy who wouldn’t give his name and won’t answer our calls. Visions of angry House leaders danced in their heads, with Connors and Jackson contemplating stepping down ahead of their midterm elections in 2014. At length, Harks sat up, compulsively clutching and releasing his empty Mountain Dew can. “Guys, we gave it the old college try, right?” Everyone nodded, including Harks. “Right. But we’re going out there in 45 minutes, and all we have are a collection of semi-coherent paragraphs and Edith’s lame play or whatever. No offense, Edith.”
“Offense taken,” said Hunter, with a cold stare. “Right,” agreed Harks cheerily, crushing his Mountain Dew can and throwing it onto the pile in the corner. “I know a guy who can handle this ... I think he lives down on 2nd and K Street. I’ll just get him the instructions and he’ll have it together by 5. Sound good?” Assent was given immediately, and at press time, the bill was being carefully crafted by Steve Carrigan, a legislative specialist at the Advocacy Center for Communications Security. The bill is expected to be voted down in the Senate anyway.
