Powers of Congress

Day 727, 09:11 • Published in USA USA • by Rheinlander von Phalz
16 November 2009, Day 727 of the New World. The earliest day to declare candidacy for Congress is today, and citizens should soon expect their media to be flooded with campaign platforms (unless they only read the top 5). During this term, I have noticed some conflicting opinions about what Congress actually is and what it can and should do. I want to draw on some of my experience in Congress to explain what, exactly, Congress can do and dispel some of the incorrect perceptions about how much power Congress has.



The physical powers endowed to all members of Congress are as follows: A Congressman can propose a new citizen fee, the amount of money a new citizen born in the country receives from the national treasury, which must receive a majority vote to pass. A Congressman can propose a donation from the national accounts to an organization, specifying the amount of currency and the type of currency, which must receive a majority vote to pass. A Congressman can propose to issue money, which consumes a certain amount of gold from the national accounts and generates a certain amount of the local currency, also requiring a majority vote. A Congressman can propose a new minimum wage in the country’s local currency, which becomes law with a majority vote. A Congressman can propose to impeach the president, ending the executive’s term of office if the proposal receives a supermajority vote (greater than 66😵. Finally, a Congressman can provide citizenship to a resident foreign national who had requested it; this needs no approval from any other Congressman.

In addition to the proposals Congressmen can initiate and the citizenships they can grant, they also must approve of a war declaration, peace declaration, mutual protection pact, construction purchase, or new citizen message for it to become a reality.

The procedure leading to an approved law is rarely as simple as one Congressman clicking his way through the country administration page. If a tax change or new citizen fee is proposed with no prior discussion, it will be shot down. For something drastic like that, and for bills that do not come into effect in eRepublik, just off-site, at least one Congressman must sponsor a bill in the Congressional section of the eUS forums. It must then receive at least five approvals before going to vote and must receive a majority in favor with at least twenty representatives voting.

Donations and issuing money are somewhat more routine but also have a level of procedure that is enforced. The country accumulates currency in its national account, and all we really need in the national account is gold for alliances and war maneuvers. Currency can be made useful by the Congressional Budget Office, which pays for expenditures by the approved budget and sells currency for gold, maintaining the US😨Gold exchange rate (40:1).

The on-site portion of the United States Congress is rather unimpressive. There is a donation, usually to the same organization, almost daily, and some countries appear for mutual protection pact renewal each month. Perhaps a couple of times a term there will be a real debate and vote, such as the change to the value-added tax on food during the term of the 22nd Congress. This leads to some poor perceptions about Congress from members of the public.

Congress has been accused of being a “rubber stamp” for the President. In fact, it has been claimed that Congress is a rubber stamp without leveling that as an accusation. The basic premises of these arguments is that the President tends to have more experience than individual members of Congress and that Congress is needed to make certain things work in eRepublik, such as mutual protection pact renewals. Occasionally, we’ll see a campaign platform saying something along the lines of, “I can click ‘Yes’ as well as anyone, so vote for me.”



The idea that the legislative branch is subordinate to the executive is outright incorrect. In fact, Congress can impeach the President. If sixty-six percent of more of the individuals who sit in Congress want the current President to end his term, it ends. If the President disapproves of Congress, he is unable to dissolve that body. If anyone disapproves of a sitting Congressman, there is nothing that can be done to end his term. With both Presidents and Congressman, the electorate can always make sure that a bad politician does not get reelected.

In the United States, Congress does tend to give a lot of authority to its President. This is necessary because of the nature of eRepublik and the extended period of war we just experienced. In recent months, policy has been heavily focused on the military, which is the domain of the President. Long periods of unchecked executive authority have led many to forget that there is a check to his power. At the same time, the fortress strategy employed by the United States drastically changed Congressional elections.

Those in support of a rubber-stamp Congress have a tactic to attack the legitimacy of Congress: most Congressmen were elected by their party’s mobile votes. This broad, sweeping accusation turns Congress into a battleground between parties and Congressmen into pawns, rather than elected representatives. Certainly some Congressmen were elected solely for their party affiliation, but the same could be said of Presidents. Even with acknowledging one or even five poor Congressmen, attacking the foundation of Congress as a body is uncalled for.

What people need to understand is that there is a difference between Congress as a whole and individual Congressmen. Individual Congressmen can be poor, elected because of their party affiliation, even by underhanded “sniping” tactics, and incompetent. However, that individual is about one-fiftieth of Congress. A poor performance on the part of one individual is no reason to depredate the institution. We will not see a Congress composed entirely of all-stars, because Congress is an entry-point into politics and only so many first-timers will blossom into great leaders. Those who do distinguish themselves tend to get offered other positions elsewhere.


Click for full size

A strong accusation against Congress born of the fortress strategy and vote moving is that Congress is not “democratically” elected. Not only is this a wildly powerful charge, it is unfounded. The same electorate who voted for the President voted in the Congressional elections. The only difference is that the region in which a citizen voted in matters. We are all aware that our population is primary in California and Florida, so those regions see many more votes than any others. In fact, the lowest-voted candidate in a fortress state last month received 69 votes; compare that to the highest-voted candidate in a non-fortress state, who received 27 votes. Realize, however, that a Congressman from California gets just as big a vote as a Congressman from New Hampshire, and that no amount of complaining will change the mechanics of the Congressional elections. We all know the rules going into the elections on the 25th and you, the responsible voters, should be aware of who you are supporting just as you should be for a Presidential election. We all acknowledge that some proportion of the country is not very active in politics and will just vote in California and Florida for the experience. Congressmen in the Wasteland were elected with fewer votes, but their voters were active enough to care to move.

Those who disapprove of vote moving are really shooting themselves in the foot when it comes to Congressional representation. If Florida and California have more than 70% of the United States population combined, without moving they only get 4% of the seats in Congress. Calling out a Wasteland Congressman means that you would rather 96% of the seats in Congress be filled by people unwilling to move to a fortress. We don’t care that you would rather the number of seats offered be proportionate to the population of the region; that is not how it works.

By reducing the prestige of Congress and attacking its legitimacy, you deny the potential contributions of some very intelligent and dedicated people. Congress should not overstep its authority, I agree, but it should have the powers granted to it. By attacking the institution as a whole, you threaten to make it less attractive and reduce the number and quality of applicants looking to break into politics. Instead of downgrading Congress to a bunch of yes-men, it should remain a qualified, competent check to executive authority and its capacities and dedicated individuals recognized as such by the rest of the government.