
在上一篇专栏中,我曾表示,众议院比原计划提前两周休会进入中期选举间歇期,这大概率无关紧要。在如此短的时间里,几乎没有什么能扭转公众对国会的态度,或其解决高物价、战争、政府腐败等问题的能力。此外,我认为,除非立法直接影响民众的生活生计,否则人们很少关注国会通过了什么法案。然而,参议院却坚持己见,在最后两周继续开工,处理那些可能在选举中带来支持率提振的事务。
In my previous column, I said it probably didn’t matter that the House recessed for the midterm break two weeks earlier than originally planned. There was not much that could be done in that short time frame to turn around public attitudes toward Congress or its ability to resolve issues like high prices, a war, or government corruption. Besides, I argued, people don’t pay much attention to what legislation Congress enacts unless it directly affects their lives and livelihood. The Senate, nevertheless, stuck to its guns and stayed working these last two weeks on matters that could potentially produce a favorability bump at the polls.
参议院的这一赌注让我想起了那首乡村歌曲:“再给我最后一次机会,在你说我们完了之前。”参议院多数党领袖约翰·图恩(约翰·图恩,共和党,南达科他州)的建议箱很快塞满了同僚们关于如何保住参议院控制权的想法。参议员乔什·霍利(共和党,密苏里州)和众议员阿什利·辛森(共和党,爱荷华州)敦促暂征联邦汽油税,以降低加油站油价。
The Senate’s gambit reminded me of the country song, “Give me just a one more last chance, before you say we’re through.”Senate Majority Leader John Thune’s (R-S.D.) suggestion box soon filled with ideas from his colleagues on how to retain chamber control. Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) and Rep. Ashley Hinson (R-Iowa) urged suspending the federal gas tax to bring down prices at the pump.
参议员苏珊·柯林斯(共和党,缅因州)施压领导层将胰岛素价格上限定在35美元。其他提案则被扔向“许愿墙”,希望能侥幸通过。尽管点子不少,但参议院上周晚些时候离开华盛顿时,更多的是一声叹息,而非轰轰烈烈。不出所料,在中期选举倒计时的这个关头,党派政治和参议院迟缓的立法节奏开始发挥作用,导致立法赛场上陷入近乎瘫痪的僵局。
Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) pressed their leadership to cap the cost of insulin at $35. Other proposals were tossed at the wishing wall in hopes they would stick. Despite the wealth of ideas, the Senate left town late last week with more of a whimper than a bang. Not surprisingly, at this late hour in the midterm countdown, partisan politics and the Senate’s sclerotic legislative pace came into play, resulting in near-gridlock on the legislative gridiron.
共和党领导层优先事项榜首是参议员乔恩·休斯特德(共和党,俄亥俄州)提出的《费率支付人保护法案》。该法案将要求州公用事业监管机构考虑让大型数据中心自行承担电网和基础设施成本,而不是由消费者买单。此前,一模一样的法案已在众议院以压倒性多数通过。
Heading the list of Republican leadership priorities was the Ratepayer Protection Act, introduced by Sen. Jon Husted (R-Ohio). It would require state utility regulators to consider making large data centers pay for their own grid and infrastructure costs instead of sticking consumers with the bill. An identical bill previously passed the House overwhelmingly.
参议院少数党领袖查克·舒默(纽约州民主党)称胡斯特的法案是“欺诈”,因为它是自愿的,并且不会影响当前消费者的能源成本,因为该法案要两年后才会生效。上个月,参议员马丁·海因里希(新墨西哥州民主党)通过一致同意阻止胡斯特将其法案提交全体表决。海因里希和参议员谢尔登·怀特豪斯(罗得岛州民主党)一直在协商他们自己的更严格的数据中心法案,并敦促参议员们等到选举后再比较不同方案。
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Shumer (D-N.Y.) called Husted’s bill a “fraud” because it is voluntary and would not affect current consumer energy costs because it would not take effect for two years. Last month, Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.) blocked Husted from bringing his bill to the floor by unanimous consent. Heinrich and Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) have been negotiating their own tougher data center bill and urged senators to wait until after the elections to compare the alternatives.
胡斯特面临来自前参议员谢罗德·布朗(俄亥俄州民主党)的严峻连任挑战,后者在广告上投入了数百万美元,指责胡斯特支持数据中心并导致电费飙升数千美元。图恩抨击他的民主党同僚,仅仅为了在选举前阻止共和党再赢得一次“胜利”,就阻挠胡斯特的许可改革措施。随着数据中心法案的夭折,参议院大部分时间都在处理一些重要性远不及的数据法案,这些法案可以通过一致同意通过。
Husted is facing a tough reelection challenge from former Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), who has spent millions on ads attacking Husted for supporting data centers and causing electric bills to spiral by thousands of dollars. Thune blasted his Democratic colleagues for blocking Husted’s permitting reform measure simply to deny Republicans another “win” before the election. With the demise of the data center bill, the Senate spent much of its time on bills of much less importance that could be passed by unanimous consent.
其中一些是对联邦邮局和建筑的常规更名,或是指定对个别议员有意义的纪念日、周和月。令我注意到的是由参议员安格斯·金(缅因州独立党)提出的法案,指定2026年9月25日为“全国龙虾日”。该法案仅在一天前由主要共同提案人苏珊·柯林斯提出,她正面临激烈的连任竞争。在这堆杂乱的议案中,参议院于9月24日以49票对50票否决了参议员蒂姆·凯恩(弗吉尼亚州民主党)提出的结束伊朗战争的决议。
Some of these were the routine re-namings of federal post offices and buildings, or designating commemorative days, weeks and months of interest to individual members. One that caught my eye, introduced by Sen. Angus King (I-Maine), designated Sept. 25, 2026, as “National Lobster Day.”It had been introduced just a day earlier with lead co-sponsor, Susan Collins, who is in a tight reelection race. In the midst of this mish-mash of measures, the Senate voted 49-50 on Sept. 24 to defeat a resolution by Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) to end the Iran war.
虽然这是一次共和党的胜利,但并不符合公众的意愿。参议院在休会前唯一能够达成一致的重大议案是一项两党合作的法案——《保护大学体育法案》,由参议员泰德·克鲁兹(德克萨斯州共和党)和玛丽亚·坎特威尔(华盛顿州民主党)共同发起。该法案以77票对22票通过参议院,将对现行标准进行编码和修订,涉及运动员报酬、转会以及在校年限等方面。
It was a Republican victory but one out of favor with the public. The only major measure the Senate could agree on before it adjourned was a bipartisan bill, the Protect College Sports Act co-sponsored by Sens. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) and Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.). The bill passed the Senate, 77-22. It would codify and revise existing standards regulating such things as athletes’ compensation, transfers, and years in school.
这项法案其实并不像想象中那样能吸引选民支持。参议员约翰·肯尼迪(共和党,路易斯安那州)以其讽刺式的幽默指出,尽管他会支持该法案,但他在竞选活动中“从未遇到过哪怕一个人”声称自己晚上会因那些大学橄榄球教练而彻夜难眠。参议院过去两周这场喧嚣闹剧的教训是:如果你指望在选举前最后一刻找到某种灵丹妙药来确保自己的政治前途,就别去敲立法机构的门,祈求获得能维持权力的魔药了。
The bill is not exactly a campaign vote grabber. Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.), with his sardonic wit, said that while he would support the bill, he “hadn’t met a single person on the campaign trail” who said they lay awake at night worrying about those college football coaches. The moral of this fortnight frenzy in the Senate is: If you’re looking for a last-minute election elixir to secure your future, do not come knocking on legislative doors for a stay-in-power potion.
你的命运很可能并不会因此改变。议员们的胜败取决于他们的声誉、品格、对手的实力以及经济形势,而不是他们名下通过了多少法案。唐·沃尔芬斯伯格是一位拥有28年国会工作经验的资深职员,最终担任众议院规则委员会的主任。他是《国会与人民:审议式民主的考验》(2000年)和《国会文化的变迁:从公平竞争到权力博弈》(2018年)的作者。
Chances are your fate will not change. Members will win or lose based on their reputation, character, strength of their opponents, and the economy, and not on the number of bill notches in their belts. Don Wolfensberger is a 28-year congressional staff veteran, culminating as chief of staff of the House Rules Committee. He is author of, “Congress and the People: Deliberative Democracy on Trial” (2000), and, “Changing Cultures in Congress: From Fair Play to Power Plays” (2018).