Editorial: Congress is a war zone

Some of the biggest challenges facing this nation - reducing debt, fixing Social Security, reforming immigration policy - can't be done unless Democrats and Republicans work together.

Yet partisanship in Washington is at its worst level in decades. The two parties rarely agree on minor matters, let alone on the bigger problems that require hard work and political risk-taking.

The crisis has grown worse partly because the more partisan voters in both parties have been voting out lawmakers whom they view as too cooperative with the opposition. The systematic weeding out of moderate lawmakers makes compromise more difficult.

Regardless of which party holds the presidency or controls Congress, it's in the nation's best interests for both parties to work together more often. The question is how to reduce the level of partisan rancor and foster compromise.

Former members of Congress from both parties gathered recently at the National Archives in Washington to discuss this challenge. Their consensus: There are no quick solutions, and change will come only when voters and party leaders desire finding common ground.

Trent Lott, the former Senate Republican leader from Mississippi, acknowledged he was part of the problem while serving until 2007. "The problem is us - we became such partisan warriors," Lott said. "Men and women of goodwill have to step up and say, 'We're going to stop this.' It takes work."

Tom Foley, the former Democratic speaker from Washington state, said members of opposing parties need to find ways to build friendships. Lawmakers today usually don't bring their families to Washington to live, reducing the opportunities for socializing.

"You cannot have a better personal relationship than when your children are involved," Foley said.

One key way to ease partisanship is for more states to adopt nonpartisan redistricting. Every 10 years, after the census, states redraw the boundaries of congressional and legislative districts. Too often in states such as Pennsylvania, the process is controlled by partisans. Their goal is to protect incumbents by creating "safe" districts that are contorted to include more Democratic or Republican voters.

The advent of computer technology using voter registration patterns to redraw district boundaries has turned protecting incumbents into a science. The trend makes elections less competitive, and incumbents concern themselves more with satisfying their base of partisan voters.

"That polarizes the two parties," said former Rep. Martin Frost, a Democrat from Texas.

The Iowa system, which uses a nonpartisan commission and requires geographically compact districts, helps to produce competitive elections. Pennsylvania, one of the most gerrymandered states in the nation, would need to approve a constitutional amendment to change its reapportionment system. Not surprisingly, the legislature has resisted this important reform. (New Jersey uses a bipartisan commission with a nonpartisan "tiebreaker" member.)

Voters, too, have the ability to bring about changes in attitudes among lawmakers. It can be as simple as asking a candidate to name one major piece of bipartisan legislation that he or she intends to support if elected.

In the end, it requires voters who truly want their representatives to find common ground.