No, not a nicer office. (Most offices in DC are the same size). No, not better committee assignments, although that does sometimes come. No, not more interview requests (the squeaky wheel usually gets the grease, and that isn’t always a good thing).
No, the benefits of seniority is the ability to influence new members about the “Proper Role of Government” - especially when it comes to entitlements. Many would like us all to take a Ron Paul approach and simply vote NO on everything. Others think radical change is needed now before we slip further. I can respect both of those opinions.
I favor a third way. There is much in Washington I want to see changed and am working towards. None is more vital than ending the ever expanding reach of entitlement programs and social welfare systems that are a drain on our pocketbooks and the dreams and aspirations of many. I believe Ezra Taft Benson said it best,
HOW CAN PRESENT SOCIALISTIC TRENDS BE REVERSED?
This brings up the next question: How is it possible to cut out the various welfare-state features of our government which have already fastened themselves like cancer cells onto the body politic? Isn’t drastic surgery already necessary, and can it be performed without endangering the patient? In answer, it is obvious that drastic measures ARE called for. No half-way or compromise actions will suffice. Like all surgery, it will not be without discomfort and perhaps even some scar tissue for a long time to come. But it must be done if the patient is to be saved, and it can be done without undue risk.
Obviously, not all welfare-state programs currently in force can be dropped simultaneously without causing tremendous economic and social upheaval. To try to do so would be like finding oneself at the controls of a hijacked airplane and attempting to return it by simply cutting off the engines in flight. It must be flown back, lowered in altitude, gradually reduced in speed and brought in for a smooth landing. Translated into practical terms, this means that the first step toward restoring the limited concept of government should be to freeze all welfare-state programs at their present level, making sure that no new ones are added. The next step would be to allow all present programs to run out their term with absolutely no renewal. The third step would involve the gradual phasing-out of those programs which are indefinite in their term. In my opinion, the bulk of the transition could be accomplished within a ten-year period and virtually completed within twenty years. Congress would serve as the initiator of this phase-out program, and the President would act as the executive in accordance with traditional constitutional procedures.
This view brings me back to seniority. There are not many radicals in Congress. Radicals tend to get nothing done in an institution designed to be slow and deliberative. Instead, it is the slow, steady, patient, and principled who effect real change. It is not as fast as some may like (it may shock you that I don’t like how long it takes), but if we think back to the time of FDR or 90% marginal tax rates, we have made progress. We have changed the debate, and many of us continue to fight the good fight. I could use more members to help me, including in Utah (especially the 2nd District). But regardless, I will continue to fight to make the change we all want - sometimes not as fast as you would like, and probably not as flashy or well spoken as you would like, but I won’t give up.