LETTER FROM WASHINGTON : Congress Needs Perks to Bank On

So I’m sitting around worrying about really serious problems--like I don’t have a thing to wear for nuclear winter--and I keep getting distracted, derailed, in fact, because everybody here is so obsessed with some petty scandal in the House of Representatives.

What, again? Why is everybody so upset?

So the bank at the House honored 8,331 bad checks without charging penalties? So some members are playing a more sophisticated version of the old college game “walk the check” at a few House eateries?

Big deal.

Suddenly every perk, every small sign of respect, every privilege we give our hard-working honorable congressman is being pummeled.

America, you’ve got it all wrong. This bounced-check business, in particular, isn’t a scandal. It’s the nation’s best insurance policy against corruption yet.

This Latex National Bank--a 100-year-old lending institution situated so congressmen and their minions can conveniently do their banking--may be the one thing that stands between them and the mobs of big defense contractors, savings-and-loan slickers and swarms of other lobbyists and political action committees.

What if somebody like Richard H. Lehman of Sanger is short a few bucks? Would we rather the good congressman lay a little rubber on the House bank or call a buddy at a savings and loan for a campaign contribution?

And if Rep. Dana Rohrabacher of Long Beach needs quick cash for termite inspection at his new Arlington home? Would we rather have the taxpayers back an interest-free loan or have the Rev. Lou Sheldon of the Traditional Values Coalition shell it out? The answer is obvious. (Rohrabacher, by the way, proved his commitment to traditional values when he got caught up in this mess: He had his parents wire him the money to cover his overdraft.)

New York Rep. Robert Mrazek--bless his heart--tried to put this whole fiasco in proper perspective. When the whistle blowers fingered him for bouncing a few checks, he just fessed up and with a hang-dog face said he hoped voters would give him a little credit for telling the truth.

And Mrazek made a greater philosophical point that says a lot about what passes for morality in Washington these days when he told the New York Times, “I’m not a child abuser. I didn’t beat my wife.”

On top of the bad checks are the bad chits. Members owe $300,000 for eating at House restaurants. I’d rather float them a few dollars to eat chicken a la king and lemon meringue pie than have them scarf down filet mignon and creme brulee at, say, La Colline or La Brasserie. Either we buy lunch--or the lobbyists will.

How can we expect people who are too busy working out the details of a $380-billion budget deficit to pay much attention to a mere $300,000 in chits?

And, I’m more than just a little suspicious about the timing of this aspect of the scandal.

Could there be some connection between the sudden announcement of these unpaid bills and Speaker Thomas F. Foley’s diet--he’s lost 80 pounds. Foley used to be a two-dessert regular in the Members Dining Room and now he’s supporting a new No-Free-Lunch mandate in House restaurants? (There’s nothing worse than a reformed eater.)

Lacking some real domestic disasters (what’s a recession and unemployment among working friends?) some American columnists are in a snit about our pampered representatives. Instead of “Free Eats on Capitol Hill,” the headlines should have read: “Self-Important Become Self-Righteous.” Even New York’s man-of-the-people, Jimmy Breslin, got into the act with his Sunday column:

“How many times have we sat in front of television and heard one of those vile congressmen tell us: ‘Remember there is no such thing as a free lunch in this country.’

“They mean there must be no free lunch for some poor worker who sits on the radiator in the belt factory and has a can of soup and would rather go out for pizza, but must watch their couple of dollars because the subway and bus fares in New York are so high today that if they eat now they might have to walk on Friday.”

Oh please, Jimmy, give me a break.

He’d probably even object to the cheap haircuts at the House barbershop, free tax advice and fixed parking tickets.

I think it would be in the interest of national security if all members had to get those $5 haircuts instead of those $50 blow-dried jobs. In fact, it should be a requirement before running for Congress: All candidates would have to fly to Washington for a 1950s buzz-cut as proof they really want to live off the taxpayers. And after they have reduced the deficit, I’d be all for chipping in to buy a few blow-dryers and some mousse.

I am personally thrilled that after creating completely incomprehensible tax laws, congressmen are humble enough to admit even they don’t understand them. So from February to April 15 every year, they invite the Internal Revenue Service to open up shop in both the House and Senate to help members and their staffs prepare their tax returns. Do we really expect them to use H&R; Block?

And finally the question of those greased parking tickets.

Why should members have to be like every other schnook in Washington and have to hunt for parking? Why should they be slowed even a millisecond from official business? So they get a ticket once in awhile and the House sergeant-at-arms gets them dismissed?

These tickets may be the last tidbit of control we have over our dear congressmen. It gives me just that little bit of comfort knowing somewhere in a bureaucratic office in the District of Columbia there is a stack of tickets--golden evidence--that reveals all:

“So, Mr. Chairman, what kind of official business were you up to at 4 in the morning in Georgetown?”