ORANGE COUNTY VOICES : Frankly, We Should Cancel Current Residents of House : Rep. Rohrabacher’s abuse of congressional mailing privilege and his feeble excuses for it show why incumbents must go.

The recent revelation that Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-Huntington Beach) abused his congressional franking privilege is one of those rare metaphors that so precisely captures the misguided condition of politics today.

Due to reapportionment, Rohrabacher faces the prospect of asking a largely new constituency for reelection this year. Prompted by that challenge, Rohrabacher used our tax dollars to mail 150,000 newsletters in January to people he does not now represent. This little calling card cost us about $18,000.

The act was perfectly legal, and like unrepentant gangsters, Rohrabacher showed no remorse. In fact, after that mailing he said he planned to send out a second newsletter at taxpayer expense.

Recently, in a Times article, Rohrabacher said: “Incumbents have a number of advantages, and this is one of them. I have opposed it, but that doesn’t mean that I should unilaterally refrain from doing something that’s being done . . . by many, many others throughout the country.”

Excuse No. 1: Everyone else is doing it.

Rohrabacher further said: “This is not a loophole. This is something that has been put into the law intentionally by the liberal Democrats who control both houses of Congress.”

Excuse No. 2: It’s the Democrats’ fault.

At this juncture, it must be said that Rohrabacher is far from alone in the abuse of this and other congressional “privileges.” From Democrat Alan Cranston stepping to the Keating Waltz to Republican Newt Gingrich’s Great Book Deal, the guilt spreads wide and thick.

That is exactly the point. These incidents illustrate that the uppermost concern of congressional incumbents--Democrat and Republican--(and incidentally, on the minds of most state level politicians and some on the local level) is reelection.

Certainly, in a country such as ours where competition is woven into the very fabric of our lives, winning is important. We should not expect elections to be circuses of altruistic gymnastics. But, the trapeze has swung to the other end of the arena: winning is everything.

All decisions in campaign and on the job are based directly on winning the next election. This doesn’t mean they are doing what their constituents want them to do, therefore safeguarding their place next election in constituent hearts and minds. It means that specific, high-profile “issues” are chosen as bones to the people and that risk is distilled out of the process. For instance:

Incumbents will debate challengers only if the latter is a serious threat, therefore smothering the discussion of ongoing and potential issues.

The incestuous relationship between PAC and other large contributions and access to the legislator leads to a severely disproportionate ratio of money going to incumbents.

Campaign “issues,” like those I mentioned earlier, are pared down to only those the candidates choose rather than being opened up to a wide-ranging discussion of all public injuries.

And of course, incumbents have the franking privilege.

Is it any wonder that incumbents are returned to Congress at a 95% to 99% rate while frustration with job performance remains high among the citizenry?

Rohrabacher’s excuses that “others do it” and that “it’s the Democrats’ fault” don’t fly. Neither does his suggestion that he really opposes franking and would support a bill by Rep. William M. Thomas (R-Bakersfield) that would specifically outlaw his recent action.

Rohrabacher’s words, as are most from the collective lips of Congress, are pure posture. Their purpose is solely reelective.

I said that Rohrabacher’s act was perfectly legal. That, in part, is the problem. Legislators decide what is legal, and they don’t govern themselves well.

To bring forth real representatives who don’t fear democratic challenge or losing the next election, who let their on-the-job actions rather than public relations mouthpieces speak at election time, the path is clear. Average citizens must run for office; the media must delegate time and space to all candidates; public, taxpayer-funded debates among all candidates must be statutorily instituted; Americans must get a real education in politics; and, most important, we must remove the professional politician as much as possible from our government.

The term limitation firestorm won’t completely fix the problem because the professional politician will just job-jump and, frankly, there’s more of them where they came from. Just open the phone book and count the attorney listings.

Rohrabacher and his buddies have it their way for now. That doesn’t mean forever. Unelect them and then run for office. It’s the only way to begin ending the abuses.