Dingell's Popularity is Artificial

So, John Dingell of Michigan has become the longest serving member of Congress ever. He's been around since 1955, having taken over a seat his father held, and has now spent over 20,000 days on the job. What, really, are we supposed to make of this?

Has he done that great of a job that such longevity merits accolades? The answer to that of course will depend on your political leanings. He certainly has amassed great power over all those years, and that is the essence of being a member of Congress: the longer you're there, the stronger you are. Not that that is a good thing, quite frankly. No individual ought to have too much power in our government. That's why we had a revolution in the first place.

What actually explains his long run in our nation's capital anyway? Is he in truth all that good at what he does? Or has he simply hung around a long time, and gained a veneration not actually reflective of his talents?

We'll go with that. This isn't to question his work ethic or commitment to whatever he believes in; seen strictly in political terms he has certainly been a good tin soldier for the Democrats, and we honestly don't doubt that he puts in his days' work. Still, we can't help but feel he's popular only because he's been around the block a few times. And why is that?

Simply put, the lazy voter. Everyone knows how much name recognition means in politics. Counting the years his father, John Dingell, Sr., served, there has been a Dingell in the House of Representatives from somewhere in southeast Michigan for 80 years. That's about one-third the life of the entire Republic. It boggles the mind to believe that a family which has spent that much time in Washington hasn't done enough to merit at least an occasional electoral loss. The only obvious reason this has not happened is that people every even year November have become so comfortable with the name that they effectively refuse to consider his reelection qualifications on their own merit.

Surely other factors are involved, but surely too this is the primary one. People see a name they know, they feel good about it, they cast their ballot. Everyone seems to win. As such, no one questions it. That isn't democracy, folks. It is however blind support for a petty royalty without the ermine robe.