Hensarling, known for his bluntness, was more honest than many by mentioning his term-limited tenure at the helm of the committee.

Supposedly, placing term limits on chairmanships is a way of "draining the swamp" – that horrible-smelling thing that infects Washington.

If you let someone stay on as chairman of a committee, they could become "captured" by the industry or bureaucracy. Or, to put it another way, they could become "bought" by the very people they supervise.

So, House Republicans years ago imposed a three-term limit on chairmanships. Members cannot spend more than six years as head of any committee.

Senate Republicans have similar rules governing their chairmanships. As a result, Sen. Richard Shelby (R-Ala.) had to relinquish his chairmanship of the Senate Banking Committee at the beginning of this year.

Makes sense, right? You don't want chairmen to become so entrenched that they become ineffective overseers of our bureaucracy, right?

Nope.

It's a ridiculous solution to a perceived problem.

Rather than draining the swamp, the term limits further muddy the water.

You arbitrarily remove the chairman of a committee, who has likely become an expert in the subject area he oversees.

This increases the power of unelected congressional committee staff members, who have by then developed the necessary expertise to provide the oversight that Congress is supposed to provide.

Now, there's no doubt that there have been committee chairmen who needed to be removed.

And prior to the mid-1970s, it was virtually impossible to remove chairmen. Chairmen (and yes, they all were men) became too powerful and some even retained their chairmanships despite becoming somewhat senile. Some were so disoriented that their staff ran their committees.

And so, Democrats, the party that controlled Congress, adopted rules that made it easier to remove chairmen. Rules were adopted that allowed the full Democratic Caucus to vote on chairmen.

That made committee chairmen more accountable to the members of their caucuses and allowed for an easier removal of chairmen.

The limits now in effect among Republicans simply allow committee heads to cash in early and become lobbyists for the very industries they have supervised. Or, in many cases, they become policy advisors for law firms representing those industries.

Policy advisors, in many cases, are simply lobbyists who don't have to register as lobbyists because they aren't lobbying.

Right.

Take the late Rep. Mike Oxley (R-Ohio). Oxley was a well-respected member of Congress who eventually rose to the chairmanship of the House Financial Services Committee.

He was co-author of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, which tightened regulation of public company boards, management and public accounting firms.

Oxley served his six years as chairman. He then retired.

Upon his retirement, Oxley became vice chairman of NASDAQ and a partner at the law firm of BakerHostetler, a Washington law firm. Later, he became a lobbyist for the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, the "self-regulatory body of the securities industry."

So, did imposing a term limit on Oxley do anything to drain the swamp? No. He simply cashed in and became another type of swamp creature.

The swamp, if one really exists, just became more polluted.

Scary Times, Chapter 87

So, Time-Warner and AT&T want to merge. Say what you want about this mega-merger from an antitrust perspective, but as with everything in Washington, politics has entered the negotiations.

Let's follow the moving pieces.

The two companies want to merge.

Time-Warner owns CNN.

President Trump hates CNN; he's made no bones about that. He calls the network "fake news." He's been at war with the cable news network since even before his election. Remember Trump's re-tweeting of an animation showing a speeding train hitting the CNN logo?

And Trump's son-in-law, Jared Kushner, reportedly told a CNN official that the network should dump 20% of its staff because of its lousy analysis of the 2016 election.

And the president has shown disdain for the First Amendment, which guarantees a free press. And he has threatened to go after NBC television stations because he thinks the network broadcasts "fake news."

He said the network's Federal Communications Commission license should be challenged, even though the network's affiliates, not the network itself, holds the licenses.

During his campaign, he threatened to try to tighten libel laws in ways that clearly violate the United States Constitution.

The Justice Department has sent signals that it might be OK with the merger if Time Warner sells either DirectTV or CNN.

That's right – Trump's Justice Department might try to force Time Warner to sell CNN.

And who might be interested in buying CNN? Well, maybe Rupert Murdoch, who owns Fox News, Trump's favorite news network. Trump has made no bones about his love for Fox News and has even touted specific network programs and hosts.

Scary?

I just laid out the pieces. You draw your own conclusions.

We Knew That

On Nov. 11, the Washington Post ran a story on its website headlined, "D.C. Dips to Record Low."

Upon further reading, it became clear that it was a weather story.

Another interpretation of the headline was probably correct too.

David Baumann is a Correspondent-at-Large for CU Times. He can be reached at [email protected].