Bipartisan Group Spends $2.3 Million Discovering That Legislative Failure Sounds Better With Different Words

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE — Office of the Bipartisan Commission on Legislative Process Modernization and Nomenclature Integrity

WASHINGTON, D.C. — The Bipartisan Commission on Legislative Process Modernization and Nomenclature Integrity announced today the successful completion of its eighteen-month mandate, releasing a landmark 94-page communications framework that it described as "the most significant reform to how Congress talks about not doing things since the introduction of the phrase 'under review' in 1987."

The Commission, established in March 2023 with a budget of $2.3 million drawn from a discretionary administrative fund, was tasked with addressing what its founding resolution called "a crisis of legislative perception" — the growing public impression that Congress was incapable of passing legislation. After extensive research, the Commission concluded that this impression was, in fact, largely accurate, but that significant improvements could be achieved by describing the situation differently.

"Language matters," said Commission Co-Chair Representative Dale Harmon (R-OH), at a press conference attended by eleven journalists and a congressional intern who wandered in looking for a bathroom. "When people hear 'deadlock,' they think failure. When they hear 'Extended Deliberative Consensus-Building,' they think: process. And process is something Americans can feel good about."

The Problem, As Identified By People Paid To Identify It

The Commission's report, titled Toward a More Resonant Legislative Vocabulary: A Framework for Process Communication in the Modern Civic Environment, identifies seventeen terms currently in use to describe congressional inaction and proposes updated alternatives for each.

"Deadlock" becomes "Extended Deliberative Consensus-Building." "Stalled" becomes "In Active Pre-Advancement." "Failed to pass" becomes "Declined to advance at this time, pending further alignment." "Nothing happened" does not appear in the glossary, as it was deemed, per the report's methodology section, "insufficiently actionable as a communications unit."

The rebranding effort cost approximately $847,000 in consulting fees, paid to a Washington communications firm, Meridian Strategic Narratives LLC, which the Commission selected following a competitive tender process that Meridian Strategic Narratives LLC also helped design.

"We brought real rigor to this," said Meridian's lead consultant, Courtney Voss, who billed the project at $340 an hour and described her role as "linguistic infrastructure development." "Focus groups in six states confirmed that 'Extended Deliberative Consensus-Building' tested significantly better than 'nothing is happening.' Significantly better. Like, twelve points."

Ms. Voss was asked what "twelve points" meant in this context. She said it was "a composite resonance metric" and moved on.

Reactions From Across The Spectrum, All Broadly Positive

The Commission was at pains to emphasize the bipartisan nature of its achievement, noting that consultants, think tank fellows, and communications professionals from across the ideological spectrum all agreed the new terminology represented meaningful progress.

Dr. Franklin Oakes, a senior fellow at the Heritage Foundation's Center for Governance Clarity, called the framework "a long-overdue correction to the negativity bias that has distorted public understanding of the legislative process." He added that "Extended Deliberative Consensus-Building" accurately reflected "the constitutional design of a system built on deliberation," and that critics who preferred the word "deadlock" were "essentially arguing against the Founders."

Miranda Chu, a policy communications director at the Center for Progressive Legislative Action, said the new language was "honestly kind of a historic step" and that reframing inaction as process was "actually pretty aligned with where we are on narrative equity in civic engagement." She noted that her organization had long advocated for "humanizing the timeline of change," and that this framework was "adjacent to that in a real way."

Both Dr. Oakes and Ms. Chu were asked whether the bills that prompted the Commission's formation had made any legislative progress during the eighteen months the Commission spent on terminology. Both said they would have to check. Neither followed up.

The Bills In Question

A footnote on page 87 of the Commission's report — beneath a chart illustrating the "resonance gradient" of various legislative vocabulary options — confirms that the three pieces of legislation the Commission was originally formed to advance "remain in committee pending further deliberative alignment," a phrase that, as of this week, is the Commission's officially recommended replacement for "have not moved since 2019."

The bills cover, respectively: a federal infrastructure maintenance fund, a bipartisan rural broadband access proposal, and a measure to update federal cybersecurity procurement standards. All three passed their initial committee hearings with strong bipartisan support. All three were then referred to subcommittees, where they entered what the Commission's new framework would describe as "a sustained pre-advancement deliberative posture."

A spokesperson for the Commission confirmed that the new terminology framework does not include any mechanism for advancing the bills themselves, as this "falls outside the Commission's mandate, which was communications-focused."

What Comes Next

The Commission's report has been submitted to the House Rules Committee, the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration, and the Congressional Research Service, each of which has confirmed receipt and indicated the document will receive "appropriate review."

The Commission itself has formally dissolved, though three of its members have already submitted a proposal to establish a follow-up body — the Bipartisan Commission on Legislative Vocabulary Implementation and Adoption Monitoring — to oversee rollout of the new terminology across congressional communications offices. The proposed budget is $1.8 million. The proposed timeline is fourteen months.

A draft resolution authorizing the follow-up commission was introduced on Wednesday. It has been referred to subcommittee, where it is currently in Active Pre-Advancement.

Progress, by any name, continues.