Tom Ferguson is a Professor of Political Science at the University of Massachusetts Boston, Senior Fellow at the Roosevelt Institute, and member of the Advisory Board of the Institute for New Economic Thinking.

“Nothing gets done in Washington.”  Although it has been the lament of Americans for years, Congressional approval ratings slid into a ditch last week, matching an all-time low of 13% as the Occupy Wall Street protests spread across the country.  Could the out of control, centralized pay-to-play system in Congress have something to do with the ever-growing “stalemate machine” in Washington? Yes, says Tom Ferguson, professor at UMass-Boston, in a new piece that spells out the damaging effects big money has had on our democracy in recent years.

“Uniquely among legislatures in the developed world, our Congressional parties now post prices for key slots on committees. You want it — you buy it, runs the challenge. They even sell on the installment plan: You want to chair an important committee? That’ll be $200,000 down and the same amount later, through fundraising. Unlike most retailers, though, Congressional leaders selling committee positions never offer discounts,” says Ferguson.

This, he says, can lead to just a few special interests owning most of our Congressional leadership.  “Big interest groups (think finance or oil or utilities or health care) can control the membership of the committees that write the legislation that regulates them. Outside investors and interest groups also become decisive in resolving leadership struggles within the parties in Congress. You want your man or woman in the leadership? Just send money. Lots of it,” says Ferguson.

“The system also produces top-heavy, cash-rich leadership structures within each party. It ensures that national party campaigns rest heavily on slogan-filled, fabulously expensive lowest-common-denominator appeals to collections of affluent special interests,” he asserts.

The numbers tell the story.  Take a look at the staggering pay-to-play amounts from the 2008 fundraising cycle in Marian Currinder’s book Money in the House:

Under the new rules for the 2008 election cycle, the DCCC [Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee] asked rank-and-file members to contribute $125,000 in dues and to raise an additional $75,000 for the party. Subcommittee chairpersons must contribute $150,000 in dues and raise an additional $100,000. Members who sit on the most powerful committees … must contribute $200,000 and raise an additional $250,000. Subcommittee chairs on power committees and committee chairs of non-power committees must contribute $250,000 and raise $250,000. The five chairs of the power committees must contribute $500,000 and raise an additional $1 million. House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, Majority Whip James Clyburn, and Democratic Caucus Chair Rahm Emanuel must contribute $800,000 and raise $2.5 million. The four Democrats who serve as part of the extended leadership must contribute $450,000 and raise $500,000, and the nine Chief Deputy Whips must contribute $300,000 and raise $500,000. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi must contribute a staggering $800,000 and raise an additional $25 million.

With minimum contributions to the DCCC set at $200,000, Ferguson says that the need to keep the huge money machine humming along has fundamentally changed the way decision-making works in on the Hill.

“The tidal wave of cash has structurally transformed Congress. It swept away the old seniority system that used to govern leadership selection and committee assignments in Congress.” In its place, Ferguson says, the parties have centralized their messaging, following the “central office” practices of big-box retailers like Walmart, Best Buy, or Target.

The concentration of power at the top has given party leadership more say than ever. “They grandstand by trying to hold up legislation. They push hot-button legislative issues that have no chance of passage, just to win plaudits and money from donor blocs and special-interest supporters. When they are in the minority, they obstruct legislation, playing to the gallery and hoping to make an impression in the media. Aware that most Americans pay little attention, both parties flood the airwaves with more of the same old same old, hoping that some of it will stick,” says Ferguson.

To read more, check out Ferguson’s piece “Posted Prices and the Capitol Hill Stalemate Machine” in the Washington Spectator.

– Megan Robertson is a digital producer for DylanRatigan.com.