One cause of Washington gridlock: Gerrymandering

WASHINGTON - Welcome to Washington dysfunction, 2013 edition.

Gridlock has described this town for the last several years -- the most recent example being the showdown over the fiscal cliff -- and it doesn't appear the polarization will lessen anytime soon.

"We have created a set of congressional districts, due in large part to gerrymandering, that means there are relatively few members of the Congress, of the House of Representatives, that are inclined to feel any urgency about accommodation or compromise," says Brigham Young University political scientist David Magleby. "And that makes governing pretty hard."

The tumultuous battle over how to avert hikes on every taxpayer went down to the wire, and nearly fell apart amid rumblings by House Republicans that they would reject the final deal.

Worse, the deal punts more big decisions -- raising the nation's borrowing limit and smoothing out spending cuts -- for a couple of months. Come March, Congress will again be taking the country to the brink of shutting down, or possibly, actual default.

Sticking to campaign-style ideology in office has become more of a way of life in Washington, especially after the rise of Tea Party-backed Republicans and a left tilt for some Democrats. Taking a hard-line on issues, such as a GOP pledge against raising any taxes, leaves little room for negotiation.

"That assumes you'll get your way at all times but that's not life; that's not the legislator life," says Magleby. "We compromise."

Historically, there has been more ability to do so in Congress, with moderates bridging the gap between the two parties. But many of those members have lost tough elections, leaving, for example, only a handful of so-called Blue Dog Democrats like Rep. Jim Matheson of Utah who were the go-to bloc to make deals.

Matheson, in his seventh term, agrees new, partisan congressional districts have produced members rigidly toeing a party line.

"They're more threatened by a challenge from a more extreme element in their party than they are by a general election challenge based on the way congressional districts have been set up across the country," says Matheson, who represents the most Republican district of any Democrat. "There's something to that that makes it more challenging to have consensus building."

Matheson notes that in his 12 years in Congress, he's seen the shift away from bipartisan compromises toward a strategy of simply trying to make the other side look bad. "Something has got to give in this dynamic," he says.

Sen. Orrin Hatch, who is in, he says, his final term in the Senate, was the only vote in Utah's delegation for the fiscal cliff bill, and he argues that the deal was a "perfect illustration of how compromise does happen."

In the Senate of old, Hatch was one of those who forged compromises, including many with the late Sen. Ted Kennedy, such as the Children's Health Insurance Program and a national service initiative. But Hatch, who is beginning his seventh term, says the body has shifted.

"The Democrats (have gone) more liberal, the Republicans more conservative," he says. "That's really what's involved here."

Former Republican Sen. Bob Bennett of Utah, saw the growth in the partisan divide during his waning years.

Out of the Senate and in the private world of consulting and lobbying, Bennett says he's optimistic cooler minds will prevail with the new House and Senate and with President Barack Obama's second term.

"The problems are serious enough that serious people will emerge, and they will emerge as leaders and pretty soon one party or the other will begin to coalesce to solve our problems," Bennett says.