NORM ORNSTEIN of the American Enterprise Institute quite literally wrote the book on congressional dysfunction. So it is profoundly depressing to see that he has now labelled the 112th Congress the worst one ever. More discouraging still, this is not a temporary problem brought about by transient phenomena such as the recent recession and the advent of the tea-party movement. It is the culmination of a long period of realignment in American politics, encompassing sharper ideological conflict between the parties, the extinction of the Boll Weevils and the Gypsy Moths, the simultaneous balkanisation of the mass media, the advent of the permanent campaign and a new way of thinking and operating on Capitol Hill. Moreover, it is going to become even worse:

Partisan and ideological conflict is inherent in democratic political systems, of course, and governing is often a messy process. But this level of dysfunction is not typical. And it is not going away in the near future. The 2012 elections are sure to bring very close margins in both houses of Congress, and even more ideological polarization; the redistricting process now underway in the House is targeting some of the last few Blue Dog Democrats in places like North Carolina and enhancing the role of primary elections on the Republican side, which will pull candidates and representatives even further to the right.

Early last year, when President Obama's health-insurance reform looked as if it had run into a brick wall on Capitol Hill, I made a somewhat heroic effort in The Economist to argue that American politics were not quite as paralysed as they looked. In the end, that piece argued,

the question of whether a country is governable turns on how much government you think it needs. America's founders injected suspicion of government not only into the constitution but also into the political DNA of its people. And even in the teeth of today's economic woes, at least as many Americans seem to think that what ails them is too much government, not too little.

But there was a kicker:

However much Americans say they want a small government, they seem wedded to the expensive benefits of the big one they actually have, such as Social Security, health care for the elderly and a strong national defence. With deficits running at $1 trillion a year, and in order to stay solvent, they will have at some point to cut spending, pay more taxes, or both. Last month the Senate blocked a proposal for a bipartisan commission on deficit reduction: the yeas outnumbered the nays by 53 to 46, but failed to reach a supermajority. Mr Obama is now creating a commission by executive order, but its powers are unclear. To balance the books, politicians have sometimes to do things the people themselves oppose—even in America. That will be the true test of whether the country is governable.

We are now, it seems to me, facing a real instance of that journalistic cliche: a moment of truth. And it's hard to feel optimistic.