I’m writing this column on Memorial Day. By the time it goes to press midweek, I will be off thinking of other things — as will most readers. Real life keeps making its demands.

But the parallel reality is that the meaning of Memorial Day is timeless; parades and ceremonies reinforce that meaning, but we must never let them take the place of 24/7 recognition of the sacrifices made by generations of Americans on our behalf. Winston Churchill said it best when describing the nation-saving role of the Royal Air Force (RAF) in repelling the relentless airborne Nazi onslaught: “Never has so much been owed by so many to so few.”

And for me, this Memorial Day weekend raised a few other thoughts about our current dilemmas in the U.S. A Sunday morning CBS interview of two U.S. congressmen, Mike Waltz (R-FL) and Pat Ryan (D-NY) — both U.S. Army veterans — highlighted their collaboration on veterans’ issues. What grabbed my attention was their evident commitment to set aside — at least for those issues — the partisan counterproductive head-knocking that infects nearly all congressional activity.

That, in turn, prompts a wild question: Why is the behavior and performance of our U.S. Congress so totally different from that of the U.S. Army units they served with — or, for that matter, a submarine crew like the one I served on 55 years ago? Is there something we can learn from our veterans that might make our Congress more effective?

With that crazy question in the air, an intriguing array of similarities — and stark differences — comes to mind. Among them:

• Both Congress and all units of the Armed Forces are agents of public service in roles of vital importance to the nation.

• In the military, leadership is key to unit performance — the chain of command is unambiguous, and accountability for the outcome, good or bad, rests directly on the leaders’ shoulders. In civilian government service, not so much. Moreover, military leaders expose themselves to the same risks as those under their command. Pinned down under enemy fire, no one — including the leader — wants to “take that hill.” But they do, often with the leader out front. That makes all the difference.

• On a ship’s crew, everyone works, no one gets a free ride, and individuals are respected for how well they do their jobs, not for what they say.

• A deployed Army unit or a submarine at sea does its work out of the public eye. By comparison, Congress is under a microscope, subject to endless kibbitzing, second-guessing, and rock-throwing. Worse, all members win their jobs via election, and the critics’ interpretations of their work have a direct bearing on their reelection prospects. That does not inspire courageous, politically incorrect behavior.

In short, in a military unit, our mission was always crystal clear: our commanding officer was in charge, and our single constituency was the nation. Not so in Congress, where 24/7 media attention and partisan political pressures rule the day.

But maybe we can learn how to bridge those differences and deploy a more focused, less political U.S. Congress. There are some bright spots, including the increasing presence of former, accomplished military leaders engaged in elected government service. It turns out that two of Representative Ryan’s West Point classmates — Republicans John James and Wesley Hunt — are also members of the 117th Congress. I’ve no doubt that all three still live by General Douglas MacArthur’s famous three-word capsule of West Point’s underlying ethic: Duty, Honor, Country.

Another encouraging sign is the rejuvenated legislative performance of Congress under the leadership of new House Speaker (or “Accidental Speaker,” as he’s called by some in the media) Mike Johnson. Building on his success in breaking through the long-stalled legislation on U.S. support for Israel, Ukraine, and Taiwan, Johnson has continued to hit stride, mothering an impressive string of significant legislative actions.

Strong leadership is not always well received. Johnson became the latest target for the fringe group of GOP congressional malcontents who tried once again to ditch a GOP-selected speaker. It’s unclear what positive result they hoped to achieve, but happily, their initiative went down in flames, garnering little support among Republicans or Democrats.

For the first time since the 2022 midterm elections, we’re seeing evidence that a nearly evenly divided House (just like the U.S. electorate) can get the job done, and we’re not hearing catcalls of criticism about the floundering, rudderless GOP-led House.

OK, it’s unrealistic to imagine Congress acting like a crack team of Army Rangers or a well-trained Navy ship’s force. But what’s not to like about a Congress that works like a team, with strong leadership, crystal-clear mission clarity, and a commitment to serving its single ultimate constituency — the American electorate?

This past Memorial Day weekend, we heard countless chronicles of selfless dedication to duty by members of our Armed Forces. Should we not expect a measure of that true patriotism from our elected officials?