From an article in the National section about members of Congress trying to improve their reputations:
These members of Congress, who were brought together by the group No Labels, which calls itself a bipartisan citizens' movement, have plenty of serious ideas about how to address these problems. For example, they would require Congress to work a five-day week instead of their customary three or four.
It seems to me this could be a bad idea. First of all, very few members of Congress, if any, actually work only three or four days a week. That part of the Times article is inaccurate. What does happen is that they spend three or four days a week in Washington meeting with lobbyists and with their congressional colleagues, voting, and attending hearings. They spend the other three or four days a week back in their districts attending events, raising money, and meeting with constituents. The idea that Congress would become more popular if the members spent more time in Washington hanging out with lobbyists and passing onerous laws, and less time back in the rest of the country keeping in touch with their constituents, seems questionable, at best. In fact, other proposals for reforming Congress ("Cut their pay and send them home") have focused on reducing the amount of time that lawmakers spend in Washington, making them more into part-time citizen-legislators.