tag:theconversation.com,2011:/id/topics/us-senate-12962/articlesUS Senate – The Conversation2024-03-25T12:39:00Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2256182024-03-25T12:39:00Z2024-03-25T12:39:00ZI’ve been studying congressional emails to constituents for 15 years − and found these 4 trends after scanning 185,222 of them<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/582872/original/file-20240319-26-phuyva.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=3%2C6%2C2299%2C1470&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Messages stream out from members of Congress to constituents around the country.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/illustration/washington-dc-background-royalty-free-illustration/1300184706">traffic_analyzer/DigitalVision Vectors via Getty Images</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Republicans in Congress use taxpayer-funded email messages to contact constituents more often, and perhaps more effectively, than their Democratic counterparts. </p>
<p>That’s what I’ve found over 15 years of compiling and analyzing the archive that I <a href="https://www.dcinbox.com/">call DCinbox</a>, a free and open real-time archive of every official e-newsletter sent by sitting members of Congress to their constituents. </p>
<p>To my knowledge, no other institution – not even the <a href="https://www.loc.gov/">Library of Congress</a> – digitally archives these significant historical government documents whose creation and distribution is funded by the American people. So far, my compilation includes more than 184,000 official e-newsletters, and it grows by about 30 messages each day.</p>
<p>These communications are a way for legislators to present themselves and their arguments directly to constituents, free from the oversight of a newspaper or magazine editor, and in ways that can put additional information just one hyperlink away. </p>
<p>The messages reveal fundamental differences in how each party seeks to connect with and inform their constituents: Republicans prefer visual elements and strategic timing, and Democrats prefer more text-heavy missives.</p>
<p><iframe id="w838S" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/w838S/2/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<h2>A public-minded legacy</h2>
<p>Direct ways for lawmakers to communicate with the public have a long and democratic history. When the United States was founded, members of Congress were allowed to adopt what had been a common practice in the British Parliament – using <a href="https://cha.house.gov/the-history-of-the-frank">taxpayer funds to send informational mailings</a> to constituents. This privilege, <a href="https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IF/IF10489/3">called “franking</a>,” allowed a senator or representative to sign his or her name on an envelope’s top right corner in place of a stamp. There were rules, though – the messages had to be <a href="https://ethics.house.gov/official-allowances/frank">informational, not campaign material</a> or endorsements of other politicians.</p>
<p>In recent years, this practice has evolved into <a href="https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IF/IF10489/3">sending constituents email messages</a> from House members’ and senators’ official email accounts. The rules still apply: Members of Congress who want to send campaign material or partisan political messages must do so <a href="https://cha.house.gov/communications-standards-commission">from their campaign accounts or personal accounts</a>, not email addresses ending in “@house.gov” or “@senate.gov.” </p>
<p>In 2009, I began collecting all of the official messages as a part of dissertation work, with the hopes of creating an archive for researchers to use and to answer my own questions about how legislators would “look” ideologically if all we had to go on <a href="https://www.lindseycormack.com/_files/ugd/f1b05b_258780c810564137a5c14f2a627e2a89.pdf">were the votes they decided to communicate to constituents</a>. At that time, I had to <a href="https://www.lindseycormack.com/_files/ugd/f1b05b_7c033f4587d844dd97dccdb40a33ce1c.pdf#page=27">manually enter my email address</a> into the website of every member of Congress. Now it’s easier to keep up, because I just sign up for new members’ lists after every election.</p>
<p>For years, I’ve shared various insights, analyzing <a href="https://twitter.com/DCInbox/status/677312070401056772/photo/1">word usage</a>, <a href="https://x.com/DCInbox/status/1206965493220958209?s=20">trends in geographical terms</a> and finer bits of information such as how many members of Congress talked about <a href="https://x.com/DCInbox/status/1343585291878195201?s=20">COVID-19 on a given day</a> during the pandemic. </p>
<p>From this work, I have developed a few major insights into how members of Congress use this free perk, offering a better understanding of contemporary political communication tactics. Here are four important points I’ve learned.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1343585291878195201"}"></div></p>
<h2>1. Republicans use email more – and with more strategic timing</h2>
<p>Over the past 15 years, Republicans have won <a href="https://github.com/unitedstates/congress-legislators">only slightly more seats</a> in the House and Senate than Democrats. But once in office, Republicans use this email perk far more than Democrats. </p>
<p>In every month I’ve been tracking these messages – except briefly in the middle of 2010, when Democrats held 59% of all the seats in Congress, and for nine of the 11 months at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 and early 2021 – Republicans have sent many more official e-newsletters to constituents than Democrats have.</p>
<p>Republicans also tend to be more attuned to the leisure reading habits of people. They send a greater number of their <a href="https://x.com/DCInbox/status/1246432110677823489?s=20">emails on weekends</a> when people are likely to have weekend time to take them in. Democrats are more likely to send their messages during the work week.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1246432110677823489"}"></div></p>
<h2>2. Republicans tend to stay on message</h2>
<p>Republicans in Congress are more consistent in using key terms and phrases than Democrats.</p>
<p>For example, back in 2023 Republicans were unhappy with Democratic attempts to <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2023/01/11/politics/republican-irs-funding-87000-agents/index.html">boost the IRS’ efforts</a> to reduce tax evasion. A proposal included the projection that the IRS could <a href="https://time.com/6260075/irs-87000-agents-republican-lie/">hire an additional 87,000 workers</a> over the coming decade. Republicans took to e-newsletters to oppose that move <a href="https://x.com/DCInbox/status/1584340479130234880?s=20">and specifically used that number</a> as a rallying cry.</p>
<p>And in 2022 and 2023, as <a href="https://www.npr.org/2023/05/18/1176830906/overdose-death-2022-record">fentanyl deaths gripped news headlines</a>, multiple Republicans told constituents about how the volume of fentanyl in the U.S. could “kill every single American.”</p>
<p>By contrast, Democrats are far less likely to have overlapping term usage or phrasing. That suggests they are not as focused on coordinating constituent communications as Republicans.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/582658/original/file-20240318-18-w9v0f0.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="A trio of screenshots of e-newsletters from Republican members of the House and Senate." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/582658/original/file-20240318-18-w9v0f0.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/582658/original/file-20240318-18-w9v0f0.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=192&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/582658/original/file-20240318-18-w9v0f0.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=192&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/582658/original/file-20240318-18-w9v0f0.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=192&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/582658/original/file-20240318-18-w9v0f0.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=242&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/582658/original/file-20240318-18-w9v0f0.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=242&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/582658/original/file-20240318-18-w9v0f0.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=242&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Republican e-newsletters tend to include eye-catching images up front.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Lindsey Cormack, DCinbox</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">CC BY-ND</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>3. Republicans also routinely co-opt opponents’ words</h2>
<p>GOP legislators tend to adopt phrases that originate with <a href="https://grist.org/article/whats-the-green-new-deal-the-surprising-origins-behind-a-progressive-rallying-cry/">policy oriented journalists</a>, <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/article/what-is-critical-race-theory.html">academics</a> and <a href="https://time.com/5936408/defund-the-police-definition-movement/">protesters</a> on the left into a convenient, and dismissive, shorthand. Terms like “<a href="https://x.com/DCInbox/status/1762522701233594855">Green New Deal</a>,” “<a href="https://x.com/FGawehns/status/1494700662604673027?s=20">critical race theory</a>,” “<a href="https://x.com/DCInbox/status/1529807563654586370?s=20">defund the police</a>” and “Bidenomics” are all used commonly in official Republican e-newsletters railing against Democratic policy proposals.</p>
<p>Democrats in Congress didn’t have a similar sort of concerted effort to use a Republican-originated word or phrase until 2022, when they began to use the <a href="https://x.com/DCInbox/status/1666065652489043968?s=20">term “MAGA</a>” as a way to tell constituents about parts of the Republican agenda they disagree with. And even then, only 292 e-newsletters from Democrats have used MAGA, while Republicans have sent 1,531 messages deriding the Green New Deal, 496 about critical race theory, 824 with defund the police and 330 saying Bidenomics.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/582657/original/file-20240318-26-3gd12c.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="A trio of screenshots of e-newsletters from Democratic members of the House and Senate." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/582657/original/file-20240318-26-3gd12c.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/582657/original/file-20240318-26-3gd12c.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=247&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/582657/original/file-20240318-26-3gd12c.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=247&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/582657/original/file-20240318-26-3gd12c.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=247&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/582657/original/file-20240318-26-3gd12c.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=311&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/582657/original/file-20240318-26-3gd12c.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=311&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/582657/original/file-20240318-26-3gd12c.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=311&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Democratic e-newsletters tend to be text-heavy.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Lindsey Cormack, DCinbox</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">CC BY-ND</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>4. Official e-newsletters have changed with the internet</h2>
<p>Official e-newsletters have changed over time, as trends of online communication have shifted. But here again, Republicans are ahead of Democrats.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.dcinbox.com/email/?id=225840">Republicans use more images</a> than Democrats and tend to refer constituents to <a href="https://lindsey-cormack.medium.com/the-news-congress-pushes-to-constituents-30a84e5de639">more media outlets, including those that support right-wing views</a>.</p>
<p>This official e-newsletter archive allows researchers to better understand the evolving nature of online political communications and learn about how the parties use contemporary tools to connect with their constituents. In order for the public and historians to make sense of American politics, I believe it’s important to analyze what legislators say when acting in their official capacity.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/225618/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Lindsey Cormack does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>In taxpayer-funded email messages to constituents, Republicans prefer visual elements and strategic timing, and Democrats prefer more text-heavy missives.Lindsey Cormack, Associate Professor of Political Science, Stevens Institute of TechnologyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2260502024-03-19T15:56:18Z2024-03-19T15:56:18ZPro-Israel but anti-Netanyahu: Democratic Party leaders try to find the middle ground<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/582591/original/file-20240318-24-wbahpo.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=16%2C8%2C5590%2C3724&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has come under unusual criticism from Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/israeli-prime-minister-benjamin-netanyahu-looks-on-as-the-news-photo/1719686694?adppopup=true"> Jacquelyn Martin / POOL / AFP</a></span></figcaption></figure><p><em>Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer <a href="https://apnews.com/article/schumer-netanyahu-israel-palestinians-elections-1ebf21e4c9c0f6f42478bb26e1db7a9b">said on March 14, 2024</a>, “The Netanyahu coalition no longer fits the needs of Israel.” It was an extraordinary public criticism of a longtime ally, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, by an American government official.</em> </p>
<p><em>Against the background of <a href="https://apnews.com/article/gaza-malnutrition-famine-children-dying-israel-palestinians-2f938b1a82d7822c7da67cc162da1a37">imminent famine in Gaza</a>, Schumer, the top Democrat in Congress and the <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/14/us/politics/schumer-netanyahu-israel-elections.html">highest-ranking Jewish elected official in the U.S.</a>, said Netanyahu was “an obstacle to peace” and called for new elections in Israel.</em> </p>
<p><em>Leading <a href="https://www.haaretz.com/us-news/2024-03-15/ty-article/.premium/schumer-clears-path-for-democrats-to-disavow-netanyahu-will-biden-follow/0000018e-425d-d95b-a7bf-e75fd3f40000">Democratic senators praised</a> Schumer’s speech, while <a href="https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/4532827-republicans-seethe-over-schumer-call-for-israeli-elections/">the GOP panned it</a>. <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/15/us/politics/biden-netanyahu-schumer-speech.html">President Joe Biden said it</a> was “a good speech” that raised concerns “shared not only by him but by many Americans.”</em></p>
<p><em>The Conversation’s senior politics and democracy editor, Naomi Schalit, interviewed <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=pgpEt8MAAAAJ&hl=en">scholar Dov Waxman</a> about Schumer’s speech. Waxman, an expert on both Israeli politics and the <a href="https://press.princeton.edu/books/paperback/9780691181158/trouble-in-the-tribe">American Jewish community’s relationship with Israel</a>, described the speech as a watershed moment in the U.S.-Israel relationship.</em> </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/lxKyNNx1xY8?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer gives a speech in which he calls for new elections in Israel.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p><strong><a href="https://apnews.com/article/israel-hamas-war-news-03-17-2024-ab0b75fdd8f0ab51c5e38b1870afecd8">Netanyahu’s response to Schumer</a> was, “The people of Israel will choose when they will have elections, and who they’ll elect.” What does Schumer’s speech mean for Netanyahu, both in the U.S. and in Israel?</strong></p>
<p>I don’t think most Israelis are paying much attention to what Schumer said. They’re focused on the war and especially on the current negotiations to secure a cease-fire and hostage agreement. </p>
<p>But Schumer is right that the vast majority of Israelis have <a href="https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/only-15-israelis-want-netanyahu-keep-job-after-gaza-war-poll-finds-2024-01-02/">completely lost confidence in Netanyahu</a> and his government and want him to be replaced as prime minister. Yet there isn’t majority support for immediate elections. <a href="https://en.idi.org.il/articles/52742">A plurality of Israelis want early elections to take place after the war ends</a>. At the same time, I think the positions Schumer was putting forward – particularly about the need to create a Palestinian state – are not ones that are widely shared by most Israelis. </p>
<p>Schumer’s speech matters more for American politics than for Israeli politics. It marks the <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2024/03/15/politics/schumer-israel-speech-analysis/index.html">culmination of a process</a> that’s been underway for some time, whereby the <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/03/15/schumer-biden-democrats-shift-gaza/">Democratic Party has increasingly turned against Netanyahu</a>. This is not just the progressive wing of the Democratic Party <a href="https://www.npr.org/2023/11/16/1213406754/jewish-voters-biden-israel-hamas-war">but also the moderate wing and the most pro-Israel Democrats</a>. <a href="https://www.haaretz.com/us-news/2024-03-15/ty-article/.premium/schumer-clears-path-for-democrats-to-disavow-netanyahu-will-biden-follow/0000018e-425d-d95b-a7bf-e75fd3f40000">Schumer is one of the most pro-Israel senators</a> in American history. He’s had a long relationship with Netanyahu and was considered a friend of Netanyahu. So, the break between Democrats and Netanyahu is now complete. Netanyahu has clearly become persona non grata for the Democrats.</p>
<p><strong>What was Schumer’s strategy in giving the speech?</strong></p>
<p>What Schumer, and to some extent the Biden administration, are doing is trying to position the Democratic Party as anti-Netanyahu but not anti-Israel. They want to make a distinction that it is possible and indeed necessary to take issue with Netanyahu’s policies, but that doesn’t mean that you’re not supporting Israel. </p>
<p>That’s an attempt to triangulate between the different political pressures that the Democrats are under and the political risks that Democrats now face. President Biden’s strong support for the war in Gaza has <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/19/us/politics/biden-israel-gaza-poll.html">become a domestic political liability for him</a> and for the Democratic Party as a whole. On the one hand, they need to try to win back support among progressives, <a href="https://www.npr.org/2023/11/16/1213406754/jewish-voters-biden-israel-hamas-war">younger Democrats</a> and especially among <a href="https://www.voanews.com/a/will-angry-arab-american-voters-swing-michigan-away-from-biden-/7519681.html">the Arab American voters who are outraged</a> over the Biden administration’s support for the war. But they need to do that without alienating Jewish American voters and moderate Democrats who support the war and, broadly speaking, <a href="https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2023/12/08/americans-views-of-the-israel-hamas-war/">support Israel</a>. </p>
<p>This is an attempt to find that balance without incurring major domestic political costs.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/582561/original/file-20240318-22-o4ra9x.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="A man holds a sign that reads, 'Chuck Schumer, thanks' during a protest." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/582561/original/file-20240318-22-o4ra9x.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/582561/original/file-20240318-22-o4ra9x.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/582561/original/file-20240318-22-o4ra9x.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/582561/original/file-20240318-22-o4ra9x.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/582561/original/file-20240318-22-o4ra9x.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/582561/original/file-20240318-22-o4ra9x.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/582561/original/file-20240318-22-o4ra9x.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">A man expresses his gratitude toward U.S. Sen. Chuck Schumer during a protest calling for the release of hostages and against Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his government on March 16, 2024, in Tel Aviv, Israel.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/demonstrators-holds-a-sign-that-reads-chuck-schumer-thanks-news-photo/2089768566?adppopup=true">Alexi J. Rosenfeld/Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p><strong>Schumer can say what he wants, Biden can say what he wants, and Netanyahu keeps doing what he wants. If what Schumer and Biden say doesn’t affect the behavior of the Israeli government, can it be effective domestically in the U.S.?</strong> </p>
<p><a href="https://www.timesofisrael.com/full-text-of-senator-chuck-schumers-speech-israeli-elections-are-the-only-way/">Buried in the speech</a> is a real political bombshell. Schumer said that if Netanyahu and his coalition remain in power and continue to pursue “dangerous and inflammatory policies that test existing U.S. standards for assistance,” then the U.S. will be forced to “play a more active role in shaping Israeli policy by using our leverage to change the present course.”</p>
<p>It’s not the first time that a U.S. senator or policymaker is raising the threat of <a href="https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/4453366-democrats-propose-amendment-conditioning-aid-to-israel-over-delivery-of-humanitarian-assistance-to-gaza/">potentially conditioning U.S. military aid</a>. But Schumer doing so sends a message to Israeli policymakers that mainstream, pro-Israel Democrats are now willing to consider something that was previously politically taboo, namely conditioning U.S. aid to Israel. That could induce changes in Israeli policy. </p>
<p><strong>What kind of changes?</strong></p>
<p>Specifically, the provision of humanitarian aid to Gaza, which has become a major public <a href="https://apnews.com/article/biden-netanyahu-hot-mic-gaza-885b97a75d15d15ae7f7a47d0125c918">dispute between the U.S. and Israel</a>. But whatever changes it does bring about in Israeli policy toward Gaza and the Palestinians, I don’t think it’s going to be nearly enough to satisfy the left or progressives and others who oppose the Biden administration’s policy. </p>
<p>But there’s a moderate middle, <a href="https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2021/05/11/u-s-jews-connections-with-and-attitudes-toward-israel/">particularly many American Jews</a>, who don’t want the Biden administration to stop supporting Israel but <a href="https://www.jpost.com/israel-news/article-781227">dislike Netanyahu</a> and his right-wing policies. What Schumer is saying is that the Democratic Party is the party for them, that it is a place for people who, while supporting Israel, have deep concerns about the Israeli military’s conduct in Gaza, and are frustrated with the Israeli government’s refusal to present a real plan for the day after, and its stonewalling on any prospect for a Palestinian state. </p>
<p>Schumer is expressing the sentiments of those voters, who we often don’t hear about because it’s often those on the left and the right whose voices drown out that silent majority in the middle.</p>
<p><strong>Are Schumer and Biden ahead of American public opinion or behind it?</strong></p>
<p>I think they are, as is typical of politicians, behind public opinion. The distinction between supporting Israel while criticizing its government has already been largely accepted for some time now among Jewish Americans. But it hasn’t always been reflected among politicians, who felt that when they supported Israel, they had to uncritically support the Israeli government.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/226050/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
What does it mean when a staunch supporter of Israel in Congress says he no longer supports Israel’s leadership? It’s a new kind of relationship between the longtime allies.Naomi Schalit, Senior Editor, Politics + Democracy, The Conversation USLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2259152024-03-18T17:08:04Z2024-03-18T17:08:04ZGaza conflict: Washington’s patience is wearing thin over the lack of leadership from both Israel and Palestine<p>The US senate majority leader Chuck Schumer – a Democrat and the <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/14/us/politics/schumer-netanyahu-israel-elections.html">highest-ranking Jewish official</a> in US history – has called for the removal of both Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu, and the Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, seeing both as representing the politics of the past. </p>
<p>In an incendiary intervention, Schumer – a longtime and stalwart supporter of Israel – <a href="https://www.haaretz.com/us-news/2024-03-14/ty-article/.premium/senate-majority-leader-calls-for-new-elections-in-israel/0000018e-3d65-d67c-a18e-ff6d1f4a0000">told the Senate</a> that the continuing humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza is testing US patience and that the lack of vision by both current Israeli and Palestinian leaders for the future beyond the war is also at variance with US policy.</p>
<p>Of the Israeli prime minister, he said: “Nobody expects Prime Minister Netanyahu to do the things that must be done to break the cycle of violence, to preserve his credibility on the world stage, to work to a two-state solution.” </p>
<p>Turning to Netanyahu’s counterpart in Ramallah, Schumer was equally forthright: “For there to be any hope of peace in the future, Abbas must step down and be replaced by a new generation of Palestinian leaders who will work towards attaining peace with a Jewish state.”</p>
<p>Reflecting on his fellow Democrat’s comments, US president Joe Biden said Schumer had made <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/mar/15/schumer-netanyahu-speech-biden-reaction">“a good speech”</a>, adding that: “I think he expressed a serious concern shared not only by him, but by many Americans.”</p>
<p>Schumer’s speech came at the end of a week where Israeli and Palestinian politics showed how far away they are from the kind of change that Schumer rightly says is necessary.</p>
<p>Shifting factional politics has made Netanyahu’s position more secure. On March 12, Gideon Saar – a key powerbroker in the ruling coalition and an ally of Netanyahu’s biggest rival Benny Gantz – announced he was <a href="https://www.timesofisrael.com/a-statesmanlike-right-why-gideon-saar-has-decamped-gantzs-national-unity-party/">pulling out of his alliance with Gantz</a> and demanded that Netanyahu appoint him to the war cabinet. This has weakened Gantz while strengthening Netanyahu’s position. </p>
<p>The last opinion poll taken before Saar’s announcement showed Gantz with a <a href="https://www.timesofisrael.com/poll-finds-44-of-israelis-prefer-trump-over-biden-as-next-us-president/">12-point lead over Netanyahu</a> and the opposition winning 74 seats out of the 120 Knesset seat if there were an election. But, with Saar’s change of allegiance, an election that could bring about the change that Schumer wants to see now appears further away.</p>
<p>Meanwhile, in Ramallah, the Palestinian president called on Muhammad Mustafa, a close associate, <a href="https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2024-03-14/ty-article/.premium/pa-president-abbas-to-ask-mohammad-mustafa-to-form-new-palestinian-government/0000018e-3cac-d30d-a7de-7cbf89b70000">to be prime minister</a> after the resignation of Mohammad Shtayyeh in February. </p>
<p>Washington had expressed the hope that Abbas would reach outside his circle and appoint a fresh face, maybe choosing a candidate from the next generation that could project the hope of a revitalised Palestinian Authority (PA). While Mustafa is two decades younger than Abbas, at 69 he hardly qualifies as someone who can relate to a Palestinian population with a median age is <a href="https://www.usnews.com/news/best-countries/articles/2023-11-14/population-religion-and-poverty-the-demographics-of-israel-and-gaza#">21.9 years</a>.</p>
<p>Schumer’s frustration with the regional politics reflects a long-held view in Washington. Many US presidents have found Benjamin Netanyahu difficult to deal with, going back to Bill Clinton in the 1990s. Even Donald Trump had problems with Netanyahu, as the then US president’s <a href="https://arabcenterdc.org/resource/deal-of-the-century-what-is-it-and-why-now/">“deal of the century”</a> provided for a Palestinian state – small and weak though it would have been.</p>
<h2>Testing US support</h2>
<p>The Biden administration had thought that its solidarity with Israel after the October 7 atrocities would at least give it some influence over Israel’s response. </p>
<p>It has provided significant financial and human resources to Israel over the past five months. It has been resupplying much-needed military equipment while providing a diplomatic safety net through its veto at the UN security council. </p>
<p>This has been backed by the assiduous efforts of US secretary of state, Antony Blinken, to achieve a ceasefire and the return of the Israeli hostages. But Washington has watched in horror as its ally flattened Gaza and exacted a terrible civilian death toll.</p>
<p>Schumer is right when he says that Netanyahu’s alliance with Israel’s far-right is driving the country towards pariah status. The Gaza tragedy is accompanied by a <a href="https://arabcenterdc.org/resource/the-occupied-west-bank-since-october-7-movement-restrictions-and-collective-punishment/">vicious conflict in the occupied West Bank</a>, which has seen a rising number of Palestinian civilian deaths as a result of both IDF action and settler violence. All of this is aimed at undermining any moves towards reconciliation between Israelis and Palestinians and a two-state solution.</p>
<p>Abbas succeeded Yasser Arafat as the president of the PA on Arafat’s death in 2004. He won the election in 2005 but has not held elections since. His administration lacks legitimacy and is widely seen as corrupt. </p>
<p>The combination of inefficiency and corruption of the PA and the continuing inhumanities of more than five decades of Israeli occupation alienates many Palestinians from any idea of peaceful coexistence with Israel and increases the attractiveness of extremist views. Schumer is right that there are extremists on both sides who want the destruction of the other,</p>
<p>But the US administration and leaders like Schumer are unable to change the politics of either Israel or Palestine, all they can do is call for new leaders. </p>
<p>Indeed, some might argue that all this noise about replacing leaders of other countries not only smacks of colonialism but could have the opposite effect. Netanyahu and Abbas – who are both beleaguered at home – might find it useful to have a foreign adversary as a foil to shore up domestic support. Both will pose as defenders of the nation. </p>
<p>With conflict resolution, the challenge is to bring together leaders who are often deeply flawed and who advance reprehensible policies. If they weren’t so flawed and unable to see the other side’s point there would not be a conflict. Schumer has shone a light on the extremist politics in both Israel and Palestine. The political developments in both countries this week make the vision of a peaceful future look more difficult. </p>
<p>And that’s why the US and the international community need to rise to the challenge. Less rhetoric and more practical peacebuilding would be a good start.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/225915/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>John Strawson does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>But there is little sign that either side is listening.John Strawson, Emeritus Professor of Law, University of East LondonLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2247182024-03-04T18:49:30Z2024-03-04T18:49:30ZThe Constitution sets some limits on the people’s choices for president - but the Supreme Court rules it’s unconstitutional for state governments to decide on Trump’s qualifications<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/579002/original/file-20240229-24-47x21c.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=174%2C174%2C2495%2C1526&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">A 1935 painting depicts the 1787 meeting that adopted the U.S. Constitution.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:%27The_Adoption_of_the_U.S._Constitution_in_Congress_at_Independence_Hall,_Philadelphia,_Sept._17,_1787%27_(1935),_by_John_H._Froehlich.jpg">John H. Froehlich via Wikimedia Commons</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>When the Supreme Court ruled on March 4, 2024, that former President Donald Trump <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-719_19m2.pdf">could appear on state presidential ballots</a> for the 2024 election, it did not address an idea that seemed simple and compelling when Justice Brett Kavanaugh raised it during the Feb. 8, 2024, oral arguments in the case:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>“<a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2023/23-719_5he6.pdf">What about the idea that we should think about democracy</a>, think about the right of the people to elect candidates of their choice, of letting the people decide?”</p>
</blockquote>
<p>In essence, he was asking whether it would be better to let the people, rather than a court or a state official, decide whether a controversial candidate should return to the White House.</p>
<p>Kavanaugh had a point. Under the Constitution, the people can be – and are – trusted to make a great many important decisions.</p>
<p>But Kavanaugh also missed a key point that I learned in years of <a href="https://my.wlu.edu/directory/profile?ID=x1345">teaching about the presidency, the Constitution and impeachment</a>. Right from the very beginning of the nation, and persisting until today, there have been rules that limit the ability of the people to choose their leaders.</p>
<h2>The Constitutional Convention of 1787</h2>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/579003/original/file-20240229-18-i9mxdb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="A man in formal 18th century dress." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/579003/original/file-20240229-18-i9mxdb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/579003/original/file-20240229-18-i9mxdb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=767&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/579003/original/file-20240229-18-i9mxdb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=767&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/579003/original/file-20240229-18-i9mxdb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=767&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/579003/original/file-20240229-18-i9mxdb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=964&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/579003/original/file-20240229-18-i9mxdb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=964&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/579003/original/file-20240229-18-i9mxdb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=964&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Gouverneur Morris.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Portrait_of_Gouverneur_Morris_(1752-1816),_1817.jpg">Ezra Ames via Wikimedia Commons</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The drafters of the Constitution already had the discussion Kavanaugh was trying to start during the oral arguments.</p>
<p>In July 1787, the delegates to the Constitutional Convention, where the Constitution was written, were discussing impeachment. Gouverneur Morris – a Pennsylvania delegate who <a href="https://www.neh.gov/article/confessions-gouverneur-morris">wrote the preamble to the Constitution</a>, including its opening phrase, “<a href="https://constitutioncenter.org/the-constitution/preamble">We the People of the United States</a>” – made an argument Kavanaugh’s question would echo 237 years later.</p>
<p>When discussing <a href="https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/inside-founding-fathers-debate-over-what-constituted-impeachable-offense-180965083/">whether it should be possible for Congress to remove the president</a>, Morris said no.</p>
<p>The people could decide for themselves, he said. Making the president subject to impeachment, Morris said, “<a href="https://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/a1_2_5s7.html">will hold him in such dependence</a> that he will be no check on the Legislature, (nor) a firm guardian of the people and of the public interest.” With regular national elections, Morris said, a flawed chief executive could be removed from office by the voters. Morris added, “<a href="https://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/a1_2_5s7.html">In case he should be reelected</a>, that will be sufficient proof of his innocence.”</p>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/579005/original/file-20240229-16-zek6xd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="A man in formal 18th century dress." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/579005/original/file-20240229-16-zek6xd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/579005/original/file-20240229-16-zek6xd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=699&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/579005/original/file-20240229-16-zek6xd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=699&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/579005/original/file-20240229-16-zek6xd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=699&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/579005/original/file-20240229-16-zek6xd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=879&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/579005/original/file-20240229-16-zek6xd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=879&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/579005/original/file-20240229-16-zek6xd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=879&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">George Mason.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:George_Mason.jpg">Dominic W. Boudet after John Hesselius via Wikimedia Commons</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>But George Mason, a Virginia delegate and slaveholder who <a href="https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/george-mason-forgotten-founder-he-conceived-the-bill-of-rights-64408583/">championed the idea for the Bill of Rights</a>, was ready with a response. Pointing out that true and fair elections were key to the new nation’s success, Mason noted that if criminal conduct by some future president involved corruption of the election process, the people might have trouble deciding the culprit’s fate in a subsequent election:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>“<a href="https://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/a1_2_5s7.html">Shall any man be above Justice?</a> Above all shall that man be above it, who can commit the most extensive injustice? … Shall the man who has practised corruption and by that means procured his appointment in the first instance, be suffered to escape punishment, by repeating his guilt?”</p>
</blockquote>
<p><a href="https://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/a1_2_5s7.html">Others chimed in with similar replies</a>: Benjamin Franklin of Pennsylvania; James Madison of Virginia, a future president; Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts, a future vice president; and Edmund Randolph of Virginia, a future U.S. attorney general and secretary of state.</p>
<p>The records of the Constitutional Convention say this at the conclusion of that section of debate: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>“Mr. Gouverneur Morris’s opinion had been changed by the arguments used in the discussion. … Our Executive was not like a Magistrate having a life interest, much less like one having an hereditary interest in his office. He may be bribed by a greater interest to betray his trust … The Executive ought therefore to be impeachable for treachery; Corrupting his electors, and incapacity.” </p>
</blockquote>
<p>The outcome of that discussion resulted in the first of several rules that prevent the American people from choosing just anyone as the president.</p>
<h2>Key restrictions</h2>
<p><a href="https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/article-1/#article-1-section-3-clause-6">Section 3 of Article 1 of the Constitution</a> is the most direct result of the debate between Morris and Mason. It says that people, including the president, who are impeached and convicted can be barred from office.</p>
<p><a href="https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/article-2/#article-2-section-1-clause-5">Section 1 of Article 2 of the Constitution</a> imposes more limits. It declares that some people <a href="https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/article-2/#article-2-section-1-clause-5">simply can’t be president</a> – those not born U.S. citizens, those under age 35 and those who have lived less than 14 years of their lives in the U.S.</p>
<p>Eight decades later, Congress and the states agreed to add a new restriction: <a href="https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/amendment-14/#amendment-14-section-3">Section 3 of the 14th Amendment</a>, ratified in 1868, says those seeking to hold federal and state offices who have previously taken an oath to support the Constitution <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-14th-amendment-bars-trump-from-office-a-constitutional-law-scholar-explains-principle-behind-colorado-supreme-court-ruling-219763">may not have attemped to subvert or overthrow the Constitution</a>.</p>
<p>And in 1951, the <a href="https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/amendment-22/">22nd Amendment to the Constitution</a> was ratified, declaring that nobody who had been president for two terms could become president again.</p>
<p>All of these rules stand in the way of simply “letting the people decide,” as Kavanaugh suggested. Strictly speaking, those rules are not democratic. But they are intended to protect democracy itself.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/579006/original/file-20240229-18-uxjqr6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="A large room with chairs and desks." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/579006/original/file-20240229-18-uxjqr6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/579006/original/file-20240229-18-uxjqr6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=233&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/579006/original/file-20240229-18-uxjqr6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=233&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/579006/original/file-20240229-18-uxjqr6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=233&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/579006/original/file-20240229-18-uxjqr6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=293&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/579006/original/file-20240229-18-uxjqr6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=293&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/579006/original/file-20240229-18-uxjqr6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=293&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The U.S. Senate is one of the less democratic elements of the federal government.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:United_States_Senate_Floor.jpg">U.S. Senate via Wikimedia Commons</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Democracy isn’t always democratic</h2>
<p>There are plenty of provisions in the Constitution that run counter to simple democracy. </p>
<p>The Senate and the Electoral College give <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-does-the-electoral-college-exist-and-how-does-it-work-5-essential-reads-149502">extra power to states with relatively small populations</a>.</p>
<p>No Congress – even one whose members were each elected by huge majorities – can pass a law abridging freedom of religion or freedom of speech. If a Congress were to pass such a law, the Supreme Court, which has been called <a href="https://www.thirteen.org/wnet/supremecourt/democracy/history.html">the nation’s least democratic branch</a>, could declare it unconstitutional.</p>
<p>Democratic majorities in America are both empowered and constrained by the Constitution. The founders wanted the will of the people to be heard and respected but never given absolute power. Absolute power of any kind was to be checked by a complicated set of prohibitions and procedures.</p>
<p>Kavanaugh was wise to call attention to the fact that in a democracy, the preferences of the people get a high level of deference. Voters certainly can <a href="https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/07/21/little-change-in-americans-views-of-trump-over-the-past-year/">judge the conduct and character of Donald Trump</a> – and many have done so, both favorably and unfavorably.</p>
<p>But George Mason was also right. When politicians corrupt the electoral process, or try to do so, it makes little sense to use elections as the mechanism to fix the problem. </p>
<p>The constitutional provisions for impeachment and the 14th Amendment make clear that people who are found guilty of serious wrongdoing while in office, or violate an oath to support the Constitution, are ineligible to hold high office thereafter. In short, the people can’t choose a Senate-convicted official or an oath-breaking insurrectionist, even if they want to. </p>
<p>America’s Constitution has long acknowledged that the preservation of the republic may, in some cases, require the disqualification of candidates and officeholders who commit crimes while in positions of power or participate in insurrection against the very government they have sworn to serve. </p>
<p>The Supreme Court has sidestepped the question of whether Trump’s actions disqualify him from office and declared instead that Congress must make that determination, under the various constitutional restrictions that continue to exist about who is allowed to serve as president. The practical effect of its decision will be to let the people decide this vital question in the coming presidential election.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/224718/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Robert A. Strong does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Right from the very beginning of the nation, there have been rules that limit the ability of the people to choose their leaders.Robert A. Strong, Emeritus Professor of Politics, Washington and Lee University; Senior Fellow, Miller Center, University of VirginiaLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2236822024-02-15T18:10:44Z2024-02-15T18:10:44ZUkraine recap: prospect of renewed US funding a boost for beleaguered Zelensky<p>It’s appropriate, a fortnight out from the second anniversary of the full-scale Russian invasion, to look back and see what the mood was this time last year as we marked the end of the first year of all-out war in Ukraine. We had just published a piece by two security analysts from the Paris-based research university Sciences Po, who had outlined <a href="https://theconversation.com/a-year-on-russias-war-against-ukraine-could-go-in-three-different-directions-199556">three possible scenarios</a> for the 12 months ahead. </p>
<p>The first two options were major military setbacks for Russia or Ukraine, with major losses of troops and territory. The third was almost uncannily prescient, envisaging – as it did:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>a drawn-out conflict leading to exhaustion and war weariness – not only in Russia and Ukraine, but also among those Kyiv is depending on for the military supplies that are keeping the country afloat.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Which, broadly speaking, fairly neatly sums up the current state of the war in February 2024. Ukraine’s much-anticipated spring 2023 counteroffensive got under way later than had been hoped and when it did, Ukrainian troops found themselves facing extensive and well thought-out Russian defensive lines. Months of bitter, attritional fighting resulted in few Ukrainian gains at a significant cost in terms of both manpower and precious materiel. </p>
<p>Worse, Ukraine’s forces found themselves being pushed back in various areas along the frontline and, in others, caught up in desperate and bloody defensive efforts around towns and cities long since reduced to rubble. The town of Avdiivka, in the eastern Donetsk Oblast with a pre-war population of more than 32,000 people, now looks set to join placenames such as Bakhmut and Soledar as costly and morale-sapping defeats.</p>
<p>In an attempt to change the momentum, which in recent months has been with Russia, Ukraine’s president Volodymyr Zelensky last week replaced his commander-in-chief Valeriy Zaluzhnyi with Gen Oleksandr Syrskyi – who masterminded the defence of Kyiv in May 2022 and the successful counter-offensive in late summer which saw Ukraine recapture significant territory.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/575994/original/file-20240215-24-epce1z.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="ISW map showing the battle lines around Avdiivka and Donetsk in eastern Ukraine, February 2024." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/575994/original/file-20240215-24-epce1z.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/575994/original/file-20240215-24-epce1z.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=916&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/575994/original/file-20240215-24-epce1z.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=916&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/575994/original/file-20240215-24-epce1z.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=916&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/575994/original/file-20240215-24-epce1z.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1151&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/575994/original/file-20240215-24-epce1z.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1151&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/575994/original/file-20240215-24-epce1z.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1151&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The battle for Avdiivka and Donetsk, February 2024.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Institute for the Study of War</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>But, as Stefan Wolff and Tetyana Malyarenko <a href="https://theconversation.com/ukraine-war-kyiv-needs-a-fundamental-rethink-of-its-strategy-not-just-a-reshuffle-of-military-leadership-223236">point out</a>, Syrskyi is also associated with the defence of Bakhmut, a battle that consumed so many lives on either side. Wolff, an expert in international security from the University of Birmingham, and Malyarenko of the University of Odesa, are concerned that there are as yet few signs of any fresh strategic thinking from Ukraine’s military planners which might begin to turn things around. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/ukraine-war-kyiv-needs-a-fundamental-rethink-of-its-strategy-not-just-a-reshuffle-of-military-leadership-223236">Ukraine war: Kyiv needs a fundamental rethink of its strategy, not just a reshuffle of military leadership</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>They also point to the fact that Ukraine’s remarkable battlefield successes in 2022 came when western support for Ukraine was in full swing. But fresh supplies of weapons and ammunition from the EU and the US began to dry up in 2023, seriously hamstringing the Ukraine army’s ability to gain the initiative on the battlefield.</p>
<hr>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="Ukraine Recap weekly email newsletter" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/449743/original/file-20220303-4351-1xhaozt.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/449743/original/file-20220303-4351-1xhaozt.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/449743/original/file-20220303-4351-1xhaozt.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/449743/original/file-20220303-4351-1xhaozt.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/449743/original/file-20220303-4351-1xhaozt.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/449743/original/file-20220303-4351-1xhaozt.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/449743/original/file-20220303-4351-1xhaozt.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p><em>Since Vladimir Putin sent his war machine into Ukraine on February 24 2022, The Conversation has called upon some of the leading experts in international security, geopolitics and military tactics to help our readers <a href="https://theconversation.com/uk/topics/ukraine-12-months-at-war-134215?utm_source=TCUK&utm_medium=linkback&utm_campaign=Ukraine12Months">understand the big issues</a>. You can also <a href="https://theconversation.com/uk/newsletters/ukraine-recap-114?utm_source=TCUK&utm_medium=linkback&utm_campaign=Ukraine12Months">subscribe to our fortnightly recap</a> of expert analysis of the conflict in Ukraine.</em></p>
<hr>
<p>In both cases there was an identifiable rogue element: in the case of the EU it was Hungarian president, Viktor Orbán, who vetoed EU military aid to Ukraine for some months, only relenting in Janaury under intense pressure from other EU heads of government. In the US, it was Donald Trump. Trump, who famously said he could bring an end to the war “in a day”, has strongly opposed giving more aid to Ukraine and for months has bullied his wing of the Republican party into obstructing Joe Biden’s US$95 billion (£75 billion) aid package in the US Senate.</p>
<p>After months of bitter debate the bill finally passed the senate this week. But, as Dafydd Townley, an expert in US politics from the University of Portsmouth, <a href="https://theconversation.com/us-senate-passes-us-95-billion-aid-package-for-ukraine-what-this-tells-us-about-republican-support-for-trump-223502">writes here</a>, there is no guarantee that the bill will even be brought before the House of Representatives, let alone receive the House’s approval, given the GOP’s majority there.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/us-senate-passes-us-95-billion-aid-package-for-ukraine-what-this-tells-us-about-republican-support-for-trump-223502">US Senate passes US$95 billion aid package for Ukraine – what this tells us about Republican support for Trump</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Incidentally, it’s worth looking at what surveys of the American public say about whether their government should support Ukraine and, if so, in what way. Paul Whiteley, a professor in the department of government at the University of Essex, <a href="https://theconversation.com/ukraine-war-what-the-us-public-thinks-about-giving-military-and-other-aid-223064">found that</a> support for Ukraine tended to divide down party lines, with Democrats tending to think the US should continue – or do more – to support Ukraine, while by contrast many Republicans thought the US had already spent too much on aid. </p>
<p>A fair few independent voters felt the same way, which probably helps explain Republican obduracy over supplying more arms and ammunition, despite the fact – as has been regularly pointed out – that much of the $60 billion-plus provided for by Biden’s latest bill will never leave the US and will go straight to buy American arms. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/ukraine-war-what-the-us-public-thinks-about-giving-military-and-other-aid-223064">Ukraine war: what the US public thinks about giving military and other aid</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Friends and enemies</h2>
<p>You may well remember when Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin met in Helsinki in 2018 in the wake of allegations that Russia had interfered in the 2016 election that had sent Trump to the White House. The then US president raised eyebrows (and a few hackles in the US intelligence community) when he said he believed Putin’s assertion that Russia had done nothing to mess with US democracy, seemingly content to take the Russian leader’s word over his own intelligence agencies.</p>
<p>One of Trump’s greatest allies in the media, former Fox News host Tucker Carlson, sat down with Putin for a two-hour interview last week. Inderjeet Parmar, an expert in US politics at City, University of London, watched the interview and <a href="https://theconversation.com/tucker-carlsons-putin-interview-gave-russian-leader-a-platform-to-boost-his-own-cause-and-that-of-donald-trump-223108">gives us his verdict</a>. </p>
<p>Given Carlson’s core audience, it was a chance for the Russian president to speak directly to the Make America Great Again (Maga) constituency and he took the opportunity – with a fair bit of help from Carlson – to repeat Kremlin talking points (namely: if America stops sending weapons to Ukraine the war will be over in no time), while picking holes in the Biden administration’s performance.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/tucker-carlsons-putin-interview-gave-russian-leader-a-platform-to-boost-his-own-cause-and-that-of-donald-trump-223108">Tucker Carlson's Putin interview gave Russian leader a platform to boost his own cause – and that of Donald Trump</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Putin began the interview with a half-hour primer on Russian history designed to back his oft-repeated assertion that Ukraine has always been part of Russia and that the two countries have a shared history going back to the 8th century. He followed this a few days later by placing sanctions on a group of UK historians – “so-called academics” who “make a significant contribution to the subversive work of London against Russia”.</p>
<p>Nick Mayhew, an expert in Russian history and culture, is familiar with the foundational myths that Putin is so fond of and says it’s “so spurious that it requires the silencing of credible historians”. Much of the story comes from a 12th-century chronicle which, among other things, attempts to trace the origins of the Slavic people back to Noah’s Ark. He <a href="https://theconversation.com/vladimir-putins-history-war-where-truth-is-the-first-casualty-223365">concludes</a>: “Putin’s early history of Ukraine is part of a Russian imperialist story that has been told for centuries. Only it is exactly that, a story.”</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/vladimir-putins-history-war-where-truth-is-the-first-casualty-223365">Vladimir Putin's history war where truth is the first casualty</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Incidentally, Putin’s origin story includes Belarus as a land that was also part of early Russia. And there’s little doubt that the Kremlin has a large amount of influence over the government there with Belarus president Alexander Lukashenko counted among his closest allies and most faithful supporters.</p>
<p>The same can’t be said for the Belarus people, who are by and large fairly sick of Lukashenko and dead set against joining the war on Moscow’s side. Natasha Lindstaedt, an expert on post-Soviet eastern Europe at the University of Essex, says 97% of Belarusians are opposed to deploying their country’s troops in Ukraine and the vast majority wouldn’t blame a soldier who refused to fight on Russia’s side.</p>
<p>As she <a href="https://theconversation.com/ukraine-war-why-propaganda-doesnt-work-as-well-in-belarus-as-it-does-in-russia-222038">notes here</a>, despite Russia’s iron grip on their country’s economy and the Kremlin’s influence over their government, the people of Belarus are not inclined to believe Russian propaganda about the war. In fact, she writes, they tend to disbelieve pretty much everything their own government says.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/ukraine-war-why-propaganda-doesnt-work-as-well-in-belarus-as-it-does-in-russia-222038">Ukraine war: why propaganda doesn't work as well in Belarus as it does in Russia</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>It’s unavoidable though, in the intense battle for hearts and minds, that some in Ukraine have opted to side with Russia for one reason or another. Ronald Niezen of the University of San Diego says that in areas occupied by Russia and now retaken by Ukraine, <a href="https://theconversation.com/enemy-collaboration-in-occupied-ukraine-evokes-painful-memories-in-europe-and-the-response-risks-a-rush-to-vigilante-justice-212416">the search is on for collaborators</a>. He says more than 7,000 criminal cases have been opened accusing Ukrainians of giving aid to the enemy. </p>
<p>Some, he writes, are fairly clear-cut instances of Ukainians providing the invaders with information about Ukrainian targets or those among their neighbours who might become partisans and fight behind the lines. Others are less so: people who continued to do their jobs after their town was occupied: local government officials, garbage collectors and the like. </p>
<p>Niezen, who writes that his own father died leaving his family with doubts about his conduct in occupied Netherlands during the second world war, cautions against the same outbreaks of vigilante violence that broke out in many countries once the Nazi occupiers were driven out.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/enemy-collaboration-in-occupied-ukraine-evokes-painful-memories-in-europe-and-the-response-risks-a-rush-to-vigilante-justice-212416">Enemy collaboration in occupied Ukraine evokes painful memories in Europe – and the response risks a rush to vigilante justice</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p><em>Ukraine Recap is available as a fortnightly email newsletter. <a href="https://theconversation.com/uk/newsletters/ukraine-recap-114?utm_source=TCUK&utm_medium=linkback&utm_campaign=UK+Newsletter+Ukraine+Recap+2022+Mar&utm_content=WeeklyRecapBottom">Click here to get our recaps directly in your inbox.</a></em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/223682/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
A selection of our coverage of the conflict from the past fortnight.Jonathan Este, Senior International Affairs Editor, Associate EditorLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2235022024-02-15T12:56:12Z2024-02-15T12:56:12ZUS Senate passes US$95 billion aid package for Ukraine – what this tells us about Republican support for Trump<p>After months of wrangling, the US Senate has finally <a href="https://edition.cnn.com/2024/02/12/politics/senate-foreign-aid-bill-ukraine/index.html">passed</a> Joe Biden’s US$95 billion (£75 billion) foreign aid package. Ukraine is the destination for almost two-thirds of the aid, with US$14 billion set aside to assist Israel’s war against Hamas, and US$10 billion destined for humanitarian aid in conflict areas, such as Gaza.</p>
<p>The bill passed the Senate by 70 votes to 29, with 22 Republicans joining the Democrat majority. But two Democrats and Bernie Sanders, the independent senator for Vermont, voted against the bill because of its support of Israel.</p>
<p>The split in the Senate illustrates the divisions among both parties on the subject.</p>
<p>Republican senators originally <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/feb/07/us-senate-vote-bipartisan-border-bill">voted against</a> a much larger bill (US$118 billion). They demanded that any foreign aid package must be dependent on increased funding for security on the US southern border with Mexico, and declared the proposed bill was insufficient to address concerns there.</p>
<p>But when former president Donald Trump <a href="https://www.politico.com/news/2024/01/27/trump-mike-johnson-border-00138223">came out against the bill</a>, even with the financial support for border control measures, Republicans were divided. Trump called the bill a “horrible, open borders betrayal of America,” and vowed that he would “fight it all the way”.</p>
<p>Republican support for the bill was led by Senate minority leader, Mitch McConnell. McConnell has always been supportive of Ukraine, claiming it is in the US interest to support Ukraine. After passing the bill, <a href="https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2024/feb/11/mitch-mcconnell-fires-back-gop-critics-ukraine-aid/">McConnell argued:</a> “We equip our friends to face our shared adversaries so we’re less likely to have to spend American lives to defeat them.”</p>
<p>McConnell’s advocacy was enough to get the bill through the Senate, although his position as leader has been severely weakened by the number of GOP senators who defied him on the aid package.</p>
<p>McConnell’s support for Ukraine puts him in direct opposition to Trump. Last year, <a href="https://www.wsj.com/video/watch-trump-says-as-president-hed-settle-ukraine-war-within-24-hours/0BCA9F18-D3BF-43DA-9220-C13587EAEDF2">Trump said</a> he could end the war in Ukraine in just one day if he was reelected, indicating he would push the US towards a more isolationist position.</p>
<p>The former president doubled down on this with a statement at a rally in South Carolina on February 11, where <a href="https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/republicans-gop-trump-nato-remarks-b2494597.html">he declared</a> he would refuse to support Nato members who failed to pay their way, and that he would encourage invading nations “to do whatever the hell they want”.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/jGP1hJJNstI?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>This is not a new position for Trump, who has regularly <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/14/us/politics/nato-president-trump.html">talked about</a> pulling US support for Nato. But, as with his position on the Ukraine aid package, not all Republicans support his views. </p>
<p>Senator Josh Hawley, a staunch supporter of the former president, said that Trump was right to criticise those nations that did not pay 2% of their GDP towards the upkeep of Nato. But <a href="https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/republicans-gop-trump-nato-remarks-b2494597.html">he added</a> that the US should live up to its commitments and that if Russia “invaded a Nato country, we’d have to defend them”.</p>
<p>Unsurprisingly, Utah’s Republican Senator Mitt Romney, a long-time Trump critic, <a href="https://www.romney.senate.gov/romney-if-your-position-is-being-cheered-by-vladimir-putin-its-time-to-reconsider-your-position/">said</a> on the Senate floor: “If we fail to help Ukraine, we will abandon our word and our commitment, proving to our friends a view that America cannot be trusted.”</p>
<p>It is too early to know whether – and to what extent – Trump is losing the support of some of the Republican party. But there definitely appears to be a division along foreign policy between the former president and some Senate Republicans. </p>
<p>What is clear is that the majority of those opposed to abandoning Ukraine – and who supported the bill through the Senate – are made up primarily of national security hawks and former veterans.</p>
<h2>Now for the House</h2>
<p>Even though the bill has passed the Democrat-controlled Senate, it will have an extremely tough time in getting through the GOP-controlled House of Representatives. McConnell has already reached out to the House speaker, Mike Johnson, to ensure that it will get a fair hearing, but there are questions about whether the bill will even reach the floor. </p>
<p>In an <a href="https://www.politico.com/news/2024/02/13/mcconnell-johnson-ukraine-aid-senate-00141201">interview</a> with US politics website Politico, McConnell asked Johnson to “allow the House to work its will on the issue of Ukraine aid”.</p>
<p>House Republicans have <a href="https://www.ft.com/content/bd3b8f97-cb00-4723-866e-8c94900680c3">called</a> the bill a “waste of time” and “dead on arrival” in the lower chamber. House support for the war in the Ukraine has fallen, especially as Republicans have begun to <a href="https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2024/02/07/house-oversight-republican-letter-ukraine-aid-border/72497628007/">scrutinise</a> the details of US assistance to Kyiv.</p>
<p>Johnson has declared that the bill will not even get a reading without sufficient provisions for security on the US southern border. “National security begins with border security,” <a href="https://thehill.com/homenews/house/4466433-discharge-petition-ukraine-aid/">he said</a>. “We have said that all along. That has been my comment since late October, it is my comment today.”</p>
<p>Johnson’s refusal to get the bill on the floor of the House is understandable. House Republicans that oppose the bill believe that if it does get a reading then there is enough of a majority among moderates in both parties for it to pass. Republican representative Andy Biggs, a member of the Trump-supporting <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_Caucus">Freedom Caucus</a>, <a href="https://x.com/AnthonyAdragna/status/1757415224875929742?s=20">told</a> one talk radio host: “If it were to get to the floor, it would pass.” </p>
<p>This is a not a sign that Trump’s influence on House Republicans is dwindling. But it shows there is still just enough bipartisan support for Ukraine for bills such as this to pass Congress.</p>
<p>Johnson is now at the centre of what will be a parliamentary issue. If he refuses to allow the bill to be read, then it may make it onto the floor through a <a href="https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R45920">“discharge petition”</a> brought about by a bipartisan majority. </p>
<p>This is a mechanism by which matters can be brought before the House without the sponsorship of the majority leadership. It would undermine Johnson’s position as leader of the House and deeply divide the Republicans in an election year.</p>
<p>The Senate passing the bill is a small victory for the pro-Ukraine lobby – but there could be many twists and turns before it gets voted on in the House, if it does at all.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/223502/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Dafydd Townley does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>There’s no guarantee that the bill will even make it onto the floor of the US House of Representatives.Dafydd Townley, Teaching Fellow in International Security, University of PortsmouthLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2230722024-02-13T13:21:23Z2024-02-13T13:21:23ZImmigration reform has always been tough, and rarely happens in election years - 4 things to know<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/575094/original/file-20240212-24-rrmn75.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Migrants cross the border from Mexico into Texas on Feb. 6, 2024. </span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/migrants-cross-the-border-to-usa-through-gate-36-and-to-be-news-photo/1983631787?adppopup=true">Christian Torres/Anadolu via Getty Images</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Immigration is already a major polarizing issue in the 2024 U.S. presidential election. Arrests for <a href="https://apnews.com/article/immigration-border-crossings-mexico-biden-18ac91ef502e0c5433f74de6cc629b32">illegal border crossings</a> from Mexico reached an all-time high in December 2023, and cities like New York and Chicago are struggling to provide housing and basic services for tens of thousands of <a href="https://www.texastribune.org/2024/01/04/texas-migrants-new-york-bus-companies-lawsuit/#:%7E:text=As%20of%20Dec.,33%2C600%20migrants%20to%20New%20York.">migrants arriving from Texas</a>. </p>
<p>In early February 2024, a group of senators <a href="https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-senate-unveils-118-billion-bipartisan-bill-tighten-border-security-aid-2024-02-04/">proposed new immigration legislation</a> that would have slowed the migrant influx at the border. The bill would have made it harder for migrants to both apply for and receive asylum, which is the legal right to stay in the U.S. because of fear of persecution if they return back home. <a href="https://apnews.com/article/congress-border-deal-rejected-lankford-immigration-045fdf42d42b26270ee1f5f73e8bc1b0">But the bill</a>, like others proposed in recent years, quickly faltered after Republicans opposed it. </p>
<p>This is far from the first time that Democrats and Republicans have failed to pass legislation that was intended to improve the country’s immigration system. </p>
<p>I am a <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=Y1qVRfUAAAAJ&hl=en">scholar of immigration and refugee policy</a>. Here are four key reasons why meaningful immigration policy change has been so difficult to achieve – and why it remains a pipe dream:</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/575096/original/file-20240212-20-e4zl2t.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="People wearing dark clothing and jackets reach for and hold bags of bread." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/575096/original/file-20240212-20-e4zl2t.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/575096/original/file-20240212-20-e4zl2t.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/575096/original/file-20240212-20-e4zl2t.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/575096/original/file-20240212-20-e4zl2t.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/575096/original/file-20240212-20-e4zl2t.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/575096/original/file-20240212-20-e4zl2t.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/575096/original/file-20240212-20-e4zl2t.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Newly arrived migrants receive a meal from a church in Manhattan on Jan. 24, 2024. According to New York Mayor Eric Adams’ administration, 172,400 migrants have arrived in the city since the spring of 2022.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/people-mostly-newly-arrived-migrants-receive-an-afternoon-news-photo/1958071905?adppopup=true">Spencer Platt/Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>1. Immigration reform has always been hard</h2>
<p>The U.S. has faced major roadblocks every time it has tried to achieve immigration reform. </p>
<p>For decades after World War II, presidents, lawmakers and activists tried and failed to revamp the nation’s immigration system to remove <a href="https://www.hachettebookgroup.com/titles/erika-lee/america-for-americans/9781541672598/?lens=basic-books">racist quotas based on national origin</a>, set in the 1920s, that restricted all but northern and western Europeans from immigrating to the U.S. </p>
<p>Change finally came in 1965, when Congress passed the <a href="https://www.uscis.gov/laws-and-policy/legislation/immigration-and-nationality-act">Immigration and Nationality Act</a>. This required extensive negotiations. The final bipartisan bargain <a href="https://www.npr.org/2015/10/03/445339838/the-unintended-consequences-of-the-1965-immigration-act">removed racist quotas but appeased those who wanted to restrict immigration</a> by prioritizing new immigrants’ connections to family already in the country – a preference that lawmakers thought would favor Europeans.</p>
<p>The <a href="https://press.princeton.edu/books/paperback/9780691088051/dividing-lines">last big immigration reform</a> happened in 1986, when Congress passed the <a href="https://guides.loc.gov/latinx-civil-rights/irca">Immigration Reform and Control Act</a>. Year after year, throughout the 1970s and 1980s, Congressional bills to address the porous border with Mexico and the undocumented immigrant population living in the country went nowhere. After many false starts, an uneasy Left-Right majority finally agreed in 1986 on a package that sanctioned employers who hired undocumented immigrants, provided legal status to roughly 3 million undocumented migrants, created a new farmworker program, and increased border security resources.</p>
<p>For almost four decades, Washington has been stuck in neutral on this issue.</p>
<h2>2. The US is more polarized on immigration than ever before</h2>
<p>Americans have been at odds over how to handle immigration since the nation’s founding. But partisan and ideological polarization over border control and immigrants’ rights <a href="https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/R/bo221112082.html">is greater today</a> than any other time.</p>
<p>Over the past 20 years, <a href="https://global.oup.com/academic/product/the-politics-of-immigration-9780190235307?cc=us&lang=en&">Democratic and Republican voters</a> and politicians alike became more firmly <a href="https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/R/bo28424644.html">aligned with rival</a> pro- and anti-immigration rights movements.</p>
<p>In 2008, 46% of Republicans and 39% of Democrats said they thought immigration to the U.S. <a href="https://news.gallup.com/poll/395882/immigration-views-remain-mixed-highly-partisan.aspx">should be decreased</a>. In 2023, GOP support for decreased immigration soared to 73%, compared with just 18% of Democrats who said they wanted that. Today, Republicans are almost three times as likely as Democrats to see unauthorized immigration as a very big national problem – <a href="https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2023/06/21/inflation-health-costs-partisan-cooperation-among-the-nations-top-problems/">70% versus 25%</a>.</p>
<p>Despite growing polarization, leaders from both parties have tried a few times in recent decades to work together on bipartisan reform. </p>
<p>In 2006, former President George W. Bush, a Republican, joined Senators Edward Kennedy, a Democrat, John McCain, a member of the GOP, and other lawmakers in a coalition that pushed for comprehensive immigration reform. Like the 1986 reform, their proposal included stronger border security measures, a path to legalization for undocumented immigrants and a new, expansive program for employers to legally host foreign workers. </p>
<p>Right-wing pundits and anti-immigrant activists vigorously mobilized <a href="https://cis.org/Historical-Overview-Immigration-Policy">against the legislation,</a> and the GOP-controlled House of Representatives killed the bill.</p>
<p>In 2013, a <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2013/06/24/getting-to-maybe">bipartisan group of politicians called the “Gang of Eight”</a> spearheaded a new reform. Their bill reflected a familiar package: a new path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants, more work visas for skilled foreign immigrants, and a guest worker program. The <a href="https://www.politico.com/story/2013/06/immigration-bill-2013-senate-passes-093530">Senate passed the legislation</a>, but the <a href="https://www.salon.com/2007/06/26/immigration_22/">measure then died</a> in the House. The Republican majority there refused to vote on what they considered an amnesty bill.</p>
<p>Partisan warfare over immigration reached a fevered pitch during the Donald Trump presidency. Liberals, for example, rallied against Trump’s <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/photo/2017/01/a-weekend-of-protest-against-trumps-immigration-ban/514953/">ban on immigrants from some Muslim countries</a>, and conservatives fretted over <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/donald-trump-the-migrant-caravan-and-a-manufactured-crisis-at-the-us-border">caravans of migrants crossing into the country</a>. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/575364/original/file-20240213-30-wm3195.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="Kyrsten Sinema wears a red dress and red framed glasses and gestures with her hands, while people stand around her and hold out phones and tape recorders." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/575364/original/file-20240213-30-wm3195.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/575364/original/file-20240213-30-wm3195.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=410&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/575364/original/file-20240213-30-wm3195.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=410&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/575364/original/file-20240213-30-wm3195.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=410&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/575364/original/file-20240213-30-wm3195.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=516&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/575364/original/file-20240213-30-wm3195.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=516&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/575364/original/file-20240213-30-wm3195.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=516&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">US Senator Kyrsten Sinema, one of the co-sponsors of the Senate bi-partisan border and immigration bill, speaks to reporters in Washington, D.C., on Feb. 5, 2024.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/sen-kyrsten-sinema-speaks-to-reporters-at-the-u-s-capitol-news-photo/1988744214?adppopup=true">Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>3. There’s little bipartisan agreement over what the problem actually is</h2>
<p>Most Americans generally agree that the nation’s immigration system is broken. Yet different political groups cannot agree on what exactly is wrong and how to solve it.</p>
<p>For some Republicans, including former Trump, the problem is lax border control and permissive policies that allow dangerous migrants to enter and stay in the country. Right-wing politicians and commentators, like Tucker Carlson, have exploited these anxieties, warning that large-scale immigration will <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/15/us/replacement-theory-shooting-tucker-carlson.html">“replace” white Americans</a>. Their solution is to militarize the nation’s borders, deport undocumented immigrants living in the country, and make it harder for people to legally stay in the country. </p>
<p><a href="https://www.hoover.org/research/mobility-socialism-how-anti-immigration-politics-advances-socialism-and-impedes-capitalism">There are also conservatives</a> who think immigration is consistent with the principles of individual liberty, entrepreneurship and national economic growth. They support more visas for highly skilled newcomers, especially those with strong science and technology backgrounds.</p>
<p>Democrats <a href="https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2022/09/08/republicans-and-democrats-have-different-top-priorities-for-u-s-immigration-policy/">aligned with the immigrant rights</a> movement believe that the country is obliged to address the humanitarian needs of migrants seeking asylum at the southern border. They argue that millions of undocumented people <a href="https://www.ucpress.edu/book/9780520287266/lives-in-limbo">living in the shadows</a> of American life creates an undemocratic caste system, and they think this can be solved by creating pathways for most undocumented immigrants to get legal permanent residency. </p>
<p>Moderate Democrats <a href="https://www.azcentral.com/story/opinion/op-ed/laurieroberts/2024/02/07/kyrsten-sinema-border-bill-impact-arizona-election/72509061007/">advocate tougher restrictions to address migrant surges</a> that overwhelm Border Patrol agents and other officials along the U.S.-Mexican border. Their solutions include hiring thousands of new immigration officers, strengthening physical and technological barriers along the border, and making the asylum program more efficient. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/575097/original/file-20240212-16-pkh45o.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="Joe Biden wears dark sunglasses and a suit and walks, in front of men in green uniforms, along a large fence. The sun shines through it." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/575097/original/file-20240212-16-pkh45o.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/575097/original/file-20240212-16-pkh45o.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/575097/original/file-20240212-16-pkh45o.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/575097/original/file-20240212-16-pkh45o.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/575097/original/file-20240212-16-pkh45o.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/575097/original/file-20240212-16-pkh45o.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/575097/original/file-20240212-16-pkh45o.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">President Joe Biden walks along the U.S.-Mexico border fence in January 2023 in El Paso, Texas.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/president-joe-biden-walks-along-the-us-mexico-border-fence-news-photo/1246095870?adppopup=true">Jim Watson/AFP via Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>4. Immigration reform is especially messy in a presidential election year</h2>
<p>Presidential election years are fertile ground for politicking on immigrants and borders, but not lasting policy reform.</p>
<p>In 2021, President Joe Biden and his supporters introduced an <a href="https://www.azcentral.com/story/opinion/op-ed/laurieroberts/2024/02/07/kyrsten-sinema-border-bill-impact-arizona-election/72509061007/">immigration bill</a> that would offer a pathway to legal residency for nearly all undocumented immigrants. But the measure never gained the 60 votes necessary to win passage in the Senate. </p>
<p>Now, Biden finds himself <a href="https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/4394262-biden-approval-rating-on-handling-immigration-reaches-all-time-low-poll/">underwater with voters, including Democrats, on immigration</a> and the perceived chaos at the border. </p>
<p>Eager to protect themselves in the 2024 election and to alleviate the headaches that migrant surges at the border present, Biden and other top Democrats temporarily set aside past blueprints for legalizing undocumented people and <a href="https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-senate-unveils-118-billion-bipartisan-bill-tighten-border-security-aid-2024-02-04/">joined Republican negotiators</a> in advancing one of the <a href="https://www.wsj.com/politics/policy/border-deal-to-cut-illegal-immigration-is-released-after-months-of-talks-26a66211">toughest border security measures</a> in decades. This bill, which the Senate introduced on Feb. 5, 2024, would have dedicated US$20.2 billion to strengthen border security, and it would have made it much harder for immigrants to apply for or receive asylum. </p>
<p>Republican border hawks had long demanded more restrictive immigration rules. But they did not embrace this deal. When Trump eviscerated the legislation, intent on keeping problems at the border as a campaign issue, Republican members of Congress lined up to quickly kill the legislation.</p>
<p>The death of the bipartisan Senate border deal is a triumph of election-year grandstanding over governing. Yet its demise also reflects a much longer trend of ideological conflict and partisan warfare that has made congressional gridlock on immigration reform a defining feature of contemporary American politics.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/223072/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Daniel Tichenor does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Immigration reform has always been hard to accomplish. As the U.S. enters an election year, bipartisan reform now appears out of reach.Daniel Tichenor, Professor of Political Science, University of OregonLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2218432024-02-06T18:38:07Z2024-02-06T18:38:07ZTrump was not king and can be prosecuted for crimes committed while president: Appeals court places limits on immunity<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/571677/original/file-20240126-29-tdia3r.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C1131%2C4697%2C2665&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Donald Trump speaks after the appeals court hearing on his claim of immunity from prosecution on Jan. 9, 2024, in Washington. </span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/washington-dc-former-president-donald-trump-flanked-by-news-photo/1913170507?adppopup=true">Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post via Getty Images</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>In a 57-page opinion issued on Feb. 6, 2024, a federal appeals court ruled against former President Donald Trump, deciding that <a href="https://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/opinions.nsf/1AC5A0E7090A350785258ABB0052D942/$file/23-3228-2039001.pdf">presidents are not immune from criminal prosecution</a> for actions they took while in office.</p>
<p>The decision allows the federal prosecution of Trump for attempting to undermine the 2020 election to continue. </p>
<p>A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit – <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2024/01/09/us/politics/trump-immunity-judges-henderson-michelle-childs-florence-pan.html">two appointed by Democratic presidents and one by a Republican</a> – <a href="https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/24180338-12_1-chutkan-rejects-mtd">affirmed the Dec. 1, 2023, ruling of District Court Judge Tonya Chutkan</a>, in which she said that a former president does not enjoy complete immunity from criminal prosecution for actions taken while in office.</p>
<p><a href="https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4450878-trump-campaign-immunity-ruling-appeal/">The Hill reported</a> that Trump spokesman Steven Cheung responded to the appeals court ruling by saying, “President Trump respectfully disagrees with the DC Circuit’s decision and will appeal it in order to safeguard the Presidency and the Constitution.” The decision, Cheung said, “threatens the bedrock of our Republic.”</p>
<p><a href="https://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/opinions.nsf/1AC5A0E7090A350785258ABB0052D942/$file/23-3228-2039001.pdf">The appeals court panel rejected Trump’s argument</a> that the structure of U.S. government and the demands of the presidency necessitated immunity, instead stating that his claims of “unbounded authority to commit crimes” would “collapse our system of separated powers.” In their words, “President Trump has become citizen Trump,” and therefore had only the defenses available to any criminal defendant, not a special immunity privilege unavailable to anyone else. </p>
<p>As a scholar of <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?hl=en&user=7cOGzcwAAAAJ">judicial behavior and American politics</a>, I have been closely watching this case. The court’s decision, particularly if the Supreme Court allows it to stand, is likely to have ramifications across the U.S. legal and political systems for decades. </p>
<h2>‘Divine right of kings’</h2>
<p>Trump is the subject of multiple civil and criminal cases <a href="https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/trumps-2024-trials-where-they-stand-and-what-to-expect">in both state and federal courts</a>. He is currently appealing several of them, including one relating to his appearance on the Colorado ballot, which the <a href="https://www.scotusblog.com/2024/01/supreme-court-agrees-to-hear-trump-plea-to-remain-on-colorado-ballot/">Supreme Court has already agreed to hear</a>. </p>
<p>In mid-December 2023, the federal government asked the Supreme Court to weigh in on the immunity dispute as well, but the court declined to do so, at least until the appeal was heard by the <a href="https://www.scotusblog.com/2023/12/court-wont-hear-trump-immunity-dispute-now/">U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit</a> </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/571682/original/file-20240126-19-ygquzh.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="A crowd with banners and flags climbing stairs of large government building with white columns." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/571682/original/file-20240126-19-ygquzh.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/571682/original/file-20240126-19-ygquzh.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/571682/original/file-20240126-19-ygquzh.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/571682/original/file-20240126-19-ygquzh.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/571682/original/file-20240126-19-ygquzh.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/571682/original/file-20240126-19-ygquzh.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/571682/original/file-20240126-19-ygquzh.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Pro-Trump protesters on Jan. 6, 2021, attempting to disrupt Congress’ certification of Joe Biden winning the presidency.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/protesters-gather-on-the-second-day-of-pro-trump-events-news-photo/1230456688?adppopup=true">Kent Nishimura / Los Angeles Times via Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>This particular case involves the prosecution of Trump by special counsel Jack Smith. On Aug. 1, 2023, <a href="https://embed.documentcloud.org/documents/23893902-trump-indictment/?embed=1">Smith indicted Trump on four counts of violating federal law</a> for his conduct relating to the 2020 election, including conspiracy to defraud the United States, conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding, obstruction of and attempt to obstruct an official proceeding and conspiracy against rights. The proceeding in the appeals court was not about whether Trump committed these crimes but whether he could be prosecuted for them at all.</p>
<p>Trump’s argument centered on a claim of presidential immunity – the notion that a president cannot be subjected to legal action for official conduct or actions taken as part of the job. While there is no explicit language in the U.S. Constitution about such immunity, the Supreme Court had previously ruled in <a href="https://www.oyez.org/cases/1981/79-1738">Nixon v. Fitzgerald</a> that presidents can be protected from civil lawsuits for their “official acts.” </p>
<p>The Nixon decision did not control the outcome here, however, because that case involved a civil lawsuit rather than a criminal prosecution. As highlighted during the oral argument in Trump’s appeal, that distinction – of whether it’s a civil or criminal case – makes a world of difference. </p>
<p>Protecting the president from the hassles of civil litigation is one thing; permitting the president, charged in Article 2 of the Constitution <a href="https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artII-1/ALDE_00000243/#:%7E:text=Section%203%20further%20grants%20the,the%20laws%20are%20faithfully%20executed.">with faithful execution of the laws</a>, to be able to break those same laws with impunity is quite another. </p>
<p>That sort of upside-down world is precisely what led District Court Judge Chutkan to issue her sweeping ruling on Dec. 1, 2023, that presidents are not immune from prosecution for crimes committed while in office. As she put it, Trump did not have the “<a href="https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/24180338-12_1-chutkan-rejects-mtd">divine right of kings to evade criminal accountability</a>.” The court today agreed with that sentiment. </p>
<h2>High stakes</h2>
<p>The oral argument before the appeals court on Jan. 9, 2024, <a href="https://www.c-span.org/video/?532581-1/district-columbia-circuit-court-oral-arguments-president-trumps-immunity-claims">was similarly dramatic</a>. </p>
<p>The three judges spent over an hour rigorously questioning both sides, and the language was often sweeping. </p>
<p>Trump’s lawyer spoke of a president’s need to take “bold and fearless” executive action, to not have to constantly “look over their shoulder” for fear of prosecution and of the “republic shattering” consequences of ruling against the former president. Judge Florence Y. Pan raised striking hypotheticals about presidents assassinating political opponents or selling national security secrets to foreign governments. The lawyer for the federal government noted the “frightening future” if presidents were free to violate the law while in office. </p>
<p>The court’s opinion addressed Trump’s argument that future presidents would be unable to take decisive action for fear of prosecution. The judges ruled that the risk of “chilling … Presidential action appears to be low” and was outweighed by the public’s interest in accountability.</p>
<p>The appeals court judges included a passage from a Supreme Court opinion in their decision: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>“No man in this country is so high that he is above the law. No officer of the law may set that law at defiance with impunity. All the officers of the government, from the highest to the lowest, are creatures of the law and are bound to obey it.” </p>
</blockquote>
<p>That principle, the appeals court panel wrote, “applies, of course, to a President.”</p>
<p>The court’s Feb. 6, 2024, decision will have a substantial impact, at least until any final ruling is issued by the Supreme Court.</p>
<p>Trump can be criminally prosecuted for the actions he took to overturn the 2020 election. Whether the case makes it to trial or results in a conviction, what happens to all the other pending cases involving Trump, and whether the former president is returned to the White House, are unanswered questions so far.</p>
<p>The Supreme Court will surely be asked to provide some of those answers.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/221843/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Claire Wofford does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Donald Trump has claimed he is immune from prosecution for actions he took as part of his job as president. An appeals court unanimously disagreed, allowing the many prosecutions of Trump to proceed.Claire Wofford, Associate Professor of Political Science, College of CharlestonLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2222562024-02-01T13:33:05Z2024-02-01T13:33:05ZAre social media apps ‘dangerous products’? 2 scholars explain how the companies rely on young users but fail to protect them<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/572539/original/file-20240131-19-ltvgx5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C0%2C4929%2C3283&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The CEOs of Discord, Snap, TikTok, X and Meta prepare to testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Jan. 31, 2024.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/jason-citron-ceo-of-discord-evan-spiegel-ceo-of-snap-shou-news-photo/1975356383">Alex Wong/Getty Images</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>“You have blood on your hands.”</p>
<p>“I’m sorry for everything you have all been through.”</p>
<p>These quotes, the first from Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., speaking to Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, and the second from Zuckerberg to families of victims of online child abuse in the audience, are highlights from an extraordinary day of <a href="https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/committee-activity/hearings/big-tech-and-the-online-child-sexual-exploitation-crisis">testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee </a>about protecting children online. </p>
<p>But perhaps the most telling quote from the Jan. 31, 2024, hearing came not from the CEOs of Meta, TikTok, X, Discord or Snap but from Sen. Graham in his opening statement: Social media platforms “as they are currently designed and operate are dangerous products.”</p>
<p>We are <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?hl=en&user=yu4Ew7gAAAAJ&view_op=list_works&sortby=pubdate">university researchers</a> <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?hl=en&user=AkbGPz4AAAAJ&view_op=list_works&sortby=pubdate">who study</a> how social media organizes news, information and communities. Whether or not social media apps meet the legal definition of “<a href="https://dictionary.findlaw.com/definition/unreasonably-dangerous.html">unreasonably dangerous products</a>,” the social media companies’ business models do rely on having millions of young users. At the same time, we believe that the companies have not invested sufficient resources to effectively protect those users.</p>
<p>Mobile device use by children and teens <a href="https://www.edweek.org/leadership/kids-screen-time-rose-during-the-pandemic-and-stayed-high-thats-a-problem/2023/02">skyrocketed during the pandemic and has stayed high</a>. Naturally, teens want to be where their friends are, be it the skate park or on social media. In 2022, there were an estimated 49.8 million users age 17 and under of YouTube, 19 million of TikTok, 18 million of Snapchat, 16.7 million of Instagram, 9.9 million of Facebook and 7 million of Twitter, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0295337">according to a recent study</a> by researchers at Harvard’s Chan School of Public Health. </p>
<p>Teens are a significant revenue source for social media companies. Revenue from users 17 and under of social media <a href="https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0295337">was US$11 billion</a> in 2022, according to the Chan School study. Instagram netted nearly $5 billion, while TikTok and YouTube each accrued over $2 billion. Teens mean green.</p>
<p>Social media poses a <a href="https://www.psychiatrist.com/news/surgeon-general-advisory-social-media-poses-profound-risk-of-harm-to-kids/">range of risks for teens</a>, from exposing them to harassment, bullying and sexual exploitation to encouraging eating disorders and suicidal ideation. For Congress to take meaningful action on protecting children online, we identify three issues that need to be accounted for: age, business model and content moderation.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/yUAfRod2xgI?wmode=transparent&start=261" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">Following vigorous prompting from Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg apologized to families of victims of online child abuse.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>How old are you?</h2>
<p>Social media companies have an incentive to look the other way in terms of their users’ ages. Otherwise they would have to spend the resources to moderate their content appropriately. Millions of underage users – those under 13 – are an “<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/25/technology/instagram-meta-children-privacy.html">open secret</a>” at Meta. Meta has <a href="https://about.fb.com/news/2022/06/new-ways-to-verify-age-on-instagram/">described some potential strategies</a> to verify user ages, like requiring identification or video selfies, and using AI to guess their age based on “Happy Birthday” messages. </p>
<p>However, the accuracy of these methods is not publicly open to scrutiny, so it’s difficult to audit them independently.</p>
<p>Meta has stated that <a href="https://about.fb.com/news/2023/11/online-teen-safety-legislation-is-needed/">online teen safety legislation is needed</a> to prevent harm, but the company points to app stores, currently dominated by Apple and Google, as the place where age verification should happen. However, these guardrails can be easily circumvented by accessing a social media platform’s website rather than its app.</p>
<h2>New generations of customers</h2>
<p>Teen adoption is crucial for continued growth of all social media platforms. The <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-facebook-files-11631713039?mod=bigtop-breadcrumb">Facebook Files</a>, an investigation based on a review of company documents, showed that Instagram’s growth strategy relies on teens helping family members, particularly younger siblings, get on the platform. Meta claims it optimizes for “meaningful social interaction,” prioritizing family and friends’ content over other interests. However, Instagram allows pseudonymity and multiple accounts, which makes parental oversight even more difficult.</p>
<p>On Nov. 7, 2023, <a href="https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/2023-11-07_-_testimony_-_bejar.pdf">Auturo Bejar</a>, a former senior engineer at Facebook, testified before Congress. At Meta he surveyed teen Instagram users and found 24% of 13- to 15-year-olds said they had received unwanted advances within the past seven days, a fact he characterizes as “likely the largest-scale sexual harassment of teens to have ever happened.” Meta has since <a href="https://about.fb.com/news/2024/01/introducing-stricter-message-settings-for-teens-on-instagram-and-facebook/">implemented restrictions</a> on direct messaging in its products for underage users.</p>
<p>But to be clear, widespread harassment, bullying and solicitation is a part of the landscape of social media, and it’s going to take more than parents and app stores to rein it in.</p>
<p>Meta recently announced that it is aiming to provide teens with “<a href="https://about.fb.com/news/2024/01/teen-protections-age-appropriate-experiences-on-our-apps/">age-appropriate experiences</a>,” in part by prohibiting searches for terms related to suicide, self-harm and eating disorders. However, these steps don’t stop online communities that promote these harmful behaviors from flourishing on the company’s social media platforms. It takes a carefully trained team of human moderators to monitor and enforce terms of service violations for dangerous groups.</p>
<h2>Content moderation</h2>
<p>Social media companies point to the promise of artificial intelligence to moderate content and provide safety on their platforms, but AI is not a silver bullet for managing human behavior. Communities adapt quickly to AI moderation, augmenting banned words with purposeful misspellings and creating backup accounts to prevent getting kicked off a platform.</p>
<p>Human content moderation is also problematic, given social media companies’ business models and practices. Since 2022, <a href="https://techcrunch.com/2024/01/25/tech-layoffs-2023-list/">social media companies</a> have implemented massive layoffs that struck at the heart of their trust and safety operations and weakened content moderation across the industry. </p>
<p>Congress will need hard data from the social media companies – data the companies have not provided to date – to assess the appropriate ratio of moderators to users.</p>
<h2>The way forward</h2>
<p>In health care, professionals have a duty to warn if they believe something dangerous might happen. When these uncomfortable truths surface in corporate research, little is done to inform the public of threats to safety. Congress could mandate reporting when internal studies reveal damaging outcomes. </p>
<p>Helping teens today will require social media companies to invest in human content moderation and meaningful age verification. But even that is not likely to fix the problem. The challenge is facing the reality that social media as it exists today thrives on having legions of young users spending significant time in environments that put them at risk. These dangers for young users are baked into the design of contemporary social media, which requires much clearer statutes about who polices social media and when intervention is needed.</p>
<p>One of the motives for tech companies not to segment their user base by age, which would better protect children, is how it would affect advertising revenue. Congress has limited tools available to enact change, such as enforcing laws about advertising transparency, including “know your customer” rules. Especially as AI accelerates targeted marketing, social media companies are going to continue making it easy for advertisers to reach users of any age. But if advertisers knew what proportion of ads were seen by children, rather than adults, they may think twice about where they place ads in the future.</p>
<p>Despite a number of high-profile hearings on the harms of social media, Congress has not yet passed legislation to protect children or make social media platforms liable for the content published on their platforms. But with so many young people online post-pandemic, it’s up to Congress to implement guardrails that ultimately put privacy and community safety at the center of social media design.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/222256/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Joan Donovan is on the board of Free Press and the founder of the Critical Internet Studies Institute.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Sara Parker works for the Media Ecosystem Observatory at McGill University. Their work is largely funded by the Government of Canada. </span></em></p>As legislators rail against social media companies, the companies continue to put millions of young people at risk. Here’s how − and what can be done about it.Joan Donovan, Assistant Professor of Journalism and Emerging Media Studies, Boston UniversitySara Parker, Research Analyst at the Media Ecosystem Observatory, McGill UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2180102024-01-12T13:28:25Z2024-01-12T13:28:25ZBiden, like Trump, sidesteps Congress to get things done<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/568634/original/file-20240110-21-zk1t05.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=18%2C4%2C3008%2C2032&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Former President Donald Trump and President Joe Biden.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/this-combination-of-pictures-created-on-september-29-2020-news-photo/1228795132?adppopup=true">Jim Watson,Saul Loeb/AFP via Getty Images</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>With two presidents – one current and one former – running against each other <a href="https://theconstitutionalist.org/2023/02/12/can-trump-pull-a-cleveland/">for the first time since 1912</a>, the 2024 election presents voters with the unique opportunity to compare how Democrat Joe Biden and Republican Donald Trump, who are <a href="https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/potential-rematch-between-biden-and-trump-in-2024-could-shake-up-american-politics">each likely to get their party’s nomination</a>, actually used the authority of the presidency. </p>
<p>Examining Biden and Trump from this perspective, it’s clear that while they pursued vastly different policies, they often used presidential power in remarkably similar ways.</p>
<p>Both Trump and Biden have tried to achieve their policy goals in ways that avoided having to get Congress’ cooperation. There are a few exceptions, with major legislation passed early in the presidents’ terms when they had a unified government – Trump with the <a href="https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-to-sign-tax-bill-before-leaving-for-holiday/">2017 tax cuts</a> and Biden with the <a href="https://www.npr.org/2021/11/15/1055841358/biden-signs-1t-bipartisan-infrastructure-bill-into-law">2021 infrastructure bill</a> and <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/cleanenergy/inflation-reduction-act-guidebook/#:%7E:text=On%20August%2016%2C%202022%2C%20President,change%20in%20the%20nation%27s%20history.">2022 Inflation Reduction Act</a>.</p>
<p>But more frequently, they aimed to accomplish their objectives either through their power over the executive branch and administrative agencies or in foreign policy, where a president possesses more discretion than in domestic affairs.</p>
<p>Such similarities in men who could not be more different in their political values and policy priorities naturally raise the question: Why do Trump and Biden seem so alike in how they are using presidential power? <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=9I_KwakAAAAJ&hl=en">As a scholar</a> who studies how the constitutional structure of American political institutions effects the authority and behavior of individuals operating within those institutions, I see these similarities as being driven by the fact that, as presidents, they faced the same incentives and constraints.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/568655/original/file-20240110-23-axkvme.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="A man in a suit, seated at a desk, holding up a signed document and flanked by two other men in suits who are standing." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/568655/original/file-20240110-23-axkvme.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/568655/original/file-20240110-23-axkvme.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/568655/original/file-20240110-23-axkvme.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/568655/original/file-20240110-23-axkvme.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/568655/original/file-20240110-23-axkvme.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/568655/original/file-20240110-23-axkvme.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/568655/original/file-20240110-23-axkvme.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">President Donald Trump holds up a signed executive order on June 24, 2019, to increase sanctions on Iran, flanked by Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin, left, and Vice President Mike Pence.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://newsroom.ap.org/detail/TrumpExecutiveOrders/a89440a71ec14f0384a2f0d9dda60685/photo?Query=Trump%20executive%20order%20visa%20muslim&mediaType=photo&sortBy=arrivaldatetime:desc&dateRange=Anytime&totalCount=1309&digitizationType=Digitized&currentItemNo=NaN&vs=true&vs=true">AP Photo/Alex Brandon, File</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Policy through executive order</h2>
<p>One place where this similarity is particularly evident is in the number and scope of Trump’s and Biden’s executive orders, which recent presidents have used to order administrative agencies to enact particular policies unilaterally. </p>
<p>Through their first three years in office, the two presidents issued a comparable number of executive orders – <a href="https://ballotpedia.org/Joe_Biden%27s_executive_orders_and_actions">127 for Biden</a> <a href="https://www.federalregister.gov/presidential-documents/executive-orders">and 137 for Trump</a>, often for major policy objectives. </p>
<p>For example, Trump’s infamous 2017 “Muslim ban” restricting the immigration into the U.S. of people from several majority-Muslim countries, as well as immigrants from Venezuela and North Korea, was instituted through two <a href="https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2017/02/01/2017-02281/protecting-the-nation-from-foreign-terrorist-entry-into-the-united-states">executive</a> <a href="https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2017/03/09/2017-04837/protecting-the-nation-from-foreign-terrorist-entry-into-the-united-states">orders</a>. </p>
<p>Similarly, Biden’s sweeping effort <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2022/08/24/fact-sheet-president-biden-announces-student-loan-relief-for-borrowers-who-need-it-most/#:%7E:text=Forgive%20loan%20balances%20after%2010,debt%2Dfree%20within%2010%20years.">in 2022</a> to <a href="https://www.nasfaa.org/news-item/27820/Answering_the_10_000_Question_Biden_Takes_Executive_Action_on_Student_Loan_Cancellation_Extends_Repayment_Pause">cancel student loan debt</a> was also initiated through an executive order. </p>
<p>In foreign policy, <a href="https://www.politico.com/news/2020/09/15/trump-abraham-accords-palestinians-peace-deal-415083">Trump was able to conclude the Abraham Accords</a> in 2020, normalizing relations between Israel and several Middle Eastern nations. He also unilaterally pulled <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/01/climate/trump-paris-climate-agreement.html">out of the Paris climate accord</a> in 2017 without congressional input. </p>
<p>When Biden entered office in 2020, he reversed Trump’s action and <a href="https://www.state.gov/the-united-states-officially-rejoins-the-paris-agreement/">reentered the Paris climate accord</a> and <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/31/us/politics/biden-defends-afghanistan-withdrawal.html">ended the war in Afghanistan</a> by withdrawing U.S. troops there.</p>
<h2>Trouble in the party</h2>
<p>One reason for the two presidents’ similar exercise of executive power is the circumstances of their presidencies. </p>
<p>Despite their differences, Trump and Biden have faced many of the same isolating conditions that prevent them from achieving great victories through legislation, which forced them to act in those areas where presidential power is stronger. </p>
<p>While <a href="https://spia.uga.edu/faculty_pages/carson/forum17.pdf">both had</a> <a href="https://www.voanews.com/a/usa_us-politics_control-white-house-and-congress-democrats-have-2-years-make-big-changes/6201047.html">unified government</a> in the first half of their terms with their party controlling both houses of Congress, both of their parties were internally fractured. </p>
<p>Trump’s attempt to repeal President Barack Obama’s Affordable Care Act was <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/senate-gop-effort-repeal-obamacare-fails-n787311">famously torpedoed</a> by a dramatic thumbs-down from Republican Sen. John McCain. </p>
<p>These Republican fractures became even more evident as Trump’s presidency wore on. One crucial example of this division: Trump was the only president to have <a href="https://www.npr.org/2021/01/14/956621191/these-are-the-10-republicans-who-voted-to-impeach-trump">members of his own party</a> <a href="https://www.npr.org/sections/trump-impeachment-trial-live-updates/2021/02/15/967878039/7-gop-senators-voted-to-convict-trump-only-1-faces-voters-next-year">vote for his removal</a> from office in his two historic impeachments. </p>
<p>Biden has been forced to deal with the consistent threat of potential defections from Democratic Sens. Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema. To get their crucial votes, he had to substantially <a href="https://apnews.com/article/biden-politics-kyrsten-sinema-joe-manchin-congress-c0d40a6f2490b2613a690995daca7e11">water down</a> his “Build Back Better” infrastructure bill. </p>
<p>Sinema has since left the Democratic Party to <a href="https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/kyrsten-sinema-is-becoming-an-independent-what-does-that-mean-for-the-senate">become an independent</a>, and Manchin is <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-11-15/joe-manchin-absolutely-considering-2024-presidential-run-he-says">exploring a third-party run for president</a> against Biden. The <a href="https://www.newsweek.com/joe-manchin-switching-party-democrat-independent-senate-slim-majority-1819160">Democrats’ Senate majority is too slim</a> to allow the White House to ignore either of these troublesome senators.</p>
<p>After the midterm elections, <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/what-divided-government-means-for-washington-11668642809">both presidents found</a> <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/health-care-trump-animate-voters-survey-shows-1541548869">themselves facing divided government</a>, with the House of Representatives held by the opposing party. </p>
<p>The House in both cases was not afraid to flex its muscle against the president, freely employing its impeachment authority against both of them. They <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/18/us/politics/trump-impeached.html">impeached Trump</a> <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/13/us/politics/trump-impeached.html">twice</a> and have opened an <a href="https://apnews.com/article/hunter-biden-impeachment-inquiry-house-republicans-51576c5fe4294be2605a14fa81075196">impeachment inquiry</a> against Biden, which may soon lead to a formal impeachment vote.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/568664/original/file-20240110-29-4iicgx.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="A young girl sits at a table holding a pen, surrounded by adults." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/568664/original/file-20240110-29-4iicgx.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/568664/original/file-20240110-29-4iicgx.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/568664/original/file-20240110-29-4iicgx.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/568664/original/file-20240110-29-4iicgx.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/568664/original/file-20240110-29-4iicgx.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/568664/original/file-20240110-29-4iicgx.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/568664/original/file-20240110-29-4iicgx.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Gianna Floyd, the daughter of George Floyd, holds a pen used by U.S. President Joe Biden at the White House on May 25, 2022, to sign an executive order enacting further police reform.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/gianna-floyd-the-daughter-of-george-floyd-holds-a-pen-used-news-photo/1399292579?adppopup=true">Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>The Constitution rules</h2>
<p>Both presidents have been similarly unpopular with Americans. According to Gallup, both presidents had an <a href="https://news.gallup.com/poll/329384/presidential-approval-ratings-joe-biden.aspx">average approval rating of 43%</a> in the third year of their administrations, and this unpopularity has meant that neither Trump nor Biden has been able to effectively utilize the bully pulpit to force change.</p>
<p>In these conditions, it is no surprise that Trump and Biden turned to the one source of power still available to them: the Constitution. </p>
<p>The structure of American political institutions, <a href="https://www.usa.gov/branches-of-government#:%7E:text=Learn%20about%20the%20executive%2C%20legislative,will%20have%20too%20much%20power.">set up by the Constitution</a>, affects the authority and behavior of individuals operating within those institutions. With that in mind, it is apparent that the policy successes and failures of the Trump and Biden administrations have largely lined up with the powers that the Constitution does and does not give presidents. </p>
<p>With Congress either too obstinate or too polarized to act on the president’s agenda, a president will naturally use the tools that are available to him. The Constitution dictates that those tools are primarily found in administrative actions and foreign policy.</p>
<p>By looking at the Trump and Biden administrations from this constitutional perspective, it’s clear how, despite the hyperpolarization of our politics, the Constitution continues to be influential in the power it grants presidents operating without the cooperation of Congress. </p>
<p>Trump and Biden are very different presidents. Yet, in working from the same constitutional toolbox, they used the means available to their office in similar ways, even in the pursuit of very dissimilar ends.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/218010/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Jordan Cash does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Biden and Trump are polar opposites when it comes to policy. But they have wielded the power of the presidency in similar ways.Jordan Cash, Assistant Professor of Political Science, Michigan State UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2177692023-12-06T13:27:56Z2023-12-06T13:27:56ZTuberville ends holdout on most high-ranking military nominations<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/563759/original/file-20231205-23-ex4w1f.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Alabama Sen. Tommy Tuberville speaks to reporters at the U.S. Capitol in November 2023. </span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/sen-tommy-tuberville-speaks-to-reporters-on-his-way-to-a-news-photo/1768727663?adppopup=true">Drew Angerer/Getty Images</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>After holding up the promotions or new assignments of several hundred senior officers for nearly a year, U.S. Senator Tommy Tuberville relented to pressure from both GOP and Democratic Senate members and <a href="https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/sen-tommy-tuberville-says-hes-ending-his-blockade-of-military-nominations">ended most of his campaign</a> against a military policy on abortion.</p>
<p>But while Tuberville’s announcement clears the way for about <a href="https://thehill.com/homenews/ap/ap-politics/ap-sen-tommy-tuberville-says-hes-ending-blockade-of-most-military-nominees/">400 appointments</a>, published reports said that Tuberville would continue to block the promotions of 10 four-star generals and admirals. </p>
<p>Within hours of Tuberville’s decision, the Senate confirmed hundreds of nominations.</p>
<p>Tuberville’s announcement come on the heels of growing pressure from Democratic Senate Leader Charles Schumer as well as several GOP senators who grew frustrated over Tuberville’s actions that many argued jeopardized national security.</p>
<p>In September 2023 and again in November, the Senate got around Tuberville’s blockage by <a href="https://www.marinecorpstimes.com/news/pentagon-congress/2023/11/02/no-2-marine-confirmed-by-senate-amid-top-marines-health-crisis/">voting on several individual nominations</a> for top-level positions, including the <a href="https://rollcall.com/2023/09/20/in-preemptive-strike-schumer-files-cloture-on-top-dod-jobs/">chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff</a>.</p>
<h2>A far-right fight</h2>
<p>Tuberville <a href="https://thehill.com/policy/defense/4116064-senate-democrats-press-mcconnell-on-tubervilles-reckless-military-hold/">had blocked the Senate from considering their nominations because he opposes a Defense Department policy</a> to reimburse travel expenses for military personnel who have to <a href="https://media.defense.gov/2022/Oct/20/2003099747/-1/-1/1/MEMORANDUM-ENSURING-ACCESS-TO-REPRODUCTIVE-HEALTH-CARE.PDF">leave their states to get abortions</a> or other reproductive care.</p>
<p>The policy was put in place after the Supreme Court’s 2022 ruling in <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/19-1392_6j37.pdf">Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization</a>, which overturned previous Supreme Court rulings affirming federal protections for abortion and returned the responsibility of passing abortion laws to the states.</p>
<p>A U.S. senator has the prerogative of placing <a href="https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R43563">what is called a hold</a> on a measure, preventing the Senate from acting on that measure. </p>
<p>Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin <a href="https://www.defense.gov/News/News-Stories/Article/Article/3458194/dod-officials-highlight-risks-to-force-posed-by-senate-nomination-hold/">characterized Tuberville’s hold as a threat</a> to national defense. Senate Democrats <a href="https://thehill.com/policy/defense/4116064-senate-democrats-press-mcconnell-on-tubervilles-reckless-military-hold/">have called him reckless</a>, and more than 550 military families petitioned Tuberville and Senate leaders <a href="https://www.military.com/daily-news/2023/07/24/military-spouses-deliver-petition-calling-end-tuberville-blockade-senior-officer-promotions.html">to end the stalemate</a>. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, a Republican from Kentucky, has said <a href="https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/mcconnell-dod-reject-gop-senators-blockade-military-promotions-rcna83827">he does not support a hold on military nominations</a>.</p>
<p>But Tuberville didn’t budge for months.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/539273/original/file-20230725-21-gdrpzc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="A man wearing a dark suit walks toward a lectern, carrying a white binder in his right hand and paper and a pen in his left. He is fallowed by a man wearing a brown military uniform, carrying papers clutched under his left arm." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/539273/original/file-20230725-21-gdrpzc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/539273/original/file-20230725-21-gdrpzc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/539273/original/file-20230725-21-gdrpzc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/539273/original/file-20230725-21-gdrpzc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/539273/original/file-20230725-21-gdrpzc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/539273/original/file-20230725-21-gdrpzc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/539273/original/file-20230725-21-gdrpzc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">U.S. Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin departs a news briefing on July 18, 2023, at the Pentagon in Arlington, Va. At right is Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Mark Milley.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/secretary-of-defense-lloyd-austin-departs-a-press-briefing-news-photo/1553860889">Win McNamee/Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>No monopoly on Senate holds</h2>
<p>The practice of senators placing holds on legislation <a href="https://www.heraldnet.com/opinion/comment-senators-holds-are-undermining-their-own-power/">has become more frequent in recent decades</a>. But it is not a practice confined to lawmakers of one party. </p>
<p>Republican Sen. J. D. Vance of Ohio <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/ohio-republican-vance-will-hold-justice-dept-nominees-senate-trump-cas-rcna89109">placed a hold on the confirmation</a> of Justice Department officials to protest the federal indictment of former president Donald J. Trump. Independent Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont is <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2023/06/12/sanders-hold-nih-director-drug-prices/">using the same tactic to block President Joe Biden’s nominee</a> to head the National Institute of Health until the Biden administration delivers a plan to lower prescription drug prices. Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia will not approve any nominees for positions in the Environmental Protection Agency because <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/05/10/manchin-biden-epa-power-plant-emissions/">he opposes proposed regulations to limit power plant emissions</a>. The holds these senators are using make a connection between the agencies the senators want to take an action and the agencies’ nominees.</p>
<p>Tuberville had been using the hold <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/tuberville-military-hold-phone-call-defense-secretary-austin-rcna94913">to get the Senate to vote on a bill</a> introduced by Democratic Sen. Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire that, if passed, would make the Defense Department’s policy law. In that case, Tuberville said he would relinquish his hold. If the bill fails, he wants the Defense Department to end the policy on reimbursement for travel related to reproductive care.</p>
<h2>Holding promotions hostage</h2>
<p>This is not the first time senators have used the promotion process to object to military policy or practice. But, in most cases, those objections pertained to specific individuals. </p>
<p>Perhaps the most obvious cases occurred <a href="https://www.senate.gov/about/powers-procedures/investigations/joint-committee-conduct-of-war.htm">during the Civil War</a> when the Republican senators most committed to ending the war and ending slavery dragged their heels over promotions as a way to push that agenda.</p>
<p>General <a href="https://www.battlefields.org/learn/biographies/george-g-meade">George G. Meade</a> is perhaps best known as the victorious U.S. general at the battle of Gettysburg. You might think that leading the army that defeated Robert E. Lee’s Army of Northern Virginia in the war’s most famous battle would mean Meade would have no problem securing a well-deserved promotion. </p>
<p>But that was not the case. Meade’s handling of his forces at Gettysburg <a href="https://www.essentialcivilwarcurriculum.com/the-joint-committee-on-the-conduct-of-the-war.html">came under criticism from a congressional committee</a> – the Joint Committee on the Conduct of the War – as well as some of his fellow generals, <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_-0_cfwB5f4">who wanted to highlight their own contributions, while diminishing his</a>.</p>
<p>Essential to that scrutiny was that Meade had a reputation as a Democrat who was not an enthusiastic supporter of emancipation as a war aim. His detractors, including committee members and several generals, embraced the destruction of slavery and <a href="https://www.essentialcivilwarcurriculum.com/the-joint-committee-on-the-conduct-of-the-war.html">wanted war to be waged vigorously against Confederate civilians</a> as well as enemy forces. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/539363/original/file-20230725-21-l92zfh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="A street-level view of a five-sided office building." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/539363/original/file-20230725-21-l92zfh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/539363/original/file-20230725-21-l92zfh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=317&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/539363/original/file-20230725-21-l92zfh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=317&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/539363/original/file-20230725-21-l92zfh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=317&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/539363/original/file-20230725-21-l92zfh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=398&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/539363/original/file-20230725-21-l92zfh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=398&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/539363/original/file-20230725-21-l92zfh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=398&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The Pentagon building, located in Arlington County, Va., across the Potomac River from Washington.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/the-pentagon-building-located-in-arlington-county-virginia-news-photo/1061919960?adppopup=true">Michael Brochstein/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>As a result, Meade’s <a href="https://www.usace.army.mil/About/History/Army-Engineers-in-the-Civil-War/Engineer-Biographies/George-Meade/">promotion to major general</a> in the regular army – a rank that would persist after the war – ran into snags, largely because of concern that if Meade were nominated, the Senate would not confirm him.</p>
<p>Although General Ulysses S. Grant repeatedly pushed for Meade’s promotion, it would not be until November 1864, after President Abraham Lincoln was safely reelected, that Meade’s name was presented for confirmation, according to the book “<a href="https://www.worldcat.org/title/24081924">Meade of Gettysburg</a>.” The Senate finally approved the promotion in February 1865, just two months before <a href="https://www.battlefields.org/learn/civil-war/battles/appomattox-court-house">Lee surrendered to Grant at Appomattox Court House</a>. </p>
<p>Other army promotions faced similar obstacles. Even Grant’s elevation to lieutenant general in the winter of 1863-1864 proved a struggle, as Congress wrangled over the wording of the bill that reestablished that rank. Some Republicans wanted to delay the promotion until the end of the war; others wanted to force Lincoln to nominate Grant for the new rank. It took over 11 weeks just to pass the bill, and Grant accepted his commission in March 1864, <a href="https://www.c-span.org/video/?305846-3/lincoln-congress-grant-lieutenant-general-act">some three months after the bill was introduced</a>.</p>
<p>These cases involve individuals, albeit in high positions, and in many cases political debate over the promotions involved discussions of their presumed support for the destruction of slavery as a war aim. </p>
<p>Tuberville’s actions were not focused in the way those previous cases were. He blocked consideration of all nominations because of an unrelated Defense Department policy. This public obstruction spotlights how Senate rules, written and unwritten, <a href="https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R43563">offer opportunities for individual senators to impede the legislative process</a> until their demands are met.</p>
<p><em>This is an updated version of an <a href="https://theconversation.com/sen-tubervilles-blockade-of-us-military-promotions-takes-a-historic-tradition-to-a-radical-new-level-and-could-go-beyond-congress-august-break-209831">article published</a> on July 26, 2023.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/217769/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Brooks D. Simpson does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Republican Sen. Tommy Tuberville of Alabama had used a long-standing Senate practice to block military promotions.Brooks D. Simpson, Foundation Professor of History, Arizona State UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2162042023-10-23T18:59:36Z2023-10-23T18:59:36ZGOP’s House paralysis is a crisis in a time of crises<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/555378/original/file-20231023-25-n0skbs.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=19%2C0%2C4341%2C2903&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">There's trouble under the U.S. Capitol dome. </span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/photo/dark-government-royalty-free-image/1181743541?phrase=US+house+of+representatives&adppopup=true"> iStock / Getty Images Plus</a></span></figcaption></figure><p><a href="https://www.npr.org/2023/10/23/1207933406/the-house-is-without-a-speaker-nearly-3-weeks-after-kevin-mccarthy-was-ousted">House Republicans fired one leader</a>, Kevin McCarthy, and have spent almost three weeks trying unsuccessfully to choose another to succeed him as speaker of the House. That’s left the U.S. House of Representatives <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2023/10/21/politics/house-speaker-race-candidates/index.html">unable to do its work</a>, paralyzing the entire legislative branch of government, because the Senate can’t pass legislation without a functioning House. </p>
<p>Is this a “constitutional crisis?” Or something less significant?</p>
<p>The speaker of the House of Representatives is <a href="https://theconversation.com/what-does-the-speaker-of-the-house-do-heres-what-kevin-mccarthys-successor-will-have-for-a-job-94884">a powerful position with an outsized role in lawmaking</a>. According to the rules of the House, the speaker is “<a href="https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GPO-HPRACTICE-108/html/GPO-HPRACTICE-108-35.htm">the presiding officer of the House and is charged</a> <a href="https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GPO-HPRACTICE-108/html/GPO-HPRACTICE-108-35.htm">with numerous duties and responsibilities by law and by the House rules</a>.” </p>
<p>The speaker calls the House to order, refers bills to committees, appoints committee members, rules on points of order and recognizes members on the floor. These duties and responsibilities keep the House engaged in considering and passing bills. </p>
<p>In short, the speaker is critical to the administration of House business. Under the <a href="https://www.senate.gov/about/officers-staff/president-pro-tempore/presidential-succession-act.htm">Presidential Succession Act</a>, passed to supplement Article 2 of the Constitution, the speaker also stands <a href="https://www.usa.gov/presidential-succession">second</a> in line to the presidency, after the vice president, in the event of the president’s incapacity.</p>
<p>For now, the House is presided over by a temporary speaker, U.S. Rep. Patrick McHenry, a Republican from North Carolina, but scholars and experts are <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2023/10/04/us/politics/patrick-mchenry-interim-speaker.html">divided about whether the House rules</a> allow the person in that role to fulfill all the critical duties of the speakership. Because the situation is unprecedented and because the rules are ambiguous, <a href="https://www.politico.com/live-updates/2023/10/19/congress/jordans-new-plan-00122465">McHenry appears reluctant to exercise</a> anything other than the minimal powers necessary to elect a new speaker.</p>
<p>Thus the House remains in limbo, with action needed as <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2023/09/30/government-shutdown-live-updates-congress-faces-funding-deadline.html">budget deadlines loom</a> and <a href="https://www.latimes.com/world-nation/story/2023-10-22/israel-strikes-gaza-syria-and-west-bank-as-war-against-hamas-threatens-to-ignite-other-fronts">a war between Israel and Hamas threatens to spread</a> to other fronts. <a href="https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Stefanie-Lindquist-2">As a scholar of both constitutional law and politics</a>, I believe the U.S. could be viewed as in constitutional crisis – a crisis that, if it does not end, could provoke larger crises ahead.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/555380/original/file-20231023-15-s57hlb.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="An empty leather chair behind a lectern and in front of an American flag." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/555380/original/file-20231023-15-s57hlb.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/555380/original/file-20231023-15-s57hlb.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=425&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/555380/original/file-20231023-15-s57hlb.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=425&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/555380/original/file-20231023-15-s57hlb.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=425&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/555380/original/file-20231023-15-s57hlb.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=535&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/555380/original/file-20231023-15-s57hlb.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=535&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/555380/original/file-20231023-15-s57hlb.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=535&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The chair for the speaker of the House remains empty at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/the-chair-for-the-speaker-of-the-house-remains-empty-as-news-photo/1746583947?adppopup=true">Drew Angerer/Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>What is a “constitutional crisis”?</h2>
<p>The term “constitutional crisis” is largely undefined, although <a href="https://www.vox.com/2019/5/16/18617661/donald-trump-congress-constitutional-crisis">scholars generally agree on a few</a> of its characteristics. </p>
<p>One common factor in most historical events described as constitutional crises is that constitutionally mandated processes for resolving conflict break down or have no ready answers. Typically, constitutional crises emerge when the legislature and the president find themselves in conflict over the legality or wisdom of a particular action or policy. </p>
<p>When the legislature and the president reach such an impasse, one or the other of the branches could exercise force to achieve its preferred outcome. </p>
<p>This applies not only to the U.S. but other countries as well. In the case of Russian President Boris Yeltsin’s confrontation with the Russian Parliament <a href="https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-book/russia-programs/2018-10-04/yeltsin-shelled-russian-parliament-25-years-ago-us-praised-superb-handling">over the power of the presidency</a> in 1993, for example, Yeltsin deployed the Russian military to attack the Parliament and arrest its members. </p>
<p>In the U.S. in 1832 and 1833, conflict between the federal and state governments led President Andrew Jackson to threaten military force to ensure that federal law would be followed in South Carolina during the so-called “<a href="https://www.britannica.com/topic/nullification-crisis">nullification crisis</a>.” In that crisis, South Carolina claimed that a state could unilaterally block a federal law imposing tariffs on imports. Believing that South Carolina’s actions threatened the union and the constitutional order, Jackson proposed to send federal troops to the state to collect the tariffs. This threat of force ultimately led to South Carolina’s capitulation. </p>
<p>Clearly, the Republican standoff in Congress does not rise to the level of a crisis that might involve military force. Yet to the extent that a constitutional crisis involves the paralysis of government machinery without a readily available solution under the Constitution, the current situation in the House could qualify. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/555382/original/file-20231023-15-lv228c.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="A white haired man in a gray suit and bow tie sits and listens." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/555382/original/file-20231023-15-lv228c.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/555382/original/file-20231023-15-lv228c.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=446&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/555382/original/file-20231023-15-lv228c.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=446&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/555382/original/file-20231023-15-lv228c.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=446&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/555382/original/file-20231023-15-lv228c.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=560&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/555382/original/file-20231023-15-lv228c.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=560&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/555382/original/file-20231023-15-lv228c.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=560&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">U.S. Speaker Pro Tempore Patrick McHenry listens as the House of Representatives votes for a third time on whether to elevate Rep. Jim Jordan to Speaker of the House.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/speaker-pro-tempore-rep-patrick-mchenry-listens-as-the-news-photo/1746641345?adppopup=true">Win McNamee/Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Paralyzed Congress</h2>
<p>Because the speaker is a constitutionally mandated office whose occupant is second in line for the presidency, the role is part of the U.S. constitutional machinery. The Constitution clearly contemplates that a speaker will lead the House, although it does not define their duties, which are determined by the House’s own rules. Those rules have evolved over time to elevate the speaker’s role as central to the lawmaking functions of Congress. And without a speaker, it is not clear that Congress can fulfill its constitutional functions. At the same time, no constitutional remedy exists to solve the current impasse.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/about-the-white-house/our-government/the-legislative-branch/">To enact legislation</a>, both chambers in Congress must agree on statutory language and submit the bill to the president for his approval. </p>
<p>Without the House, however, Congress will be unable to fund the federal government, which requires yearly budgetary authorization from Congress for its funding. As the nation’s largest employer, the federal government’s failure to pay its employees’ wages will cause financial disruption to millions, even if retroactive <a href="https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IN/IN12251">pay is available afterward</a>. </p>
<p>Critical regulatory agencies that keep water clean, air breathable, roads and bridges safe and the country’s financial system operating fairly and effectively could be stalled in meeting their legal duties to the nation. </p>
<p>Other pressing national concerns, such as the <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/10/22/house-speaker-candidates-running/">opioid crisis</a>, will continue without federal legislation to address them. Efforts to support Ukraine and Israel in their battles against Russia and Hamas will be stymied. </p>
<p>A <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2023/10/21/politics/house-speaker-race-candidates/index.html">paralyzed federal government paralyzes the nation</a>, with potentially dire national and global consequences to the economy, the environment and U.S. foreign policy. The absence of a speaker – a single individual but the linchpin in Congress – could thus produce a dangerous crisis in our constitutional democracy. </p>
<p>The longer this impasse continues, the greater the threat to the constitutional order.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/216204/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Stefanie Lindquist does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The absence of a speaker of the House − a single individual but the linchpin in Congress − could produce a dangerous crisis in America’s constitutional democracy.Stefanie Lindquist, Foundation Professor of Law and Political Science, Arizona State UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2149932023-10-04T15:06:38Z2023-10-04T15:06:38ZOuster of Speaker McCarthy highlights House Republican fractures in an increasingly polarized America<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/552072/original/file-20231004-24-y82i7z.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=17%2C8%2C5973%2C3979&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Kevin McCarthy, just before he was ousted as speaker of the House. </span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/speaker-of-the-house-kevin-mccarthy-is-surrounded-by-staff-news-photo/1715424738?adppopup=true">Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images</a></span></figcaption></figure><p><em>The House of Representatives on Oct. 3, 2023, did something that had never been done before in the nation’s history: It <a href="https://apnews.com/article/mccarthy-gaetz-speaker-motion-to-vacate-congress-327e294a39f8de079ef5e4abfb1fa555">ousted the speaker of the House</a>. Kevin McCarthy, a California Republican, lost his job in a vote of 216 to 210. To look deeper than the surface machinations, The Conversation U.S. spoke with political scientist <a href="https://www.charlesrhunt.com/">Charles R. Hunt</a> at Boise State University.</em></p>
<p><em>He offers a sense of what this historic development might mean for the government at the moment, as well as for American democracy over the longer term.</em></p>
<h2>What does the ouster say about the House’s ability to function, such as to pass a new budget in the next 45 days?</h2>
<p>It’s important to remember what the purpose of the speaker of the House is: to literally speak for the entire House, to guide legislation through. It’s an unruly chamber of <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-the-us-house-of-representatives-has-435-seats-and-how-that-could-change-191629">435 members</a>.</p>
<p>So what you need, ideally, is someone who has the trust of the chamber – particularly of their own party, since the majority party at least traditionally has unilateral control over the business of the House. So both trust and party discipline are conducive to a smoothly functioning legislative process. </p>
<p>When Americans think of a functioning democracy, they might think of bills getting passed on time, of Congress getting things done. But voters of all party affiliations are frustrated by the gridlock here, particularly <a href="https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2022/03/10/the-polarization-in-todays-congress-has-roots-that-go-back-decades/">over the past decade or two</a>. </p>
<p>The interesting thing about this situation with the speakership is that gridlock has traditionally been between the two parties. Right now, it’s within one party.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/551917/original/file-20231003-23-xtl9h.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="A dark-haired woman walking down a hallway, talking." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/551917/original/file-20231003-23-xtl9h.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/551917/original/file-20231003-23-xtl9h.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/551917/original/file-20231003-23-xtl9h.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/551917/original/file-20231003-23-xtl9h.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/551917/original/file-20231003-23-xtl9h.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/551917/original/file-20231003-23-xtl9h.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/551917/original/file-20231003-23-xtl9h.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Rep. Nancy Mace, a Republican from South Carolina, voted to oust Kevin McCarthy as speaker.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/rep-nancy-mace-arrives-for-a-house-republican-caucus-news-photo/1704665153?adppopup=true">Drew Angerer/Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Do House members want to do what the public wants them to do – get things done?</h2>
<p>Americans say they <a href="https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/new-poll-shows-americans-want-congressional-cooperation-but-expect-gridlock">don’t want</a> to be focusing on these fights. But there are members of Congress for whom these fights are really important to how they represent — like Florida Republican Matt Gaetz — who hail from very Republican districts and have staked their reputations on fighting establishment figures in their own party like Kevin McCarthy. Likewise, many Democrats back in 2019 or 2020, when they held the majority in the House, felt they had a responsibility to their mostly Democratic constituents to bring the fight to President Donald Trump.</p>
<p>For some in the GOP, there is also this ideology of smaller government, less spending, lowering the national debt – the more typical conservative Republican priorities. They are not new, but there is now this sense that being anti-establishment, and trying to wield power to its greatest possible extent, is a goal in itself.</p>
<p>Some voters have looked at how the House has operated over the past couple of decades and thought, “we don’t want any more of that.” So they are willing to put their trust in the hands of some of these people who want to, figuratively at least, burn the place down – even if there is no clear exit strategy for what happens next. The <a href="https://www.reuters.com/world/us/what-are-next-steps-us-house-searches-new-speaker-2023-10-03/">lack of a plan after McCarthy’s ouster</a> seems to show that obstruction is kind of the point.</p>
<h2>How can people understand these events in the context of America’s system of representative democracy?</h2>
<p>Gaetz has been saying he doesn’t like the process, that he wants to go back to “<a href="https://www.cbsnews.com/news/why-oust-mccarthy-matt-gaetz-remove-speaker-of-the-house/">regular order</a>,” in which budget proposals are voted on separately, instead of in huge omnibus spending bills. He and others just see that the way the House is conducting its business is not working. In Congress, those concerns are mainly coming from the far left and far right. They relate to the increasing polarization in this country, and Congress mirrors that growing division. </p>
<p>Democrats are getting more progressive, and Republicans in particular are getting more conservative over time. This is in part because <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-this-cycle-of-redistricting-is-making-gerrymandered-congressional-districts-even-safer-and-undermining-majority-rule-173103">districts are becoming more and more safe</a> for one party or the other. So the average district is less likely to produce a moderate member of Congress. That increases the influence of party primaries. The voters who participate in these elections tend to be pretty ideologically extreme Republicans and Democrats who don’t want to see their representatives working with the other side.</p>
<p>And the more polarized the country gets, the more you see this element of <a href="https://theconversation.com/bidens-dragging-poll-numbers-wont-matter-in-2024-if-enough-voters-loathe-his-opponent-even-more-204608">negative partisanship</a>, where a representative’s voters are more driven by how much their candidate is willing to fight against the other side, rather than how much they’re getting done for their own side. </p>
<h2>Why isn’t this kind of drama happening in the Senate?</h2>
<p>The cultures of the two institutions are really different, even today. George Washington is said to have described the House as a cup of hot tea that was going to overflow with the passions of the “common people,” and the <a href="https://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/minute/Senate_Created.htm">Senate would be the saucer</a> that would catch that overflow.</p>
<p>This session, both institutions are living up to those reputations.</p>
<p>The first reason is that House districts are smaller. They can be drawn in very specific ways and gerrymandered and are more subject to <a href="https://theconversation.com/when-it-comes-to-explaining-elections-in-congress-gerrymandering-is-overrated-201454">geographic sorting</a>, so you end up with really extreme districts, politically. </p>
<p>Whereas in the Senate, they represent whole states. They typically have to represent a lot more people than a House district, a much broader constituency. That can lead to adopting a more consensus-driven tone.</p>
<p>The rules of the Senate are also much more consensus-driven. Rules like the <a href="https://www.senate.gov/about/powers-procedures/filibusters-cloture.htm">filibuster</a> and <a href="https://www.senate.gov/about/powers-procedures/rules-procedures/first-unanimous-consent-agreement.htm">Unanimous Consent Agreements</a> can force more moderate senators to work together to reach a kind of consensus. </p>
<p>Plus, because it’s a smaller body, there is generally more collegiality. These senators know each other better, and so even between the parties you get people teaming up on legislative proposals a lot more often. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/551920/original/file-20231003-19-fdn0eu.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="Two men in suits shake hands in front of the US Capitol." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/551920/original/file-20231003-19-fdn0eu.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/551920/original/file-20231003-19-fdn0eu.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=426&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/551920/original/file-20231003-19-fdn0eu.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=426&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/551920/original/file-20231003-19-fdn0eu.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=426&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/551920/original/file-20231003-19-fdn0eu.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=535&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/551920/original/file-20231003-19-fdn0eu.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=535&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/551920/original/file-20231003-19-fdn0eu.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=535&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The Senate is more inclined to bipartisanship than the House, as can be seen in the handshake between GOP Sen. Jerry Moran (R-KS) and Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, a Democrat, after both worked to pass toxic exposure legislation in 2022.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/sen-jon-tester-looks-on-as-sen-jerry-moran-and-senate-news-photo/1403310961?adppopup=true">Joe Raedle/Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Finally, Senate leadership is less powerful. Mitch McConnell, when he was the majority leader, wielded a great amount of procedural power, and Chuck Schumer does now, but much less than the speaker does in the House. This creates a lot of the friction in the House between leadership and rank and file that you don’t typically see in the Senate.</p>
<h2>What are the key differences that help explain how these different House members are behaving?</h2>
<p>This is the big question Americans ask: Why on Earth does Congress do any of the things it does? </p>
<p>It may not seem like it, but members of Congress have incentives for doing what they do. There are the incentives of Congress as a whole. There are the incentives of the two parties, which is why they meet in their conferences and caucuses to strategize.</p>
<p>But individual members also face <a href="https://theconversation.com/voters-want-compromise-in-congress-so-why-the-brinkmanship-over-the-debt-ceiling-206465">very different pressures</a> in their different districts, even if they’re in the same party. Consider Gaetz, whose district Trump won by almost 40 points. He faces no serious challenge in a general election against a Democrat because it’s mostly Republicans in the district. The only race that really matters in this district is the primary. </p>
<p>By contrast, think of a moderate Republican from New York in a district that Joe Biden won by four or five points. This person understands that to get reelected, they need some critical mass of independents and maybe even some Democrats to support them.</p>
<p>Ultimately, the only constituency that any member of Congress must be responsive to is the one in their district. In political science, we call it <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/07343469.2020.1811425">dyadic representation</a>. It’s a pairing, a dialogue, between a member and their constituents. And that is ultimately what they are thinking about, or, at least, they should be thinking about if they want to get reelected. This is how you get these divergent approaches to governing.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/214993/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Charlie Hunt does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Long gridlocked by fighting between the two major political parties, the US House is now split by conflict within the GOP, thanks in part to redistricting practices that boost extremism.Charlie Hunt, Assistant Professor of Political Science, Boise State UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2145482023-09-29T17:05:58Z2023-09-29T17:05:58ZFeinstein’s death raises the question: How are vacant Senate seats filled?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/550773/original/file-20230927-23-37f41o.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=5%2C0%2C3771%2C2719&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Sen. Bob Menendez and his wife arrive at the U.S. District Court in New York City on Sept. 27, 2023.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/senator-bob-menendez-democrat-of-new-jersey-and-his-wife-news-photo/1692730524?adppopup=true">Timothy A. Clary/AFP via Getty Images</a></span></figcaption></figure><p><em>There’s an empty seat in the U.S. Senate now that California’s longtime and senior senator, <a href="https://theconversation.com/sen-dianne-feinstein-a-trailblazer-from-san-franciscos-city-hall-to-capitol-hill-199948">Dianne Feinstein, has died</a>. California Gov. Gavin Newsom announced on social media that <a href="https://twitter.com/GavinNewsom/status/1708699205206933871">he has chosen former state labor leader and current Emily’s List president Laphonza Butler</a>, whom he said would be “the first Black lesbian to openly serve in the U.S. Senate,” to the seat.</em></p>
<p><em>And, following the Sept. 22, 2023, federal <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/sen-bob-menendez-indicted-federal-charges-rcna111447">indictment on bribery and other charges</a> of U.S. Sen. Bob Menendez, a Democrat from New Jersey, numerous people, including some prominent Democratic lawmakers, have called for Menendez to resign. Even Democratic New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy, <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2023/09/22/politics/new-jersey-democrats-menendez/index.html">who would appoint a replacement for Menendez</a>, has said the senator should step down.</em></p>
<p><em>So far, Menendez, <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/sen-bob-menendez-arraigned-resignation-calls-grow-louder-rcna117438">who has pleaded not guilty</a> to the charges, has <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/25/nyregion/menendez-bribery-charges.html">refused to resign</a> from the Senate.</em></p>
<p><em>The possibility of other U.S. Senate vacancies looms, as well. Following two on-camera episodes during summer 2023 when Sen. Mitch McConnell, a Republican, appeared temporarily unable to speak or move, <a href="https://newrepublic.com/post/175328/republicans-resign-mitch-mcconnell-second-freezing-incident">some Republicans called for McConnell to resign</a>.</em></p>
<p><em>McConnell has not indicated he plans to step aside.</em></p>
<p><em>The Conversation asked <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=6P3QreQAAAAJ&hl=en">Gibbs Knotts</a>, a professor of political science at the College of Charleston, to explain states’ processes for replacing U.S. senators who choose or are forced to vacate their seats, or who die while in office.</em></p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/551027/original/file-20230928-23-8m0ezq.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="A gray-haired man in a blue blazer walks in a building followed by several other people." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/551027/original/file-20230928-23-8m0ezq.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/551027/original/file-20230928-23-8m0ezq.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/551027/original/file-20230928-23-8m0ezq.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/551027/original/file-20230928-23-8m0ezq.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/551027/original/file-20230928-23-8m0ezq.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/551027/original/file-20230928-23-8m0ezq.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/551027/original/file-20230928-23-8m0ezq.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell during the opening of the Senate at the U.S. Capitol on September 05, 2023 in Washington, D.C.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/senate-minority-leader-mitch-mcconnell-walks-to-the-senate-news-photo/1661896770?adppopup=true">Tasos Katopodis/Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Who has the power in most states to temporarily or permanently replace US senators?</h2>
<p>The basic rules about replacing U.S. senators are spelled out in the <a href="https://www.archives.gov/milestone-documents/17th-amendment">17th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution</a>: “When vacancies happen in the representation of any State in the Senate, the executive authority of such State shall issue writs of election to fill such vacancies: Provided, That the legislature of any State may empower the executive thereof to make temporary appointments until the people fill the vacancies by election as the legislature may direct.”</p>
<p>In simple terms, in 46 of the 50 states, <a href="https://www.ncsl.org/elections-and-campaigns/vacancies-in-the-united-states-senate">governors have the power to make temporary appointments to fill U.S. Senate vacancies</a> until either a scheduled or special election determines who will fill the remainder of a vacating senator’s term. <a href="https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2023-09-29/who-newsom-appoint-to-fill-dianne-feinsteins-senate-term-what-we-know">That’s the case in California</a>, where Gov. Gavin Newsom, a Democrat, will name Feinstein’s replacement. That person <a href="https://www.ncsl.org/elections-and-campaigns/vacancies-in-the-united-states-senate">will serve until the next election</a> for that seat, in November 2024.</p>
<p>Permanent replacements require an election. But there are rules about when and how these elections occur and those rules vary by state.</p>
<p>In 37 states, <a href="https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R44781">gubernatorial appointees serve</a> the remainder of the term or until the next scheduled general election. In the remaining states with gubernatorial appointments, special elections are required, often with an accelerated timetable. For example, <a href="https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R44781">Alabama law requires</a> a special election within 60 days of the gubernatorial appointment, while <a href="https://www.ncsl.org/elections-and-campaigns/vacancies-in-the-united-states-senate">Massachusetts law calls for</a> an election 145 to 160 days after the appointment. </p>
<p>North Dakota, Oregon, Rhode Island and Wisconsin do not allow governors to make temporary appointments. Those states only fill U.S. Senate vacancies by special election, but laws specify time periods in most states. For example, <a href="https://www.ncsl.org/elections-and-campaigns/vacancies-in-the-united-states-senate">special elections in Wisconsin must take place between 62 and 77 days of the vacancy</a> unless the opening occurs after July 1 during an even-numbered year. In this case the contest takes place during the November general election. However, <a href="https://www.ncsl.org/elections-and-campaigns/vacancies-in-the-united-states-senate">there is not a time period specified</a> by state law in Oregon.</p>
<h2>How long do those appointments last?</h2>
<p>If a person appointed to the seat by the governor then wins a special election or a contest scheduled alongside statewide elections, they will serve the remainder of the vacating senator’s term. Otherwise, if someone else wins the special election, they get to serve out the vacating senator’s term.</p>
<h2>What rules are there on how governors make the appointments?</h2>
<p>Governors have some restrictions on how they make U.S. Senate appointments. In 10 of the gubernatorial appointment states, <a href="https://www.ncsl.org/elections-and-campaigns/vacancies-in-the-united-states-senate">U.S. senators must be from the same party as the prior incumbent</a>. Arizona, Hawaii, Kentucky, Maryland, Montana, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Utah, West Virginia and Wyoming have this restriction. </p>
<p>In Utah, <a href="https://www.ncsl.org/elections-and-campaigns/vacancies-in-the-united-states-senate">the governor is required to select from a list of three candidates</a> submitted by the party of the U.S. senator being replaced.</p>
<p>In the rest of the states, the governor has the power to appoint a successor, regardless of party, <a href="https://www.ncsl.org/elections-and-campaigns/vacancies-in-the-united-states-senate">including in California</a>.</p>
<h2>Do state legislators have a say in the process?</h2>
<p>While governors have most of the power, state legislators also have a say in the process. Most notably, legislators establish the appointment procedures and set the general rules about when an election must occur. If they don’t like the process, they have the power to change it.</p>
<p>A recent example occurred in Oklahoma in 2021, which was then one of a very few states where a vacated Senate seat went unfilled until the next election. </p>
<p>Dissatisfied with that process, the Republican-controlled legislature <a href="http://www.oklegislature.gov/BillInfo.aspx?Bill=sb959&Session=2100">passed a law</a> to allow gubernatorial appointments for vacated U.S. Senate seats. <a href="https://www.koco.com/article/oklahoma-house-passes-bill-allowing-governor-to-appoint-us-senator-amid-vacancy/35604497">Republican legislators were motivated to change their state’s law</a>, in part, because of the 50-50 split in the U.S. Senate and a fear that a vacated seat would give an advantage to Democrats.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/214548/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Gibbs Knotts does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>California’s governor has already announced his pick for the the seat, Laphonza Butler. Here’s more on the state-by-state process for replacing a senator who has died, is facing criminal charges or has serious illness.Gibbs Knotts, Professor of Political Science, College of CharlestonLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2143442023-09-29T12:27:01Z2023-09-29T12:27:01ZJohn Fetterman might be the first to try to bare his legs in the Senate, but shorts have been ticking people off for almost a century<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/550735/original/file-20230927-17-74340e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=9%2C4%2C3049%2C2297&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The Shorts Protest of 1930 brought more than 600 students to the steps of Robinson Hall at Dartmouth College.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Courtesy of Rauner Library, Dartmouth College</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>When Sen. Chuck Schumer <a href="https://www.axios.com/2023/09/17/senate-drops-dress-code-schumer">quietly relaxed the U.S. Senate’s dress code</a>, supposedly to accommodate Sen. John Fetterman’s desire to wear hooded sweatshirts and gym shorts, <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/politics/fetterman-reignites-dress-code-bickering-with-senate-colleagues-after-menendez-bribery-charges">the backlash was swift</a>.</p>
<p>Apparently, it was enough to compel senators <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/politics/senate-unanimously-passes-reinstate-formal-dress-code-after-sen-john-fetterman-controversy">to unanimously pass</a> a resolution on Sept. 28, 2023, mandating a coat, tie and slacks for men on the Senate floor. </p>
<p><a href="https://www.researchgate.net/scientific-contributions/Deirdre-Clemente-2080373698">As a fashion historian</a>, I’ve heard this tune before. <a href="https://uncpress.org/book/9781469629919/dress-casual/">It’s the same one sung by college administrators</a> in the late 1950s when women wanted to wear pants to the campus cafeteria. And I could hear the chorus of befuddled office managers who wanted to ban polo shirts in the early 1990s, just as <a href="https://www.ivy-style.com/upending-what-guys-wear-to-work-forever-the-dockers-story.html">Casual Fridays</a> revolutionized what people wear to work.</p>
<p>The people living through these changes often consider them devolution rather than evolution. An old guard steps forward to protect the sartorial standards of a previous time by using terms such as “respect” and “tradition.” They might be able to staunch the shift, as the Senate seems to have done. But time and again, their efforts to regulate attire ultimately end up failing. </p>
<h2>‘Brainless’ students bare their legs</h2>
<p>Shorts, in particular, have a history of eliciting ire.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.nytimes.com/slideshow/2015/08/09/magazine/short-game.html">The Shorts Protest of 1930</a> brought more than 600 students to the hallowed steps of Robinson Hall at then-all-male Dartmouth College to defy the much-hated dress codes outlawing exercise clothing in campus buildings. </p>
<p>The editors of the student newspaper <a href="https://uncpress.org/book/9781469629919/dress-casual/">had challenged readers</a> to “bring forth your treasured possession – be it tailored to fit or old flannels delegged” so that the men could “lounge forth to the supreme pleasure of complete leg freedom.” The students came in old basketball uniforms, tweed walking shorts and newly minted cutoffs. </p>
<p>It was bigger than campus rules. It was about freedom and self-expression. The Associated Press picked up the story and took it national. <a href="https://theprince.princeton.edu/princetonperiodicals/?a=d&d=Princetonian19300516-01.2.19&srpos=1&e=-------en-20--1--txt-txIN-dartmouth+shorts------">Student papers at Princeton</a> and Harvard covered it, too, and Fox Movietone News showed up to record the day’s events. </p>
<p>The blowback from the old guard was instant and vitriolic. A “Prominent Boston Clothier” <a href="https://uncpress.org/book/9781469629919/dress-casual/">sat down and wrote a letter</a> to the university to declare the “average American student” to be “the most brainless of any student in the world” and “Having no brains to make them famous, they must use their legs.”</p>
<h2>Regulating women’s bodies</h2>
<p>Women also decided to get into the shorts game. Beginning in the late 1920s, shorts worn by women in public spaces were the subject of intense debate for more than 30 years. </p>
<p>Social critics, boyfriends and fashion writers tried to <a href="https://panewsarchive.psu.edu/lccn/sn85054904/1945-07-13/ed-1/seq-4/#words=slacks+Women">put parameters on “when” and “where”</a> the garment could be worn. Shorts were banned from church services but not from informal social activities. You couldn’t wear them to dinner at the cafeteria, but they were OK for lunch. And some country clubs in the 1930s <a href="https://theconversation.com/serena-williams-catsuit-controversy-evokes-the-battle-over-women-wearing-shorts-102537">made women wear trenchcoats</a> to the tennis court in order to cover their shorts. </p>
<p>Time moved on, and men and women continued to simply … <a href="https://www.chronicallyvintage.com/2013/08/serving-up-some-vintage-tennis-history.html">wear shorts</a>. In 1955, <a href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.5149/9781469614083_clemente">Esquire confirmed for readers</a>, “You can now wear shorts for sports and informal business anywhere the weather’s hot, and no one is going to bat an eye.” </p>
<h2>Pants pushback</h2>
<p>For decades, written or unwritten dress rules also forbade women from wearing pants to formal settings. </p>
<p>University deans, schoolmarms and human resources managers penned dress codes outright forbidding the garment or relegating it to certain areas. <a href="https://www.abebooks.com/LADY-LORE-Witan-K.U-Putnam-James/30985683379/bd">Etiquette writers explained that slacks</a> “insulted the aesthetic sense of men” and were appropriate in only one setting: when “you’re roughing it.” </p>
<p>Nonetheless, women continued to wear pants in many varieties. </p>
<p>In November 1970, a reporter for the San Francisco Chronicle researched an article on maitre d’s at fancy restaurants refusing to seat women in pantsuits. At one establishment, the host explained to her, “<a href="https://static1.squarespace.com/static/59692deb29687f436321d3c1/t/6515b9ffed79b71ae5aaa0c1/1695922689066/Women+in+Pants+suits%2C+SF.png">If we admit one woman in pants, we have to admit them all</a>.” Others cited “propriety” and “decorum” as reasons to deny entrance. </p>
<p>The criticisms surrounding Schumer’s decision sound a lot like the complaints against female politicians wearing pants. In 1993, Sens. Carol Moseley-Braun and Barbara Mikulski <a href="https://www.mentalfloss.com/article/93384/why-women-couldnt-wear-pants-senate-floor-until-1993">wore their pantsuits to the Senate floor</a>. </p>
<p>Rather than remove the women, Martha Pope, the first female sergeant-at-arms, <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/2002/06/05/the-evolution-of-the-pantsuit-a-debate-that-continues-one-leg-at-a-time/53931c05-19ce-4372-b40a-9ee7ec6bf716/">amended the written dress rules</a> to specify pantsuits as appropriate business attire.</p>
<h2>Independence and individuality</h2>
<p>As sartorial standards change, what people wear in public becomes ground zero for hashing out new ideas of race, class and gender. Most often, wealthy white men are the arbiters of “appropriate” and “inappropriate.”</p>
<p>For more than a century, fashion has dramatically moved away from being a top-down regulatory process to being a means of individual expression. At a celebratory fashion show for the country’s bicentennial in 1976, former Miss America Bess Myerson <a href="https://uncpress.org/book/9781469629919/dress-casual/">told the audience</a>, “Our clothing and our lifestyle have reflected each other, reinforcing our independence and individuality.” </p>
<p>She proclaimed that in 20th-century America, fashions were not “uniforms of rank or class, as they were in many old lands from which our people fled.” </p>
<p>Whether written down or just implicit, dress codes have meaning only when they are enforced. To me, the idea of policing the dress of adult professionals is simply outdated.</p>
<p>When John Fetterman wears gym shorts in public, I see him tapping into his personal identity and his political brand. Despite the buttoned-up outrage and <a href="https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2023/09/19/senate-dress-code-casual-divided-cnc-vpx.cnn">jokes from Susan Collins about wearing a bikini</a> on the Senate floor, fashion is born of culture, and culture is dynamic.</p>
<p>And cultural forces are almost impossible to beat back.</p>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/214344/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Deirdre Clemente does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>As fashion norms change, what people wear in public becomes ground zero for hashing out new ideas of race, class and gender.Deirdre Clemente, Associate Professor of History, University of Nevada, Las VegasLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2144312023-09-28T12:30:09Z2023-09-28T12:30:09ZGovernment shutdowns hurt federal worker morale, long after paychecks resume − especially for those considered ‘nonessential’<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/550724/original/file-20230927-23-memaj7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">A government shutdown would affect more than 2 million federal employees, plus more than 3 million contractors. </span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/sunrise-hits-the-u-s-capitol-dome-on-september-30-2021-in-news-photo/1344056675?adppopup=true">Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Unless <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2023/09/27/government-shutdown-house-rejects-senate-spending-bill/">Congress and the White House can agree on a budget</a> or extend funding short term, the <a href="https://apnews.com/article/shutdown-mccarthy-biden-trump-republicans-e4c37673b6507deaed2902f2166ef759">federal government will shut</a> down on Oct. 1, 2023. </p>
<p>This means that approximately <a href="https://www.fedscope.opm.gov/employment.aspx">2.2 million</a> civilian federal employees would be furloughed and face delayed paychecks and lost work hours – in addition to <a href="https://www.volckeralliance.org/resources/true-size-government">3.7 million federal contractors</a> who would also be forced to stop working and forgo their pay. </p>
<p>I am a <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=AJLW1HwAAAAJ&hl=en&oi=ao">scholar of public administration</a> with a focus on government employees’ career paths. Much of my research centers on how turbulent politics filter into career employees’ daily lives, influencing their choices to join, stay with or leave the government workforce. </p>
<p><a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0095399718760589">People don’t leave government</a> because of a single event like a shutdown. </p>
<p>But negative experiences accumulate over time. </p>
<p>Shutdowns lead to more people being more likely to leave government employment – and higher workloads and lower motivation for those who remain. These conditions may feed Republican political goals, but they harm the millions of Americans who depend on competent, timely assistance from the public servants on the government payroll. This ultimately leads to lower work performance and employee retention problems. </p>
<p>My interviews with federal employees show that some will consider leaving if they are told that their work is not essential, they face financial stress or they don’t have a big enough project budget to do their job. </p>
<p>I have found that politicians and other people deriding government employees’ work is another factor that can push them to look for work elsewhere. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/550725/original/file-20230927-25-fngbz5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="A group of people wear hats and warm clothing and hold up signs that say 'I am a federal employee' and 'Sorry, we're closed.'" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/550725/original/file-20230927-25-fngbz5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/550725/original/file-20230927-25-fngbz5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/550725/original/file-20230927-25-fngbz5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/550725/original/file-20230927-25-fngbz5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/550725/original/file-20230927-25-fngbz5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/550725/original/file-20230927-25-fngbz5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/550725/original/file-20230927-25-fngbz5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Federal workers protest the government shutdown in Chicago in 2019.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/government-workers-protest-the-government-shutdown-during-a-news-photo/1092313396?adppopup=true">Scott Olson/Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Financial stresses</h2>
<p>The first U.S. government shutdown <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/14/politics/first-government-shutdown-1976/index.html">happened in 1976</a>. Since then, the <a href="https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/1/19/16905584/government-shutdown-history-clinton-obama-explained">government has experienced</a> 21 shutdowns. </p>
<p>The <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/longest-government-shutdown/">shortest shutdown</a> lasted only a day, <a href="https://www.govexec.com/management/2023/09/5-longest-government-shutdowns-us-history/390655/">and the longest</a> – and most recent – in 2019 was 35 days. The average shutdown is 7.6 days if all shutdowns are included. If you exclude the record-setting <a href="https://www.history.com/news/ronald-reagan-government-shutdown-reasons">eight consecutive short shutdowns</a> in 1981, the average length is 11.2 days. </p>
<p>These <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-09-25/shutdowns-cost-billions-as-us-federal-workers-paid-to-stay-home">shutdowns are often expensive</a>. The U.S. Congressional Budget Office estimated that one 35-day shutdown, from December 2018 to January 2019, cost the <a href="https://www.cbo.gov/system/files/2019-01/54937-PartialShutdownEffects.pdf">U.S. economy over US$3 billion</a>, given the loss of federal workers’ contributions to the economy and other factors. </p>
<p>But federal employees and contractors – people who work for the government, though not in a full-time, salaried capacity – feel the worst effects of a government shutdown. </p>
<h2>Essential and nonessential workers</h2>
<p>Almost all civilian federal employees – with the exception of U.S. Postal Service workers – do not receive paychecks when the government is closed, regardless of whether federal agencies determine their work is considered “essential” or “nonessential.”</p>
<p>A large range of employees, from National Park rangers to medical researchers, are typically considered nonessential and stay home during a shutdown. <a href="https://time.com/6316879/how-government-shutdown-affects-americans/">Essential workers who must stay on the job could include</a> law enforcement officials and federal prison guards. </p>
<p>Both nonessential and essential workers, whether they are working during a shutdown or not, won’t get paid until after the shutdown ends. </p>
<p>Even short delays in pay can have substantial financial effects.</p>
<p>In 2017, a quarter of the federal workforce made less than $56,143 a year, and the <a href="https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/data-analysis-documentation/federal-employment-reports/reports-publications/salary-information-for-the-executive-branch.pdf">median salary was $79,386</a>. Some of these workers live paycheck to paycheck. </p>
<p>My research shows this gap in pay can leave people unable to pay their rent or mortgages and can also lead to <a href="https://washingtoncitypaper.com/article/182274/the-dc-guide-to-the-201819-government-shutdown/">difficulty paying</a> for everyday expenses like groceries. </p>
<p>Many end up depending on food banks and other resources to bridge the gap between paychecks. Federal workers like administrative assistants or security guards who receive lower wages, or young workers who haven’t built up financial reserves, are the first affected. </p>
<h2>Different results for employees</h2>
<p>Workers who are considered “essential” must work through a shutdown without receiving pay until after the government reopens. Their “nonessential” peers are not allowed to do any work, also without receiving their salary until the government reopens. </p>
<p>Contractors will not be allowed to work during a shutdown and will never receive any compensation. </p>
<p>But contractors and federal employees are often working in the same office. They are functionally co-workers who know that some will be paid and others will not if a shutdown happens. </p>
<p>Individual managers make the decision about which employees are “essential” and which are not. </p>
<p>Some managers use the work itself to guide their choices, while others may look at fairness concerns and individual employee circumstances, like how long someone has been on the job. </p>
<p>Inconsistency in these decisions leaves room for tensions over fairness. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/550727/original/file-20230927-17-4js43n.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="A row of people stand in a hall and wear purple hats and hold up white papers." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/550727/original/file-20230927-17-4js43n.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/550727/original/file-20230927-17-4js43n.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=387&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/550727/original/file-20230927-17-4js43n.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=387&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/550727/original/file-20230927-17-4js43n.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=387&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/550727/original/file-20230927-17-4js43n.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=487&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/550727/original/file-20230927-17-4js43n.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=487&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/550727/original/file-20230927-17-4js43n.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=487&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Furloughed contract workers, including custodians and security officers, hold unpaid bills on Capitol Hill during a shutdown in 2019.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/furloughed-contract-workers-including-security-officers-and-news-photo/1083341754?adppopup=true">Saul Loeb/AFP via Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>‘Really offended’</h2>
<p>My research shows that a discrepancy in how workers are treated during a shutdown can create workplace conflicts. As a result, employees can wind up feeling low morale, which reduces work productivity.</p>
<p>One federal worker I interviewed following a two-week shutdown in 2013 said: “Up to September 30th we were working 10-hour days. On October 1st we were nonessential.” </p>
<p>Another furloughed employee explained why the division between employees who were asked to continue working or stay home during a shutdown made some people upset. </p>
<p>“We had to put together two lists: mission essential and not. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/0095399718760589">People who were not essential</a> were really offended thinking that others thought what they did was not important. That government shutdown had a greater effect than what I thought it was going to have on the workforce,” this employee explained. </p>
<h2>A loss for the workforce</h2>
<p>Shutdowns have other hidden costs that could undermine the federal workforce’s strength. </p>
<p>In 2017, about 45% of <a href="https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/data-analysis-documentation/federal-employment-reports/reports-publications/full-time-permanent-age-distributions/">federal employees were older than 50</a>, while only 6% were younger than 30.</p>
<p>If a wave of future retirements leaves a smaller pool of workers who are questioning their careers in government, this could weaken the federal workforce and its performance. </p>
<p>Shutdowns become a part of workers’ decision-making process about their career paths.</p>
<p>My research shows that workers at the beginning of their careers are more likely to change jobs than colleagues who have been there longer. </p>
<p>Many people I have interviewed also say that the strain of shutdowns made them consider retiring earlier instead of waiting a few more years. </p>
<h2>Long-term damage</h2>
<p>Conservative politicians have long advocated for reducing the size of the federal government. Then-President Ronald Reagan succinctly made this point in 1981, when he said, “<a href="https://www.reaganlibrary.gov/archives/speech/inaugural-address-1981">Government is not the solution</a> to our problem, government is the problem.”</p>
<p>If one views government and spending as fundamentally flawed, then taking drastic action to reduce spending and even shutting down the government becomes a viable path for achieving policy goals and political points. </p>
<p>The problem is that shutting down government is expensive and causes long-term damage.</p>
<p>By authorizing a shutdown, elected officials are signaling in concrete ways that the work of the federal government and its employees is not valued. And regular Americans rely on federal employees to do quality work for all sorts of things, including maintaining national park monuments, inspecting hazardous waste sites and monitoring drinking water facilities. </p>
<p>Even if public proclamations about firing federal employees and <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/draining-the-swamp">“draining the swamp”</a> are not acted on, they could make anyone interested in federal service think twice. </p>
<p>I think people need to recognize that government shutdowns have a price that is far greater than a temporary disruption.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/214431/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Susannah Bruns Ali does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>While a single shutdown is unlikely to push a government worker to quit, the cumulative effect of multiple shutdowns can lead to low worker morale and employee retention problems.Susannah Bruns Ali, Assistant Professor of Public Policy and Administration, Florida International UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2142252023-09-24T18:24:50Z2023-09-24T18:24:50ZMenendez indictment looks bad, but there are defenses he can make<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/549871/original/file-20230924-21-ath6uu.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=5%2C0%2C1985%2C1326&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Sen. Bob Menendez, D-N.J., and his wife, Nadine Arslanian Menendez.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://newsroom.ap.org/detail/MenendezBriberyDeveloper/4219da16c3724960a83927459e24e8ef/photo?Query=Menendez&mediaType=photo&sortBy=arrivaldatetime:desc&dateRange=Anytime&totalCount=5321&currentItemNo=4">AP Photo/Susan Walsh, File</a></span></figcaption></figure><p><em>Reactions came quickly to the <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2023/09/22/nyregion/menendez-indictment-document.html">federal indictment</a> on Sept. 22, 2023, of New Jersey’s senior U.S. senator, Democrat Bob Menendez. New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy joined other state Democrats <a href="https://www.politico.com/news/2023/09/22/new-jersey-democrats-menendez-indictment-00117693">in urging Menendez to resign</a>, saying, “The alleged facts are so serious that they compromise the ability of Senator Menendez to effectively represent the people of our state.”</em></p>
<p><em>The <a href="https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/pr/us-senator-robert-menendez-his-wife-and-three-new-jersey-businessmen-charged-bribery">indictment charged Menendez</a>, “his wife NADINE MENENDEZ, a/k/a ‘Nadine Arslanian,’ and three New Jersey businessmen, WAEL HANA, a/k/a ‘Will Hana,’ JOSE URIBE, and FRED DAIBES, with participating in a years-long bribery scheme … in exchange for MENENDEZ’s agreement to use his official position to protect and enrich them and to benefit the Government of Egypt.” Menendez said he believed the case would be “successfully resolved once <a href="https://rollcall.com/?p=727870">all of the facts are presented</a>,” but he stepped down temporarily as chairman of the Senate’s influential Committee on Foreign Relations.</em> </p>
<p><em>The Conversation’s senior politics and democracy editor, Naomi Schalit, interviewed longtime Washington lawyer and Penn State Dickinson Law professor Stanley M. Brand, who has served <a href="https://pennstatelaw.psu.edu/faculty/brand">as general counsel for the House of Representatives</a> and is a prominent white-collar defense attorney, and asked him to explain the indictment – and the outlook for Menendez both legally and politically.</em></p>
<p><strong>What did you think when you first read this indictment?</strong></p>
<p>As an old pal once told me, “even a thin pancake has two sides.”</p>
<p>Reading the criminal indictment in a case for the first time often produces a startled reaction to the government’s case. But as my over 40 years of experience <a href="https://pennstatelaw.psu.edu/faculty/brand">defending public corruption cases and teaching criminal law</a> have taught me, there are usually issues presented by an indictment that can be challenged by the defense. </p>
<p>In addition, as judges routinely instruct juries in these cases, the indictment is not evidence and the jury may not rely on it to draw any conclusions. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/549872/original/file-20230924-21-2fp318.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="A man in a suit pointing at a poster board with various photos on it." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/549872/original/file-20230924-21-2fp318.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/549872/original/file-20230924-21-2fp318.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/549872/original/file-20230924-21-2fp318.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/549872/original/file-20230924-21-2fp318.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/549872/original/file-20230924-21-2fp318.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/549872/original/file-20230924-21-2fp318.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/549872/original/file-20230924-21-2fp318.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Damian Williams, U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York, speaks during a news conference on Sept. 22, 2023, after announcing the Menendez indictment.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/damian-williams-u-s-attorney-for-the-southern-district-of-news-photo/1695609428?adppopup=true">Alexi J. Rosenfeld/Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p><strong>The average reader will look at the indictment and say, “These guys are toast.” But are there ways Menendez can defend himself?</strong></p>
<p>There are a number of complex issues presented by these charges that could be argued by the defense in court. </p>
<p>First, while the indictment charges a conspiracy to commit bribery, it does not charge the substantive crime of bribery itself. This may suggest that the government lacks what it believes is direct evidence of a quid pro quo – “this for that” – between Menendez and the alleged bribers. </p>
<p>There is evidence of conversations and texts that coyly and perhaps purposely avoid explicit acknowledgment of a corrupt agreement – for instance, “On or about January 24, 2022, DAIBES’s Driver exchanged two brief calls with NADINE MENENDEZ. NADINE MENENDEZ then texted DAIBES, writing, ‘Thank you. Christmas in January.’” </p>
<p>The government will argue that this reflects acknowledgment of a connection between official action and delivery of cash to Sen. Menendez, even though it is a less-than-express statement of the connection. </p>
<p>Speaking in this kind of code may not fully absolve the defendants, but the government must prove the defendants’ intent to carry out a corrupt agreement beyond a reasonable doubt – and juries sometimes want to see more than innuendo before convicting.</p>
<p>The government has also charged <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1346">a crime called</a> “<a href="https://sgp.fas.org/crs/misc/R45479.pdf">honest services fraud</a>” – essentially, a crime involving a public official putting their own financial interest above the public interest in their otherwise honest and faithful performance of their duties.</p>
<p>The alleged failure of Menendez to list the gifts, as required, on his Senate financial disclosure forms will be cited by prosecutors as evidence of “consciousness of guilt” – an attempt to conceal the transactions. </p>
<p>However, under <a href="https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/mcdonnell-v-united-states/">a recent Supreme Court case</a> involving former <a href="https://theconversation.com/state-prosecutors-and-voters-not-the-feds-can-hold-corrupt-officials-accountable-138385">Gov. Bob McDonnell of Virginia for similar crimes</a>, the definition of “<a href="https://theconversation.com/its-getting-harder-to-prosecute-politicians-for-corruption-91609">official acts</a>” under the bribery statute has been narrowly defined to mean only formal decisions or proceedings. That definition does not include less-formal actions like those performed by Menendez, such as meetings with Egyptian military officials. </p>
<p>The Supreme Court rejected an interpretation of official acts that included arranging meetings with state officials and hosting events at the governor’s mansion, or promoting a private businessman’s products at such events. </p>
<p>When it comes time for the judge to instruct the jury at the end of the trial, Menendez may well be able to argue that much of what he did in fact did not constitute “official acts” and therefore are not illegal under the bribery statute. </p>
<p><strong>This case involves alleged favors done for a foreign country in exchange for money. Does that change this case from simple bribery to something more serious?</strong></p>
<p>The issue of foreign military sales to Egypt may also present a constitutional obstacle to the government. </p>
<p>The indictment specifically cites Menendez’s role as <a href="https://www.politico.com/news/2023/09/22/menendez-steps-down-foreign-relations-committee-00117622">chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee</a> and actions he took in that role in releasing holds on certain military sales to Egypt and letters to his colleagues on that issue. The Constitution’s <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution-conan/article-1/section-6/clause-1">speech or debate clause</a> <a href="https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R45043.pdf">protects members from</a> <a href="https://theconversation.com/doj-drops-investigation-into-three-senators-for-insider-trading-burr-probe-continues-134875">liability or questioning</a> when undertaking actions within the “legitimate legislative sphere” – which undoubtedly includes these functions. </p>
<p>While this will not likely be a defense to all the allegations, it could require paring the allegations related to this conduct. That would whittle away at a pillar of the government’s attempt to show Menendez had committed abuse of office. </p>
<p>In fact, when the government has charged members of Congress with various forms of corruption, <a href="https://theconversation.com/state-prosecutors-and-voters-not-the-feds-can-hold-corrupt-officials-accountable-138385">courts have rejected</a> any reference to their membership on congressional committees as evidence against them. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/549873/original/file-20230924-19-o34i54.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="Three men in suits, standing in front of a fire engine." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/549873/original/file-20230924-19-o34i54.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/549873/original/file-20230924-19-o34i54.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=435&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/549873/original/file-20230924-19-o34i54.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=435&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/549873/original/file-20230924-19-o34i54.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=435&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/549873/original/file-20230924-19-o34i54.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=547&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/549873/original/file-20230924-19-o34i54.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=547&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/549873/original/file-20230924-19-o34i54.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=547&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy, left, seen here in 2018 with Robert Menendez and fellow New Jersey Democratic Sen. Cory Booker, has called on Menendez to resign.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://newsroom.ap.org/detail/SuperstormSandyRebuildingAid/b3ee03a1ac9644d8add820dee6f3a57d/photo?Query=Phil%20Murphy%20Robert%20Menendez&mediaType=photo&sortBy=arrivaldatetime:desc&dateRange=Anytime&totalCount=3&currentItemNo=2">AP Photo/Wayne Parry</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p><strong>How likely is Menendez’s ouster from the Senate?</strong></p>
<p>Generally, neither the House nor Senate <a href="https://www.senate.gov/about/powers-procedures/expulsion.htm">will move to expel</a> <a href="https://www.everycrsreport.com/reports/RL33229.html">an indicted member before conviction</a>. </p>
<p>There have been rare exceptions, such as when <a href="https://www.nydailynews.com/2001/11/20/ex-sen-harrison-williams-81/">Sen. Harrison “Pete” Williams was indicted</a> in the FBI Abscam sting operation from the late 1970s and early 1980s <a href="https://www.fbi.gov/history/famous-cases/abscam">against members of Congress</a>. Williams resigned in 1982 <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1982/03/12/williams-facing-expulsion-resigns-from-us-senate/714785a8-a310-47cd-8584-959f4549fd2c/">shortly before an expected expulsion</a> vote. With current <a href="https://about.bgov.com/brief/balance-of-power-a-partisan-convergence-in-the-senate/">Democratic control of the Senate</a> by a margin of just one seat, Menendez’s ouster seems unlikely even though the Democratic governor of New Jersey would assuredly appoint a Democrat to fill the vacancy.</p>
<p><strong>‘In the history of the United States Congress, it is doubtful there has ever been a corruption allegation of this depth and seriousness,’ <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/23/nyregion/robert-menendez-political-future.html?searchResultPosition=1">former New Jersey Sen. Robert Torricelli said</a>. True?</strong></p>
<p>That seems hyperbolic. The Menendez case is just the latest in a long line of corruption cases involving members of Congress. </p>
<p>In <a href="https://www.fbi.gov/history/famous-cases/abscam">the Abscam case</a>, seven members of the House and one Senator were all convicted in a bribery scheme. That scheme involved undercover FBI agents <a href="https://www.fbi.gov/history/famous-cases/abscam">dressed up as wealthy Arabs</a> offering cash to Congress members in return for a variety of political favors. </p>
<p>In the <a href="https://ethics.house.gov/committee-reports/korean-influence-investigation">Korean Influence Investigation in 1978</a> – when I served as House counsel – <a href="https://library.cqpress.com/cqalmanac/document.php?id=cqal78-1237310">the House</a> and <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/1979/08/17/archives/investigation-into-influencebuying-by-korean-figure-comes-to-an-end.html">Department of Justice conducted an extensive investigation</a> of influence peddling by Tongsun Park, a South Korean national, in which questionnaires were sent to every member of the House relating to acceptance of gifts from Park. </p>
<p>Going all the way back to 1872, there was <a href="https://www.britannica.com/money/topic/Credit-Mobilier-Scandal">the Credit Mobilier scandal</a> that involved <a href="https://www.americanheritage.com/ultimate-congressional-scandal">prominent members of the House and Vice President Schuyler Colfax</a> in a scheme to reward these government officials with shares in the transcontinental railroad company in exchange for their support of funding for the project.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/214225/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Stanley M. Brand does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The indictment of Sen. Bob Menendez is full of lurid details – hundreds of thousands of dollars in cash stuffed into clothes among them. Will they tank Menendez’s career?Stanley M. Brand, Distinguished Fellow in Law and Government, Dickinson Law, Penn StateLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2105872023-09-01T12:43:01Z2023-09-01T12:43:01ZSen. Mitch McConnell’s legacy is the current Supreme Court and a judiciary reshaped by his ‘calculated audacity’<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/578744/original/file-20240228-22-5an3a8.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=35%2C21%2C4687%2C3122&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell departs the Senate chamber on February 28, 2024 in Washington, DC. </span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/senate-minority-leader-mitch-mcconnell-departs-the-senate-news-photo/2038738239?adppopup=true">Photo by Nathan Howard/Getty Images</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Mitch McConnell, who announced on Feb. 28, 2024, that he would <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/28/us/politics/mitch-mcconnell-senate.html">step down as the Senate GOP leader</a> later in the year, used his tenure as the longest-serving Senate leader of any party to <a href="https://www.politico.com/news/2020/09/28/senate-judiciary-staffs-up-for-barrett-fight-422595">remake the federal judiciary from top to bottom</a>. </p>
<p>His success could hardly have been predicted when Senate Republicans elected McConnell as their leader in 2006. For most of the 40-plus years I have watched McConnell, first as a reporter covering Kentucky politics and now as a <a href="https://ci.uky.edu/jam/faculty-directory/al-cross">journalism professor focused on rural issues</a>, he seemed to have no great ambition or goals, other than gaining power and keeping it. </p>
<p>He always cared about the courts, though. In 1987, after Democrats defeated Supreme Court nominee Robert Bork, <a href="https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/film/supreme-revenge/">McConnell warned</a> that if a Democratic president “sends up somebody we don’t like” to a Republican-controlled Senate, the GOP would follow suit. He fulfilled that threat in 2016, <a href="https://www.npr.org/2016/09/06/492857860/173-days-and-counting-gop-unlikely-to-end-blockade-on-garland-nomination-soon">refusing to confirm Merrick Garland</a>, Barack Obama’s pick for the Supreme Court. </p>
<p>Keeping that vacancy open helped elect Donald Trump. Two people could hardly be more different, but the taciturn McConnell and the voluble Trump have at least one thing in common: They want power. </p>
<p>Trump had exercised his power with what often seems like reckless audacity, but McConnell’s 36-year Senate tenure is built on his calculated audacity.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/360565/original/file-20200929-18-u7yqy1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="Trump points at McConnell in a crowd while shaking his hand" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/360565/original/file-20200929-18-u7yqy1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/360565/original/file-20200929-18-u7yqy1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=431&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/360565/original/file-20200929-18-u7yqy1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=431&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/360565/original/file-20200929-18-u7yqy1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=431&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/360565/original/file-20200929-18-u7yqy1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=541&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/360565/original/file-20200929-18-u7yqy1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=541&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/360565/original/file-20200929-18-u7yqy1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=541&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Trump and McConnell in February 2017.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/president-donald-trump-shakes-hands-with-senate-majority-news-photo/646462182?adppopup=true">Bill Clark/CQ Roll Call</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>McConnell’s political rise</h2>
<p>It was audacious, back in 1977, to think that a wonky lawyer who had been disqualified from his only previous campaign for public office could defeat a popular two-term county executive in Louisville. </p>
<p>McConnell ran anyway. </p>
<p>It was audacious to think that a Republican could get the local labor council to endorse him in that race, but he got it, by <a href="https://www.npr.org/transcripts/729957825">leading the members to believe he would help them get collective bargaining for public employees</a>. </p>
<p>McConnell won the race. He didn’t pursue collective bargaining.</p>
<p>Seven years later, it was audacious to think that an urbanite who wore loafers to dusty, gravelly county fairs and lacked a compelling personality could unseat a popular two-term Kentucky senator, especially when he trailed by <a href="https://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/congress/article151298992.html">40 points</a> in August. But McConnell won. </p>
<p>As soon as he won a second term in 1990, McConnell started trying to <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/22/magazine/mcconnell-senate-trump.html">climb the Senate leadership ladder</a>, facilitated in large measure by his willingness to be the point man on campaign finance issues, an area his colleagues feared. They reacted emotionally to this touchy issue; he studied it, owned it and moved higher in the leadership.</p>
<h2>Business, not service</h2>
<p>In politics, lack of emotion is usually a drawback. McConnell makes up for that by having command of the rules and the facts and a methodical attitude.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/360558/original/file-20200929-14-898n8g.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="Black and white image of a younger Mcconnell" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/360558/original/file-20200929-14-898n8g.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/360558/original/file-20200929-14-898n8g.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=414&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/360558/original/file-20200929-14-898n8g.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=414&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/360558/original/file-20200929-14-898n8g.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=414&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/360558/original/file-20200929-14-898n8g.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=520&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/360558/original/file-20200929-14-898n8g.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=520&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/360558/original/file-20200929-14-898n8g.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=520&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">McConnell in 1992.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/close-up-of-sen-mitch-mcconnell-r-ky-in-april-1992-news-photo/674220092?adppopup=true">Laura Patterson/CQ Roll Call via Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The recording on his home phone once said, “This is Mitch McConnell. You’ve reached my home. If this call is about business, please call my office.”</p>
<p>Business. Not something like “my service to you in the United States Senate,” but “business.” </p>
<p>This lack of emotion keeps McConnell disciplined. I am not the only person he has told, “The most important word in the English language is ‘focus,’ because if you don’t focus, you don’t get anything done.”</p>
<p>Five years ago, I spoke to the <a href="https://louisville.edu/admissions/cost-aid/scholarships/mentored-scholarships/mcconnell">McConnell Scholars</a>, the political-leadership program he started at the University of Louisville. One thank-you gift was a letter opener bearing two words: focus and humility. The first word was no surprise, because of McConnell’s well-known maxim; the second one intrigued me.</p>
<p>The director of the program, Gary Gregg, says adding “humility” was his idea. But it fits the founder. With his studied approach and careful reticence, McConnell is the opposite of bombast, and that surely helped him gain the Republican leader’s job and stay there. He has occasionally described his colleagues as prima donnas who <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/22/magazine/mcconnell-senate-trump.html">look in the mirror and see a president</a>, something he claims to have never done. </p>
<p>When the colleagues in your party caucus know you are focused on their interests and not your own, you can keep getting reelected leader, as McConnell has done without opposition every two years since 2006.</p>
<h2>McConnell’s Supreme Court</h2>
<p>McConnell’s caucus trusts him. When he saw Obama as an existential threat – someone who could bring back enough moderate Democrats to give the party a long-term governing majority – McConnell held the caucus together <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/24/health/policy/24health.html">in opposition to Obamacare</a>, and Republicans used that as an issue to rouse their base in the 2010 midterm election.</p>
<p>Meanwhile, McConnell was working on the federal judiciary. <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/22/magazine/trump-remaking-courts-judiciary.html">He and his colleagues slow-walked</a> and filibustered Obama’s nominees, requiring “aye” votes from 60 of the 100 senators to confirm each one. The process consumed so much time that then-Majority Leader Harry Reid abolished the filibuster for nominations, except those to the Supreme Court. </p>
<p>That sped up the process, allowing Obama to appoint 323 judges, <a href="https://www.brookings.edu/blog/fixgov/2018/06/04/senate-obstructionism-handed-judicial-vacancies-to-trump/">about as many</a> as George W. Bush. But Republicans’ additional delaying tactics still left 105 vacancies for Trump to fill.</p>
<p>When Democrats weakened the filibuster, McConnell <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/22/us/politics/reid-sets-in-motion-steps-to-limit-use-of-filibuster.html">warned</a>, “You’ll regret this. And you may regret it a lot sooner than you think.”</p>
<p>Democrats may now concede that point. McConnell and Trump put nearly 200 judges on the federal courts, making them all the more a <a href="https://www.npr.org/2020/07/02/886285772/trump-and-mcconnell-via-swath-of-judges-will-affect-u-s-law-for-decades">white-male bastion of judicial conservatism</a>.</p>
<p>When <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/14/us/antonin-scalia-death.html">Justice Antonin Scalia died in February 2016</a> and McConnell said <a href="https://www.politico.com/story/2016/02/mitch-mcconnell-antonin-scalia-supreme-court-nomination-219248">the seat wouldn’t be filled until after the November election</a>, it was another case of calculated audacity.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/360555/original/file-20200929-18-1fbrdf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="Schumer holds a sign reading, 'The American people should have a voice in the selection of their next Supreme Court Justice. Therefore, this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new President.'" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/360555/original/file-20200929-18-1fbrdf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/360555/original/file-20200929-18-1fbrdf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/360555/original/file-20200929-18-1fbrdf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/360555/original/file-20200929-18-1fbrdf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/360555/original/file-20200929-18-1fbrdf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/360555/original/file-20200929-18-1fbrdf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/360555/original/file-20200929-18-1fbrdf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Sen. Chuck Schumer reminding McConnell of his ‘rule,’ September 2020.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/senate-minority-leader-chuck-schumer-holds-a-poster-with-a-news-photo/1275576995?adppopup=true">Alex Wong/Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Democrats cried foul, but they were powerless to reverse his decision because Republicans stuck with him.</p>
<p>Trump’s 2016 victory preserved the Senate Republican majority, which then did away with the Supreme Court exception, allowing McConnell and his colleagues to install by simple majority vote the sort of Supreme Court justices they wanted: Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/26/politics/amy-coney-barrett-supreme-court-nominee/index.html">Amy Coney Barrett</a>.</p>
<p>It is the Roberts Court, but it is also the McConnell Court.</p>
<p><em>This is an updated version of an <a href="https://theconversation.com/mitch-mcconnells-legacy-is-a-conservative-supreme-court-shaped-by-his-calculated-audacity-147062">article</a> originally published Oct. 1, 2020.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/210587/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Al Cross does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Mitch McConnell, who has announced he will step down from his role as Senate GOP leader, was an uncharismatic Kentucky lawyer who came to rule the Senate and remake the US Supreme Court.Al Cross, Professor and director emeritus, Institute for Rural Journalism, University of KentuckyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2114902023-08-14T17:44:40Z2023-08-14T17:44:40ZTommy Tuberville reportedly doesn’t live in Alabama − should he still be its senator?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/542482/original/file-20230813-42160-9mvwcr.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=14%2C7%2C4811%2C3205&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Alabama voters elected Sen. Tommy Tuberville on Nov. 3, 2020. </span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://newsroom.ap.org/detail/Election2020SenateTuberville/ee9266cbcd5d4529b2c7a043281f85b4/photo?Query=Tuberville&mediaType=photo&sortBy=creationdatetime:desc&dateRange=Anytime&totalCount=596&currentItemNo=178">AP Photo/Butch Dill</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Alabama GOP Sen. Tommy Tuberville has come under scrutiny following reports that he <a href="https://www.al.com/news/2023/08/can-tommy-tuberville-represent-alabama-in-us-senate-if-he-lives-in-florida.html">recently sold</a> the last remaining properties he owns in the state that he represents in the U.S. Senate. Instead, Tuberville <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/08/10/tommy-tuberville-floridas-third-senator/">appears to live almost full time</a> at his beach house in the Florida panhandle.</p>
<p>Although details are still emerging about Tuberville’s precise living situation, <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/08/10/tommy-tuberville-floridas-third-senator/">The Washington Post’s Glenn Kessler has reported</a> that the Auburn, Alabama, address Tuberville listed when he declared his candidacy for Senate in 2019 is co-owned by his wife and son. Kessler’s review of campaign finance reports and property documents related to Tuberville “indicate that his home is actually a $3 million, 4,000-square-foot beach house he has lived in for nearly two decades in Santa Rosa Beach, Florida.”</p>
<p>Why does this matter? </p>
<p>Because Tuberville is running up against one of the oldest constitutional requirements that apply to anyone running for Congress: that <a href="https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artI-S3-C3-1/ALDE_00013345/">candidates must live in the state they represent</a> by the time they take office. </p>
<p>But whether Tuberville’s situation actually violates the Constitution – or matters to voters – is another question. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/542483/original/file-20230813-82741-fsa66m.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="A large white building with a dome atop it." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/542483/original/file-20230813-82741-fsa66m.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/542483/original/file-20230813-82741-fsa66m.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/542483/original/file-20230813-82741-fsa66m.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/542483/original/file-20230813-82741-fsa66m.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/542483/original/file-20230813-82741-fsa66m.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/542483/original/file-20230813-82741-fsa66m.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/542483/original/file-20230813-82741-fsa66m.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">To serve in Congress, the U.S. Constitution requires that a member must be an inhabitant of the state they represent.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://newsroom.ap.org/detail/CongressDebt/15da08cb69a24b598addbce1b25df374/photo?Query=U.S.%20Congress%20building&mediaType=photo&sortBy=arrivaldatetime:desc&dateRange=Anytime&totalCount=864&currentItemNo=24&vs=true">AP Photo/Alex Brandon</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Residency requirements in Congress</h2>
<p>The legal requirement that candidates and members of legislative bodies live in the place they represent is not new. In the case of Congress, it was <a href="https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/debates_808.asp#1">debated heavily</a> during the Constitutional Convention in 1787. </p>
<p>The framers decided that members of both the House and the Senate would be required only to be “an inhabitant” of the state they represent. Strange as it may sound, this means that House members don’t even need to live in their specific district – just their home state. In fact, a <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/politics/wp/2017/04/21/at-least-20-members-of-the-house-are-registered-to-vote-outside-their-districts/">2017 report from The Washington Post</a> found that about 5% of all House members don’t live in the districts they represent. </p>
<h2>Legal consequences for nonresidency</h2>
<p>In Tuberville’s case, it’s possible that he doesn’t meet the constitutional minimum of state residency. Whether he might face any consequences for this potential violation, however, is unclear. </p>
<p>Courts and congressional committees have looked into similar violations in the past. They have generally opted for a wide interpretation of what is called “<a href="https://www.everycrsreport.com/reports/R41946.html#_Toc410112355">inhabitancy</a>,” often settling for evidence that a member paid taxes in or was registered to vote in the state, even if it was at an address that the member spent little to no time in.</p>
<p>Officials at state and local levels, however, where <a href="https://www.ncsl.org/elections-and-campaigns/eligibility-requirements-to-run-for-the-state-legislature">residency requirements can be stronger</a>, have paid the price for being a nonresident. A <a href="https://law.georgia.gov/opinions/2001-3-0">2001 legal opinion</a> from the Georgia attorney general found that if a state legislator “moves his permanent residence outside his district, the office will become vacant as a matter of law,” meaning that the lawmaker would disqualify themselves from serving. </p>
<p>This is precisely what happened in my hometown of Boise, Idaho, when a city councilwoman was <a href="https://www.ktvb.com/article/news/local/208/boise-city-council-president-holli-woodings-details-process-of-councilmember-sanchez-losing-her-seat/277-cec1eaff-2f4d-408b-8412-df26f4cff95b">legally forced out of office</a> after she inadvertently moved out of the district she was representing.</p>
<h2>Why have residency requirements?</h2>
<p>Although it can be inconvenient, there are good reasons to establish legal residency requirements. </p>
<p>The framers discussed many of them: <a href="https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Hamilton/01-04-02-0205">Alexander Hamilton argued</a> that because of the residency requirement, representatives in Congress “will not only bring with them a considerable knowledge of its laws, and a local knowledge of their respective districts.” In other words, representatives with local ties would be more likely to understand the unique needs of their constituents and thus how to best represent them.</p>
<p>But these requirements aren’t without their drawbacks. For instance, <a href="https://www.charlesrhunt.com/_files/ugd/a6ee68_17c414c6c2754735a1e2ba32a6b55f44.docx?dn=Residency%20Requirements%20Preprint.docx">my own research suggests</a> that in states with stricter residency requirements, their state legislative districts as a whole are more gerrymandered – that is, districts are drawn for the purpose of benefiting the election of a particular legislator or party. Why? Because state legislatures that decide their states’ redistricting processes appear to go out of their way to draw misshapen districts to include the homes of incumbents.</p>
<p>Residency requirements also pose a significant hurdle to candidate quality. That’s because, unlike in Congress, states often set even stricter standards for offices like governor and state legislator, in some cases requiring many years of residency before qualifying for candidacy. The more onerous the residency requirement – for example, <a href="https://www.ncsl.org/elections-and-campaigns/eligibility-requirements-to-run-for-the-state-legislature">requiring five rather than two years</a> of residency before holding office – the more otherwise qualified citizens the law excludes from serving. </p>
<p>In <a href="https://www.charlesrhunt.com/_files/ugd/a6ee68_17c414c6c2754735a1e2ba32a6b55f44.docx?dn=Residency%20Requirements%20Preprint.docx">my own analysis</a> of gubernatorial residency requirements, I found that many states prevent as much as one-fifth of their residents from serving as governor as a result of residency requirements and <a href="https://www.elections.alaska.gov/doc/forms/H05.pdf">more than 30% in Alaska’s case</a>.</p>
<p><iframe id="nPH1e" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/nPH1e/1/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<p>At a time when <a href="https://global.oup.com/academic/product/running-from-office-9780199397655?cc=us&lang=en&">fewer and fewer Americans show any interest in running for office</a> – even while they disapprove of politicians more and more – this is a serious concern for citizens and lawmakers to reckon with. </p>
<h2>Will Tuberville pay for carpetbagging?</h2>
<p>Even if Tuberville doesn’t face legal trouble, it could become a political liability for him, and the political science research bears this out. In my book, “<a href="https://www.press.umich.edu/12157973/home_field_advantage">Home Field Advantage</a>,” I found that candidates who were born and raised in their home districts consistently outperform so-called “carpetbaggers” – those with few to no ties to their districts – in congressional elections. </p>
<p>This has also played out in high-profile ways in the real world. <a href="https://theconversation.com/dr-oz-should-be-worried-voters-punish-carpetbaggers-and-new-research-shows-why-188569">During 2022’s midterm elections campaign</a>, the news buzzed with Pennsylvania voters’ ridicule for Republican Senate candidate Mehmet Oz’s attempts to come across like a regular Pennsylvanian while – among other mishaps – <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/oz-accused-filming-pennsylvania-campaign-ad-at-new-jersey-home-2022-7">recording campaign videos</a> at his home in New Jersey and <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/ozs-viral-crudite-video-sums-up-campaign-fetterman-pennsylvania-rcna43992">mispronouncing the name of a local grocery store</a> chain. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/kDsFjrXWnnI?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">In the 2020 U.S. Senate race, Tuberville’s GOP primary rival questioned whether he lived in Alabama or Florida.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Some of Tuberville’s rural-state colleagues, like Montana Democrat <a href="https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/04/leading-montana-gop-senate-candidate-matt-rosendales-thick-maryland-accent.html">Jon Tester</a> and West Virginia Democrat <a href="https://rollcall.com/2018/11/06/west-virginias-joe-manchin-stays-put-in-trump-country/">Joe Manchin</a>, have also vastly outperformed their party’s expectations in their states, thanks in part to deep local ties and authenticity.</p>
<p>On the other hand, Tuberville is a Republican in GOP-dominated Alabama and <a href="https://www.al.com/news/2022/11/tuberville-sticking-with-trump-he-doesnt-have-to-learn-the-ropes.html">a loyal soldier for former President Donald Trump</a> in a state where Trump is popular. Plus, although Tuberville was born and raised in Arkansas, he became a hero in Alabama in the 2000s as a <a href="https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/30253791/former-college-football-coach-tommy-tuberville-wins-alabama-senate-seat">successful head coach</a> for the Auburn University football program. </p>
<p>Tuberville also has plenty of time to clean up this mess, as he is not up for reelection again until 2026. However, unless he can show some more concrete evidence of residency, a lawsuit challenging his local credentials may not be out of the question.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/211490/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Charlie Hunt does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The framers decided that members of both the House and Senate would be required to be “an inhabitant” of the state they represent.Charlie Hunt, Assistant Professor of Political Science, Boise State UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2086312023-07-24T12:16:22Z2023-07-24T12:16:22ZTaylor Swift: Person of the year and political influencer<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/538543/original/file-20230720-29-90pi0e.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=14%2C14%2C3273%2C2430&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">That's a lot of potential voters behind Swift at her Denver concert on July 14, 2023.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/taylor-swift-performs-onstage-during-taylor-swift-the-news-photo/1544910187?adppopup=true">Tom Cooper/TAS23/Getty Images for TAS Rights Management</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Even before Taylor Swift was named “<a href="https://time.com/6342806/person-of-the-year-2023-taylor-swift/">person of the year” by Time magazine</a>, politicians courted Swiftie voters.</p>
<p>Call me a Swiftie, too. Like any millennial pop music fan active on social media, I followed Taylor Swift’s Eras Tour – the <a href="https://variety.com/2023/music/news/taylor-swift-eras-tour-surprise-songs-list-1235578714/">surprise songs</a>, the <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-are-taylor-swift-tickets-so-hard-to-get-the-economics-are-complicated-208567">scramble to get tickets</a>, her <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/danidiplacido/2023/05/24/taylor-swifts-matty-healy-controversy-explained/?sh=1a46afdb26bc">brief romance</a> with that guy from The 1975 with a history of racist comments.</p>
<p>But as a political scientist, I was intrigued by something else: reaction to the tour by government officials. New Jersey <a href="https://www.foodnetwork.com/fn-dish/news/new-jersey-taylor-swift-ham-egg-cheese-sandwich">renamed</a> the state’s famed Taylor ham, egg and cheese in her honor – it’s now the “Taylor Swift Ham, Egg, and Cheese” <a href="https://pub.njleg.gov/bills/2016/A4000/3667_I1.HTM">official state sandwich</a>. </p>
<p>Pittsburgh’s <a href="https://www.wpxi.com/news/local/mayor-ed-gainey-renames-pittsburgh-swiftsburgh-friday-saturday-honor-eras-tour/ZEVOJJKUDJH5ND2EE7EYIKRCCY/">mayor briefly renamed</a> the city “Swiftsburgh” when her tour hit town. </p>
<p>And in my neck of the woods, Swift Street in North Kansas City <a href="https://www.kmbc.com/article/north-kansas-city-temporarily-renames-street-in-honor-of-taylor-swift/44309042">was temporarily rebranded</a> “Swift Street (Taylor’s Version).” </p>
<p>Local or state governments have lauded Swift in some way at virtually every stop on her tour. While these honors make for great photo opportunities for Swifties, the politics of these moves is worth examining. Do politicians have something to gain in appealing to Swift’s fans?</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1669754533444984832"}"></div></p>
<h2>Celebrities can help politicians</h2>
<p>Unlike many celebrities, Swift does not involve herself much in politics. One particular tool of politicians looking to boost their numbers is to get celebrity endorsements. But Swift’s use of endorsements has been limited, <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2018/10/07/taylor-swift-endorses-democrats-bredesen-cooper-in-instagram-post.html">save for backing</a> two Democrats in her adopted home state of Tennessee: Phil Bredesen in his Senate race and U.S. Rep. Jim Cooper in his 2018 reelection campaign. Swift also endorsed <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2020/10/07/entertainment/taylor-swift-joe-biden/index.html">Joe Biden in 2020</a>.</p>
<p>Bredesen’s <a href="https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=2010-01-01%202023-07-20&geo=US&q=phil%20bredesen&hl=en">peak</a> in Google search interest from 2010 to the present coincided with Swift’s endorsement in October 2018. Cooper saw <a href="https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=2010-01-01%202023-07-20&geo=US&q=%2Fm%2F03tm2p&hl=en">more Google search traffic</a> with Swift’s endorsement than at any point since his vote for the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act in March 2010.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/538748/original/file-20230721-19-5kqtg1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="A chart shows the Google search interest in Phil Bredesen and Jim Cooper peaking with Swift's endorsement" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/538748/original/file-20230721-19-5kqtg1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/538748/original/file-20230721-19-5kqtg1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=361&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/538748/original/file-20230721-19-5kqtg1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=361&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/538748/original/file-20230721-19-5kqtg1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=361&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/538748/original/file-20230721-19-5kqtg1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=453&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/538748/original/file-20230721-19-5kqtg1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=453&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/538748/original/file-20230721-19-5kqtg1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=453&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Google search interest in Phil Bredesen and Jim Cooper peaked with Swift’s endorsement.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=2010-01-01%202023-07-21&geo=US&q=%2Fm%2F03tm2p,%2Fm%2F02655s&hl=en">Matt Harris</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>While the specific impact of Swift’s endorsements is difficult to assess, an <a href="https://www.tennessean.com/story/entertainment/music/2018/11/07/taylor-swift-bredesen-endorsement-tennessee-senate-race-political-post/1918440002/">Emerson College poll</a> of Tennesseans in 2018 found that 11.7% of those surveyed said Swift’s endorsement would make them more likely to support Bredesen – a number unlikely to make a difference in a race Bredesen lost by nearly 11 points despite Swift’s support. Cooper easily won reelection in his heavily Democratic Nashville-based district.</p>
<p>Although Swift’s endorsements likely did not sway these particular races, celebrity endorsements can matter in close races, particularly when the celebrity making the endorsement is viewed favorably – a likely scenario in Swift’s case. </p>
<h2>Fawning = attention</h2>
<p>A <a href="https://pro.morningconsult.com/instant-intel/taylor-swift-fandom-demographic">slight majority</a> of Americans consider themselves at least something of a fan of Swift’s music – that includes me – and a June 2023 Echelon Insights <a href="https://echelonin.wpenginepowered.com/wp-content/uploads/June-2023-Omnibus-Crosstabs-EXTERNAL.pdf">poll</a> showed 50% of likely voters view Swift at least somewhat favorably. This is a higher favorability rating than Joe Biden, Donald Trump and both major political parties.</p>
<p>We’re not talking about endorsements here, though – we’re talking about politicians aligning themselves with Swift with no reciprocity. One clear benefit to public officials fawning over Swift? Attention – not unlike that seen for Bredesen and Cooper in 2018. </p>
<p>New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy’s <a href="https://twitter.com/GovMurphy/status/1661761816588955648?s=20">tweet</a> declaring the “Taylor Swift ham, egg, and cheese” garnered 5,700 likes; his next unrelated tweet had fewer than 100. </p>
<p>A cursory analysis of social media data seems to support the idea that the use of Swift’s name in honorary government actions produces a result similar to that of Swift’s endorsements: it drives engagement. Murphy’s Instagram post lauding Swift garnered the most likes on any post of his in 2023, with the exception of an early June post on the state’s <a href="https://www.instagram.com/p/CtMi_8KMA0Q/">air-quality crisis</a>.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1661761816588955648"}"></div></p>
<p>OK, so politicians need publicity, and they can use Taylor Swift’s name to get it. But what about Swifties as a voting bloc? </p>
<p>The idea that Swifties might be a key demographic in future elections is not far-fetched given their <a href="https://pro.morningconsult.com/instant-intel/taylor-swift-fandom-demographic">location and age</a>. A majority of Swift’s fans live in the suburbs, the <a href="https://www.politico.com/f/?id=0000017f-bcf4-d17b-a1ff-bef5e8a70000">swing territory</a> of American politics. Further, most are Gen Zers or Millennials. These groups encompass an increasing share of the electorate with each passing year – up to <a href="https://time.com/6049270/2020-election-young-voters/">31% in 2020</a>. Swift’s favorability among those ages 18 to 29 <a href="http://echelonin.wpenginepowered.com/wp-content/uploads/June-2023-Omnibus-Crosstabs-EXTERNAL.pdf">stands at 72%</a>, and by one poll’s estimate, 21% in that age cohort say they would vote for Swift over Trump and Biden.</p>
<h2>Taylor Swift Post Office?</h2>
<p>World leaders from numerous countries have <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/hughmcintyre/2023/07/08/world-leaders-keep-asking-taylor-swift-to-bring-the-eras-tour-to-their-countries/?sh=3a7d6ff3415c">taken to social media</a> to ask Swift to bring her tour to their countries. There’s an economic angle to this, of course, as a Swift tour stop can <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/hughmcintyre/2023/06/09/taylor-swifts-the-eras-tour-could-generate-46-billion-for-local-economies/?sh=176cec68442d">generate huge sums</a> in consumer spending. In the U.S., however, the honorifics bestowed upon Swift have come since her tour dates were confirmed. </p>
<p>There is a question of whether these Swift-adjacent stunts boil down to campaigning thinly disguised as official government action. This is perhaps best demonstrated in Canada, where a member of Parliament <a href="https://www.thestar.com/politics/federal/after-taylor-swift-snubs-canada-mp-files-a-parliamentary-grievance/article_aefb1060-63da-58a3-b790-2e65a51d6696.html?">filed a parliamentary grievance</a> over the singer’s lack of Canadian tour dates. </p>
<p>Such behavior is perhaps analogous to, on a larger scale, the <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/04/the-crackdown-on-naming-post-offices/452544/">renaming of post offices</a> in the U.S. Congress. While generally innocuous and locally meaningful, these moves still require government resources and staffers to put their attention toward them as opposed to substantive policy matters.</p>
<p>Taylor Swift is an enormously popular figure, particularly among demographic groups that will be increasingly important in future American elections. In close races, voices such as Swift’s could prove critical – not necessarily because she influences how fans vote, but because her voice provides <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/1940161208321948?casa_token=FqVHkgX13GQAAAAA:8D39zHPXgQcumJ9DdrnYmjACC2c8j7diH0oSQXqQ-BqqDKU0_FoozCAA08TKUf-UsItfKby-AnSz">attention and credibility</a> to candidates.</p>
<p><em>This is an update to a story originally published on July 24, 2023, to reflect Swift being named Time magazine’s Person of the Year.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/208631/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Matt Harris does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Pittsburgh’s mayor renamed the city ‘Swiftsburgh’ when the singer’s tour hit town. He’s not the only politician who has publicly fawned over the star.Matt Harris, Associate Professor of Political Science, Park UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2059052023-05-18T12:42:27Z2023-05-18T12:42:27ZFeinstein just the latest example of an old problem: Politicians have long been able to evade questions about their ability to serve<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/526913/original/file-20230517-25-ct8my0.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C0%2C5991%2C3988&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Sen. Dianne Feinstein, in a wheelchair as she returns to the Senate after a more than two-month absence, May 10, 2023. </span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://newsroom.ap.org/detail/Senate%20Feinstein/de7f088c19ed478dad46dafebb75f624?Query=Feinstein%20wheelchair&mediaType=photo&sortBy=creationdatetime:desc&dateRange=Anytime&totalCount=19&currentItemNo=14">AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>California Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein <a href="https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/with-sen-feinstein-back-in-senate-3-of-bidens-judicial-nominees-move-forward">recently returned to the Senate after an almost three-month absence</a> that – because she could not vote remotely and the Senate is closely divided – <a href="https://apnews.com/article/feinstein-resign-senate-judiciary-committee-judges-shingles-c888eaa95acc390b8a4f50864e411ca7">left the Democrats’ agenda in limbo</a>. </p>
<p>Feinstein turns 90 in June and <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2023/05/18/us/politics/feinstein-illness-shingles-senate.html">can barely walk on her own</a>, and <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/dianne-feinsteins-missteps-raise-a-painful-age-question-among-senate-democrats">her mental acuity has been in question for many years</a>. Yet she is holding on to her seat and <a href="https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/3962961-california-liberal-groups-call-on-feinstein-to-resign/">won’t resign</a> despite <a href="https://apnews.com/article/dianne-feinstein-senate-shingles-biden-judiciary-committee-49374eadf516a1fb521cac466bb5d18f">fervent pleas from some within her party</a>. </p>
<p>Politicians are <a href="https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.40.5.822">vulnerable when they’re accused of almost any impropriety</a> real or imagined, but <a href="https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2023/05/dianne-feinstein-health-concerns">physical ailments and deteriorated health</a> may be the one topic for which politicians can escape scrutiny. </p>
<h2>Health, privacy and how to be trustworthy</h2>
<p>Most people expect that their health is a private matter. And for a politician or candidate, such disclosures can be used <a href="https://rollcall.com/2022/05/25/an-rx-for-politicians-full-medical-disclosure/">as political weapons by their opponents</a>. But when voluntarily entering the sphere of public service, does someone have an obligation to inform constituents about how well one is actually able to do the job?</p>
<p>Perhaps Feinstein – or her staff – knows that politicians can evade questions about their health practically with impunity. But politicians who are dodgy about their medical condition can put constituents at a disadvantage. </p>
<p>Ironically, according to my research, if Feinstein would come clean about her impairments, the media and public would probably be far more forgiving. But she seems intent on taking <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X15600732">politicians’ all-too-common route of engaging in deceptive evasion</a>. She loses trustworthiness when the public clearly sees her <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X17706960">dodging questions</a>. In <a href="https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2023/05/17/dianne-feinstein-absence-audio-benjamin-oreskes-cnntm-vpx.cnn">her most recent interaction with reporters</a> she was politely asked how she’s feeling. <a href="https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2023-05-16/feinstein-absence-senate-washington-health">She said</a> she’s fine except for a problem with her leg. </p>
<p>The reporter courteously asked what was wrong with her leg. She said “<a href="https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2023/05/dianne-feinstein-health-return-to-senate.html">nothing that’s anyone concern but mine</a>.” Then she repeatedly asserted, falsely, “<a href="https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2023/05/dianne-feinstein-health-return-to-senate.html">I haven’t been gone</a>” from the Senate, and <a href="https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2023/05/17/dianne-feinstein-absence-audio-benjamin-oreskes-cnntm-vpx.cnn">her office appears to be further stonewalling when asked for follow-up or clarification</a>.</p>
<p>By overtly deflecting reporters’ questions – about her leg and her absences – she is probably causing people to think and obsess even more about her inadequacies as an elected official, based on <a href="https://doi.org/10.1093/joc/jqz036">experiments I have conducted</a>. If Feinstein demonstrated a sincere, pleasant demeanor <a href="https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2023/05/dianne-feinsteins-return-is-a-ghoulish-spectacle.html">instead of glaring at reporters</a>, and provided transparent disclosures about her health, she would shift from being perceived as <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/psq.12809">duplicitous</a> to being trustworthy, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X211045724">based on experiments I have run</a>. </p>
<h2>Precedent for secrecy</h2>
<p>Nonetheless, the default position for public figures – especially politicians – seems to be <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X15600732">diversionary maneuvers to evade questions</a>. And the reason may not just be a complicit <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X17744004">partisan base that allows politicians to deceive with impunity</a>. The media have long allowed politicians’ poor health to stay hidden. </p>
<p>History is full of examples of the <a href="https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315499055">media’s covering up politicians’ medical problems</a>. That, in turn, exacerbates a common perception <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2020.1808516">that reporters are complicit</a> with politicians in concealing important information from the public. </p>
<p>Traditionally, reporters hate cover-ups. But the media seem to make an exception for health concerns. Reporters apparently consider it within the bounds of campaign job interviews to <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00993853">ask a politician whom he is having sex with</a>, <a href="https://www.proquest.com/openview/a6c2432390bafa8f4a9efd1340e45caf/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=25289">what type of underwear he wears</a>, <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2022-election/-check-walker-acknowledges-giving-700-ex-denies-claim-knew-was-abortio-rcna52252">how many ex-girlfriends’ abortions he paid for</a> and <a href="https://nypost.com/2022/12/26/rep-elect-george-santos-admits-fabricating-key-details-of-his-bio/">precisely how gay he is</a>. </p>
<p>But reporters practically become snooty, high-brow puritans at the thought of asking politicians <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10900-009-9217-x">whether their health will allow them to show up to work</a>.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/512898/original/file-20230301-20-l24x25.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="An older woman with black hair looking out from a desk." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/512898/original/file-20230301-20-l24x25.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/512898/original/file-20230301-20-l24x25.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/512898/original/file-20230301-20-l24x25.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/512898/original/file-20230301-20-l24x25.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/512898/original/file-20230301-20-l24x25.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/512898/original/file-20230301-20-l24x25.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/512898/original/file-20230301-20-l24x25.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The press did not report for a long time that Sen. Dianne Feinstein, now 89 years old, had lost much of her mental sharpness and her memory.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/sen-dianne-feinstein-d-calif-attends-a-senate-news-photo/1246880948?phrase=Feinstein&adppopup=true">Amanda Andrade-Rhoades/For The Washington Post via Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Reporters in cahoots</h2>
<p>Sen. Strom Thurmond did not retire until he was 100 years old, and <a href="https://nypost.com/2022/04/14/joe-biden-shows-why-politicians-need-age-limits/">reporters largely kept</a> <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/2001/04/26/the-seniority-of-strom-thurmond/b0e1ed9d-f150-4261-b7c5-ed1f57dd1e06/">his cognitive ailments hidden</a>. <a href="https://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/article248666375.html">Like Feinstein</a>, Thurmond often showed evidence of cognitive decline when speaking.</p>
<p>An extreme example of this phenomenon of politicians deceiving is provided by <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/2023/02/02/george-santos-lies-psychology-bernie-madoff/">serial liar Rep. George Santos</a>. Unlike most politicians who lie about their health to sound as if they are impervious to maladies, the New York lawmaker took the opposite approach while campaigning for Congress. Santos listed all sorts of health problems he suffers from: acute chronic bronchitis, a brain tumor, an immunodeficiency and susceptibility to cancer. </p>
<p>Most of Santos’ claims about his life other than his health <a href="https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2023/01/george-santos-didnt-lie-about-being-an-early-covid-survivor.html">have been fact-checked</a>. After he was elected, the media thoroughly investigated and dispelled his claims ranging from <a href="https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2023/feb/22/george-santos/george-santos-said-he-never-claimed-to-be-jewish-b/">saying he was Jewish</a> to saying he had <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/25/nyregion/santos-baruch-volleyball.html">played college volleyball</a>. But Santos’ statements about his own mental or physical abilities <a href="https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/george-santos-lies-drag-mugging-b2277226.html">seem to have gone unquestioned</a>. Santos was either lying or telling the truth about being unwell. </p>
<p>Either way, the public should have known.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/512901/original/file-20230301-20-hi6apx.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="A man in a dark jacket, red tie and white shirt raising his right hand and looking upward." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/512901/original/file-20230301-20-hi6apx.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/512901/original/file-20230301-20-hi6apx.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/512901/original/file-20230301-20-hi6apx.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/512901/original/file-20230301-20-hi6apx.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/512901/original/file-20230301-20-hi6apx.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/512901/original/file-20230301-20-hi6apx.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/512901/original/file-20230301-20-hi6apx.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Despite fact-checking many of Rep. George Santos’ assertions, the press didn’t check out his claims about his health.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/new-york-congressman-elect-george-santos-speaks-during-the-news-photo/1245739587?phrase=George%20Santos%20candidate&adppopup=true">David Becker/The Washington Post via Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Fit for office</h2>
<p>It may be time to consider a politician’s health – literal, physical fitness for the office – to be fair game for disclosure. Asking politicians whether they have the ability to serve in office should not be off-limits, nor considered evidence of “ableism.” </p>
<p>If civil discussions of mental and physical health impairments can be held – rather than treated like stigmas that must be hidden – <a href="https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.77.3.474">democracy would be healthier</a>. The public should be able to expect their representatives to be able to show up to work and honestly serve their constituents. And that means reporters and the general public should ask the necessary questions of their elected officials.</p>
<p><em>This is an updated version of an <a href="https://theconversation.com/politicians-health-problems-are-important-information-for-voters-but-reporters-and-candidates-often-conceal-them-200513">article</a> originally published March 3, 2023.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/205905/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>David E. Clementson does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Physical ailments and deteriorated health may be the one area in which politicians can escape scrutiny.David E. Clementson, Assistant Professor in the Grady College of Journalism and Mass Communication, University of GeorgiaLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2053762023-05-17T18:15:29Z2023-05-17T18:15:29Z‘Mistaken, misread, misquoted, mislabeled, and mis-spoken’ – what Woody Guthrie wrote about the national debt debate in Congress during the Depression<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/526336/original/file-20230515-38447-uevzio.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=2%2C2%2C564%2C347&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Guthrie questioned whether politicians really cared about the public interest -- such as the welfare of these veterans demonstrating in front of Congress in 1932.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/common/image/bonus_marchers.htm">Senate Historical Office</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>The debt ceiling debate between the House GOP and President Joe Biden could, if not solved, lead to economic chaos and destruction – so it might seem strangely lighthearted to wonder what a Great Depression-era singer and activist would think about this particular political moment. </p>
<p>Certainly, in all the research I did in putting together my book “<a href="https://www.upress.state.ms.us/Books/P/Prophet-Singer">Prophet Singer: The Voice and Vision of Woody Guthrie</a>,” I never came across any comment Woody Guthrie made about the debt ceiling. </p>
<p>But he lived through the Great Depression and its aftermath. He also stood witness to legislators struggling to correct the direction that the nation was headed in during the 1930s and early ‘40s.</p>
<p>He had a lot to say about Congress in general and how it handled the national debt in particular.</p>
<p>He once made a folksy joke that suggests his feelings about this supposedly august body. </p>
<p>“The Housewives of the country are always afraid at nite, afraid they’s a Robber in the House. Nope, Milady most of em is in the Senate,” he wrote <a href="https://www.peopleslight.org/whats-on/archive/2017-2018-season/woody-sez/dramaturgy-note/">in his regular column for The People’s Daily, called “Woody Sez.”</a></p>
<p>Guthrie constantly railed against politicians, both Republican and Democrat, who he thought represented their own selfish interests rather than those of deserving working men and women. </p>
<p>What if he could survey today’s America? Would his comments on the state of the nation in the past suggest that he would have something to say in 2023?</p>
<p>In fact, some of his observations sound as if they were written about this political moment – rather than his own. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/526310/original/file-20230515-31621-ummfq5.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="A man with a hat playing a guitar with a sticker attached that says, 'This Machine Kills Fascists.'" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/526310/original/file-20230515-31621-ummfq5.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/526310/original/file-20230515-31621-ummfq5.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=561&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/526310/original/file-20230515-31621-ummfq5.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=561&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/526310/original/file-20230515-31621-ummfq5.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=561&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/526310/original/file-20230515-31621-ummfq5.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=705&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/526310/original/file-20230515-31621-ummfq5.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=705&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/526310/original/file-20230515-31621-ummfq5.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=705&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Guthrie, who was known as ‘the Dust Bowl troubador’ for his songs about the Dust Bowl and the Depression.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.loc.gov/resource/ppmsca.74705/">Library of Congress, World Telegram photo by Al Aumuller</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>'Hearin’ the hens a cacklin’</h2>
<p>When Guthrie visited Washington, D.C., in 1940, he managed to hear some Senate debates and provided his thoughts on their effectiveness.</p>
<p>“I gawthered the Reactionary Republicans was in love with the Reactionary Republicans; also that the Liberal Democrats was in love with th’ Liberal Demacrats. Each presented a brief case of statistics proving that the other brief cases of statistics, was mistaken, misread, misquoted, mislabeled, and mis-spoken,” he wrote in his column. </p>
<p>And just what were politicians arguing over then? The national debt.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/gop-debt-ceiling-trump-presidency/">Bipartisan legislative efforts</a> raised the debt ceiling three times under President Donald Trump. Now, House Republicans are <a href="https://www.reuters.com/markets/us/biden-mccarthy-start-debt-ceiling-talks-clock-ticks-default-2023-05-09/">balking unless certain conditions are met</a>, while the Democrats are demanding a clean bill with no restrictions. </p>
<p>Guthrie witnessed much the same situation in his era. During his visit to Washington, D.C., he listened to “senators a making speeches – on every conceivable subject under the sun, an’ though the manner in which they brought forth their arguments, their polished wit, and subtle maneuvers, were all very entertaining, I come out of it as empty handed as I went in,” he wrote in “Woody Sez.” </p>
<p>He then compared their debates to “hearin’ the hens a cacklin’ – and a runnin’ out to th barn.” Despite the scene’s being “loud, noisy, and plenty entertaining,” the result was “no eggs.” </p>
<p>There’s a lot of noise coming from Congress today also – but no results.</p>
<p>What could happen if the two sides cannot agree? A telling example occurred in 2011, when the bipartisan deal to raise the debt ceiling <a href="https://theconversation.com/a-brief-history-of-debt-ceiling-crises-and-the-political-chaos-theyve-unleashed-205178">came so late that Standard & Poor’s downgraded</a> the country’s credit rating – which hiked the interest that needed to be paid on the U.S. debt.</p>
<p>But if an agreement does not happen, Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen has warned that such a crisis would bring on “<a href="https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/jy1470">economic and financial catastrophe</a>” on a national and global scale. </p>
<p>Guthrie would find this kind of brinkmanship troubling. Not because he was a political operative, with merely an intellectual understanding of the risks. Instead, he was driven by a personal knowledge of the day-to-day hardships, the human toll of such momentous political decisions. His family had fallen from middle-class safety into abject poverty even before the onset of the Great Depression. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/526325/original/file-20230515-21691-mvvckf.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="A family on the road, standing next to a rickety truck with their belongings. Two boys in overalls are wearing no shirts." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/526325/original/file-20230515-21691-mvvckf.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/526325/original/file-20230515-21691-mvvckf.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=755&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/526325/original/file-20230515-21691-mvvckf.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=755&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/526325/original/file-20230515-21691-mvvckf.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=755&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/526325/original/file-20230515-21691-mvvckf.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=949&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/526325/original/file-20230515-21691-mvvckf.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=949&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/526325/original/file-20230515-21691-mvvckf.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=949&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Guthrie knew and sang about the needs of America’s poor, such as this Depression-era impoverished family of nine on a New Mexico highway.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/service/pnp/cph/3c30000/3c30000/3c30900/3c30926v.jpg">Dorothea Lange, photographer; Library of Congress</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Because of falling agricultural prices in the aftermath of World War I and his father’s real estate speculation in some small farms surrounding their hometown of Okemah, Oklahoma, the Guthries could not keep up with their mortgages. They were forced into foreclosure. </p>
<p>Guthrie joked that his father “was the only man in the world that <a href="https://openlibrary.org/books/OL5853376M/American_folksong_Woody_Guthrie.">lost a farm a day</a> for thirty days.” </p>
<p>Foreclosures would likely be just one of <a href="https://www.forbes.com/advisor/personal-finance/debt-ceiling-hurt-your-finances/">the ruinous effects of default</a> now, along with interest rates hikes, slashing of social programs, unemployment spikes and decimation of pension plans. All are negative results, but they are certain to <a href="https://www.npr.org/2023/05/14/1176062297/how-a-default-on-the-debt-ceiling-would-affect-the-average-american">hit the poor and working class</a> the hardest.</p>
<p>Those are the people whom Woody Guthrie advocated for throughout his career. Those are the people whose hardships he lamented in such songs as <a href="https://www.woodyguthrie.org/Lyrics/I_Aint_Got_No_Home.htm">“I Ain’t Got No Home”</a> and “<a href="https://www.woodyguthrie.org/Lyrics/Dust_Bowl_Refugee.htm">Dust Bowl Refugee</a>.” </p>
<p>But he also expressed optimism about the power of those same people to make a positive change, such as in “<a href="https://www.woodyguthrie.org/Lyrics/Union_Maid.htm">Union Maid</a>” and “<a href="https://www.woodyguthrie.org/Lyrics/Better_World.htm">Better World A-Comin’</a>.” Individual and collective action was necessary, according to Guthrie, and he celebrated both. The union maid would “always get her way when she asked for better pay,” and in “Better World” he sings, “we’ll all be union and we’ll all be free.”</p>
<p>Perhaps his best-known comments about the nation appear in “<a href="https://www.woodyguthrie.org/Lyrics/This_Land.htm">This Land Is Your Land</a>,” with the popular version praising the American landscape. But in his early version of that song, he ended it with his narrator surveying a line of hungry people lined up “by the relief office” and then asked, “Was this land made for you and me?”</p>
<p>That question could rise again in 2023: If congressional leaders debating over the debt ceiling fail to find common ground for the nation’s greater good, perhaps someone will challenge them and ask if the politicians are in office for the American people, or for themselves – just as Woody Guthrie would have.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/205376/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Mark Allan Jackson does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Folk singer and activist Woody Guthrie actually had thoughts about the national debt – and politicians in general. They’re remarkably apt today.Mark Allan Jackson, Professor of English, Middle Tennessee State UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1991102023-05-11T12:11:38Z2023-05-11T12:11:38ZGrattan on Friday: Peter Dutton warns of threat to ‘working poor’ in budget reply lacking a big picture<p>Peter Dutton needed to sketch a big picture in his Thursday night budget reply – to look like an alternative prime minister. He failed to do so. </p>
<p>With the Liberals rating parlously among those aged under 40, Dutton should have been speaking especially to these voters. But his address was more of the same from a Coalition that’s unable to refresh and regroup. </p>
<p>The bar was always going to be too high for Dutton. This week’s budget, whatever criticisms can be made of it and however things work out in the months ahead, has been an elusive target for the Liberals. </p>
<p>Dutton pointed to the formidable issues Australia is grappling with – very high inflation, a housing and rental crisis, crippling power bills, millions of people having gone backwards. </p>
<p>But he lacked prescriptions, let alone ones that were any more convincing than the government’s are. </p>
<p>He risked the government’s accusation of “punching down”, dividing those on welfare (who have benefitted from the budget) and working people on low wages. The cost-of-living relief “is targeted at Australians on welfare but at the expense of the many including Labor’s working poor”. The budget “hurts working Australians”, he declared; “worse, it risks creating a generation of working poor Australians”. </p>
<p>Dutton ticked off on budget items the Coalition agrees with or doesn’t oppose. But he left up in the air the fate of the $40 a fortnight rise in JobSeeker, arguing it would be better to raise the amount the unemployed could earn, rather than increasing the base rate. Interviewed later, he would not confirm the Coalition would support the $40 increase, but it is hard to see it opposing it when push comes to shove. Nevertheless, he has left himself vulnerable to obvious attack. </p>
<p>Dutton homed in on concern, which is likely to grow, about the looming large net migration influx (much of it a post pandemic “catch up”). Labor’s “big Australia approach” would worsen Australia’s cost-of-living and inflation problems, he said. </p>
<p>“Over five years, net overseas migration will see our population increase by 1.5 million people,” he said. “It’s the biggest migration surge in our country’s history and it’s occurring amidst a housing and rental crisis.”</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/the-day-after-the-night-before-chalmers-and-taylor-on-the-budget-205431">The day after the night before - Chalmers and Taylor on the budget</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Yet Dutton did not say what his alternative would be – his statement a Coalition government would “sensibly manage migration” is a declaration of intent, not a policy. </p>
<p>He had plenty of familiar Coalition lines and sentiments. “Under a Coalition government I lead, your taxes will always be lower.” “Taxation is the killer of aspiration.” “Labor recklessly spends, carelessly cuts and inadequately saves.” </p>
<p>But his policy offerings were small beer: a ban on sports betting ads during the broadcasting of games; commitments on health; imposing a greater onus on big digital companies to stop scams and financial fraud; the restoration of the cashless debit card. A personal priority was a promise to double the size of the Australian Centre to Counter Child Exploitation.</p>
<p>What was missing was any ambitious initiative on a central issue. While it’s still relatively early in the term, and Anthony Albanese showed the benefit of holding policy back, Dutton is in a different situation. </p>
<p>He is confronting a popular government, not one on the slide. And voters won’t be attracted to an opposition that can’t project what it stands for, or whose values are seeming out of sync with the times. </p>
<p>Notably, Dutton as yet is giving no commitment on one significant tax measure in the budget – the changes to the Petroleum Resource Rent Tax, due to yield $2.4 billion over the forward estimates. The government hopes for opposition support, rather than a haggle with the Greens, whose leader Adam Bandt on Thursday said his party would, if it had the opportunity, fight to make the companies “pay their fair share of tax”. </p>
<p>The Greens’ aggressive response to the budget has underscored the challenge ahead for Labor from an increasingly assertive electoral competitor.</p>
<p>This came in a week when the broader hostility between Greens and Labor exploded in the Senate. </p>
<p>The Greens sided with the Coalition to prevent the government bringing to a vote on Thursday legislation for its $10 billion Housing Australia Future Fund, the interest on which would finance social and affordable houses. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/no-the-budget-does-not-make-further-interest-rate-rises-more-likely-205391">No, the budget does not make further interest rate rises more likely</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Senate leader Penny Wong lashed out at Greens housing spokesman Max Chandler-Mather (who last year won the Queensland seat of Griffith from Labor), accusing him of “prioritising media attention from stunts and obstruction over housing for women and kids fleeing domestic violence”.</p>
<p>“This man’s ego matters more than housing for women fleeing domestic violence and older women at risk of homelessness. What sort of party are you?” she said.</p>
<p>The Greens and Coalition also teamed up to ensure a longer Senate inquiry on family law legislation. </p>
<p>In response to the budget, predictably the Greens have delivered biting assessments, declaring it hasn’t gone far enough to help the needy. </p>
<p>Ahead of next year’s budget, this pressure from the left will just intensify. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/budget-2023-at-a-glance-major-measures-cuts-and-spends-205211">Budget 2023 at a glance: major measures, cuts and spends</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>The government’s economic inclusion advisory group, which was a major player in forcing the budget’s across-the-board (modest) rise in JobSeeker will produce another pre-budget report. That will inevitably urge further rises in welfare payments. </p>
<p>Assuming the government fell short of meeting the full recommendations, this would be manna for the Greens. And there’ll be a fresh round in the argument over the Stage 3 tax cuts. If these are not recalibrated, the Greens will have more ammunition. </p>
<p>Framing the 2024 budget, the government could be pulled between delivering more on welfare, keeping its promises on the tax cuts and, with an eye to the election due by May 2025, doing something substantial for middle Australia. </p>
<p>The last election, which added three more seats to the Greens’ lower house representation, bringing them to four, and boosted their Senate numbers from nine to 12 (now 11 with Lidia Thorpe’s defection), was a sharp reminder to Labor that the threat to it from the left is on the march. </p>
<p>It’s perhaps telling that budget week has seen the government rather complacent in the face of a weak opposition, but agitated by the minor party.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/199110/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The bar was always too hard for Dutton. This week’s budget, whatever criticisms can be made of it, has been an elusive target for the LiberalsMichelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2048632023-05-02T17:23:54Z2023-05-02T17:23:54ZYellen puts Congress on notice over impending debt default date: 5 essential reads on what’s at stake<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/523872/original/file-20230502-28-3tukkp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=12%2C38%2C4230%2C2723&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen doesn't want to look back in anger over a debt deadline missed.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/secretary-janet-yellen-leaves-after-an-open-session-of-a-news-photo/1483917268?adppopup=true">Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Lawmakers have been <a href="https://apnews.com/article/x-date-debt-ceiling-yellen-treasury-borrowing-f726fd88a9bb7f72e50f0b948731ac57">given notice of a new deadline</a> if they are to avoid a damaging default on U.S. debt: June 1, 2023.</p>
<p>If Congress fails to raise the nation’s borrowing limit by that date, <a href="https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/jy1454">Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen warned</a>, then the federal government risks being “unable to continue to satisfy all of the government’s obligations.”</p>
<p>Giving herself a little wiggle room by saying that it is pretty hard to work out the exact date of default, Yellen was clear on the potential impact: “If Congress fails to increase the debt limit, it would cause severe hardship to American families, harm our global leadership position, and raise questions about our ability to defend our national security interests.”</p>
<p>Yikes!</p>
<p>The warning may spur leaders in Congress into action. House Speaker Kevin McCarthy <a href="https://apnews.com/article/speaker-kevin-mccarty-debt-ceiling-biden-1dd542c6c7acfc2287e68e6facae2be4">fired the starting pistol on negotiations</a> over the debt ceiling in April, laying out the criteria under which Republicans would accept an increase. But McCarthy’s proposals – which have since passed <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/apr/26/us-house-debt-ceiling-bill-passed-kevin-mccarthy">a narrow vote in the House</a> – have been shot down by the Biden administration for <a href="https://theconversation.com/snap-work-requirements-dont-actually-get-more-people-working-but-they-do-drastically-limit-the-availability-of-food-aid-204257">having strings attached</a> that Democrats deemed unacceptable.</p>
<p>Explaining why the U.S. has a debt ceiling in the first place – and why it is a constant source of political wrangling – is a complicated matter. Here are five articles from The Conversation’s archive that provide some of the answers.</p>
<h2>1. What exactly is the debt ceiling?</h2>
<p>So, some basics. The debt ceiling was established by the U.S. Congress in 1917. It limits the total national debt by setting out a maximum amount that the government can borrow.</p>
<p>Steven Pressman, an <a href="https://ww4.newschool.edu/nssr/faculty/steven-pressman/">economist at The New School</a>, explained the original aim was “to let then-President Woodrow Wilson spend the money he deemed necessary to fight World War I without waiting for often-absent lawmakers to act. Congress, however, did not want to write the president a blank check, so it limited borrowing to US$11.5 billion and required legislation for any increase.”</p>
<p>Since then, the debt ceiling has <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-america-has-a-debt-ceiling-5-questions-answered-164977">been increased dozens of times</a>. It currently stands at $31.4 trillion – a figure already reached. As a result, the Treasury has taken “extraordinary measures” to enable it to keep borrowing without breaching the ceiling. Such measures, however, can only be temporary – meaning at one point Congress will have to act to lift the ceiling or default on its debt obligations, which <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/18/business/debt-limit-wall-street.html">is expected to happen in July</a> or August.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/why-america-has-a-debt-ceiling-5-questions-answered-164977">Why America has a debt ceiling: 5 questions answered</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>2. ‘Catastrophic’ consequences</h2>
<p>How bad could it be if the U.S. does default on its debt obligations? Well, <a href="https://theconversation.com/if-the-us-defaults-on-debt-expect-the-dollar-to-fall-and-with-it-americans-standard-of-living-169079">pretty bad</a>, according to Michael Humphries, <a href="https://tci.touro.edu/academics/faculty/">deputy chair of business administration at Touro University</a>, who wrote two articles on the consequences. </p>
<p>“The knock-on effect of the U.S. defaulting would be catastrophic. Investors such as pension funds and banks holding U.S. debt could fail. Tens of millions of Americans and thousands of companies that depend on government support could suffer. The dollar’s value could collapse, and the U.S. economy would most likely sink back into recession,” he wrote.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/if-the-us-defaults-on-debt-expect-the-dollar-to-fall-and-with-it-americans-standard-of-living-169079">If the US defaults on debt, expect the dollar to fall – and with it, Americans' standard of living</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>3. Undermining the dollar</h2>
<p>And that’s not all. </p>
<p>Such a default could undermine the U.S. dollar’s position as a “unit of account,” which makes it a widely used currency in global finance and trade. Loss of this status would be a <a href="https://theconversation.com/us-debt-default-could-trigger-dollars-collapse-and-severely-erode-americas-political-and-economic-might-198395">severe economic and political blow</a> to the U.S. But Humphries conceded that putting a dollar value on the price of a default is hard: </p>
<p>“The truth is, we really don’t know what will happen or how bad it will get. The scale of the damage caused by a U.S. default is hard to calculate in advance because it has never happened before.”</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/us-debt-default-could-trigger-dollars-collapse-and-severely-erode-americas-political-and-economic-might-198395">US debt default could trigger dollar’s collapse – and severely erode America’s political and economic might</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>4. Can McCarthy make a deal?</h2>
<p>Many of these concessions are known, such as allowing a single member of the House to call for a vote to remove him as speaker. But there many be others that remain secret and <a href="https://theconversation.com/house-speaker-mccarthys-powers-are-still-strong-but-hell-be-fighting-against-new-rules-that-could-prevent-anything-from-getting-done-197391">could be influencing McCarthy’s decision-making</a>, argued <a href="https://pennstatelaw.psu.edu/faculty/brand">Stanley M. Brand</a>, a law professor at Penn State and former general counsel for the House. These could make it much harder to reach a deal with Biden over the debt ceiling.</p>
<p>“Some of the new rules spawned by McCarthy’s concessions may appear to democratize the procedures for considering and passing legislation. But they are likely to make it difficult for members to get the working majority necessary to pass legislation,” Brand explained. “That could make things such as raising the statutory debt ceiling, which is necessary to avert a government shutdown and financial crisis, and passing legislation to fund the government, difficult.”</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/house-speaker-mccarthys-powers-are-still-strong-but-hell-be-fighting-against-new-rules-that-could-prevent-anything-from-getting-done-197391">House Speaker McCarthy's powers are still strong – but he'll be fighting against new rules that could prevent anything from getting done</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>5. The GOP endgame: A balanced budget</h2>
<p>Another condition McCarthy agreed to in January is to push for a “balanced budget” within 10 years.</p>
<p>The U.S. government hasn’t had a balanced budget since 2001, the year President Bill Clinton left office. <a href="https://www.hks.harvard.edu/faculty/linda-bilmes">Linda J. Bilmes</a>, a senior lecturer in public policy and public finance at Harvard Kennedy School who worked in the Clinton administration from 1997 to 2001, explained how they achieved that rare feat and <a href="https://theconversation.com/i-helped-balance-the-federal-budget-in-the-1990s-heres-just-how-hard-it-will-be-for-the-gop-to-achieve-that-same-rare-feat-198363">why it’s unlikely to be repeated today</a>. </p>
<p>“Back in 1997, after the smoke cleared, both the Clinton administration and the Republicans in Congress were able to claim some political credit for the resulting budget surpluses,” she wrote. “But – crucially – both parties recognized that a deal was in the best interest of the country and were able to line up their respective members to get the votes in Congress needed to approve it. The contrast with the current political landscape is stark.”</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/i-helped-balance-the-federal-budget-in-the-1990s-heres-just-how-hard-it-will-be-for-the-gop-to-achieve-that-same-rare-feat-198363">I helped balance the federal budget in the 1990s – here's just how hard it will be for the GOP to achieve that same rare feat</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p><em>Editor’s note: This story is a roundup of articles from The Conversation’s archives. Sections of this article appeared in a <a href="https://theconversation.com/speaker-mccarthy-lays-out-initial-cards-in-debt-ceiling-debate-5-essential-reads-on-why-its-a-high-stakes-game-204079">previous article</a> published on April 19, 2023.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/204863/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
If the US fails to increase its debt ceiling by June 1, it could be forced into an embarrassing – and hugely costly – default on its obligations.Matt Williams, Senior International EditorLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1983842023-03-07T13:44:20Z2023-03-07T13:44:20ZHow the ‘Holman rule’ allows the House to fast-track proposals to gut government programs without debate or much thought at all<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/512755/original/file-20230228-1571-bdrau5.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=26%2C26%2C5964%2C3952&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Reinstituted rules in the U.S. House of Representatives allow members to fire federal staffers and cut programs.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/pedestrian-walks-through-the-capitol-plaza-with-the-dome-of-news-photo/1247545875?phrase=Capitol%20building%20U.S.&adppopup=true">Kent Nishimura / Los Angeles Times via Getty Images</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>The slim Republican majority in the House of Representatives has just voted to give itself a streamlined way to fire civil servants and shut down federal programs it doesn’t like – outside the standard process of review and debate. </p>
<p>This method, known as the <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/01/10/gop-holman-rule-unions-biden-congress/">Holman rule</a>, has been used in the past by both parties to cloak political decisions in the language and process of saving taxpayers money. It was included in a package of rules approved as the House began its business in January. </p>
<p>As <a href="https://history.house.gov/People/Appointed-Officials/General-Counsels/">a former acting general counsel of the U.S. House of Representatives</a> and the author of <a href="https://www.google.com/books/edition/Congressional_Practice_and_Procedure/uSmcAAAAMAAJ?hl=en">a treatise on congressional procedure</a>, I know that this method has been used in the past to push extreme political agendas through the political process without due consideration for the public interest. And it’s likely to happen again.</p>
<p>Florida Republican <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/01/10/gop-holman-rule-unions-biden-congress/">Rep. Kat Cammack spoke about the Holman rule’s adoption</a> on the House floor in early January 2023, calling federal officials “unelected bureaucrats, the true, real swamp creatures here in D.C.,” saying they had “run roughshod over the American people without consequence.”</p>
<p>“Today marks our first move, and certainly not our last, to hold them accountable.”</p>
<p>Jacqueline Simon, public policy director of the American Federation of Government Employees, <a href="https://www.afge.org/article/afge-ready-to-mobilize-against-proposals-targeting-workers-under-revived-holman-rule/">sees the Holman rule differently:</a> “It goes around everything that protects the civil service from political corruption — not just federal employees but entire agencies. It is precisely for theater and to create chaos and disrupt the operation of federal agencies, including law enforcement agencies.” </p>
<p>The rule allows House members to transform the normal process of compiling appropriation bills – normally, lists of amounts of money to be spent – into vehicles <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/01/10/gop-holman-rule-unions-biden-congress/">to fire government employees and shut down programs</a> they don’t like. </p>
<p>Anything is ripe for cutting with the Holman rule, from environmental protection agencies to government efforts for human rights to existing programs for addressing sales of semi-automatic weapons.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/512757/original/file-20230228-26-qac3ix.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="A blond-haired woman in a red and white dress in front of a building's entrance." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/512757/original/file-20230228-26-qac3ix.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/512757/original/file-20230228-26-qac3ix.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/512757/original/file-20230228-26-qac3ix.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/512757/original/file-20230228-26-qac3ix.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/512757/original/file-20230228-26-qac3ix.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/512757/original/file-20230228-26-qac3ix.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/512757/original/file-20230228-26-qac3ix.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Republican Rep. Kat Cammack says the Holman rule is needed because ‘unelected bureaucrats, the true, real swamp creatures here in D.C.,’ have ‘run roughshod over the American people.’</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/rep-kat-cammack-r-fla-leaves-a-meeting-of-the-house-news-photo/1247560662?phrase=kat%20cammack&adppopup=true">Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Fast and furious</h2>
<p>Normally, such cuts to staff or programs would have to go <a href="https://books.google.com/books/about/Congressional_practice_and_procedure.html?id=uSmcAAAAMAAJ&subject=Charles%20Tiefer,%20Congressional%20Practice%20and%20Procedure%20186%20(1989)">through an extensive review process</a>, either to restructure or abolish programs. </p>
<p>That process includes initial drafting of a full-scale bill, subcommittee and full committee hearings and debates, testimony and evidence presented by the president’s administration, press coverage of these steps and adaptation of Congress members’ positions in light of that coverage. Then, votes are held on edits to the bill, known as markups, after which there is a separate committee vote on reporting the bill out to the full House, the drafting of committee report sections by supporters and opponents – and even more after that.</p>
<p>But Holman sidesteps that considered process. </p>
<p>It allows provisions for altering or abolishing programs to be offered to and made a part of appropriation bills, as long as the provision putatively saves money. Under Holman, individual House members offer amendments during full House consideration of a bill on the floor. As long as these amendments <a href="https://sgp.fas.org/crs/misc/R44736.pdf">cut spending</a>, they are considered proper. </p>
<p>For example, the <a href="https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/5376/text">Inflation Reduction Act of 2022</a> <a href="https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IN/IN11977">created a program</a> to improve the technology infrastructure of the IRS and to hire more auditors to focus on the wealthy and corporations. Estimates are the program <a href="https://federalnewsnetwork.com/congress/2023/01/house-gop-prioritizes-end-to-unnecessary-federal-programs-cutting-80b-from-irs/?subject=Jory%20Heckman,%20%22House%20GOP%20Prioritizes%20End%20to%20'Unnecessary'%20Federal%20Programs,%20Cutting%20%2480B%20from%20IRS.%22">will cost US$80 billion over a decade</a>. Proposed changes to that program in legislation that goes the normal route through many hearings might get bogged down in debate. </p>
<p>But under Holman, a critic of the program could just drop a change into the must-pass part of the appropriations bill that contains spending for Treasury Department operations and kill or alter the program. No one could stop that from happening unless they chose to vote against the entire appropriations bill, which funds that whole department of the government.</p>
<p>Similarly, the EPA proposes to strengthen regulations limiting the oil and gas industry’s <a href="https://www.epa.gov/controlling-air-pollution-oil-and-natural-gas-industry">methane emissions</a>, a potent greenhouse gas. A House critic of the methane-control program could just pop into the appropriations bill containing spending on the EPA a Holman rule provision that either cuts the program head’s salary to $1 or terminates the program altogether.</p>
<h2>Bipartisan tool – for a time</h2>
<p>Historically, the Holman rule, named after <a href="https://history.house.gov/Historical-Highlights/1851-1900/The-Holman-Rule/">Rep. William S. Holman of Indiana</a>, wasn’t a tool of only the Republican Party. It was first developed in 1876 when a <a href="https://law.yale.edu/sites/default/files/documents/pdf/mccubbins.pdf?subject=Gary%20W.%20Cox%20and%20Mathew%20D.%20McCubbins,%20%22Legislative%20Leviathan%20Revisited%20%20at%20%2249.">Democratic House majority faced a Republican president.</a> I wrote about the history of the Holman rule in my <a href="https://archive.org/details/congressionalpra0000tief">book on congressional practice and procedure</a>.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>At the time, the Democratic Party held what would later be called the solid South (today, these areas are usually Republican) and sought to expel Yankee Reconstruction – and repeal the laws behind it. Democrats adopted the Holman Rule to get those repeals of law past President Grant.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The Holman rule could be, and was, put to diverse uses in its early days. </p>
<p><a href="https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R44736">The Congressional Research Service says</a>, “A broad initial construction of the rule by the House resulted in putting a great mass of general legislation upon the appropriation bills.”</p>
<p>The Holman rule was used from 1876 to 1895 and again from 1911 to 1983. It was brought <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/virginia-politics/house-republicans-revive-obscure-rule-that-could-allow-them-to-slash-the-pay-of-individual-federal-workers-to-1/2017/01/04/4e80c990-d2b2-11e6-945a-76f69a399dd5_story.html">back into use by the GOP in 2017</a>. When Democrats took over the House in <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/01/10/gop-holman-rule-unions-biden-congress/">2019, they dropped it</a>. </p>
<p>In one notable attempt in 2017, House Republicans were <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/01/10/gop-holman-rule-unions-biden-congress/">angry about evaluations of proposed legislation by</a> <a href="https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R44736">staff of the nonpartisan Budget Analysis Division</a> of the Congressional Budget Office. So, they used the Holman rule to try to abolish that division and move its employees to another part of its parent agency, making the proposal in a wider budget allocation bill.</p>
<p>Holman allowed disgruntled Republicans to rush their proposal onto the House floor, instead of going through slower, more deliberative processes of examining whether the Budget Analysis Division was fulfilling its mission. The vote to eliminate the division failed, but, significantly, the use at that time of <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/virginia-politics/house-republicans-revive-obscure-rule-that-could-allow-them-to-slash-the-pay-of-individual-federal-workers-to-1/2017/01/04/4e80c990-d2b2-11e6-945a-76f69a399dd5_story.html">the Holman rule was promoted by the same faction</a> of the Republican party, <a href="https://perry.house.gov/uploadedfiles/hfc_rules_reforms_proposal_7.25.2022.pdf">the Freedom Caucus, that has advocated for</a> using the rule now.</p>
<h2>Greasing the skids</h2>
<p>There are a number of situations that could lead current House Republicans to use the Holman rule. </p>
<p>First, House Republican leaders may need to unify their party <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/virginia-politics/house-republicans-revive-obscure-rule-that-could-allow-them-to-slash-the-pay-of-individual-federal-workers-to-1/2017/01/04/4e80c990-d2b2-11e6-945a-76f69a399dd5_story.html">to pass controversial appropriation bills</a> in the face of anticipated unanimous Democratic resistance. Allowing Holman amendments to be proposed by members with extreme views may get needed legislative support from the fringe of the caucus.</p>
<p>House passage of provisions to cut or wipe out programs and whole agencies has two effects. House Republicans can demoralize agency employees who do not know whether to take jobs elsewhere or stay. And House passage may presage passage by the whole Congress. </p>
<p>An attempt by the Senate Democratic majority to kill a House-passed Holman rule provision when it considers legislation sent over from the House <a href="https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2022/08/26/finding-60-votes-in-an-evenly-divided-senate-a-high-bar-but-not-an-impossible-one/">would need 60 votes to move ahead</a>. That would require votes from almost a dozen Republican members, which may not be possible to get.</p>
<p>An appropriations bill that contains Holman provisions would then go <a href="https://www.senate.gov/committees/committees_faq.htm#conference_committee">to conference</a>, which is a temporary committee made up of House and Senate legislators and formed to reconcile differences in legislation passed by both chambers. Senate Democrats may go along, even with objectionable Holman or other provisions, to get buy-in from all the factions of the House Republican party needed for passage of the appropriations bill and avoidance of a government shutdown.</p>
<p>Which brings us full circle to where the Holman rule started, with the southern Democrats’ aim to force through House provisions that Republican President Ulysses S. Grant did not want. </p>
<p>Would President Joe Biden veto all the appropriation bills that have any Holman rule-passed provisions?</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/198384/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Charles Tiefer does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>House Republicans have adopted a rule used periodically over the past 150 years that allows lawmakers to speed up and streamline votes to dismantle federal programs and fire federal employees.Charles Tiefer, Professor of Law, University of BaltimoreLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.