Musical Chairs at SOTU Hasn’t Inspired Congressional Harmony

WASHINGTON, DC - JANUARY 24: U.S. Rep. Jeff Flake (R-AZ) (L) talks to U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ) before U.S. President Barack Obama delivered his State of the Union address on January 24, 2012 in Washington, DC. Obama said the focal point his speech is the central mission of our country, and his central focus as president, including 'rebuilding an economy where hard work pays off and responsibility is rewarded.'
National Journal
Elahe Izadi
Jan. 22, 2014, 3:30 p.m.

Con­gress’s prob­lems are too big for a seat­ing chart to fix.

Bi­par­tis­an seat­ing has be­come a staple at re­cent State of the Uni­on ad­dresses, and it may be this year, too. But for all the warm and fuzzy feel­ings the prac­tice is meant to in­spire, the three years on Cap­it­ol Hill since the tra­di­tion began have been among the most par­tis­an and grid­locked of all. Con­gress reached a new mile­stone last year, with the in­sti­tu­tion hav­ing its low­est out­put since 1947.

Bi­par­tis­an seat­ing has be­come the equi­val­ent of re­fer­ring to a polit­ic­al foe as “my friend.”

The prac­tice of law­makers of op­pos­ite parties sit­ting next to each oth­er dur­ing the pres­id­ent’s ad­dress began in 2011 as a re­sponse to the shoot­ing of then-Rep. Gab­ri­elle Gif­fords just weeks be­fore. Many law­makers par­ti­cip­ated, and think tank Third Way helped push the cause.

“There was al­most a phys­ic­al re­ac­tion by mem­bers to Gabby’s shoot­ing, and I think a lot of mem­bers un­der­stood how filled with rage and hatred the polit­ic­al de­bate had been for the pre­vi­ous two years, so there was very much a con­scious ef­fort that we sit to­geth­er,” re­calls former Rep. Brad Miller, who, along with oth­er North Car­o­lina Demo­crats, sat with Re­pub­lic­an Rep. Howard Coble.

In 2012, a hand­ful of law­makers con­tin­ued the prac­tice, with Gif­fords in at­tend­ance sit­ting between Ari­zona’s then-Rep. Jeff Flake, a Re­pub­lic­an, and Rep. Raul Gri­jalva, a Demo­crat. This year, four law­makers — Sens. Mark Ud­all of Col­or­ado, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, and Ari­zona Reps. Matt Sal­mon and Ron Barber, who holds Gif­fords’s old seat — are spear­head­ing the ef­fort anew, ask­ing House and Sen­ate lead­er­ship to en­cour­age mak­ing bi­par­tis­an seat­ing a per­man­ent tra­di­tion.

“Al­though this ges­ture has not ended the grid­lock on Cap­it­ol Hill, we feel it con­tin­ues to be a step in the right dir­ec­tion, sym­bol­iz­ing the im­port­ance of work­ing to­geth­er across the aisle to solve the com­mon chal­lenges we face in se­cur­ing a strong fu­ture for the United States,” the law­makers wrote in a let­ter. “Per­man­ent bi­par­tis­an seat­ing at the State of the Uni­on would be one small way to bridge the di­vide and to en­cour­age mem­bers to find bi­par­tis­an solu­tions to our na­tion’s prob­lems.”

But don’t ex­pect any dir­ect­ives in Con­gress on the mat­ter, at least not from House Speak­er John Boehner, who will be sit­ting next to Vice Pres­id­ent Joe Biden. “The Speak­er trusts mem­bers to de­cide where to sit,” Boehner spokes­man Mi­chael Steel said.

Third Way cofounder Matt Ben­nett ar­gues that such sym­bol­ism and ci­vil­ity in high-pro­file polit­ic­al events is im­port­ant, and con­sti­tutes one of many small steps to a func­tion­al Con­gress.

“This spec­tacle at the State of the Uni­on, of one side of Con­gress kind of hop­ping up and ap­plaud­ing and the oth­er glower­ing and stay­ing seated, really un­der­scores a lot of what people are feel­ing dis­heartened about,” Ben­nett says. “So when you have it mixed up a little bit and you don’t have that kind of bi­furc­ated Con­gress that’s so vis­ible in this big an­nu­al event, there is some mean­ing to that. However, we nev­er sug­ges­ted or thought for a second that this was go­ing to fix any­thing. It’s a mar­gin­al dif­fer­ence.”

Miller con­cedes that the prac­tice didn’t do much in al­ter the mood in the halls of Con­gress. But, he adds, “Op­tics are bet­ter than noth­ing. I think it’s bet­ter to do than not do, but I think it’s un­real­ist­ic to think it’s go­ing to have a big ef­fect.”

What We're Following See More »
STAFF PICKS
These (Supposed) Iowa and NH Escorts Tell All
4 hours ago
NATIONAL JOURNAL AFTER DARK

Before we get to the specifics of this exposé about escorts working the Iowa and New Hampshire primary crowds, let’s get three things out of the way: 1.) It’s from Cosmopolitan; 2.) most of the women quoted use fake (if colorful) names; and 3.) again, it’s from Cosmopolitan. That said, here’s what we learned:

  • Business was booming: one escort who says she typically gets two inquiries a weekend got 15 requests in the pre-primary weekend.
  • Their primary season clientele is a bit older than normal—”40s through mid-60s, compared with mostly twentysomething regulars” and “they’ve clearly done this before.”
  • They seemed more nervous than other clients, because “the stakes are higher when you’re working for a possible future president” but “all practiced impeccable manners.”
  • One escort “typically enjoy[s] the company of Democrats more, just because I feel like our views line up a lot more.”
Source:
STATE VS. FEDERAL
Restoring Some Sanity to Encryption
4 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

No matter where you stand on mandating companies to include a backdoor in encryption technologies, it doesn’t make sense to allow that decision to be made on a state level. “The problem with state-level legislation of this nature is that it manages to be both wildly impractical and entirely unenforceable,” writes Brian Barrett at Wired. There is a solution to this problem. “California Congressman Ted Lieu has introduced the ‘Ensuring National Constitutional Rights for Your Private Telecommunications Act of 2016,’ which we’ll call ENCRYPT. It’s a short, straightforward bill with a simple aim: to preempt states from attempting to implement their own anti-encryption policies at a state level.”

Source:
STAFF PICKS
What the Current Crop of Candidates Could Learn from JFK
4 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

Much has been made of David Brooks’s recent New York Times column, in which confesses to missing already the civility and humanity of Barack Obama, compared to who might take his place. In NewYorker.com, Jeffrey Frank reminds us how critical such attributes are to foreign policy. “It’s hard to imagine Kennedy so casually referring to the leader of Russia as a gangster or a thug. For that matter, it’s hard to imagine any president comparing the Russian leader to Hitler [as] Hillary Clinton did at a private fund-raiser. … Kennedy, who always worried that miscalculation could lead to war, paid close attention to the language of diplomacy.”

Source:
STAFF PICKS
Hillary Is Running Against the Bill of 1992
4 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

The New Covenant. The Third Way. The Democratic Leadership Council style. Call it what you will, but whatever centrist triangulation Bill Clinton embraced in 1992, Hillary Clinton wants no part of it in 2016. Writing for Bloomberg, Sasha Issenberg and Margaret Talev explore how Hillary’s campaign has “diverged pointedly” from what made Bill so successful: “For Hillary to survive, Clintonism had to die.” Bill’s positions in 1992—from capital punishment to free trade—“represented a carefully calibrated diversion from the liberal orthodoxy of the previous decade.” But in New Hampshire, Hillary “worked to juggle nostalgia for past Clinton primary campaigns in the state with the fact that the Bill of 1992 or the Hillary of 2008 would likely be a marginal figure within today’s Democratic politics.”

Source:
STAFF PICKS
Trevor Noah Needs to Find His Voice. And Fast.
5 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

At first, “it was pleasant” to see Trevor Noah “smiling away and deeply dimpling in the Stewart seat, the seat that had lately grown gray hairs,” writes The Atlantic‘s James Parker in assessing the new host of the once-indispensable Daily Show. But where Jon Stewart was a heavyweight, Noah is “a very able lightweight, [who] needs time too. But he won’t get any. As a culture, we’re not about to nurture this talent, to give it room to grow. Our patience was exhausted long ago, by some other guy. We’re going to pass judgment and move on. There’s a reason Simon Cowell is so rich. Impress us today or get thee hence. So it comes to this: It’s now or never, Trevor.”

Source:
×