Why We're Polarized
Punishing GOP members who voted for the infrastructure bill is a sure-fire way to make American politics even more dysfunctional and polarized than it already is
I’m Michael A. Cohen, and this is Truth and Consequences: A no-holds-barred look at the absurdities, hypocrisies, and surreality of American politics. If you received this email - or you are a free subscriber - and you’d like to subscribe: you can sign up here.
The Movember Special continues. Click below for a 20% discount on a subscription to Truth and Consequences.
In America’s constitutional system, legislative representatives are directly elected — both by congressional district and by state — to protect and defend the interests of their constituents. This system, which differs from the parliamentary structure in most Western democracies, has long been driven by parochialism, in which regional or district-level concerns drive the decision-making of members of Congress. It is why, for example, that in the 1950s and 1960s, the biggest impediment to civil rights legislation, favored by a Democratic president, was fellow Southern Democrats. The latter took more seriously devotion to its region than it did to its party.
This spirit of parochialism, which contributed to the vote-trading and log-rolling that long came to define congressional debates, has eroded as American politics has become more partisan and tribalistic. Quite simply, party loyalty is now as, if not more important, than loyalty to one’s constituents.
This brings me to a disturbing story in today’s Punchbowl newsletter:
The GOP leadership is bracing for rank-and-file lawmakers to attempt to strip committee assignments from the 13 Republican lawmakers who voted for the $1 trillion bipartisan infrastructure bill. Several of these lawmakers are also ranking members -- top Republicans on committees -- and those could be at risk, too.
A number of GOP lawmakers were upset by the fact that several of their Republican colleagues voted early for the infrastructure package, helping Democrats cross the majority threshold on a key piece of President Joe Biden’s legislative agenda and undermining their party strategy.
These rank-and-file lawmakers want America to adopt a parliamentary approach to politics, in which party members vote in unison, irrespective of how it might affect not only their constituents but also their near-term electoral prospects.
Take, for example, Congressman Brian Fitzpatrick, who represents Bucks Country, Pennsylvania, where I grew up. The First District is one of the few congressional districts in America won by President Biden but represented by a Republican congressman. The area has long been narrowly contested in congressional elections, swinging back and forth between Democrats and Republicans, which requires Fitzpatrick to act like a Republican but not too much like a Republican. He voted for the infrastructure bill, though he opposes Biden’s Build Back Better Agenda. He proposed censuring President Trump earlier this year for his role in the January 6 insurrection but voted against articles of impeachment. In short, unlike Republican members in ruby-red districts, he’s constantly walking a political tightrope.
For other Republican members who voted for the infrastructure bill, like David McKinley of West Virginia's 1st Congressional District, his support had far more to do with how the bill would impact his constituents. In a statement, McKinley said, "We’ve all heard stories of children in West Virginia sitting in parking lots to do their schoolwork because their homes are not connected to reliable broadband internet. Tonight, I voted for those kids and to give the next generation of West Virginians hope for a brighter future."
Rep. Don Young cited the $3.5 billion for federal highway funding in his home state of Alaska as his reason for supporting the legislation.
It’s essential to keep in mind that such decision-making did not use to be controversial. In the past, infrastructure bills passed with overwhelming bipartisan majorities because usually, every member of Congress had some local wish list project stuffed into the legislation. Indeed, what is most surprising about the $1.2 trillion infrastructure bill is not that 13 Republicans voted for it — it’s that only 13 Republican members voted for it.
The Era of Polarization
Of course, we no longer live in a political world in which members of Congress, particularly Republicans, vote in a parochial manner. It’s “team red” or “team blue” all the time. Now we have members of Congress who makes statements like this about infrastructure bills:
Marsha Blackburn, of course, represents the state of Tennessee, which relies on the Tennessee Valley Authority for its electricity needs, a federal program that dates to the New Deal.
Punishing Republican members of Congress who voted for legislation that 19 Republican senators voted for is a surefire way to make Congress even more polarized. It will make bipartisanship that much more challenging to achieve. It will give us more Republican members like Rep. Marjorie Taylor-Greene, who tweeted out the phone numbers of the 13 Republicans who supported the legislation after the House vote on the infrastructure bill. Some are now getting death threats. In short, it further turns America’s bicameral system of government into a parliamentary system in which party affiliation is the only consideration for members of Congress. All that is a long way of saying that if you think congressional gridlock and dysfunction is bad now: it can still get worse.
Su-no-no
Earlier today, New Hampshire Governor Chris Sununu surprised the political world by announcing that he would not challenge Senator Maggie Hassan (pictured above) in 2022 — and instead will seek a fourth term as governor. A Sununu senatorial bid was considered the most significant political threat to Hassan’s chances of reelection, and both former President Trump and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell had vigorously lobbied him to run.
Sununu gave an interesting explanation for his decision that directly relates to the point raised above. He doesn’t want to run, he said because in the Senate today, “too often doing nothing is considered a win.” Sununu is precisely describing the political strategy of obstructionism utilized by Mitch McConnell.
When you think about it, what exactly is the upside in being a Senator these days? As it is, Sununu has a pretty good gig. Being a governor is not like being one out of a hundred. It means: you’re one of one. If Sununu were to win in a race (that is likely a toss-up) and Republicans were to take back the Senate, his only job would be to vote “no” over and over again on every legislative item on President Biden’s wish list. Surely, he would not be spending his time seeking bipartisan compromise with his Democratic colleagues. On the other hand, suppose that somehow Republicans did win back the White House in 2024 and controlled the Senate. In that case, Sununu could spend his time casting votes for barely qualified conservative jurists to hold lifetime positions on the federal bench — and not much else.
That’s the kind of job that might appeal to highly partisan and ambitious Republicans, but it sounds a bit like hell for most normal people. Quite simply, if the House Republicans who want to punish their 13 colleagues for voting for an infrastructure bill get their way — Congress will be reserved for the kind of elected official more interested in scoring political points than getting something done.
Of course, this is already happening. Reasonable Republicans (and I’m using this term generously) are running for the exits. In Ohio, Rob Portman, who voted for the bipartisan infrastructure bill, will likely be replaced by Josh Mandel, who believes that the separation of church and state should no longer exist. Rep. Anthony Gonzalez in Ohio is retiring. He’ll likely be replaced by Max Miller, a former Trump aide, who his former girlfriend, Stephanie Grisham, says hit and punched her. Sean Parnell is accused of trying to strangle his wife and hitting his kids. He is also the leading candidate for the GOP Senate nomination in Pennsylvania. When asked yesterday if Parnell is “the right candidate” for the Keystone State, Sen. Rick Scott, the head of the National Republican Senate Committee, refused to say no. Considering that Trump has endorsed Parnell, Scott is taking the politically safe route.
McConnell did the same when he recently endorsed Trump-favored Herschel Walker for the GOP Senate race in Georgia. Walker is accused of having pointed a loaded pistol at his ex-wife’s head.
Hard to figure why Sununu wouldn’t want to be a member of that crew.
What’s Going On?
Great piece by Jennifer Gonnerman for the New Yorker on a murder witness living with the consequences of sending three men to prison on a lie.
Josh Hawley, who has refused to stand up to Donald Trump’s boorish and lawless behavior throughout his public life, thinks the biggest problem in America is a lack of masculinity.
If we lived in a normal, healthy country, Rep. Paul Gosar would already be expelled from Congress.
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar has some wise words about Aaron Rodgers and the damage he has done.
Mitch McConnell is a sad, cynical man:
“Safely huddled with Democratic leaders as they watched video of police battling Trump supporters in the Capitol, McConnell reacted with anger and revulsion, according to Sen. Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.), who was also in the secure location.
“I thought to myself, 'This could be a transformative moment. He appears to have taken this very seriously,’ ” recalled Durbin, who spent hours that day holed up with the Republican leader.
But when it came time to hold Trump to account, McConnell backed off. While seven GOP senators voted to convict Trump following his impeachment by the House for inciting an insurrection, McConnell supported acquittal, ensuring Trump would face no formal penalty for inciting an insurrection.”