Disorder in the House

Watching the State of the Union last Thursday, it seemed like half the country was hyperventilating due to their uncontrollable rage at Joe Biden while the other half was holding its breath in hopes the president wouldn’t trip going up (or down) the stairs of the dais in the House chamber. Now that the annual event is over and the mostly favorable reviews are rolling in, it is a good opportunity to focus on an aspect of the occasion that the Congress must address unless they are resigned to continually reenforcing the public’s already dismal regard for the institution. 

Only 12 percent in a recent poll claimed to have a favorable view of Congress, the poorest showing memory. When former speaker Nancy Pelosi was asked about the low approval ratings some years ago, she expressed astonishment that anyone held a positive view. Yet the Congress of which she spoke, despite the energetic feuding and hyperpolarized parties, resembles a courteous knitting group compared to the undisciplined clown show on full display in the House chamber these days.)

Geezer alert: I realize that complaining about how congressional behavior was so much better in days past makes me sound like an aging veteran of Capitol Hill who longs for the long-gone days of disagreeing without being disagreeable. But given the general agreement that it would take some improvement in self-management for the current crop of legislators to rise even to the level of “disagreeable,” I might be on to something here.

Not that members needed to wait for something broadcast nationally, in prime time, to unveil their puerile and discourteous behavior. Schoolyard epithets and potty-mouth expletives cascade from congressional yaps on such a regular basis that even the most offensive outburst barely registers anymore. In 2019, a survey of the use of swearing by public officials on Twitter reported a marked increase since 2015, the Year of the Golden Escalator. (Run-of-the-mill public swearing had risen from just 58 incidents in 2014 to an impressive 1,225 by the end of the third quarter of 2019. The increased use of the big two words was even more impressive: “sh*t” rose from a measly 21 instances to 558 and the grandaddy of all curses, the F-bomb, rose from zero to 579 in 2018.)

Historians of congressional smuttiness will doubtless trace back this implosion of congressional courtesy to the explosive outburst of Rep. Joe Wilson (R-SC) in 2009, chastising President Obama as a “liar” during a joint session on health care. The insult earned Wilson a disapproving look from Speaker Pelosi that could have frozen blood in the veins. (It also earned Wilson hundreds of thousands of dollars in campaign contributions over the following days.) Today’s observers of what passes for congressional discourse have become inured to the repetition of the slur by Rep. Marjorie Taylor Green (R-GA) or Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-CO), who unleash it whenever they feel it is appropriate (which is apparently frequently).

And while it is true that Donald Trump’s childish reliance on profanity appears to have given license to Republicans to curse blithely on the public record, the practice is not unknown among Democrats either. Who can (or would want to) forget the very helpful comment of Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) about Trump, “We’re gonna go in and impeach the motherf—er” in 2019, or presidential candidate Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ) denouncing Trump’s statements as “a bullshit soup.” 

It is almost comical to recall that the speaker of the House, Tip O’Neill, was punished by his colleagues forty years ago when he denounced a particularly egregious act of mendacity by Rep. Newt Gingrich (R-GA) as “the lowest thing” he had ever seen on the floor of the House. Not only was O’Neill’s remark unremarkably modest, even by the standards of the 1980’s, but it undoubtedly was accurate as well. The difference is that the presiding officer (O’Neill’s roommate!) demonstrated integrity and respect for propriety (and the House rules) and, notwithstanding the embarrassment to his friend, affirmed the objection. 

Prior to this week’s SOTU, Speaker Mike Johnson (R-GA), aware that past outbursts from Green and her zany MAGA soulmates made Republicans sound like a roiling lynch mob, urged his colleagues to behave with “decorum” during President Biden’s speech. He might as well have delivered his admonition to the tropical bird house at the National Zoo. He was, after all, lecturing people like Rep. Mark Green (R-TN), who recently insulted Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas at an official hearing as being “a reptile with no balls.” Despite Johnson’s admonition, Biden’s speech produced a cacophony of Republican insults and jeers aimed at the president, who literally laughed off the slights and challenged his critics to legislate rather than castigate.

Five years ago, I testified before the Committee on Modernization of the Congress that was seeking recommendations for improving the functioning of the House. “Organizational reform alone cannot heal the partisan discord that frustrates the members of this House and the citizens of the country,” I told the committee. Noting the “loss of the collegiality crucial to bipartisan collaboration,” I suggested the members consider implementing “tougher rules governing floor speech [that] could help refocus floor debate on substantive issues and lower the political temperature.” Pretty obviously, this wise counsel was not adopted.

Members who regularly rely on profane language bring disrespect on the institution in which they serve. One can reasonably assume that some of the worst offenders welcome the opportunity to heap opprobrium on Congress. This is a role for the leadership who presumably understand their responsibility in preserving public confidence in our institutions of government. When Speaker Pelosi rarely employed harsh language – she once referred to a Senate intelligence bill as “a piece of crap” — she quickly admonished herself by adding, “pardon my French.” The use of profanity even by a president earned a steely look of reproach from the speaker.

Amending the House rules to chastise intemperate speech wouldn’t single-handedly restore collegiality to the Congress, but it sure wouldn’t hurt. It is too much to expect from Speaker Johnson, who lives under a threat of being ousted by his own party. But if Democrats have a chance to revise the rules next January, it would be a good idea to upgrade the level of speech that is considered acceptable on the House floor and in its committee rooms to something above a locker room vocabulary of non-deleted expletives.