Tuesday, January 11
First day on the job!
Following the Tucson shootings, many offices have slowed or stopped work, and Congressman/women have returned to their district for the week. The tone has been decidedly bipartisan, with a few exceptions. The headline of Politico (a Capitol Hill newspaper) talked about members trying to "avoid politics" in all of this. They had a prayer session on Monday on the Capitol Hill steps with nearly every staff members from both
sides of the aisle in attendance, and a pro forma House session today with politicians from both sides making speeches against violence and hate, and for kindness and healing. So it has been a particularly interesting time to enter Washington, normally so politicized, in a moment when the nation has more or less come together again. The rhetoric has been bipartisan, like I said. Sarah Palin (though not an elected official) has blasted the media for "blood libel" after many made connections with her past rhetoric which has been seen as violent and incendiary and provoking the attack in Arizona. But politicians have been very kind to each other, rejecting politics in this time of national mourning. These kinds of events always seem to transcend politics, slow down the hatred and anger, make people rise above the fray.
Thankfully, I think this will also change the rhetoric has been flying around unabated over the last few elections cycles. Politicians on both sides of the aisle (like Bill Clinton), and even media leaders (like Roger Ailes of FOX) have called for the "vitriol" (to use Obama's word) to be dampened. Most have acknowledged that there is some link between rhetoric and the violence in Arizona, whether direct or indirect, and although the event itself was terrifying and unfortunate, the silver lining is that this will probably increase bipartisanship and cooperation, and make elected officers and media members watch what they say more closely. I see a very good result emerging out of a terrible situation.
Day 3
Tying in “The Interns Speak” (an intern testimonial article given to us by our professor), I am comforted by many of the testimonies given by the former interns reflecting on their experiences. I was particularly affected by Bert’s testimony (213-4), which encouraged interns facing nothing but “grunt work” to “stand up and say something to the intern coordinator.” Although I don’t necessarily feel this like now (on my second day), I had the thought, as I answered phones and sorted mail, that this might be how it is for the rest of the semester. His testimony comforted me by reminding me that I can say something to the internship coordinator if there is something bothering me. Another testimonial that hit hard was Diane’s (218). She said that if you start out doing menial tasks, just wait. The office needs to get to know you, to trust you and your judgment. I hope this is the case with our office. I’ve been basically trying to do everything I’ve been given very well, and with a good attitude. For example, today John, one of our legislative aids, handed me a project to work on that involved me finding a letter the staff here had written about a year back supporting the grant proposal of a local firefighting unit in the district, and then writing up a new document modeled after that one. My first non-menial task! However, I looked and looked and looked, but couldn’t find the file. I poured through every document since 2009 looking for this file. I searched “fire,” “firefighters,” “grant,” “Safer,” and “AFG,” but all I could find was a document whose title was FDSupportltr.doc, but in fact was blank. I eventually had to tell John I couldn’t find anything. I feel disappointed to have not been successful in my first non-menial mission. But I know I did my absolute best. I hope that John is not disappointed, but rather spurned on by my hard work and feels good about giving me more in the future.
Day 5
Our congressman's presence in this office is very positive. He brings smiles and laughs into every corner, every room. He hosted about twenty UAW reps today in his office, and he handled them excellently. He really is an excellent politician, and I think an excellent person (or as much as you can be as a nationally-recognized public servant). I gave an interview to that effect to the Kent State Magazine. My perception of politicians seems to be changing. I am no longer so cynical about the intentions of our public servants- in fact, I think most politicians enter office with very good intentions. Now, some may just be deluding themselves, thinking their demagoguery and radical positions will get them places. And some may not be willing to work with others, especially others on the other side of the political aisle, as a result. But in general, even if the Congress is filled with staunch ideologues, it’s because they feel strongly about helping the American people. Liberals may disagree with Conservatives and vice-versa on how exactly to go about helping Americans, but in the end they all have the same goal. Rhetoric as a political tool should never go beyond acknowledging this fact. I admit that I have often thought that the Tea Partiers, for example, are completely beholden to corporate interest, that they falsely represent their version of America, that they don’t, in fact, have Americans in mind. Though this may be true in some ways, most politicians enter politics in order to serve others. I think this is true. Living in Washington has, surprisingly, made me less cynical than I was before.
Day 6
An interesting thing happened today. A former Congressman, Mike Parker from Mississippi, wandered into our office, looking to talk to our Chief of Staff. He wasn’t in, so instead Mike stuck around and talk to the two interns left in the office that day, Anna and me. Just meeting a former Congressman was enough of a shock, but what he and I talked about afterwards was really quite striking. He seemed depressed, perhaps a little beaten. I asked him why. He said he was old, fat, and tired. He said the life of a Congressman is hard, thankless. It forces you to put your family on hold. He told the story of going to a Mississippi GOP fundraiser, and after making a short speech, he was railed at by an energetic and stubborn Tea Party supporter out in the open. The experience left him shaken and depressed, almost in this existential kind of way. He told us about how he despises the Tea Party, how they don’t represent any kind of values he knows. Anyway, it was an interesting testimony. It added to my feeling that most Congresspeople are genuinely good inside, with mostly good intentions. It’s the job that is extremely difficult, and perhaps this is what leads politicians to do and say the dumb things they do.
Day 7
State of the Union tonight. People are buzzing about what Obama will say. One of the buzz words is “investment”-- GOP groups are already decoding the word to mean “spending.” Expect Bachmann’s rebuttal (on behalf of the TP) to decry ANY call for increased government spending, and for Paul Ryan to say something similar as well. It will be interesting to see the similarities and differences between the two. Obama is expected to call for “investment” in education and infrastructure, and for increased competitiveness on the global market. What is emerging is that what is says regarding the economy is what everyone is watching for, and to the extent that the SOTU “sets the agenda” for the coming year, this speech on the economy has the potential or not to make or break his presidency. It sounds a bit trite, but really, if he can rally enough GOPers and more importantly enough Americans (who did not support him before) behind his message, then he will be taking a lot of pressure OFF the Dems and putting it ON the Republicans to make some compromises. Personally, I hope Obama does what David Brooks would like him to do, and make a defense of the role of government in people’s lives. The anti-government rhetoric has reached a dull roar, and it’s important for the President, whose many legislative victories have also necessitated the expansion of the government’s role (at least in times of economic crisis), to defend this role, and in doing so, counter the prevailing notion somehow that government wants to intrude in people’s lives, rather than help them.
