PROGRAMMING NOTE: We’ll be off next week for the holidays but back to our normal schedule on Thursday, Jan. 2. THE ‘COARSER, MEANER’ WASHINGTON Rep. Dan Kildee got his start in politics nearly 50 years ago, including his personal 12-year stint as a member of the House. Now, as he gets ready to exit Congress, he barely recognizes the place. While he’s not a household name, the veteran Michigan Democrat is a well-respected voice on both sides of the aisle, known for his bipartisan deal-making, his effective messaging and his ability to consistently over-perform in a district redrawn to be a coin flip. So we caught up with him, looking for his unfettered thoughts on both the House and his party going forward. On his own party: He said Democrats’ current rules are holding back talented younger members from effectively climbing the ranks into committee leadership, and he advised his party broadly to practice listening, saying “We will survive this era of Trump, but we could end up looking a lot different.” On the broader House: Kildee also said Congress is a more dangerous place. He’s spoken at length about how his experiences during the Jan. 6 insurrection — he was one of the last lawmakers out of the chamber — affected his mental health, but he said death threats have forced his family to take proactive security measures back in the district. This interview has been edited for length and clarity. How has this place changed in your 12 years in office? It's an angrier place. It's more reflective of some of the divisions that appear in our society than it ever was before. I think it's a little bit schizophrenic in the sense that there still are good relationships across the aisle, but those relationships are not given the oxygen that they used to get. The ability to work across the aisle to produce bipartisan products has been diminishing a lot. So it’s not so much that we don't get to try — because we still do — but it just feels like when those efforts do appear, they don't get the oxygen. They don't get the support that they should. Can you talk about the personal experience of being a member of Congress? Jan. 6 was an experience that I had that was among the worst experiences that members had, because I was one of those people trapped in the gallery. We don't sign up for that. And even though we might say we think it comes with the territory, when you're thinking about your family — and I think about my wife being in my house, by herself, back home and knowing that there are people leaving stuff at my house. Angry signs. We’ve had to install security. We’ve had to be proactive. We gotta try to get back to just realizing everybody's a human being, and we all have the same needs and wants and fears. None of us are superhuman. And I could see this environment — It didn't chase me out of here. I'm leaving because I planned to leave around this time — but I could see why people wouldn't want to run for this job in the first place, or after being here for a while, might say, “You know what, it's not worth it.” And that's just terrible for our democracy. Are there structural changes within how your conference operates right now that would be helpful in keeping members like yourself around? Yeah, I wouldn’t adopt a Republican model [of six-year term limits at committees], but I think we have to deal with the reality that younger, newer members need to have a stronger seat at the table and feel like there's a chance for them to emerge within the committee leadership. Where we have no constraints at all, I don't think that's entirely helpful. You think about a person coming in to Congress and literally having to wait 20 years to be a subcommittee chair. That's too long. Obviously, big moments like Jan. 6 contributed in part to your departure, but was there some small moment just in the course of a day where you went: “You know what, I’m sick of this?” January 6th takes the cake when it comes to this place nearly falling apart. I actually think the 2017 tax bill was really bad. And I remember thinking to myself: “This is why elections matter.” I guess there’s little things, like when the other side clearly decided to weaponize the tools of the House. Adam Schiff being censured. That was just pathetic. I’m biased because Adam’s a close friend of mine, but that kind of thing where we reserved the use of those tools for the most egregious behavior — and then they just decide they don't like somebody and they're trying to hurt them. And they go after them. That's pretty bad. Anything else stick out as something you’ll particularly take with you? Growing up in politics, you have certain heroes that are still living heroes. [Civil rights icon and former Rep.] John Lewis was one of them. I thought, I actually get to go to work the same place John Lewis does. That was cool enough. When John got sick — it was during COVID — and he designated me to [proxy] vote for him. So for three months I had to call John. And so being his friend was enough of a gift, but then actually being able to cast the votes for the person most associated with the precious right to vote. I mean I thought: “Oh my God.” — Anthony Adragna GOOD AFTERNOON! Welcome to Inside Congress, the play-by-play guide to all things Capitol Hill, on Christmas Eve where we’re supremely grateful for your readership, engagement and tips! Our entire Hill team wishes you and yours a happy holiday season! GOP’S RECONCILIATION WARNING SIGN House Republicans' messy spending week gave them an early reality check on their ambitious legislative agenda to address the border, energy and taxes next year. Thirty-eight Republicans voted against a Trump-backed plan that included a debt ceiling hike while 34 Republicans opposed the final short-term spending bill — dozens more than Speaker Mike Johnson will be able to lose on a reconciliation plan. Reminder: Johnson can lose one GOP vote on party-line priorities (including his own speakership vote) starting on Jan. 3 and then can’t afford a single GOP no vote once members start leaving for administration posts. It’s the type of unity he’s routinely struggled to get, particularly on anything related to spending. “You can only lose one or two votes. It’s going to be tighter next year. … You’re not going to get it right the first time, so just gotta work on it,” said Rep. Kevin Hern (R-Okla.), who was recently elected to be the House GOP’s policy chair. The timeline: Republicans want to move their first reconciliation step, which is likely to focus on the border and energy, within the first 30 days of the Trump administration. That will include first needing to approve a budget resolution, which they could move on before Trump is officially sworn in, that will sketch out the broad details and green lighting the border-energy bill. And now that includes another curveball, as House GOP leaders pledged to raise the debt ceiling by $1.5 trillion and find $2.5 trillion in cuts as part of the reconciliation process. — Jordain Carney UNPRODUCTIVE — BUT GOOD AT INTRODUCING BILLS There’s ample evidence to support accusations that this was the least productive Congresses in modern history. But lawmakers were plenty good at introducing bills, tossing 19,304 items in the Capitol Hill legislative hopper, according to GovTrack. Just one percent of those — 158 pieces in total — actually became law, though President Joe Biden may still sign some more before leaving office. Compare that to the Congress of just a decade ago. Lawmakers introduced 10,637 legislative items, and three percent, or 296, became law. The huge number of bills compared to the lack of productivity might be more than correlation, too. Lawmakers often introduce legislation they know won’t make it to the floor, hoping it can take a ride on another must-pass piece of legislation, or that they can at least tell their constituents they tried. Having little to actually take credit for over the past two years might have caused an uptick in lawmakers’ desire for messaging. — Anthony Adragna
| 
No comments:
Post a Comment