Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Congress won't legislate from a distance during coronavirus crisis

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell

"We will deal with the social distancing issue without fundamentally changing Senate rules," said Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell.

Alex Wong/Getty Images

As negotiations on a coronavirus economic stimulus package that could top $1 trillion intensified Wednesday, there was early bipartisan leadership agreement on this much:

When the bill is ready for a vote, the senators and House members will cast their ballots in person at the Capitol — just as they've always done for 231 years.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has joined Speaker Nancy Pelosi in flatly rejecting the idea that democracy is best served during a pandemic by permitting the legislative branch to disappear from Washington, with lawmakers permitted to legislate with extreme social distancing — including voting for or against legislation by phone or online.


A growing group of members, from younger, tech-savvy House Democrats to a handful of self-quarantined Senate Republicans, have pressed for Congress to break with two centuries of tradition and allow remote decision-making at least until the spread of the novel coronavirus is under control.

They point to the government's warnings against large groups spending time together on aircraft or in the same rooms, saying their presence in Washington may soon imperil the collective health of Congress.

"If we're telling people to do their work from home when possible, teleconferencing as opposed to being physically present, what are we doing to achieve the same thing?" Democratic Whip Dick Durbin of Illinois said Tuesday on the Senate floor.

Later in the day, McConnnell emphatically rejected the argument that senators should be permitted to vote electronically from wherever they might be.

"We'll not be doing that," he said at a news conference where reporters' attendance was limited to reduce the risk of spreading the virus. He suggested that the period for votes, when the rules require senators to appear in the chamber for at least a few seconds to give a thumbs up or thumbs down, could be extended far beyond the customary 15 minutes to allow senators to appear in small groups rather than all at once.

"We will deal with the social distancing issue without fundamentally changing Senate rules," said McConnell, who is keeping the Senate in session until its work on the economic stimulus legislation is done.

The House is now in recess, with most members back in their home districts, until the measure is ready for debate. Before lawmakers left town, Pelosi made clear they would be recalled when it was time to legislate and that remote voting was not an option.

As a practical matter, there is no secure congressional technology to support such a switch. Beyond that, lawmakers would be subject to criticism that they were shirking their responsibilities to shape policies — especially in a time of crisis — and a disconnected legislative branch would risk ceding even more authority, power and limelight to President Trump.

Supporters say remote voting would reduce infections at a Capitol where the average age of House members is 58 and the average age of senators is 63, with 13 of them older than 75. They also argue that keeping members out of Washington now would allow them to model the behavior the government wants the rest of country to practice.

"While Congress is an institution with a proud history, we cannot stand on tradition if it puts lives — and our ability to be the voice of our constituents — at risk," says a letter signed by 45 House members and delivered to Pelosi last week.


Read More

The Unscrupulousness of AIPAC

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu addresses the American Israel Public Affairs Committee's annual policy conference at the Washington Convention Center March 6, 2018 in Washington, DC.

(Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

The Unscrupulousness of AIPAC

After AIPAC failed to defeat El-Sayed in the Michigan Democratic Senate primary—after spending $32 million—it said that it remains committed to defeating El-Sayed and his "radical, anti-Israel" agenda in the general election. Which means it is poised to sink tens of millions of dollars in supporting Republican Mike Rogers. It also said that Haley Stevens, his opponent, had presented "an authentic Democratic agenda." Meaning that El-Sayed did not? And they think that Mike Rogers, a MAGA Trump supporter, does compared with El-Sayed?

How can AIPAC say that El-Sayed does not present an authentic Democratic agenda when his socialist stance is much more in line with the principles stated in the Declaration of Independence than most centrist Democrats'? And making it sound like AIPAC cares about an authentic Democratic agenda is deceitful, when in the same breath they make clear that they will support Mike Rogers, a Trump lackey, in the general election.

Keep ReadingShow less
Scientists Warn of Deepening Federal Attacks on Research
silhouette of person using microscope

Scientists Warn of Deepening Federal Attacks on Research

Scientists and the federal government have been close partners since World War II. A landmark report by President Truman’s chief science advisor laid out a vision for government research that shaped eight decades of federally funded science. That vision is now at risk. In principle, the Trump administration has supported scientific research with its own vision for a new “golden age of science.” But in practice, the administration has upended the relationship between the government, researchers, and their institutions. The changes have alarmed working scientists and their allies, who have protested in record numbers.

In July, I moderated a webinar on “Rewriting the Rules: What’s happening to public science?” (read the transcript here). The webinar was co-sponsored by NAPA, CODE, and the Bridge Alliance, with Dr. Aaron Carroll of AcademyHealth, Dr. Chris Marcum of the Federation of American Scientists, Dr. Gretchen Goldman of the Union of Concerned Scientists, and Dr. Maryam Zaringhalam of the Center for Open Science. I also interviewed Cole Donovan of the Stand Up for Science Foundation by email.

Keep ReadingShow less
Why hasn’t the Princeton Redistricting Project spoken out?

The exterior of Capitol Hill

Getty Images

Why hasn’t the Princeton Redistricting Project spoken out?

The 2026 congressional map is finally set after ten states adopted new congressional redistricting maps for the November 3 General Election. Observers note that the Princeton Gerrymandering Project (PGP) has not graded any state’s maps since it gave California’s Proposition 50 an “F” on October 30, 2025.

The PGP has officially paused grading its Redistricting Report Card because founder Dr. Sam Wang, who transitioned from the Gerrymandering Project to the Electoral Innovation Lab, has launched a campaign for Congress in New Jersey’s 12th District, requiring him to step back from his academic roles, including his leadership at PGP.

Keep ReadingShow less
Impunity: Democracy and the Toll of Unchecked Harm

Lady Justice

Photo provided

Impunity: Democracy and the Toll of Unchecked Harm

Impunity is not only the failure to punish. It is a public answer to the question of whether harm matters.

Every democracy must repeatedly answer the question of impunity. When public trust is violated, or when law itself is manipulated or attacked, penalties matter. But the deeper question is whether a society can recognize injury and prevent further harm when it has lost the ability to clearly name wrongdoing.

Keep ReadingShow less