Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Former members of Congress say threats of violence are on the rise

Former Rep. Fred Upton, model Kate Upton and baseball pitcher Justin Verlander pose outside the Capitol

Former Rep. Fred Upton (left) received threatening messages during his time in office. Some involved his niece, model Kate Upton, and her husband, baseball star Justin Verlander.

Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call via Getty Images

Meyers is executive editor of The Fulcrum and president of DBM Content Solutions.

Baseball star Justin Verlander and model Kate Upton likely know that stalkers and threats come with their chosen professions. But the couple are far more famous than most other relatives of politicians, who have witnessed an increase in personal threats in recent years.

That’s one of the takeaways from a new survey conducted by the U.S. Association of Former Members of Congress and the University of Massachusetts Amherst that found retired lawmakers and their families have received threats at an increasing frequency.

Nearly half (47 percent) of retired members of Congress said they or their family members were threatened at least “sometimes,” with numbers significantly higher among women and Black or Latino members (69 percent).


“There is nothing new about people criticizing or disliking certain Members of Congress, but the uptick in violent threats towards our politicians is incredibly disturbing,” said FMC President L.F. Payne, a former Democratic lawmaker from Virginia. “Partisan disagreements should not lead to violence or threats. The results of this survey showcase a need for drastic action.”

survey questionFMC and UMass Poll survey


Former Rep. Fred Upton, a Michigan Republican, said he received his first threat after voting for the 1994 gun control legislation known as the Brady Bill, and then was targeted again after supporting the assault weapons ban during the Clinton administration. He experienced another surge in threats after voting to impeach former President Donald Trump.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

“At the end we were very careful about telegraphing events ahead of time, whether it was a service club or a school,” Upton said. “We just had to be more careful so no one could get a jump on us.”

Upton recounted a particular case in which a man managed to find the lawmaker’s home phone number and would call at 1 or 2 a.m.

“He was convinced that I had broken into his hotel room and stolen his AT&T phone charger, which then prevented him from dating my niece,” Upton said, explaining that Kate Upton and Verlander, now her husband, needed to get police protection.

“They were very fearful,” he said.

And in 2021, after voting in favor of a bipartisan infrastructure bill, Upton received threatening voicemail messages. He played one of the messages on CNN, allowing viewers to hear someone tell Upton: “I hope you die. I hope everybody in your f**king family dies.”

But these anecdotes are just a drop in the bucket. The U.S. Capitol Police conducted 7,501 threat investigations in 2022. While that total is a decrease from a high of 9,626 in 2021, it still represents a 90 percent increase since 2017.

The USCP says members of both parties receive threats at a similar rate, and the FMC-UMass survey bears that out. The poll found that 49 percent of Republicans and 46 percent of Democrats reported receiving threats at least sometimes.

The survey also found that lawmakers elected more recently received threats at a higher frequency.

survey question and resultsFMC and UMass Poll survey

And it’s not just members of Congress and their families. The survey found that 30 percent of former members reported their staffers had received threats sometimes or frequently, but 45 percent among staffers employed by women and minority lawmakers.

Respondents were also fearful of potential violence more broadly related to the 2024 election: 44 percent said they were very concerned, along with 40 percent who were somewhat concerned, about election-related violence occurring during next year’s presidential election. The fear is stronger among Democrats (94 percent concerned or somewhat concerned) than among GOP, but a significant share of Republicans (74 percent) share that fear.

“While these results are extremely upsetting, it’s exactly why we felt conducting this survey was so important,” said FMC CEO Pete Weichlein. “Political tension in our country is clearly coming to a boiling point, and awareness of these findings may be the first step to combating it.”

Actual violence against lawmakers and their families is rare, but certainly a concern. Most recently:

The FMC and UMass-Amherst survey included responses from 293 former House members and senators; 55 percent were Democrats and 45 percent were Republicans.

Read More

Project 2025: The Department of Labor

Hill was policy director for the Center for Humane Technology, co-founder of FairVote and political reform director at New America. You can reach him on X @StevenHill1776.

This is part of a series offering a nonpartisan counter to Project 2025, a conservative guideline to reforming government and policymaking during the first 180 days of a second Trump administration. The Fulcrum's cross partisan analysis of Project 2025 relies on unbiased critical thinking, reexamines outdated assumptions, and uses reason, scientific evidence, and data in analyzing and critiquing Project 2025.

The Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025, a right-wing blueprint for Donald Trump’s return to the White House, is an ambitious manifesto to redesign the federal government and its many administrative agencies to support and sustain neo-conservative dominance for the next decade. One of the agencies in its crosshairs is the Department of Labor, as well as its affiliated agencies, including the National Labor Relations Board, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation.

Project 2025 proposes a remake of the Department of Labor in order to roll back decades of labor laws and rights amidst a nostalgic “back to the future” framing based on race, gender, religion and anti-abortion sentiment. But oddly, tucked into the corners of the document are some real nuggets of innovative and progressive thinking that propose certain labor rights which even many liberals have never dared to propose.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

Keep ReadingShow less
Preamble to the U.S. Constitution
mscornelius/Getty Images

We can’t amend 'We the People' but 'we' do need a constitutional reboot

LaRue writes at Structure Matters. He is former deputy director of the Eisenhower Institute and of the American Society of International Law.

The following article was accepted for publication prior to the attempted assassination attempt of Donald Trump. Both the author and the editors determined no changes were necessary.

Keep ReadingShow less
Beau Breslin on C-SPAN
C-CSPAN screenshot

Project 2025: A C-SPAN interview

Beau Breslin, a regular contributor to The Fulcrum, was recently interviewed on C-SPAN’s “Washington Journal” about Project 2025.

Breslin is the Joseph C. Palamountain Jr. Chair of Political Science at Skidmore College and author of “A Constitution for the Living: Imagining How Five Generations of Americans Would Rewrite the Nation’s Fundamental Law.” He writes “A Republic, if we can keep it,” a Fulcrum series to assist American citizens on the bumpy road ahead this election year. By highlighting components, principles and stories of the Constitution, Breslin hopes to remind us that the American political experiment remains, in the words of Alexander Hamilton, the “most interesting in the world.”

Keep ReadingShow less
People protesting laws against homelessness

People protest outside the Supreme Court as the justices prepared to hear Grants Pass v. Johnson on April 22.

Matt McClain/The Washington Post via Getty Images

High court upholds law criminalizing homelessness, making things worse

Herring is an assistant professor of sociology at UCLA, co-author of an amicus brief in Johnson v. Grants Pass and a member of the Scholars Strategy Network.

In late June, the Supreme Court decided in the case of Johnson v. Grants Pass that the government can criminalize homelessness. In the court’s 6-3 decision, split along ideological lines, the conservative justices ruled that bans on sleeping in public when there are no shelter beds available do not violate the Constitution’s prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment.

This ruling will only make homelessness worse. It may also propel U.S. localities into a “race to the bottom” in passing increasingly punitive policies aimed at locking up or banishing the unhoused.

Keep ReadingShow less
Project 2025: A federal Parents' Bill of Rights

Republican House members hold a press event to highlight the introduction in 2023.

Bill O'Leary/The Washington Post via Getty Images

Project 2025: A federal Parents' Bill of Rights

Biffle is a podcast host and contributor at BillTrack50.

This is part of a series offering a nonpartisan counter to Project 2025, a conservative guideline to reforming government and policymaking during the first 180 days of a second Trump administration. The Fulcrum's cross partisan analysis of Project 2025 relies on unbiased critical thinking, reexamines outdated assumptions, and uses reason, scientific evidence, and data in analyzing and critiquing Project 2025.

Project 2025, the conservative Heritage Foundation’s blueprint for a second Trump administration, includes an outline for a Parents' Bill of Rights, cementing parental considerations as a “top tier” right.

The proposal calls for passing legislation to ensure families have a "fair hearing in court when the federal government enforces policies that undermine their rights to raise, educate, and care for their children." Further, “the law would require the government to satisfy ‘strict scrutiny’ — the highest standard of judicial review — when the government infringes parental rights.”

Keep ReadingShow less