 |
| Congressman Pete Sessions conducts a town-hall meeting at Robinson Junior High School. |
Ninety minutes into Republican Congressman Pete Sessions’ confrontational, exhausting, two-and-a-half-hour town-hall meeting at Robinson Junior High School last month, I realized it was yet another spectacular all-American failure in how such gatherings are managed, unwittingly or not, to produce frustration, misunderstanding, alienation and hostility — and not just in citizen constituents of all political stripes but in this case the congressman, understandably tired and definitely testy by evening’s end.
By the time I reached home, I also concluded the rancorous
town-hall meeting encapsulated our nation in the Age of Trump: The longtime congressman
and many of the evening’s players (though certainly not all), whether
supportive or adversarial in their roles, often displayed the worst of our
tumultuous times — sanctimonious to the point of blasphemy; rambling if not
verbose; contemptuous if not belligerent, spoiling for a fight; and uninformed,
sometimes proudly, patriotically and defiantly so.
For instance, did retired Army Green Beret, former McLennan
County Republican Party chair and local attorney Jon Ker, who served with the much-decorated
5th Special Forces Group Airborne in Vietnam, really believe he would set the right
tone at the outset by invoking God to vilify those who see something inherently
wrong in U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Enforcement raids conducted so
haphazardly, without legal discernment or decency, that legal immigrants and
U.S. citizens are sometimes swept up in indiscriminate dragnets?
“Gracious heavenly Father,” Col. Ker said after removing his
cowboy hat and commanding others to do likewise, “we humbly come before you
tonight to, first, praise and worship you for being our god and guide in these
times of contrast – the contrast of celebrating the nation you formed through
our Founding Fathers by showcasing the Army’s 250th year of protection
and valor of our people, contrasted against the damage, destruction and death
from riots across the nation by those who hate—.” At this point, loud constituent
boos drowned out the invocation.
The 78-year-old veteran continued: “Even so, we know that
even in the darkest and most difficult times, you are with us and nothing
formed against you and us will prevail. Father, you have blessed us with
leaders that love you, that seek your wisdom to serve the people and who are
not afraid to stand against evil, untruth and tyranny [more heckling erupts] –
men like Congressman Sessions. We lift him before you that he receives your blessings,
your wisdom, your truth and your stamina. As he serves us in Washington, may he
first serve you in his heart.”
One wonders whom Ker targets in his reference to “evil,
untruth and tyranny.” Possibly this was another dig at Los Angeles protesters, a
small, defiant group better handled by local law enforcement than the National Guard personnel
and Marines ordered out by President Trump amid great fanfare. Or maybe Ker refers
to millions of Americans participating in the nationwide, largely peaceful “No
Kings” protests overshadowing, on the same day, Trump’s command performance of
a parade in Washington, D.C., honoring the Army’s 250th birthday and his own 79th birthday.
So much, too, for using the Army as a nationally unifying rallying
point. Days earlier President Trump violated longstanding, sacrosanct military
protocol at Fort Bragg by drawing cheers for his recent reelection from
uniformed Army soldiers employed as props for his fiercely politicized speech; sympathetic
jeers as he maligned his political enemies (including a former commander in
chief); and more cheers (at least from white soldiers) in gloating over his
renaming of Army forts to honor Confederate heroes who vigorously fought against
the U.S. Army in our nation’s deadliest war.
Some local “No Kings” protesters attended Sessions’
town-hall meeting, most armed not with signs but questions and concerns in the tumultuous
Age of Trump. Signs brandished two days earlier at the corner of Valley Mills
Drive and Waco Drive included one held by a Hispanic veteran who wore a
T-shirt: “American Grown with Mexican Roots.” His sign that day: “We swore an
oath to OUR CONSTITUTION, NOT to a KING or wannabe DICTATOR.” Another sign that
day tells the rest of the story: “They want us to HATE each other. Don’t let
them.”
One must marvel at the abysmal timing of Ker’s “smite-your-enemies”
prayer – two days after a Minnesota state legislator was assassinated by a
masked Trump-supporting Christian zealot stalking her and other Democratic lawmakers.
Casualties included the legislator’s husband, also shot and killed, and another
state legislator and his wife, both wounded. One wonders: Is the fact that Democratic
state Sen. John Hoffman survived the attack proof God saved him to save America,
as Trump has so often claimed of himself after a failed 2024 assassination
attempt?
Ker’s notion of a fitting prayer for divisive times explains
why I no longer pray during invocations at political events. Too many among us these
days are willing to prostitute Christian faith for political ends, scoring one
for the party in a volatile, self-righteous display of patriotism and religion rather
than showcasing, say, the counsel of Jesus in the Gospels. Having lit the fuse, the retired
Army colonel retreated to his seat, leaving the congressman and his staff to
manage the rest of the town-hall meeting – now quarrelsome and unwieldy to
the point of unruliness.
Robinson Mayor and local car dealer Greg May tried resetting
the tone in his own introductory remarks – “in Robinson we are completely laid
back and we like to do things with respect and I expect that’s how we’re all
going to act tonight” – but the meeting was arguably primed for animosity even
without Ker’s prayer. Trump’s successful Make America Great Again juggernaut has
long delighted in and thrived on cultivating hatred for fellow Americans of
different political and cultural persuasions, consequently inviting in return more
contempt, more hostility.
One marvels at the failure of event organizers to capitalize
on the evening’s flag presentation to Robinson High School graduate Gage “Gonzo”
Gonzales, appointed to the U.S. Military Academy class of 2029 at West Point. Two
months earlier, speaking at a school ceremony, Gonzales drew insightfully on history
in explaining his resolve to serve his country after high school: “Now it’s
time to move on to the next chapter, a chapter built on even higher standards,
tougher challenges and greater purpose – to uphold the integrity of the Constitution
of the United States.”
As the evening quickly deteriorated, I wondered if Sessions’
staff shouldn’t have pressed Gonzo to lead the prayer or offer a few unifying
words. His part was limited to a brief and forgettable walk-on.
Much of what followed indeed focused on veterans and the military
– among the few elements of American society still regarded with some reverence,
though how long this endures in the Age of Trump is debatable. Marine veteran
Patrick Branyan, 77, who served with the celebrated 2nd Battalion, 7th Marines,
in Vietnam in 1967-68, questioned the congressman on President Trump’s ordering
700 members of his old battalion to quell citizen protests: “You know, as a
Marine, I understand the mission of the Marines is not to control
American crowds. Are you OK with this?”
“The Marines did nothing more than be there,” Sessions said in his typically wooden, syntax-challenged way to outraged jeers. “You know, it may not look good, but let me
tell you what: It’s an embarrassment what those criminals were doing.”
This disparaging reference to Los Angeles protesters objecting to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement raids and what the protesters see as military occupation prompted more
rancor in the hall. This included shouted references to the January 6, 2021,
rioters who, following unsubstantiated and incendiary claims of an election
rigged against President Trump, stormed the U.S. Capitol on his behalf and assaulted
police officers seeking to defend lawmakers including Sessions, ironically at the time
among Republicans encouraging Trump’s election falsehoods. In the aftermath, Trump
came to glorify these rioters and insurrectionists as patriots and martyrs, such as at his 2024
reelection campaign kickoff rally at Waco Regional Airport on March 25, 2023.
“Do you consider them [LA protesters] to be the enemy?”
Branyan asked Sessions incredulously. “Because the job of the Marines is to kill
the enemy. That’s the primary mission. Marines, we don’t shoot ’em in the
legs.” This was a pointed reference to President Trump’s famously asking Trump
Defense Secretary Mark Esper if armed military and police could shoot
protesters in the legs amid demonstrations filling the streets of Washington after
the murder of former Texan George Floyd by Minneapolis police in 2020. For the record, Trump denies this claim.
“Well, I don’t see them shoot anybody and they kept law and
order,” Sessions replied dismissively, moving on into the evening’s crowd to take
more constituent questions.
Left unaddressed by the congressman: legitimacy of the
president’s use of military personnel to suppress political opposition, defying
such laws as the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878, which right-wingers once championed.
It prohibits military personnel from acting as a “posse comitatus” – that is, those
“upon whom a sheriff could call for assistance in preventing any type of civil
disorder.” There is also the problem of the president’s violating the Tenth
Amendment and the principle of states' rights, which right-wingers also have championed, at least during Democratic
presidential administrations.
Branyan’s fears – rooted (as he later told me) in recollections of the deadly 1970 Kent State shootings involving the Ohio National Guard and unarmed students protesting expansion of the Vietnam War in which he fought – were timely and relevant, perhaps more so than Branyan knew. In a June 15 social-media post to supporters (which I subsequently received as an email from the Trump White House), a day before the Sessions town-hall meeting, President Trump hinted at dark political motivations and personal grievances driving his nationwide immigrant deportation scheme, notwithstanding the usual administration rhetoric about law and order. In a grammatically untidy, let-it-all-hang-out message to followers, Trump betrayed simmering resentment over his 2020 electoral defeat:
ICE Officers are herewith ordered, by notice of this TRUTH, to do all in their power to achieve the very important goal of delivering the single largest Mass Deportation Program in History. In order to achieve this, we must expand efforts to detain and deport Illegal Aliens in America’s largest Cities, such as Los Angeles, Chicago and New York, where Millions upon Millions of Illegal Aliens reside. These, and other such Cities, are the core of the Democrat Power Center, where they use Illegal Aliens to expand their Voter Base, cheat in Elections and grow the Welfare State, robbing good paying Jobs and Benefits from Hardworking American Citizens. These Radical Left Democrats are sick of mind, hate our Country and actually want to destroy our Inner Cities — And they are doing a good job of it! There is something wrong with them. That is why they believe in Open Borders, Transgender for Everybody and Men playing in Women’s Sports — And that is why I want ICE, Border Patrol and our Great and Patriotic Law Enforcement Officers to FOCUS on our crime ridden and deadly Inner Cities, and those places where Sanctuary Cities play such a big role. You don’t hear about Sanctuary Cities in our Heartland!
"Yet," retired Army Staff Sgt. Aquilino Gonell, an immigrant and former Capitol Police officer who defended the Capitol from the Trump-inspired mob of January 6, 2021, said of Trump in a social-media post of his own, "he pardoned more the 1,500 violent criminals who attacked me and my colleagues."
This theme of use, abuse and misuse of U.S. military
personnel continued. For instance, a woman whose husband served at West Point
and whose son is a Marine highlighted Trump White House plans to fire tens of thousands
of employees in the Department of Veterans Affairs. “With $45 million spent on
the [Army] parade that occurred on Saturday,” she told the congressman, “there seems
to be a disconnect between how we’re going to truly take care of our military
and our veterans while saying we’re going to have cuts of 83,000 people in the
VA.”
Without giving Sessions a chance to respond, she then inquired
of reports that, because of a Trump executive order, “VA hospitals and dentists
and other medical personnel now can legally choose to not treat a
veteran who is identified as a Democrat or a veteran who is a female.” The
constituent then sought Sessions’ help in restoring federal support for a
program at colleges and universities – including Baylor University – to help
student veterans transition from a structured military framework to a robust academic
environment.
For the record, the Trump administration did overreact
in misguided deference to an executive order of Jan. 20 focused on men who “self-identify
as women.” The administration consequently tweaked federal bylaws that forbid discrimination
in veterans care “on the basis of race, age, color, sex, religion, national
origin, politics, marital status or disability,” removing notably references
to “national origin,” “politics” and “marital status.” However, Trump VA officials brand reports of allowances for actual discrimination in
veterans care “false” and “ridiculous.”
In short, while some of my news brethren jumped the gun in
conclusions about administrative changes in bylaws to (in the words of one news
source) “allow VA doctors to refuse to treat Democrats, unmarried veterans,”
the same appears true of White House staffers arguably trying to accommodate an
executive order demanding “clear and accurate language and policies that
recognize women are biologically female and men are biologically male.” Whatever,
federal law still forbids discrimination in veterans' health care on the grounds of “national origin,” “politics”
and “marital status.”
Unraveling the Trumpian knot
If Congressman Sessions sometimes seemed ignorant of constituent concerns, it’s
possibly due to the blizzard of executive orders and declarations pursued by unquestioning
administration officials not only in occasional violation of federal law but
without approval of Congress, the ultimate law-setting body under the
Constitution (even as the Constitution itself is arguably undergoing constant reinterpretation
by the nation’s highest court in such areas as presidential immunity). This is
not to excuse Sessions from accountability, only to acknowledge the challenge of
keeping up with Trump’s flood of directives, proclamations and utterances.
The alarming spectacle of immigration deportations –
inflaming tensions nationwide as masked federal agents trample law and
tradition in pursuit of immigrants legal and illegal in farm fields and at construction
sites and on residential rooftops – contributed to Sessions’ being resoundingly booed after he claimed the
Department of Veterans Affairs under President Biden had “moved $15 billion
from veterans health care directly to the president so he could pay for these
illegals to come to the United States, so what we’re doing is, in the [Trump-ordered]
‘big, beautiful bill,’ we are going to fix this.”
Well, that’s certainly one version. Others credit the $15
billion shortfall to passage of the PACT Act, which provides medical care and
disability compensation to hundreds of thousands of veterans diagnosed with
diseases connected to toxic exposure from burn pits, radiation at weapons-testing
sites and the aerial spraying of Agent Orange. Some also credit confusion over financial
arrangements by the VA to help ICE officials process their payments to health-care
providers treating immigrant detainees – a longtime practice that reportedly does
not include funneling actual VA dollars for immigrant care.
When pressed by a veteran on Trump White House discussions to cut some 80,000 jobs from the Department of Veterans Affairs, erasing
staffing hikes by the Biden administration and possibly undermining prompt,
efficient service to the nation’s veterans – this particular veteran described the
VA health care he received as “outstanding” – Sessions in response retreated to
the point he made earlier (to audience disbelief) in claiming, once again,
the VA had moved $15 billion in veterans’ health-care dollars to President Biden
“to fund the immigration, the illegal immigration.”
As Sessions sought to make this claim, a woman kept heckling
Sessions, prompting a man to finally shout: “Let the man talk!”
Sessions replied: “You know, you can yell at me on other
issues, but not on the veterans issue. Please, if you listen, the issues
that are related to community care [veterans’ health care beyond VA facilities]
have been cut dramatically and, sir, I don’t know if you’re in community care
or not, but they were cut dramatically. And the reason why is because the
secretary moved $15 billion out of the VA and that is why last August we had to
come in and do an emergency bill.” Sessions said lawmakers weren’t told last
year where the money went but that “DOGE government efficiency” had since discovered
the truth.
The congressman concluded by thanking the veteran for his
service.
Sessions’ damning claim has circulated in a different variation among
at least some Republicans. Sen. Steve Daines, a Montana Republican, claimed in
2023 he had “just learned” VA resources were being “diverted from our nation’s
veterans to process the medical claims of illegal immigrants held in the
custody of Immigration and Customs Enforcement,” though here the argument was that
the time and efforts of VA claims processors would be better spent on veterans rather
than helping ICE administrators care for immigrants in ICE custody.
The catch: While Sen. Daines may have only learned about this
in 2023, the VA had been doing this since 2002 and the George W. Bush
administration.
Again, Capitol Hill journalists and Biden VA officials last
year explained the $15 billion shortfall in VA funding primarily resulted from record
levels of benefits to veterans under the 2022 PACT Act, which expanded coverage
to address exposure to toxic substances in military service – and which
Sessions, in another exchange with a local veteran of 22 years’ service,
volunteered he too supported. Since the PACT Act became law, more than 710,000
veterans have reportedly enrolled, obviously a significant hike in taxpayer
expense.
A Sessions spokeswoman blames the shortfall on the “Biden administration’s
intentional failure to request the correct amount of VA funding through their
presidential budget request,” thus necessitating the supplemental appropriations to which Sessions referred. However, things here get a little murky. “Despite
seeking more funds for government programs that provide free amenities to
illegal aliens like FEMA’s Shelter Service program,” she told me, “the Biden administration
failed to request the proper amount of funding for our veterans.”
Ergo, to quote her, “Congressman Sessions’ statement refers
to this clear show of motivation: the Biden administration cared more about
illegal immigrants than our nation’s veterans.”
None of this excuses the Biden administration from its own colossal failure to decisively address immigration woes when it had congressional muscle to do so – something Trump has also failed to do via congressional action. However, to mischaracterize the VA’s processing of U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Enforcement dollars to health-care professionals as funneling money appropriated for veterans to help immigrant detainees ranks up there with Sessions’ echoing Trump’s “Stop the Steal” claims ahead of violence at the U.S. Capitol in January 2021.
Mention of the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s congressionally created Shelter and Services Program by a member of Sessions’ staff is ironic: Trump during the 2024 presidential campaign repeatedly made outrageously spurious claims that FEMA disaster relief funds due storm victims were instead lavished on immigrants – a lie even Republican governors in storm-ravaged states rebuffed. The FEMA Disaster Relief Fund and the FEMA Shelter and Services Program are legally distinct, appropriated separately and carry out wholly different missions.
A point worthy of reflection: Journalists, political scientists and everyday citizens are free to speculate on "intent" and "motivation" in Trump, Biden and even Sessions, but we can never truly know what motivates a politician or anyone else to do something. The fact the Biden administration failed to properly budget for the Department of Veterans Affairs amidst a sweeping expansion of benefits and health care for a multitude of veterans exposed to burn pits and other environmental hazards does not necessarily mean the administration "cared more about illegal immigrants than our nation’s veterans." It could simply mean the administration failed to anticipate how many veterans might be impacted by the acknowledged problem of environmental hazards during military service.
Ironically, the Trump administration’s own failure to effectively prioritize veterans health care only this week prompted it to retreat from plans to lay off 80,000 or so Department of Veterans Affairs employees after widespread outcry such as that heard repeatedly at Sessions' town-hall meeting in Robinson. Even so, the VA has already shed 17,000 VA jobs since January – many of them held by veterans – and still plans to reach a total of some 30,000 VA layoffs by the end of September, reportedly through attrition and various incentive packages.
The truth about the $15 billion shortfall in VA funding? Depends on whom you believe. But the fact the situation is complicated makes it easy for either side to spin to mislead for political ends.
Heckling the congressman
Many at the Sessions town-hall meeting seemed intent on
heckling the congressman as he conducted a power-point presentation and dealt with questions. Others
tested the patience of all by lapsing into rants. During one rambling
question-turned-lecture, someone in the audience finally remarked
wearily: "Is there a question in all this?" To be
fair, the meeting was no more raucous than some of Sessions’ town-hall
meetings during the Biden presidency except here many attending clearly didn’t see
Sessions as their advocate and reminded him of this regularly.
Such behavior shouldn't surprise. Today's town-hall meetings
are spiritual descendants of colonial town-hall meetings held primarily in New
England in 18th-century America and even earlier. Many of these functioned as a purer form
of democracy with attendants participating in actual decisions of governance.
Now shorn of governing powers involving direct democracy, today's town-hall meetings often
prove occasions for constituents to vent in frustration, resentment and anger –
and very often over presidential and national politics rather than the intensely
local and regional issues that once defined them.
A 2022 Center for Effective Lawmaking study on
town-hall meetings stressed that lawmaking and informed policymaking are more demanding than one might imagine. "But national policymaking is merely one component of the job
description," Andrew J. Clarke of Lafayette College and Daniel Markovits
of Columbia University argue. "Citizens also expect members of Congress to
remain embedded in the political communities that propelled them to public
office and opponents are eager to brand incumbents as distant lawmakers that
have lost touch with local affairs."
Gerrymandering may help politicians win elections but it can
consequently present difficulty for them in keeping up with constituent
concerns and volatile sentiments in wildly drawn congressional districts,
particularly given the sustained, almost daily influence that party leaders, oligarchs and
lobbyists have over lawmakers versus the pull of everyday citizens back on the home front. A 2014 study probing some
2,000 policy cases over 20 years found “the preferences of the average American
appear to have only a minuscule, near-zero, statistically non-significant
impact upon public policy.”
Propaganda operations masquerading as legitimate news operations; politicians employing conspiracy theories and outright deceit to pander to willfully
uninformed masses; relaxed social-media policies paving the way for more falsehoods
and more exaggerations; and, finally, the dwindling relevance of daily
newspapers of record and a constituency that no longer keeps up with factually grounded news the way their parents and grandparents did only complicate matters. And the results of all this can come to a
head during town-hall meetings.
Example from the Sessions town-hall meeting: The outraged mother of an autistic child,
reminding the congressman of his own son's Down syndrome,
questioned his support of an "autism registry" to track Americans
suffering autism spectrum disorder. The initiative was reportedly pursued on the
orders of controversial Trump-appointed Health and Human Services Secretary
Robert F. Kennedy Jr., an infamous vaccine critic who has touted a widely
discredited but stubbornly held theory that routine childhood shots can cause autism, a disorder that can inhibit development of the brain and influence one's ability to socialize with others.
"How can you back a proposal that relies on debunked
science and perpetuates harmful myths about vaccines and autism?" the
mother asked angrily, her question laced with cynicism about RFK's intentions as
well as those of Trump, who has belatedly argued vaccines might indeed cause autism, despite decades
of research countering any such a link. "Where are the ethical and scientific
guardrails to ensure this initiative does not hurt or harm the very people it
claims to help? What safeguards will you put in place to protect the privacy of
those impacted by RFK Jr.'s national autism registry?"
The congressman's response: "I don't know what you're
talking about."
Sessions asked if this had been voted upon in Congress. Of course it hadn't. It was yet another extralegal romp in fantasyland by the Trump administration -- one with which Sessions should have nonetheless been acquainted.
Label it a perfect storm: National Institutes of Health Director Jay Bhattacharya on April 21 discusses a registry to "track Americans with autism" as part of an initiative "requested by the president to Secretary Kennedy," only for this to be dismissed as inaccurate on April 24 by a Trump HHS official, only for the NIH and the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services on May 7 to announce a "partnership" to focus on the root causes of autism spectrum disorder by mining data from Medicare and Medicaid enrollees diagnosed with ASD, complete with Secretary Kennedy's blessing – this time for real, apparently. Mix in RFK Jr.’s past claims about childhood vaccines with Trump's statements and record of spreading falsehoods and authoritarian leanings and one can see why scientifically grounded parents might well suspect the Trump administration's intentions and how it might misuse sensitive medical information, all sufficient to conjure up a conspiracy theory about an intrusive "autism registry" ironically running counter to the old conspiracy chestnut about childhood vaccines causing autism, all set against the embarrassment of bungled administrative messaging against an even broader backdrop of conspiracy hoaxes about COVID-19 and anger over at least some compulsory vaccinations imagined by the Biden administration to combat a deadly pandemic. For the record, the idea of compulsory vaccinations contributed to uproar aplenty at a Sessions town-hall meeting in Waco in November 2021.
Sessions, who by this late point at his June 16 town-hall
meeting seemed trapped in the role of babe in the woods, confessed of the unveiling of RFK's plan to build a real-world data platform enabling advanced
research across claims data, medical records and consumer wearables: "I
have not seen his proposal."
Such constituent confusion, cynicism and impatience was evident throughout the evening. When a woman suggested Sessions and fellow Republicans
sought to cut Medicare in the deficit-swelling, debt-busting “big, beautiful bill”
assembled primarily to cut taxes of billionaires and fund more immigrant removals,
yet continued talking over the congressman’s reply, someone finally yelled: “Listen
to the answer!” Apparently flustered, Sessions said: “Listen, I
will be pleased to come back after we do this [pass the bill] and would love to
have you come back and tell me how we cut you, because we won’t.”
A man then hollered at the lawmaker: “We’ll see!” Sessions
replied: “We will see.”
However appropriate or inappropriate the evening’s boos and heckling,
the congressman did himself no favors by sometimes evading questions. Example: When
41-year-old information technology specialist Anthony Hollister asked what Sessions
and other lawmakers were doing about the Trump administration’s ignoring or delaying
responding to federal court orders, including a “unanimous vote of the Supreme
Court, the top court in this land,” Sessions dodged with such infuriating obfuscations as
how his late father had been a federal district judge and how he himself
believes in rule of law.
Did the congressman not understand the question put to him?
At one point, Sessions retreated to the answer he gave to an earlier question about
due process rights afforded by law to every person in the United States,
citizen or not. Sessions stated that “I believe that they [immigrant
defendants] are entitled to receive due process, but if they fail to show up to
initiate that [in court], they’ve excused themselves” of such rights. But this ignored
Hollister’s question. The question at hand dealt with administration contempt
for and defiance of federal courts.
Pressed further on what Sessions and other lawmakers would do
to safeguard longstanding constitutional checks and balances from a
presidential administration’s ignoring or delaying complying with an order from
even the Supreme Court of the United States, Sessions finally asked Hollister
pointedly: “Which case is that?” When Hollister admitted he didn’t know the specific case
name, Sessions snapped, “I don’t either,” then abruptly handed the microphone
to another constituent to ask another question.
For the record, the high court order upheld a lower court order
to facilitate the return of an immigrant with legal status erroneously deported
by the Trump administration to a foreign gulag. Ignorance of the specific case name – Noem
v. Abrego Garcia – was an indisputable dodge. As a lawmaker sworn to “support
and defend the Constitution of the United States,” Sessions didn’t need to know
the case name to know of the administration’s well-publicized defiance of the
high court and the grave risks to the nation in a president who ignores the rule
of law.
Nor did Sessions reveal to constituents, let alone explain,
his May 22 vote, as part of Trump’s “big, beautiful bill,” to neuter the power
of federal district judges like his father. House Republicans inserted into the
bill a provision largely restricting district judges to injunctions impacting only
parties before their individual courts rather than applying injunctive
relief nationally. Although this provision was stricken from the final bill,
the Supreme Court of the United States has since reined in most (though not
all) such “universal injunctions.”
“The federal judiciary is highly partisan, a reality shaped
over time through the interpretation and exercise of Article III powers,” a
Sessions spokeswoman explained to me after the town-hall meeting. “Congressman
Sessions has supported efforts to limit the use of nationwide injunctions and
restore balance to the separation of powers. Just as a member of Congress
represents a specific district rather than the entire nation, a federal judge
should issue rulings within their jurisdiction and not [legislate] nationwide
policy from the bench.”
For the record, amid criticism for failing to promptly respond
to the April 10 Supreme Court order, the Trump administration in June returned legal
immigrant Kilmar Abrego Garcia to the United States to face charges that he
"conspired to bring undocumented aliens to the United States from
countries such as Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, Ecuador and elsewhere,
ultimately passing through Mexico before crossing into Texas." His family this
month cited his case as proof of a "profound constitutional crisis in which
executive agencies have repeatedly and deliberately flouted the authority of
multiple federal courts, including the Supreme Court itself.”
Hollister, who lives in the eastern part of the 17th Congressional District between Crockett and Lufkin, acknowledged afterward that he should have better educated himself in questioning the congressman about the Supreme Court decision Noem v. Abrego Garcia. "I was ill-prepared in that I didn't have that piece of information. That's bad on me for not being better-prepared. But as a U.S. congressperson, it's his job to know such things that are controversial to the people he represents."
Reality-TV America
If constituents of the 17th Congressional District left the Sessions town-hall meeting unfulfilled, it
may have been as much because of their failings as the congressman’s dodging
accountability and being unable to keep up with Trump’s daily reality-TV obsession
with provoking uproar and division. “As long as the people representing us with
the microphone believe measles vaccinations are one of the most critical issues
facing the country, we are toast,” a friend observed afterward. “Another woman
went on and on about short-selling stock. I don’t have the foggiest idea what
she was talking about.”
Equally bewildering: the ideological incoherence on parade. Sessions
quite understandably championed construction in and near his congressional district
of Samsung’s major semiconductor manufacturing facility – spurred along by the
CHIPS and Science Act mostly passed by Democratic lawmakers in 2022 and signed
into law by President Biden to bring semiconductor manufacturing back to the
United States. At the town-hall meeting, Sessions smartly hailed the Samsung
facility as “a manufacturing plant of the future.”
The Taylor-based fabrication plant, part of the largest
foreign direct investment in Texas history, will produce advanced logic chips
for 5G, high-performance computing and artificial intelligence purposes.
Following a $6.4 billion investment by the $53 billion CHIPS and Science Act,
Samsung boosted its overall investment of $17 billion to $40 billion, potentially
yielding some 20,000 jobs. Yet Sessions not only voted against the CHIPS
and Science Act, but President Trump has proposed gutting the act and using its
congressionally appropriated funds to pay down federal debt.
“Congressman Sessions supports incentives for domestic
semiconductor manufacturing,” his policy spokeswoman informed me later. “However,
he stands by his original vote against the CHIPS Act of 2022, as he remains
concerned about the excessive bureaucracy, lack of fiscal safeguards and
long-term inefficiencies in the legislation. Regarding any future proposals to
repeal or redirect CHIPS funding, the congressman would need to see the
specific details before commenting.”
This guarded assessment certainly counters the soaring
rhetoric of Republican Texas Gov. Greg Abbott who, on June 7, 2024, saluted the
Samsung expansion with a ribbon-cutting ceremony marking construction of the
$16.6 million Samsung Highway in Taylor. "Texas is more dedicated than
ever to the future of chips and Samsung in our great state,” Abbott said in
addressing 125 business and community leaders gathered. “We are proud that the
chips that run our future will be 'Made in Texas' by Samsung for generations to
come.”
More ideological incoherence? Sure. Sessions, who by all appearances has taken to his 2025 role in co-chairing the Delivering Outstanding Government Efficiency Caucus – neatly complementing Trump's backer-of-backer, eccentric billionaire and SpaceX visionary Elon Musk’s DOGE chainsawing of the federal budget – seemed unfazed by Musk’s subsequent condemnation as a “disgusting abomination” Trump’s “big, beautiful bill” with tax cuts for everybody and billions of dollars more for ramped-up immigrant deportations and detentions, even as Sessions too lamented the bill’s runaway spending and trillions in debt (for which he nonetheless voted – twice – by the Fourth of July). During his town-hall meeting, he talked of cost-cutting Medicaid reforms, even as President Trump continued to insist Medicaid would remain untouched.
Huh?
Musk, the impulsive South African-turned-Californian-turned-Texan whose SpaceX rocket-testing facility in nearby McGregor continues to shake area homes as he dreams of “direct democracy” on Mars one day, seems to have filled the void left by tea-party patriots who once vehemently protested such rampant spending – and whose absence at the Sessions town-hall meeting suggests either their lack of relevance today or their surrendering fiscally responsible principles to all-consuming Make America Great Again passions. To quote a recent social-media post from Musk: "What’s the point of DOGE if the government’s just going to add $5 trillion more in debt?"
It’s only my estimate, but of the 200 or so attending the Sessions town-hall meeting, roughly two-thirds consisted of skeptics if not outright cynics of
Trump’s policies – a switch from the Republicans and MAGA disciples who dominated
and enlivened such meetings during the Biden presidency. Those
who supported Trump resisted the notion to rise and defend him on June 16,
possibly because his off-the-cuff statements and controversial policies aren’t
easily championed before neighbors, especially given that these increasingly clash
with old-time conservative principles.
That made a key exception to this town-hall sentiment all
the more memorable.
He’s right. Polls show broad support for Trump’s priorities
of immigration, taxes, law and order. But this support crumbles given how the
president is pursuing these priorities. Americans don’t like masked federal
agents roughing up citizens or immigrants with legal status. They don’t like
risking health care and going further into unsustainable federal debt just to
keep tax cuts for billionaires. And they recognize that an administration
allowed to defy federal courts bodes ill for law and order if administrations
of other political persuasions can then do the same.
At one point, in seeking to establish that elections have
consequences, Sessions argued that because Trump in 2024 won 4 million more
votes than those for all Republican congressional candidates combined, Americans
owed him a certain deference. “He sold thoughts and ideas – and, so, in my
opinion, he deserves, just like President Obama did, just like President Biden
did – to have a say on the way that they would choose to govern,” Sessions argued.
“And that is what we’re a part of right now.”
He’s right too. Yet does such deference allow a president to defy courts and
argue for executive powers that clash with the Constitution and Congress’s own constitutionally
spelled-out responsibilities? That’s also where we are today.
One senses, too, a widening disconnect between those elected
to office on man-of-the-people rhetoric who then fall prey to party dogma and oligarchs
versus constituents who meanwhile contend with housing, commodity and fuel
costs. May 2025 figures indicated a clear weakening in consumer spending and hikes
in food and energy costs – obviously more hurtful to those among us of limited means. A
constituent citing Waco’s steep poverty rate of 25 percent broached the idea of
hiking the federal minimum wage of $7.25 or regulating rents, to which Sessions
replied: "We are a free society. This is not socialist.”
Yet the very definition of socialism is mutating fast in the
Age of Trump. At the time of Sessions’ town-hall meeting, news organizations
were reporting that President Trump (and his successors) would now have a
controlling interest in U.S. Steel under new Japanese ownership, allowing the
president to have say over the company’s transferring of production or jobs beyond
the United States or any closing of individual plants, all of which would seem
to violate previous long-held Republican principles of robust capitalism free
of federal encroachment. And yet Trump and his proxies have spent years
attacking Democrats and liberals as “socialists.”
During an exchange on the Samsung fabrication plant in which
he encouraged the pursuit of jobs such as electrician and welder, Sessions correctly
touted the good pay and benefits of jobs at H-E-B and McDonald's, only for a
constituent to explain that money earned and simple math simply didn’t add up
to a reliably “livable wage.” At one point, Sessions cited liberal Democratic
Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez: "She worked at the greatest bar in
New York and they raised the price of minimum wage and the bar closed."
Someone countered: "That's called corporate greed!"
Sessions fired back: "It's called ‘they-couldn't-make-a-go-of-it.’”
This disconnect also figured in constituent concern over cuts of several
thousand Social Security personnel. As one constituent noted, not all seniors
are knowledgeable about applying online for benefits "and now with new
regulations, they're going to have to." Sessions dismissed this concern by
noting that many government personnel are returning to work after staying home
under pandemic policies. He expressed confidence seniors could still contact
Social Security by phone. He’s right, though this is only due to a Trump administration
policy reversal amid huge public outcry. Social Security Administration
response times have reportedly worsened, too.
When yet another constituent questioned congressional discussion
over Americans working till age 70 – a distinct possibility if not likelihood given
that the eagle-eyed nonpartisan, nonprofit Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget
estimates Trump’s tax-cut bill will accelerate Social Security and Medicare
insolvency by a year, to 2032 – Sessions simply replied to this admittedly
vague, poorly worded citizen inquiry: "I hope you work as long as you want to. I'm
70." Then the congressman moved to another question.
Still fighting over 2020
Confounding town-hall tensions was the president’s feverish obsession
with insisting, up and down, that he won the 2020 election when courts
nationwide found no evidence of significant election fraud, let alone legal standing
to challenge how individual states manage their elections. At one point,
Sessions squirmed to evade answering a constituent who asked if he was at last
“coming on the record and saying the 2020 election was legitimately won by Joe
Biden.” Sessions’ reply: “What I would say to you is you’re the only person in America
who is asking that question because it is very old news.”
Old news? Hardly. How can the congressman indignantly insist
to a constituent that “you’re the only person in America who is asking that
question” when, days earlier at Fort Bragg, Trump insisted “the [2020] election
was rigged and stolen” to the applause of U.S. soldiers? Clearly the president of
the United States is keeping the “question” very much alive. Shortly after his 2025
inauguration, in victory comments in Emancipation Hall at the Capitol, Trump
referred to the 2020 election as “totally rigged.”
The question of the 2020 election remains alive also because of Sessions’ own misjudgments: posing with “Stop the Steal” protesters outside the Capitol for his Facebook page days before violence erupted; voting to block election results; and giving credence, during a May 14, 2022, town-hall meeting at West Community Center, to the now-thoroughly debunked “2000 Mules,” a “documentary” claiming massive conspiracy by Democrats to steal the 2020 election. The film has since been disowned by the conservative media company that distributed it.
No wonder. A damning lawsuit against the company (Salem
Media), pro-Trump conspiracy theorist and producer Dinesh D’Souza (earlier
convicted of campaign finance fraud) and right-wing, Texas-based True the Vote argues
they collectively employed “junk pseudoscience and excerpted surveillance video
of innocent voters” to malign a Georgia voter whom the “defendants falsely
accused of ballot fraud in their multi-million dollar-grossing film.” Only after
the 2024 election was won by Trump did D’Souza formally apologize to the
defamed Georgian who filed the lawsuit. Interestingly, D’Souza himself has blamed the documentary's falsehoods
on True the Vote's supposed researchers.
One could well argue the popular film constituted fraud in
the 2024 election that Trump won.
Nor has Trump’s pardoning of January 6 insurrectionists and
rioters after his 2025 inauguration helped put all the controversy to rest. Days after
Sessions’ town-hall meeting in Robinson, Trump declared on Truth Social that “Biden
was grossly incompetent and the 2020 election was a total FRAUD!” and that “A
Special Prosecutor must be appointed.” Trump added: “Let the work begin!”
Which, one might add, conflicts with Trump’s vow in a December 2024 “Meet the
Press” interview that he would not seek to initiate such an
investigation.
One of many lawsuits alleging sufficient improprieties nationwide to set aside the 2020 election, Latinos for Trump v. Sessions, filed in Waco’s own federal court, argued in its Jan. 18, 2021, filing that “every member of [the] currently seated 117th U.S. Congress and the president-elect, who is scheduled to be sworn in this coming Wednesday, January 20th, were not legitimately elected because the People of the United States were given ballots that were patently illegal.” Filed by a January 6 protester, the lawsuit demonstrates how far the cries of election wrongdoing can go.
Is all this another instance of Congressman Sessions being uninformed? Out of touch? Unwilling to acknowledge the embarrassments and obsessions and transgressions on his side of the aisle? In any case, constituents in the hall on June 16 hooted down the congressman after he seemed to evade the question demanding his formal acknowledgement of Biden’s legitimate election till he finally exclaimed under pressure: "I told you! He’s elected!” Even so, Sessions dismissed any notion he was an election denier, indignantly claiming such criticism was “unfair” and that he was "stunned and surprised" at the allegation.
One of the evening’s defining moments came when longtime activist Pam Kelly, 77, of Marlin, was given the microphone to ask a question layered with bitter context about not just the Republican Party but an electorate that endorsed it through the 2024 election, handing the party control of both chambers of Congress as well as the presidency under a supreme court perceived by many as beholden to or truly fearful of Trump. Her scathing question bears repeating here in full:
I have one question, but I’d like to preface it with
something if that’s OK. You’re a few years younger than me, but we basically are
of the same era, the same societal standards. I remember a time when neighbors
were helpful, caring. People respected the rule of law, our constitution and
cared about family and the Founding Fathers. Americans loved America and what
she stood for. When World War II broke out, most of our fathers went off to
fight fascism in a country far away because they believed in freedom and democracy
for everyone. My father was a captain in the United States Army.
I think that the men and women in the Greatest Generation
would never believe that a major political party in America would follow a
leader who lies, cheats, is disrespectful of women [applause], punishes the
poor, makes fun of handicapped people, courts enemies of a free people,
believes the treasure of our federal lands should be used for profit, invades
our most private information, uses his position to enhance and enrich himself
and his family [more applause], believes he is above the law, believes the Constitution
should be changed to accommodate him, creates a partisan judicial system, takes
revenge on those who disagree with him and who divides his own citizens through
fear and hate.
I have supported Republicans as many times as I have
Democrats, but right now the entire political system is dangerously sick. I
just have one question: What happened to the integrity of the Republican Party?
[Cheers, applause break out.]
To this, the congressman passed on a marvelous opportunity to
explain why MAGA principles are sufficiently compelling to shelve traditional
principles once defining American conservativism. Instead, he dodged, citing Democratic
President Bill Clinton’s losing his law license (well, suspended) for lying under
oath and Democratic President Biden’s supposedly using executive influence to
hide dissolute son Hunter Biden’s use of crack cocaine at the White House (an
allegation never proven). Loud boos erupted. So much for this searing question.
“I’ll be honest,” Kelly told me later of her question to the
congressman and his response. “I think the man has to know that I was
speaking the truth. I have trouble believing anyone of our generation could
grow up in Texas and not have that kind of integrity. When I was looking at
him, he was looking right back at me. I think he just couldn’t answer the
question so the answer he did give was, well, very juvenile. I saw no point in arguing
with him. I mean, I don’t like pulling someone’s pants down. But I think so many
people do wonder about all this.”
Even when given a chance to answer a fairly genial, softball question
with explanations of how MAGA or America First or Project 2025 or the
Department of Government Efficiency might improve the lives of everyday, ordinary Americans, Sessions whiffed. Example: when busy, upbeat, 63-year-old community
organizer Ashley Bean Thornton – who has contributed in all sorts of
roll-up-your-sleeves ways to everything from battling local poverty to
improving public education – asked the congressman a question that might have inspired
a rousing flight of oratory from an earlier generation of politician.
“One of the things that the government has done throughout
my memory of history is make wise investments in our country – you know, from [President]
Eisenhower’s investing in the [interstate] highways, all the way up to
President Biden investing in the CHIPS Act that is helping to pay for that Samsung
[plant] you mentioned,” Thornton said. “So, to kind of steer the conversation
away [from more contentious town-hall discussions involving DOGE and budget
cuts], just a little bit, what is the vision for investment coming forward?”
Sessions resisted this challenge to champion the Trump
agenda, instead giving a disheartening view of America as bankrupt and heavily reliant
on overseas investment:
The view with investment is that we have found ourselves
as being less of a good thing to bet on, that the federal government is nearing
a point where we can’t pay our bill. And there are other things that are called
crypto and gold and bricks and a lot of other things that have gathered a lot
of investment dollars. And that is why President Trump went overseas to get $6
trillion that will be invested in this country – $6 trillion will fund and fuel
a lot of investment not for the government but for jobs and people for things
you see here in Waco, Texas. They’re investing in jobs here in our country. The
$6 trillion is a guarantee they will invest in this country in our companies
and in the investments that go on. And you should expect that a lot of corporate
interest is how we employ people.
While Thornton later acknowledged being confused by
Sessions’ answer, she understood at least some of his concerns. “I think we
need some balance of cutting, taxing people who (IMHO) would be no worse off
for paying lots more taxes, and investing in our capacity to educate our
people, do groundbreaking research and invent and build new things,” she told
me. “I think that kind of investment has paid off through the
years. I think it’s great if other folks [overseas] want to invest in us,
but I don't think it does the same for us as investing in ourselves.”
Sovereignty of the people?
Other exchanges between the
congressman and skeptical constituents on June 16 invite commentary, but they’re similar enough in
tenor and illustration. Did he deserve all the mocking remarks and hooted ridicule that evening?
Possibly, though it was nowhere near as vitriolic as what I witnessed from the right-wing
extremists dominating Sessions’ town-hall meeting in Waco in November 2021,
including a rant from one constituent who wanted President Biden, not even a
year into his term, put on trial for various perceived offenses,
Nuremberg-style.
Constituent perspectives on the town-hall meeting vary
widely. A friend with a strong corporate background who is acutely aware of
public policy left “disappointed and dispirited” – sentiments he acknowledged
were probably inevitable “since the other side had complete control over the
venue and agenda. But I devoutly hoped we’d land a punch or two during the
Q&A. We didn’t. Not one.” Yet two political activists contend that Sessions’
local critics “owned the room,” even as they acknowledged that “Sessions did an
excellent job of standing there and taking the hit.”
The congressman indeed won praise from critics for mounting a town-hall meeting after the chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee in March discouraged Republican House members from holding such events, given widespread outrage over Trump’s actions. Sessions also won plaudits for declining efforts by his staff to end questions early from constituents. He took all comers till every question in the hall had been asked. Still, one wonders how the town-hall meeting might have unfolded had he and his staff heeded Baylor-trained social worker AB Waters’ advice.
“I want to preface the importance of understanding what this
town hall actually is,” Waters told Sessions after pressing him and
other lawmakers to help society’s less fortunate. “It is not a time for you to
come and tell us your agenda. We already know your agenda. And that’s what you were
elected for. You’re doing your job and I appreciate it. But for the next
town hall, I think it may be important to hear and give time for your
constituents to speak with you. And I know that you’re over time and I really
appreciate your just staying and taking our questions.”
Someone blurted out: “We spoke last November!”
“That’s great, that’s awesome,” Waters replied. “And here we
are again because town halls are important, right?”
Waters' advice reminds me of U.S. Sen. Paul Simon's deep faith in the institution of town-hall meetings. Over two terms in the Senate, the Democratic lawmaker held town-hall meetings in every county of Illinois at least twice and in almost all of the wards and townships of Cook County – reportedly more than 600 meetings. "I did it both for political purposes, obviously exposing my views to many who would never come to a Democratic political rally, and for philosophical reasons," he later wrote. "I wanted to make sure that people who are unemployed or facing a huge hospital bill had access to their senator, and not simply the big contributors or those who could afford a trip to Washington."
Over time, he forged best practices to improve how such events unfolded. These included tapping a respected, notably non-partisan community leader to strongly moderate the proceedings, outlining procedural guidelines and setting the tone for a respectful, civil discussion. Simon suggested the policymaker "give a brief opening statement of no more than ten minutes," thus allowing the vast majority of time for questions and comments from the audience. By contrast, Sessions' presentation took up the best part of an hour before questions were invited. By then his brittle speaking style, lack of context and creaky policy arguments had built up the resentment of constituents who had gathered from all over the congressional district to sound off.
Problem: Simon by all accounts approached town-hall meetings as "listening and learning sessions," which possibly made him a unique senator. Judging from his general defensiveness to the point of brusqueness when ideologically or factually cornered, Sessions appeared more of a political puppet, dancing awkwardly to tunes set by whatever forces happen to dominate his party rather than showing any real leadership or individuality. He showed little willingness to find ways to reach his more skeptical constituents or incorporate some of their considerations into his policymaking. To a degree, he has arguably devolved over time from a George W. Bush compassionate conservative to a fiscally driven tea-party Republican to, finally, a Make America Great Again apologist who in reality is Republican in name only.
Branyan, who had expressed reservations about his old Marine
battalion ordered by the president to face down protesters in Los Angeles, did give Sessions his
due: “He didn't actually answer my question, but I will say this. My wife
and I stayed till it was over and went up and shook his hand for staying there
through the question-and-answer period till everybody got a question answered.
I think that's kind of unique today for Republicans because their policies are
so unpopular that if they do a town-hall like Sessions did, there's going to be
a lot of resistance.”
Kelly also gave Sessions credit, though to no good end. "There were more people who were ticked off
than he had supporters,” she observed . “Good for him for holding out and not
walking away from it. I mean, people bordered on being rude and hostile and he
stayed. Did it do any good? No. He's continued supporting Trump since then [most notably by voting for Trump's "big, beautiful bill"] and these
are people in Congress who could actually do something about all this. They could say, ‘We're
not going to let you take any more power away from us’ or ‘We're going to
protect and defend the Constitution’ or ‘No, we're going to stick up for our
constituents.’
"I really feel like the people in Congress could take back control," she told me, "but it's either fine with them what's now going on or they're spineless, neither of which deserves any respect."
Louise Champagne, a constituent who questioned Sessions on why, amidst all the claims and allegations by Musk and Trump of widespread government fraud, no criminal indictments of fraud have surfaced, acknowledged disappointment in the congressman's responses generally: "I mean, his answers during the town-hall meeting were things like, 'Sure, it's fine, everybody should work until they're 70' and 'Oh, Waco has a 28 percent poverty rate? Well, people should go work at H-E-B and McDonald's,' as if the working poor aren't already working at places like H-E-B and McDonald's. He seemed completely unsympathetic to that."
His town-hall answer to Champagne's question on the lack of criminal indictments arising from constant claims of government fraud, no doubt figuring into Trump’s constant characterizing government rank-and-file employees as part of some corrupt, ill-defined “deep state” worthy of dissolution and restocking with Trump loyalists: "Oh, don't worry, that's getting ready to happen!"
One marvels at the questions not pressed, including about DOGE-inspired targeting of a federal grant for Mission Waco's innovative Creekside Community Village "tiny houses" project to address homelessness – such projects were supposedly a major concern to America First critics of U.S. funding of Ukrainian resistance – and the fate of a prominent, longtime Waco restaurateur whose disappearance from city life because of “immigration circumstances” remains, at least to a degree, a local mystery.
Nor did anyone air specific concern about looming Medicaid cutbacks impacting (through more red tape and more bureaucratic hurdles) Waco Family Medicine and its mission of treating thousands of medically underserved Central Texans. Established in 1969 by the McLennan County Medical Society to address a doctor shortage and a lack of primary-care access for the poor, Waco Family Medicine this year has already experienced personnel cuts of 7 percent and clinic closures due to rising health-care costs amid tightened, state-ordered Medicaid restrictions. (Medicaid, of course, has long covered low-income adults and children through state-federal heath-care partnerships.)
Yet one wonders if any town-hall meeting could have gone off well. Americans are increasingly ignorant or contemptuous of founding principles and disoriented by dizzying, high-stakes, sleight-of-hand shell games involving whataboutism, conspiracy theories and “truth-isn’t-truth” alternative realities, hatched daily by Trump, his designates and a supine Republican Party pandering to MAGA zealots while dismissing others as “snowflakes,” "RINOs" (old-fashioned Republicans who resolutely rejected dutiful MAGA conversion) and, of course, liberals. The libertarian Cato Institute’s Fourth of July 2025 survey of more than 2,000 Americans found "shocking ignorance" about our nation’s history and system of government: "Majorities of Americans don’t know why the American colonies adopted the Declaration of Independence to separate from Britain on July 4, 1776 (53 percent), or that only Congress can declare war (54 percent), or that the Supreme Court has final say over presidential actions (54 percent)."
More disturbingly, the survey, conducted in June, showed vast majorities fretting over faltering efforts to keep the government’s budget and finances sustainable (amidst a massive tax-cut bill then poised to add trillions to federal indebtedness); preventing excessive government power (clearly evident in a turbocharged Trump presidency); ensuring ordinary people have “a real voice in how the country is run” (mirrored in not only Sessions’ rebellious town-hall meeting but others across America, including one in Georgia where some constituents were tased to the approval of Republican Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene, a Sessions colleague who coincidentallyu has effectively destroyed decorum while heading a new congressional subcommittee aimed at eliminating government waste); the spectacle of political and cultural disputes spiraling into more violence (evident in events ranging from summer 2020 protests over police violence to January 6 mob violence at the Capitol). Two more priorities overwhelmingly favored in the survey: protecting future generations from environmental harm and providing "equal justice under the law," the latter arguably threatened by the Supreme Court's restraint of universal injunctions imposed, however temporarily and selectively, by lower federal courts.
To Sessions' credit, Robinson police officers in the hall were never pressed to remove or suppress any of the congressman's constituents.
In his remarks during a Robinson High School ceremony in
April, West Point appointee Gage Gonzales quoted Theodore Roosevelt from a 1910
speech given at the Sorbonne in Paris: “It is not the critic who counts; the credit belongs to
the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat
and blood." One might unthinkingly apply this to public servants such
as Congressman Sessions, though Frenchman Alexis de Tocqueville in his towering
political travelogue "Democracy in America" (1835) applied such arena
roles far more broadly:
In America, the principle of the sovereignty of the
people is neither barren nor concealed as it is with some other nations; it is
recognized by the customs and proclaimed by the laws; it spreads freely and
arrives without impediment at its most remote consequences. If there be a
country in the world where the doctrine of the sovereignty of the people can be
fairly appreciated, where it can be studied in its application to the affairs
of society and where its dangers and its advantages may be foreseen, that
country is assuredly America.
Even Teddy Roosevelt acknowledged as much in the role of the overlooked, undistinguished individual U.S. citizen,
judging from yet another passage in his famous “Man in the Arena” speech, actually
entitled “Citizenship in a Republic” for the benefit of his French audience:
The good citizen will demand liberty for himself and, as
a matter of pride, he will see to it that others receive liberty which he thus
claims as his own. Probably the best test of true love of liberty in any
country is the way in which minorities are treated in that country. Not only
should there be complete liberty in matters of religion and opinion but
complete liberty for each man to lead his life as he desires, provided only
that in so doing he does not wrong his neighbor.
To quote a memorable passage from New York Times coverage of the speech, delivered in French: "In a republic," said Mr. Roosevelt at one point, "the quality of the ruler is all important, but" – here a telling pause – "we are the rulers."
With the countdown underway to the 250th anniversary of America’s founding, Americans are clearly suffering an identity crisis, arguably sufficient to contribute to our nation’s decline and fall unless citizens – including their elected representatives – become far more cognizant of the duties and responsibilities that come with the hard-won sovereignty of the people.
