- Dennis C. Rasumussen. Fears Of A Setting Sun: The Disillusionment of America’s Founders. Princeton University Press, 2021.
Dennis Rasumussen, a distinguished professor of political science at Syracuse University, offers an historical account of Washington, Hamilton, Adams, Jefferson, and Madison after the establishment of our constitution. Rasumussen works to explain the political ideology of these five great thinkers, their accomplishments while working in our government, and ultimately, their deep disappointment with the American experiment by the time of their death. From Washington’s deep disappointment with factions and partisan antics of the Republicans and Federalists, to Hamilton’s inextinguishable hatred for Republicans and their goal to dissemble the Union, to Adam’s eternal disappointment in the virtue of American people, this text artfully takes the reader through the times and minds of our founding fathers.
Fears Of A Setting Sun has truly made me fall in love with American history. Rasumussen accompanies his claims with an incredible amount of evidence, from letters to speeches. As I finish this book, I will continue to compare fears with reality. For example, Washington’s fear of partisanship dissembling our Union is something that still haunts us today. While it isn’t the same Republican versus Federalist debate anymore, deep hatred for opposing political parties is present in most of America. This book has proven to be an historical science experiment. Famous politicians of the 1700s make claims and hypotheses about our young nation for readers in the 2000s to reflect upon. So far, my favorite section has been about John Adams. Adams was an absolute scholar in political history, regimes of the 15th, 16th, and 17th, centuries, and sociology. His pessimistic nature is truly fascinating to study through his letters and writings. His distrust in the virtue of Americans and their obsession with luxury goods is something that I tend to agree with.
This book will be incredibly useful in my Senior Project. As I work from the inside of one of our great political systems, I can compare and contrast the predictions from first hand experience! I can figure out whether our House of Representatives and Senate is broken up into a rich oligarchy and a true democratic branch like Adam’s claimed it would be. I can see whether our Federal Government should have more power than Jefferson claimed it should. Finally, I can figure out the ways in which our government is successful and able to overcome the problems our forefathers predicted would destroy it.
2. Jamie Raskin V. House Republicans Transcript. House votes to hold Scavino, Navarro in contempt of Congress in Jan. 6 probe, 2022.
On Wednesday, April 6th, I was able to attend a debate on the House floor regarding Navarro and Scavino, who were being held in contempt for failing to show up for their lawfully served subpoenas. After attending the session, I annotated a transcript of the debate in an effort to analyze the methods of both parties to persuade and combat the opposing viewpoint. Jamie Raskin is a member of the January 6th Committee and has been an outspoken advocate for democracy and the rule of law. His opposition consisted of 40 plus Republicans who took turns distracting the House floor and attempting to counteract his points.
This debate was arguably the most impactful experience I’ve had so far. Hearing Congressman Raskin speak and analyzing his debate technique has provided me with incredible insight into successful communication. Raskin uses a combination of Supreme Court cases, witty one-liners, and successful storytelling to artfully craft a persuasive argument. He started off his speech with the words, ““If 90% of success in life is just showing up, then 90% of acting in contempt of congress is not showing up by failing to show up to multiple subpoenas you were lawfully served.” By using a colloquial phrase and adapting it to fit our current situation, Raskin allowed people to easily understand what he was talking about. He quickly moved to make the American public understand even more, “If your son or daughter were subpoenaed and had to come testify before the U.S, would you advise them to sit at home on the couch and blow it off? Every year thousands of Americans are held in contempt and sent to jail for up to 6 months for acting in contempt of a subpoena and not showing up. Everyday a dozen people are being held in contempt in D.C., the same offense that they committed and must face punishment for,” (Paraphrased from his speech). Raskin is further simplifying subpoenas and forcing the American public to directly oppose the actions of Navarro and Scavino. He argued that they openly mock their own personal duty to comply with the rule of law. They act with open disregard and disobedience with the law, especially when acting in scorn of the government. His speech was far too compelling and beautiful to summarize in this one piece of writing, but I especially loved his one-liners: When responding to Navarro’s request to write answers from his home, Raskin replied, “Isn’t that nice. Wouldn’t any criminal love to answer questions from their sofa without having to be under oath?” When responding to a heckler, he stated, “The gentlelady said something about the Russian hoax or something about the Russian collusion? I accept the heckling Mr. Speaker, that’s all right because if she wants to continue to stand with Vladmir Putin and the bloody brutal invasion of Ukraine, we understand. We understand that there is a strong relationship between Putin and Trump and that there is a strong axis within the gentlelady’s party. If you want to continue to stand with Trump and Putin, that is your prerogative but please do it on your own time.” Finally, he said, “You know who vetoed it? The fourth branch of government: Donald Trump, who some of their members slavishly report to like sycophants.”
This exercise will be incredibly useful in my Senior Project and my professional career. Raskin is arguably one of the most distinguished debaters and speakers in Congress. He is also a constitutional scholar, allowing him to cite Supreme Court cases at any point in time. His mix of humor, hard hitting evidence, and analysis that supports his claims is something that I can definitely learn from. I hope to one day use his methodology and equations to draft compelling speeches.
3. Tiernan Sittenfeld (Senior Vice President, Government Affairs at League of Conservation), Geoff Garin (President, Hart Research), Rep. Lieu (California, 33). Rep. Cartwright (Pennsylvania, 8). Congressional Briefing: Data-Tested Messaging on Gas Prices, 2022.
On Tuesday, March 29th, I had the opportunity to attend a briefing session on voters reactions to rising gas prices. After attending the session, I was able to read the direct transcript and data to draft a brief for our Communications Director.
This briefing allowed me to analyze data in an effort to formulate a variety of thesis statements surrounding word choice in messaging on gas prices. I learned that concerns about the rising gas prices are widespread, even among Democratic voters who drive less than 25 miles a week. Voters are paying attention to gas prices and looking to their elected officials to solve the complex problem, weighing short-term and long-term benefits. 73% of voters indicated that they were “very concerned” about the rising gas prices, while another 18% considered themselves “fairly concerned.” In comparison to issues that generate enormous bipartisan interest, gas prices were clearly the topic that voters expressed the most concern over. Only 68% of voters indicated they were very concerned about the Russian invasion of Ukraine. In terms of word choice, I learned that within voters’ inherent nature to shift blame onto politicians, CEOs, and other key actors, there is always a request for Congress and the White House to do something. A key observation we can make is word choice! By analyzing how voters respond to almost identical questions using different words, we can better frame our messaging. For example, in one set of data, there was a clear indication of trigger words for swing voters, such as clean energy, energy security, and energy independence. While clean energy and energy independence are almost synonymous, there is a 21-point deficit between the two. In addition, energy independence and energy security show the same effect. The language of “energy independence” has more salience than “energy security,” reflecting a 6-point difference in voters who indicated “very important.” However, it was important to note that Republican voters may tend to correlate energy independence with an increase in oil drilling.
Ultimately, the exercise of formulating and analyzing data, creating thesis statements on different trigger words, and drafting a brief will be incredibly helpful to my Senior Project and future career. I now understand the importance of every single word in a sentence. Even one choice, whether it be energy independence, clean energy, or energy security, can correlate to a 21% difference in voters.
4. Gregory Gause III. Foreign Affairs Magazine: The Price of Order, Settling for Less in the Middle East, 2022.
Gregory Gause III is a professor of International Affairs at the Bush School of Government and Public Service at Texas A&M University. This article in Foreign Affairs Magazine covers the history of the Middle East and how it resulted in brutal authoritarian leaders among many countries. Gause discusses the impact of the Arab Spring, American Legislators, and oil dependent countries.
Gause covers this subject from a conservative perspective, criticizing the impact that Democratic leadership had on the region. While I disagree with his argument, his historical account of what happened is very persuasive. His methodology of connecting facts like a string of dominoes is not only hard hitting but hard to counter.
While I’m not studying geopolitical history or international relations, Congress can have a huge impact on foreign policy making. Not only can I learn from his persuasive writing, but I can learn more about what actions Congress is responsible for. Questions to consider in the future: What can Representatives do to help combat the rise of authoritarian regimes? What can Representatives do to promote democracy in the region? What can Representatives do to promote economic growth, especially in industries outside of oil exportation.
5. Jamie Raskin and the Civil Rights and Civil Liberties Subcommittee. Free Speech Under Attack: Book Bans and Academic Censorship. 2022
On April 7th, I was able to attend a hearing for book bans in America. After attending the session, I read the transcript of the session in an effort to analyze a multitude of things. Speakers included Ruby Bridges, three high school students, a librarian, and two teachers. Congressman Raskin opened the session with a beautiful speech recounting the Supreme Court cases that led us to where we stand now. From a ruling in 1943 that struck down compulsory flag salutes, to Tinker V. Des Moines School District that affirmed neither teachers or students shed their first amendment rights in school, to Pico Vs. Board of education which rejected a town school board’s effort to strip books from public school libraries, Congressman Raskin beautifully articulated his case.
I learned a lot about the efforts to ban books in our country and how to argue against them. The Constitution protects the right to receive information, affording the public access to discussion, dibate, and the dissemination of information. The answer to books whose content you oppose, is to not read them or write a negative review, or even write your own book in answer. What I found most compelling was an argument about the first amendment: The First Amendment is an apple. Everyone wants to take a bite out of it and wants to censor something, but if we allow all those bites then there’s no apple left. The way to save it for all of us is to learn to tolerate the onions you abore. It’s not easy but this is incumbent on people living in a democratic society.
Ultimately, this session will prove to be great for my Senior Project and professional career. I learned how to ask leading questions that developed arguments, how to structure arguments around Supreme Court cases, and how to use comparison to effectively persuade people.