Manchin circulates proposal to reverse Schumer on dress code
3 years ago by jeffw to c/politics
Centrist Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) is circulating a proposal to reestablish the Senate’s dress code, which Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) loosened over the weekend to allow senators to wear whatever they want on the Senate floor, according to senators familiar with the proposal.
One person familiar with the resolution said it would essentially return the Senate dress code to what it was last week, which required senators to wear coats and ties or business attire when on the Senate floor.
“I’ve signed it,” said one senator, who explained it would “define what the dress code is.”
Schumer’s decision appeared aimed at catering to first-term Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pa.), whose hoodie was a signature look on the campaign trail in 2022 and who wore a dark short-sleeved collared shirt and dark shorts to work Thursday.
But the decision to loosen the dress code is getting bipartisan pushback, including from Senate Democratic Whip Dick Durbin (Ill.), who says the Senate should have standards.
“The senator in question from Pennsylvania is a personal friend, but I think we need to have standards when it comes to what we’re wearing on the floor of the Senate, and we’re in the process of discussing that right now as to what those standards will be,” Durbin told “The Briefing with Steve Scully” on SiriusXM’s POTUS channel.
“I think the Senate needs to act on this,” Durbin said.
Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) described the bipartisan group of senators who want to restore the Senate dress code “the coalition of the rational.”
Cornyn said a Senate resolution will allow “other senators to speak” on the need for a dress code and predicted it will come to the floor.
“It’s just ridiculous that we should have to conform the dress code to the lowest common denominator,” he said.
Each house of Congress passes their own set of 12 resolutions proposing appropriations for various departments of the government then representatives of each house use those resolutions as a basis to negotiate a set of joint resolutions that has to pass both houses to be sent to the President for signature or veto. The Senate Appropriations Committee advanced all 12 resolutions for consideration by the full Senate in July. Thus far the Senate has not passed any of these resolutions.
These are our elected leaders, who could be working on reforming education, building infrastructure, improving healthcare or any number of policy goals that help the American people and better the country as a whole. And instead they're bickering about a fucking dress code, all while the government is facing an impending shutdown.
I've said it before, can't remember about what but it's sad that it needs to be repeating.
@lemmy.world
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles. Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing other users of being bots or paid actors.
- No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
- No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have comments or posts removed, weaponize reports, or violate the code of conduct, will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
go to feed...
@lemmy.world
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles. Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing other users of being bots or paid actors.
- No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
- No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have comments or posts removed, weaponize reports, or violate the code of conduct, will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
go to feed...
Any Senator that thinks this deserves any attention at all prior to passing budget and avoiding or more likely ending a shutdown is unfit for their office. Worrying over what your coworkers are wearing instead of dealing with an eminent crisis demonstrates poor judgement and an inability to properly prioritize your duties. If something like this does reach a vote before a budget is in place for the next fiscal year I would hope a majority of Senators would vote present in protest of the body's failure to act in the best interests of the nation.
save