“Cousin Marie says politicians aren’t gentlemen.” — Agatha Christie, Death on the Nile
“We are not all held to the same standard. Leaders are held to a higher standard.” — Etiquetteer
“. . . first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother’s eye.” — Matthew 7:5
Several readers have forced on Etiquetteer’s attention that the dress code of the United States Senate has been revised to make it less formal. Against his better judgment, Etiquetteer has to cede the floor to That Mr. Dimmick Who Thinks He Knows So Much, who has complicated views on this matter.
I admit it. I want it both ways. I want people — elected officials, fellow citizens — to show respect by what they wear and how they behave. Is that too much to ask? Apparently yes.
With the U.S. government headed toward a shutdown, the latest distraction is the decision of Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) to relax the Senate dress code so that business attire — a suit and tie — is no longer required for Senators to appear on the Senate floor. This is widely, and correctly, seen as an accommodation to freshman Senator John Fetterman (D-PA), whose diagnosis of clinical depression since assuming office is now as well known as his long-established daily wardrobe of gym shorts and hoodies.
I could have a real “tuck in your shirt and get off my lawn” moment about this and rant about how the Casual Friday movement of the 1990s brought us here, about Sloth and about a Decline of Standards of Decency — but that’s both a) expected of me, and b) utterly useless. Here we are in this moment; what is there to be done? First, I might ask what you were wearing when you first read that news. Would it have passed muster on the Senate floor?
We must acknowledge that more than a few Senators have been skirting the dress code, voting on bills while keeping one foot in the cloak room. “The modification is in many ways a bow to reality: In recent years, there have been plenty of senators who have departed from the suit-and-tie uniform that for decades was considered the only acceptable attire,” says the New York Times. And since the national trend has been drifting ever more quickly to Business Casual or even Casual Everyday, could this Downward Revision of the Senate dress code not be said to make the Senate even more representative of the people?
More to the point, is what one wears more important than how one behaves? Of course I remember the words of the late Mary Haines: “They are equally important, darling.” Republican Senators (and Congressional Representatives) may wring their hands in despair, but they have no leg to stand on if a) they’ve even once voted with one foot in the cloakroom to circumvent the dress code, or b) “shattered norms of decorum and conduct” themselves. (This NYT article cites chapter and verse on several of them.) Your lapels may be sharper than anyone else’s, but if they cover a poisonous heart, of what good are they?
So, I want it both ways. I admire Senator Fetterman, I sympathize with his struggle with depression, and I still want him to suit up. The Republican Senators who wrote “The world watches us on that floor and we must protect the sanctity of that place at all costs” are not wrong, but should turn their attention to how their party, and its de facto leader, have already damaged that sanctity themselves, “shattered norms of decorum and conduct,” and decide to make restoring it more of a party priority.