Cancel the State of the Union — forever
Let's make this piece of the shutdown permanent
The president "shall from time to time give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient," the Constitution says. But must he do it with such pomp and circumstance; with the bloviating exposition of so little substance; with the pageant reaction shots of Congress, all sycophantic to one audience or another; with the multiplying response speeches, each as empty as their vacuous prompt; with prop guests and press hyper-analysis and the near-religious routine of obligatory applause?
In a word, no.
None of this need happen at all — and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's Wednesday move to postpone 2019's State of the Union address until President Trump agrees to end the partial government shutdown offers a rare opening for reform.
Subscribe to The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.
Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
To be sure, that is not Pelosi's goal. She is playing a shrewd politics, leveraging Trump's engrossing love of televised self-aggrandizement against his fixation on this border wall fantasy. The ploy could work. It may be the loss of Narcissus' pool, rather than its discovery, which here undoes him.
But regardless of Pelosi's short-term aims, her invitation to Trump to send Congress a written SOTU as an alternative to total postponement could be the very disruption needed to undo this annual habit of glossing a vainglorious campaign speech with officialdom and pretending it is a serious policy pronouncement.
There is historical precedent aplenty. Though the first two presidents addressed Congress in person, Thomas Jefferson's rejection of the practice as monarchic — and therefore unsuitable for the elected administrator of a republic — held sway for a century. Woodrow Wilson revived the speechifying in 1913 ("All official Washington was agape last night over the decision of the president to go back to the long-abandoned custom," The Washington Post reported), and successive presidents have generally followed suit.
When the speech was delayed or replaced with a written update in the century since Wilson's switch, it has generally been due to national crisis (FDR and Harry Truman during World War II), looming presidential departure (most recently, Jimmy Carter in 1981), or public tragedy (Ronald Reagan after the Challenger disaster in 1986).
That the verbal delivery of the SOTU would feel inappropriate under such circumstances is telling, for there could be nothing inappropriate about fulfilling the Constitution's requirement with a written report. The administration of government continues amid national crisis, the end of a presidential term, and public tragedy, and there is no reason a sober update on that activity should be disrespectful to the national mood. Provision of facts, figures, and recommended solutions to identified problems is not offensive. We have yet to see outrage because the Government Accountability Office continues to publish reports amid catastrophe or controversy.
No, what makes SOTU inappropriate in these situations is not its existence but its form. It is unfitting for an imperial president to gladhand his way down the aisle and bask in his party's adulation when more serious things are afoot. We can no longer forget how silly it is to get caught up in scrutiny of the first lady's dress or Supreme Court justices' facial expressions or the weird mishaps of whatever rising young star of the opposition party is tasked with giving the year's response. It becomes inescapable that the SOTU is purely an exercise in political performance, and we somehow have enough decency left that no amount of stage management can make that appropriate in the face of real crisis.
And here's the thing: There's always a real crisis at hand. We are a nation perpetually at war in half a dozen nations halfway around the globe. We maintain the largest prison population on the planet, outpacing even totalitarian regimes and states with far more total residents. These and other crises — I stop the list here because there are too many options to consider, not too few — hum a constant tune not silenced by our inattention. If a vapid, performative SOTU is inappropriate given some acute crisis we cannot ignore, it remains inappropriate in the face of these chronic tragedies.
The president can fulfill his constitutional duty to update Congress on the state of the union with a letter, and, going forward, a letter should suffice. The written format encourages greater specificity and prudence, devalues hollow rhetorical flourish, and declines to contribute to the overgrown authority of the American presidency. Let's make this piece of the shutdown permanent.
Create an account with the same email registered to your subscription to unlock access.
Sign up for Today's Best Articles in your inbox
A free daily email with the biggest news stories of the day – and the best features from TheWeek.com
Bonnie Kristian was a deputy editor and acting editor-in-chief of TheWeek.com. She is a columnist at Christianity Today and author of Untrustworthy: The Knowledge Crisis Breaking Our Brains, Polluting Our Politics, and Corrupting Christian Community (forthcoming 2022) and A Flexible Faith: Rethinking What It Means to Follow Jesus Today (2018). Her writing has also appeared at Time Magazine, CNN, USA Today, Newsweek, the Los Angeles Times, and The American Conservative, among other outlets.
-
Unpasteurised milk and the American right
Under the radar Former darling of health-conscious liberal foodies is now a 'conservative culture war signal': a sign of mistrust in experts
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Published
-
Government shutdown looming? Blame the border
Talking Points Democrats and Republicans say funding for immigration enforcement is the budget battle's latest sticking point. That's about all they agree on.
By Rafi Schwartz, The Week US Published
-
'Conservatives have not limited their attack on reproductive rights to the US'
Instant Opinion Opinion, comment and editorials of the day
By Harold Maass, The Week US Published
-
The debate about Biden's age and mental fitness
In Depth Some critics argue Biden is too old to run again. Does the argument have merit?
By Grayson Quay Published
-
How would a second Trump presidency affect Britain?
Today's Big Question Re-election of Republican frontrunner could threaten UK security, warns former head of secret service
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Published
-
'Rwanda plan is less a deterrent and more a bluff'
Instant Opinion Opinion, comment and editorials of the day
By The Week UK Published
-
Henry Kissinger dies aged 100: a complicated legacy?
Talking Point Top US diplomat and Nobel Peace Prize winner remembered as both foreign policy genius and war criminal
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Last updated
-
Trump’s rhetoric: a shift to 'straight-up Nazi talk'
Why everyone's talking about Would-be president's sinister language is backed by an incendiary policy agenda, say commentators
By The Week UK Published
-
More covfefe: is the world ready for a second Donald Trump presidency?
Today's Big Question Republican's re-election would be a 'nightmare' scenario for Europe, Ukraine and the West
By Sorcha Bradley, The Week UK Published
-
Xi-Biden meeting: what's in it for both leaders?
Today's Big Question Two superpowers seek to stabilise relations amid global turmoil but core issues of security, trade and Taiwan remain
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Published
-
Will North Korea take advantage of Israel-Hamas conflict?
Today's Big Question Pyongyang's ties with Russia are 'growing and dangerous' amid reports it sent weapons to Gaza
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Published