At last, the outdated dress code in Congress has been abolished, joining other bad ideas that have been discarded throughout history. Americans have undergone a transformative experience with work, especially during the pandemic when working from home increased productivity. This change is especially prevalent among the younger generation, who reject jobs that infringe on their personal freedom, including dictating what they wear. They are disillusioned by a government led by a gerontocracy that fails to bring about positive change. Removing the dress code is a small step towards making Congress more relatable and accessible.
However, changing the dress code is only a partial solution. The issue lies with the Capitol itself. Its grand architecture, Latin inscriptions, and statues of slaveholding presidents do not align with our current values and interests. It also suppresses individual and political expression. Perhaps it’s time to reconsider not only Congress’s dress code but also its office space.
There are endless possibilities for relocating Congress outside the Capitol since there is no legal requirement to conduct business there. One option could be moving Congress to a shopping mall, specifically its food court. A mall offers convenience, ample parking, and a relaxed atmosphere that promotes efficiency. The traditional chamber desks that resemble Longfellow writing with an old pen would be replaced with abundant seating that eliminates hierarchy. While everyone may desire to sit alongside popular eateries like Orange Julius, it should not require multiple terms in office or membership in exclusive societies. In a true democratic fashion, the best seats could be reserved for the youngest members, incentivizing them to arrive first.
Imagine a newly elected senator seeking reassurance from his tablemate before casting his first vote. He stretches his legs, grabs a refreshing drink, and gains the confidence to vote on important matters. Working parents can end their day by picking up a delicious meal to take home. Children would enjoy the combination of engaging legislative proceedings and dining options. The sergeant at arms, dressed casually in a Snuggie and shower slides, would call the (food) court to order, announcing the president’s arrival for the State of the Union address. This innovative, fun, and informal approach would be refreshing. Similarly, the Ways and Means Committee could conduct its important work in a Foot Locker, a more sensible location than one with transom windows.
Chuck Schumer’s decision to modify the rules was likely influenced by Senator John Fetterman’s predicament. Fetterman, who wears a mall-appropriate hoodie and gym shorts, has sometimes been forced to shout his votes from doorways. When announcing the reform, Schumer acknowledged the power of long-standing but futile traditions by stating, “Senators are able to choose what they wear on the Senate floor. I will continue to wear a suit.”
Typically, dress codes are contested by women and girls. However, in this case, it only took the desires of two cisgender, straight white men to prompt change. Shopping malls can provide a balancing force to privilege. Despite their image as entertainment venues, malls were originally designed to cater to suburban women who lacked access to urban centers’ commercial spaces. Malls have consistently met their needs. In a mall, the thunderous speeches traditionally uttered by male legislators in the Capitol’s grand dome would be replaced by the polite requests of young boys asking their mothers for quarters to play arcade games.
Critics of the dress code reform, mainly conservatives, are appalled by the situation. They advocate for propriety, decency, and correctness that they themselves no longer embody. Conservatism once reflected restraint and a refusal to engage in the crude language and actions of the radical left. It emphasized the power of dressing modestly. For instance, Richard Nixon, with a twinkle in his eye, welcomed the Ray Conniff Singers in the East Room while proudly stating that he liked “square” music. But one of the singers, before performing, held up a scroll that read “Stop the killing” and delivered a message challenging Nixon’s faith. Instead of responding with incivility, Nixon accepted it with grace and planned his next steps calmly.
However, many present-day conservatives no longer prioritize public restraint, viewing it as a losing strategy. They believe that their politeness and even temper allowed liberal aggression to overpower them, and they refuse to tolerate it any longer. Marjorie Taylor Greene called Lauren Boebert a derogatory term on the House floor, and Tim Burchett endorsed the idea of the women having a physical altercation, claiming that he appreciated the concept due to his affinity for professional wrestling. Lindsey Graham spoke on Fox News, casually stating that Donald Trump had “scared the shit out of Mexico” in the context of immigration.
One July evening, a group of congressional pages were capturing the awe-inspiring Capitol dome in photos. When Representative Derrick Van Orden encountered them, he unleashed a barrage of expletives, berating the pages and accusing them of defiling the space. This kind of language reflects the casual tone of a mall, where politicians like Lauren Boebert no longer want to spend their lunch breaks eating underwhelming food but instead seek out trendy options.
The beauty of this proposal lies in the fact that shopping malls face declining popularity. Many malls stand abandoned, reminders of a past era. The nostalgia-fueled excitement of wandering through vast hallways with linked pinkie fingers is long gone. Despite this decline, we often take for granted their existence and the conveniences they provide, such as stores like Sharper Image where grandparents receive Christmas presents. Shopping malls have become irrelevant to our modern lifestyles.
In conclusion, the overhaul of Congress’s dress code is a positive step, but more profound changes are necessary. Relocating Congress to a shopping mall, specifically its food court, offers a practical solution. It provides a casual environment conducive to productivity. Shopping malls could mitigate the impact of privilege and encourage a more inclusive and relaxed atmosphere. While some conservatives voice opposition to the reform, their arguments are undermined by their own failure to embody the values they espouse. The decline of shopping malls aligns with our current disinterest in these spaces. Ultimately, this proposal revitalizes democracy and brings Congress closer to the people it represents.
Denial of responsibility! Vigour Times is an automatic aggregator of Global media. In each content, the hyperlink to the primary source is specified. All trademarks belong to their rightful owners, and all materials to their authors. For any complaint, please reach us at – [email protected]. We will take necessary action within 24 hours.
