Is the Fever Breaking? Two Centrist Senators on the 2022 Elections

Written By Guest User

Dec 7, 2022 | Doug Jones & Bob Corker on election results, a divided government, and Senate dynamics.

“It appears to me that the fever has broken,” observes Bob Corker, former two-term U.S. Senator from Tennessee, in this episode on the upcoming Congress. ”And it appears to me that there's gonna be a real serious debate on the Republican side of the aisle as to where the party is gonna go in 2024.”

That sense of fading GOP loyalty to former President Trump after another disappointing election is literally the elephant in the room as we discuss 2022 election results, some surprising bipartisan success stories on gun safety and gay marriage protection from the current Congress, and the prospects for effective government going forward with divisions by chamber control but also by faction within each major party.

Our other featured guest, former Democratic Senator from Alabama Doug Jones, puts it another way. “Right now you got a lot of folks feeling their oats over in the House, even though it is a very slim majority,” says Jones, the surprise winner of a Senate special election in 2017. “And they have promised a lot of oversight, a lot of investigations involving every agency… Who the hell knows? On the Senate side, though, it will be steady as she goes.”

Why are the U.S. Senate and House so different in culture and process? We’ll delve into that question with each of our Senatorial guests, as well as in our next episode on the U.S. House, our season finale.

For now, though, join our conversation with two recent U.S. Senators who worked the middle of the aisle in Congress – Alabama Democrat Doug Jones, who came to national prominence as a civil rights litigator, and Tennessee Republican Bob Corker, who raised the alarm early on during the chaotic Trump administration as Chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

SHOW NOTES

Our Guests

  • The Hon. Bob Corker is a former Republican Senator from Tennessee, serving for two terms in Congress. A commercial real estate developer, he began his political career as commissioner for the Tennessee Finance and Administration Department before being elected Mayor of Chattanooga in 2001. While a member of the U.S. Senate, Corker served as Chair of the Foreign Relations Committee. You can follow him on Twitter @SenBobCorker

  • The Hon. Doug Jones is a former Democratic Senator from Alabama, serving in Congress for three years after a high-profile special election in 2017. He was the first Democrat to represent Alabama in the U.S. Senate in over two decades. Jones was appointed U.S. Attorney for Alabama’s Northern District in 1997, and is known for his prosecution of two Ku Klux Klan members for their role in the 1963 Birmingham church bombing. You can follow him on Twitter @DougJones

Fact Check:

  • Senator Bob Corker states in this episode that The Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008, which created the $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP), passed in the Senate with 72 yeas. The final vote count was actually 74-25-1. You can view more details about that legislation here.

More on the post-midterm Congress:

 

Bipartisan legislation passed this term:

 

Failed bipartisan legislation mentioned by our guests:

 

More on Senate Rules:

 

Op-Eds by Sen. Doug Jones:

Interviews with Sen. Bob Corker:

 

Original music by Ryan Adair Rooney

Want more Purple content? Please subscribe to Purple Principle Premium on Apple Podcasts: https://link.chtbl.com/PurpleApple

  • Bob Corker:

    But it appears to me that, that the fever has broken, and it appears to me that there's gonna be an all out debate. A real, serious debate in the Republican side of the aisle as to where the party is gonna go in 2024.

    Robert Pease (host):

    That’s the centrist GOP Senator, Bob Corker of Tennessee, who served two terms from 2006 to 2018, and took some serious heat from the Trump White House for his push back on foreign policy issues. In the aftermath of 2022 election results, Senator Corker feels that the feverish loyalty to former President Trump as a GOP party leader may finally be breaking.

    Doug Jones:

    And right now, you got a lot of folks feeling their oats over in the House. Even though it is a very slim majority, it is still a majority. And they have promised a lot of oversight, a lot of investigations involving every agency… Who the hell knows? I mean, it’s gonna be pretty crazy. On the Senate side, though, it will be steady as she goes. I, I think you will see some opportunity with Republicans to try to get something done.

    Robert Pease (host):

    And that’s Doug Jones, former Democratic U.S. Senator from Alabama, who also worked the middle within a closely divided Senate during his 3 year tenure. He’s concerned about hyperpartisanship in the GOP controlled house next session, but not as concerned about the closely divided U.S. Senate. Why are these two chambers so different? I’m Robert Pease and this is the Purple Principle, a podcast about the perils of polarization, here with Dylan Nicholls to examine those Senate vs. House differences in two special post-election episodes, starting with the US Senate where 60 votes is so often needed to accomplish just about anything.

    Dylan Nicholls (cohost):

    That’s right Rob. The Senate is different. But despite this roadblock, several pieces of important legislation have been passed over the past two years in a 50-50 Senate.

    [Archival, News Anchor reports passage of infrastructure bill]

    Anchor:

    Breaking news right now on Capitol Hill, where the Senate just passed the $1 trillion infrastructure bill this morning, with strong bipartisan support.

    [Archival, News Anchor reports passage of gun legislation]

    Anchor:

    As for that bipartisan gun legislation, the President also touting the fact that this was passed with Republican and Democratic support.

    [Archival, News Anchor reports passage of Respect for Marriage Act]

    Anchor:

    12 Republicans joined with the Democrats to pass the Respect for Marriage Act, you heard the vote count right there.

    Robert Pease (host):

    Will that kind of legislative progress continue into the new session, with the House under GOP control and a presidential race underway?

    Dylan Nicholls (cohost):

    That’s the multi-trillion dollar question as negotiations begin over the debt ceiling and the annual budget. Both our guests today have commented on increasing polarization between the parties during their time in the Senate. But there’s also polarization within the parties too, between populists vs traditional conservatives in the GOP, and progressives vs moderates on the Democratic side.

    Robert Pease (host):

    Absolutely, Dylan, that’s so important. And we probably haven’t spent enough time on those ideological and factional divides within each party on this show. But we will hear from both Senators on this important subject. Senator Corker, he felt his own party overused the filibuster on many occasions during his two terms.

    Dylan Nicholls (cohost):

    And Senator Jones describes how an opportunity for police reform was lost due to hyperpartisanship on the Democratic side of the aisle.

    Robert Pease (host):

    Let’s kick things off with former Senator Doug Jones. Again, he’s the centrist Democrat who gained national prominence as a civil rights prosecutor. We asked him about a different type of polarization he experienced growing up in Alabama during the period of court ordered desegregation.

    [Enter Doug Jones Interview]

    Doug Jones:

    Yeah, you know, look, I appreciate that and it’s great to be with you guys. You know, it was a polarized, not as partisan, because everything was Democrats at that time, the difference is that it was polarized within the Democratic Party. You had those standing up for Civil Rights, and at the same time those standing in the school house door. So the polarization was really not as political as it was cultural, as it was in society, and certainly those things always form everything that happens. In your, I think, formative years help drive things later in life. And for me, it was growing up in a segregated society for the first, like, twelve years of my life. And then as I got to junior high and high school, I went to school with black kids. And what I found was that, you know, kids do a lot better job sometimes of adapting to changes like that than parents did. And we did everything that we could to have a good high school, to have a good experience. College it carried that forward, and then in law school.

    Dylan Nicholls (cohost):

    Yeah, well, many of our listeners will remember you as the Democratic Senator from Alabama, but as we were talking about, you had a remarkable career as a prosecutor. Uh, you’ve been quoted as saying you skipped some law school classes in ‘77 to sit in on the trial of Robert Chambliss, a ringleader behind the 1963 Birmingham church bombing. And a few decades later, there you are prosecuting other extremist conspirators in that same bombing as a U.S. Attorney. Can you talk to us a little bit about that journey, and why the arch of justice was so long there?

    Doug Jones:

    Well, I think that the arch of justice was so long because people just left that. You had to have a dedicated group of people. And Bill Baxley, who prosecuted the first case when I was in law school, was such a dedicated attorney general for the state of Alabama and really believed in that case and believed that it needed to be prosecuted. But after he left office, it just kinda sat back on the shelf for a long time. But then there were some other things that happened that caused not only the 16th Street bombing case to be reopened, but some in Mississippi. And that let a lot of people in Birmingham look and say “we can go back and look at these old cases, we can go back and do justice where justice had been denied.” It was a long way from my segregated world in Fairfield, Alabama to be able to come in and not only finish that case, to pick up where Baxley left off as I watched, but to do it in the same courtroom, where as a 24-year-old kid I sat with eyes wide open watching one of the greatest trials that I’ll ever witness. So it was a, it builds in your DNA at that point, when you see that justice delayed does not have to be justice denied.

    Dylan Nicholls (cohost):

    Yeah, some important history there… jumping ahead to your election to the Senate in 2017, your opponent of course faced a number of scandals at the time, but still a historic election considering it had been decades since Alabama last had a Democratic Senator.

    [Archival - News Anchor on election night describing Jones’ historic victory]

    Anchor:

    [cheers] …and now here in this ballroom in the Birmingham Sheraton, you've got people pouring in to see the fact that for the first time in 25 years a Democrat will be representing Alabama in the Senate.

    Dylan Nicholls (cohost):

    How do you think you were able to speak to all voters in that election and win a mandate, even though you were a part of the minority party?

    Doug Jones:

    Well, I think there was a combination of a lot of things. First of all, you gotta remember that it was a special election. And in a special election, sometimes the partisan nature kind of, is not as significant. People are going to be looking at candidates, they’re not going to be going in voting in a party, they’re going to be voting in candidates. That was a big help for us in Alabama, because it is such a partisan state right now.

    Robert Pease (host):

    That’s for sure, and like so many other states Senator, unfortunately, if I can jump in here with a question about partisanship on a national level in the U.S. Congress. We now know there’ll be a slight Democratic majority in the Senate, slight Republican one in the House. Should we expect then just total gridlock or could there be some surprises?

    Doug Jones:

    Well, you know, look, it seems that the most likelihood is, uh, gridlock only because you have a really chaotic House Republican Caucus. You know, Kevin McCarthy was reelected as leader, but the fact is he didn't–- there were 31 people that voted against him. So you really don't know where that's gonna go and what he's gonna have to do to try to shore that up in order to become Speaker.

    Robert Pease (host):

    Yeah. So in that context, how important is it that Mitch McConnell won reelection as the Senate Minority Leader? I mean, granted, he certainly has a storied history of obstruction, but could it not have been even worse if he had lost control, if there were even less control under Scott?

    Doug Jones:

    Oh, clearly, clearly. I mean, at the end of the day, Mitch is an institutionalist. He tries to use the institutions for his political advantage. Make no mistake about that. But at the same time, he has at least done some work. I mean, you know, you look at a 50-50 Senate in this past year, and there was at least enough Republicans who were able to, uh, and they, this is hard to do. You had the CHIP act, which helps, uh, manufacturing, uh, in America with chips. You had the PACT act, you had the gun act. Mitch let folks work. You know, the, all of those things, Robert, all of those things were on the table in the last administration. But the problem is you had a president who kept throwing them, you know, a, a wrench into everything. Just as you would get this bipartisan work, Trump would throw a poison pill in there that Democrats just couldn't swallow. And that prevented so much bipartisan legislation.

    Robert Pease (host):

    Yeah. Well, tell us what it's like to be a centrist in a closely divided senate and either a centrist Democrat or Republican on these very close votes, and the pressures that people will be under under these next two years as things come up for a vote.

    Doug Jones:

    The pressures are really to try to pull people together to see if you can advance legislation regardless of what the legislation might be, if you can advance it somehow. And remember in the Senate you do have still the filibuster. And so you've either gotta advance something with 60 votes, which is an effort these days to try to get 60 votes in the Senate because centrists, there's not that many left I think in the Senate. We've had a lot of, a number of those that have either retired or were beaten in 2018, 2020, and even this year. So it's a lot harder pulling 60 votes together to try to get something accomplished. So, I used to tell people they were always, you know, coming in Alabama, they’d say “we're really, you know, proud of you for reaching across the aisle Doug.” And I, I’d say, “well what you're really proud of me more for probably is reaching in my aisle to try to pull some from the left a little bit closer to the center.”

    Robert Pease (host):

    Yeah. Well speaking of issues that have long been gridlocked, immigration's been 35 years since there's been major legislative action. We had the Republican strategist, Mike Madrid on recently. We'd like to play you a clip from him about how he feels both parties have been responsible for that gridlock.

    [TPP Archival, Mike Madrid S3 Ep20]

    Mike Madrid:

    Both parties are equally complicit and not fixing the problem because they're both vested in the problem continuing. Most people might be shocked by that, say, well I thought it was just Republicans doing that. No, absolutely not. The Democrats don't want this problem fixed either because this energizes their base. It's one of the crucial political tools that they have to run against Republicans on with the Latino electorate. And neither of them want this solved.

    Doug Jones:

    Totally, completely agree with that and… neither party wants to alienate a base. And it's not just the base of Latino voters, uh, Hispanic voters for Democrats. It is just the folks on the, a little bit farther left. You don't want to alienate those folks even though they may not personally benefit because they're not Hispanic. But I think you don't want to alienate 'em. So I, you know, look, you know, when I first got to the Senate in 2018, there was an effort. Donald Trump had said, why don't we just go ahead and not do full immigration reform? Let's do DACA and let's build, you know, do some border security. He actually said that, let's do those two pillars. And so there was a group of about 20 to 25 bipartisan senators that got together routinely in Susan Collins's office. And together we hashed out a plan to do just that. It was one that we had the votes for. And then once again, Donald Trump at the last minute says, no, no, no, no, no, I don't wanna do that. I wanna do this and I wanna do that. And he completely destroyed the effort and we lost about four votes in the Senate

    [Archival - Anchor Reports Donald Trump Won’t Support Moderate Immigration Bill]

    Anchor:

    President Trump saying he will not sign a moderate immigration bill, especially if it does not include that wall. These comments reportedly caught Republican leaders off guard as GOP lawmakers are working on voting next week on both a middle ground and a hard right immigration bill, both of those…

    Doug Jones:

    And Democrats I think have to be very, very careful on this issue. ‘Cause I think we're losing some Hispanic voters because of this issue. They don't want open borders per se. What they want is to be able to have an immigration system that works, that works for everybody, that works for our economy, that works for others. So we've gotta try to find, and somebody has gotta break this loose, but it is gonna take some real political courage, I think, to go against the tide of your own politics.

    Robert Pease (host):

    And so it's probably unrealistic to expect much movement with a divided Congress.

    Doug Jones:

    You know, again, I think it's, you shouldn't expect it. But you know, one thing I've learned about Congress on both sides of the aisle is to expect the unexpected. And somebody could step up. You've got the folks in the Freedom Caucus that'll fight anything like that. But at the same time, there is opportunities now in this divided Congress. That's what I think people are missing, is that when people look at a divided Congress, this close, the knee-jerk reaction, the, the fallback position is always, “Oh my God, nothing will ever get done.” But if they would, people in Congress as well as the public, would look at it in a different way and demand something a different way to say, “look guys, you are divided, but yet this country goes forward.” We've gotta have things going forward. We've gotta have, technology is not stopping, our budgets are not stopping, the world and our security is not put on hold just because you can't get your crap together. Sit down with each other, let's talk about this. Understand that you can't always get what you want, but if you try you will get what you need. Both parties can do that.

    Dylan Nicholls (cohost):

    So Senator, the red wave many expected from the midterms did not occur. That appears to be due in part to the rejection of some Trump endorsed candidates in key states who made election denialism a part of their campaign.

    [Archival, Anchor reports Oz’s loss to Fetterman]

    Anchor:

    Right now, ABC News is projecting the winner of the U.S. Senate Race in Pennsylvania as Lt. Gov. John Fetterman…

    [Archival, Anchor reports Bolduc’s loss to Hassan]

    Anchor:

    …Maggie Hassan holds on as the U.S. Senator there, massive ticket splitting in New Hampshire. Don Bolduc, a very extreme version of a Trump supporter on the Republican side failing there…

    [Archival, Anchor reports Laxalt’s loss to Cortez Masto]

    Anchor:

    …the Democrats will retain the majority with at least 50 seats as ABC News now projects Nevada Democratic incumbent Catherine Cortez-Masto will defeat the state's former Attorney General, Republican Adam Laxalt.

    Dylan Nicholls (cohost):

    Do you think voters sent a message about democracy this election and do you think these results will temper that extreme wing of the party that's anti-democratic going into 2024?

    Doug Jones:

    Well I damn sure think they sent a message, whether or not anybody's listening remains to be seen. I know Democrats have been listening. I think moderate Republicans are listening. Donald Trump clearly is not listening. But I think that there is still a very strong MAGA faction of the Republican Party, and how they fare right now is gonna depend, I think in part, in large part, on how other Republicans stand up and speak out.

    Robert Pease (host):

    Well, as a centrist trying to work across the aisle in your time in the Senate, did you ever feel that some of the rhetoric coming from the far left was hindering your cause? We've had a number of guests speak to that. And Thomas Edsall of The New York Times really even says, look, the Democrats are currently the rational party, and the rational party bears some responsibility for turning the temperature down.

    Doug Jones:

    Yes, I, I completely agree. I followed his writings, I follow his work and I completely agree with that. You know, I would cringe sometimes when I would hear things like defunding the police, when I would hear things about the Green New Deal, which is kind of a made up kind of thing with a whole bunch of aspirational things without any real goals and plans to get there, that I knew people were gonna push back on. Every time I heard the word Democratic Socialist, I would cringe ‘cause I knew how people react to that. And so, yes, I think it did hurt Democrats. I think that that's pretty clear now that it hurt. And then I'll give you one really the best example I think of, of how that rhetoric and how people wanting to check every box hurt. And that was after George Floyd's death, and there were calls for police reform, law enforcement reform, legitimate calls. We had seen too many black men killed at the hands of police. We saw too much systemic racism throughout a lot of law enforcement. And there were calls from a lot of things. I was a co-sponsor of the Booker-Harris Bill, of the George Floyd Act in the Senate. Tim Scott had another bill. There were pieces of both of those bills that could have been very effective in law enforcement reform, but they couldn't bring them together. And in late summer of 2020, uh, Mitch McConnell decided he would take a vote and try to put Tim Scott's bill on the floor. The civil rights groups and the far left went crazy. They decided, no, everybody needs to vote against it. Everybody needs to stop it from even coming to the floor to debate. And guess what, we still have no law enforcement reform bill. And so sometimes I think folks just get so set that they don't wanna move and they don't understand that something's better than nothing. And I, I, that's why I was so proud of people like Chris Murphy on the Democratic side and John Cornyn on the Republican side, to at least get some measure of some common sense gun safety measures on the floor and passed this time. It was not everything Democrats wanted. It was more than a lot of Republicans voted, wanted, but it made sense and that's what we need to have more of.

    Robert Pease (host):

    And it's also unfortunate that I believe it passed the day before the Supreme Court abortion rights decision, didn’t get a whole lot of press. I'm not sure a large number of Americans are aware that a group of Republicans crossed the NRA. It's, you know, it's an important precedent.

    Doug Jones:

    Yes, absolutely. No question about it.

    Robert Pease (host):

    Yeah, so our final bit of purple question for all guests Senator Jones, as a Democrat, if you could name a couple of Republicans that in your experience or in recent memory were willing to cross the aisle, were better able to solve problems and hold the country together.

    Doug Jones:

    Well, you know, look, I think if you go back a long ways, you can find a lot of that. I mean, look, think about this, the Voting Rights Act and the Civil Rights Act would've never passed had it not been for Everett Dirksen and a number of, uh, Republicans in the 1960s. You had southern Democrats all block voting against it. So over time, I think there's been a lot of that. In my time, you know, Lamar Alexander from Tennessee and Bob Corker from Tennessee were both, uh, senators who I worked with. Jeff Flake was someone, but they, you know, Bob and Jeff kind of got run out of the Republican Party by Donald Trump because they were outspoken against him. I think that there are still folks there, and obviously from the Republican side, Susan Collins, Mitt Romney, and Lisa Murkowski are the three that automatically come to mind. Hopefully there will be others that rise up.

    [Exit Doug Jones Interview]

    Robert Pease (host):

    We just heard a bit of purple from the former Democratic U.S. Senator, Doug Jones of Alabama, including mention of our next guest, the moderate GOP Senator Bob Corker. Again, Doug Jones remains hopeful there’s enough moderation within the GOP to forge some bipartisanship in the next Senate session despite a high degree of hot air expected from the House next door.

    Dylan Nicholls (cohost):

    And both senators do emphasize that the Senate is just very different from the House. Different elections, as in state wide rather than by district. And different rules, as in the filibuster and cloture..

    Robert Pease (host):

    Let’s hear more from Bob Corker about this unusual institution, the U.S. Senate, where a single senator has so much power to block action, yet a supermajority of 60 senators is generally needed for major legislation.

    Dylan Nicholls (cohost):

    Starting with the question: What is it like to arrive in the Senate as a centrist, therefore a possible swing vote, with pressure bearing down from both sides of the aisle?

    [Enter Bob Corker Interview]

    Bob Corker:

    I'd never really been a part of this, anything in the Senate. And, you know, I had to learn. I lived in a, I had a basement office as every new senator does. And, and I quickly realized that after about six weeks, that I could have 28 or nine meaningless meetings a day, or I could focus on the topics that mattered, that I felt mattered most to our country. And if you were willing to get in and roll up your sleeves and to make a proposed piece of legislation better and showed good intentions, and the willingness, as I mentioned, to try to seek an 80% win for yourself and the other side getting the same, it was really easy to make a difference in the minority, again because of the 60 vote threshold. That changed over time, by the way.

    Dylan Nicholls (cohost):

    Yeah. But it just requires that willingness to compromise, and speaking of that, during your time in the Senate, you were chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, an important role in Congress. Was there a bipartisan foreign policy bill or effort you're particularly proud of from that time, or really any bipartisan legislative achievement for that matter?

    Bob Corker:

    Yeah, you're fast forwarding to really my second term when I became the lead Republican in foreign relations, and then two years later, chairman, when we were in the majority. I'd like to talk some about the very beginning also, but we'll go back to that in just a moment. But yes, every piece of legislation while I was chairman, for it to be heard at all in our committee, it had to be bipartisan. We did not, I did not take up any bills that were partisan bills. Everybody on the committee knew that, uh, they knew the committee's, the committee's heritage had been that at our shore's edge partisanship stopped. And yes, there were some, in particular, I was particularly proud of the bill that we passed 98 to one on the Senate floor, a hundred percent in the committee itself, where we forced the Obama administration to bring the elements of the Iran Nuclear Deal to the Senate–

    [Archival, Anchor reports Iran Nuclear Deal Review Bill passage]

    Anchor:

    In a rare, near unanimous and bipartisan vote, the senate declared it would have its say in ongoing nuclear talks with Iran. The Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act passed 98 to one. It would give Congress up to 52 days to review any proposed nuclear agreement with Iran. During that time, the President could not reduce imposed sanctions.

    Bob Corker:

    –we couldn't force 'em to make it a treaty. We couldn't force 'em to make it a legislative agreement, but we could force them to have to bring it to us, let us understand all the codicils, everything that went with it. Another piece was when President Trump was in power, and we passed a, a bill sanctioning Russia, sanctioning Iran, sanctioning North Korea. It passed overwhelmingly. Again, in that case, you had Republicans who were pushing back against the administration. But again, it was because both of these bills began as bipartisan pieces of legislation.

    Dylan Nicholls (cohost):

    Yeah. And you had mentioned there were some, also some bipartisan achievements that stood out to you from your time before chairman, your early senate career.

    Bob Corker:

    Yeah, I think, you know, my first, I told you that when I first came to the Senate it was, uh, just a, a myriad of meetings that seemed very meaningless. And I began to dig into the issues that I felt were important. One night, I got a call at 10 o'clock at night to show up the next morning, uh, with two other Republican senators and three Democratic senators to meet with Hank Paulson and Ben Bernanke when the financial crisis hit. I'd only been in the Senate for about a year and a half. I'd only been on the banking committee, which had jurisdiction for, uh, probably six months or so. And we were able to shape something that no Democrat, no Republican wanted to support. Democrats did not want to bail out banks, Republicans wanted nothing to do with interfering, interfering in the free enterprise system. And yet on the Senate floor, and I don't want to take credit for the bill itself, but helping shape it, it was done by more senior people, on the Senate floor 72 people voted for a piece of legislation called TARP. None of whom, nobody wanted to be in that position, but did so to save our country from a financial crisis at a point in time when we were concerned that money wasn't gonna be coming out of ATMs on a Friday.

    Dylan Nicholls (cohost):

    Yeah. One of those moments that certainly transcends party politics. On that topic, in 2017, you weren't afraid to be a vocal critic of former President Trump's approach to foreign policy where you felt it was necessary. You were quoted in an interview saying he would have to concern anyone who cares about our nation, and that, every single day at the White House, it's a situation of trying to contain him.

    [Archival - Corker speaking candidly to reporter about Trump concerns]

    Bob Corker:

    …the shame of it is there are some really good people around him. And, uh, if he would stay out of their way and let them perform, people like Tillerson, and Mattis, and others, um, you know, we could really make progress on things that matter greatly to our country…

    Dylan Nicholls (cohost):

    Many Republicans were hesitant to criticize the party leader at the time. What prompted you to speak out and why did these issues transcend party for you?

    Bob Corker:

    Well, I ran for the Senate because I cared about our country, and I agreed to serve only two terms. And so, Dylan, the whole time I was in the Senate, I felt like a total free agent, an independent, uh, I didn't honestly think I would run for a second term four years into my first term. But I did become concerned, and I voiced those, and I was concerned about numbers of foreign policy issues. One was the tariffs that we were willy nilly putting on allies of ours under a national security, uh, component of the 1974 Trade Act, which obviously was not relevant to what was happening. So yes, I raised numbers of concerns. I did so, I worked with three presidents, and in all three cases when I felt that something was counter to our national interest, I would express it. And express support for those things that I thought were in our national interest.

    Dylan Nicholls (cohost):

    Right and, going forward to today, how do you hold the center on an, a crucial issue like funding for Ukraine? Uh, there seem to be outer wings of both parties suggesting funding might be in question in the future. Why is that so important and, uh, how can you hold the center there?

    Bob Corker:

    Yeah, so, you know, it's, let me go back to a point that you brought up earlier. There are less people in the Senate that are willing to, you know, reach across the aisle, right? Every time you do something that is counter to a hundred percent your party, you understand, you burn political capital. And of course, that to me is the point of accumulating political capital. So you can make a difference at those times when it makes most difference. Yes, there are people on both sides of the aisle that seem to be resistant to us continuing to support Ukraine. My sense is that our support for Ukraine will continue, even though there are those voices. And I think it, you know, it's appropriate obviously to question where the funds are going to make sure that they're going to the right places. But it's also to me, very important that we continue to support Ukraine in their effort. It says a lot about the West, says a lot about democracy, and it's just who we as a country are, and we should be supporting their efforts, especially because one of the reasons that they're in the situation they're in is they have been moving our direction, haven't they? They've been moving towards the West. We've encouraged them to do so, and at this moment in time, we need to be supporting that effort.

    Robert Pease (host):

    Yeah. Well, let's talk about an issue that has probably been gridlocked in part because of the filibuster, but also maybe because both parties kind of like having the issue for their bases, and that's immigration.

    Bob Corker:

    You're right, both sides play politics with it. It's a shame. It hurts our country. In 2013, we did pass off the Senate floor with 68 votes full blown immigration reform. And I offered an amendment with Senator Hoeven, Corker-Hoeven Amendment, Hoeven-Corker amendment, whatever you want to call it, that put in stringent security measures, border security measures, and internal security measures. I have to tell you, it was one of the most meaningful votes that I cast. It really, I walked off the Senate floor somewhat emotional because I felt like we had finally dealt with an issue that was dividing our country and affected so many people in our country that are here, that work every day, that are part of building this great country. I enjoyed that debate as much as any debate I've ever been involved in. I was so proud to have offered the amendment that brought Republicans onto the bill and got us 68 votes in the Senate, and very disappointed the House did not take it up at that time.

    Robert Pease (host):

    Yeah. Well, let's talk about factionalism in the Senate versus the House. It's so clear in the House, these factions, you know, elect their leaders and these caucuses, and you know exactly how many members they have. It seems so less clear in the, in the Senate. Are there clear factions in the Senate?

    Bob Corker:

    Well, it's not like the House is where you actually formally set up a, you know, group of people who join hands and, you know, generally speaking, stand together on particular issues. But no, it exists. I mean, the, I'll speak to, uh, uh, you know, I, I used, there's a senator that I enjoyed working with a great deal on my side of the aisle. I won't mention his name. But we used to talk all the time about the fact that the Republican Party is, at least the Republican Senate anyway, is at least three, three different parties that in many cases, depending on the issue, can be very different. The Democrat side, at least three, maybe four different groups of people. And, uh, of course, now on my side of the aisle, you have this whole thing of populism versus conservatism, which are two very, very different, uh, schools of thought, if you will.

    Robert Pease (host):

    Yes. Well, I, I would imagine that Trump's candidacy is a polarizing issue within the Republican side of the aisle in the Senate. We know there's not a great amount of affection between Mitch McConnell, former President Trump. We know there were seven Republicans who voted for conviction. Are there actually things that a sitting senator can do with regard to the primary to try and help a more moderate candidate or try and, uh, you know, promote a return to more traditional Republican values?

    Bob Corker:

    Sure, I mean, I think a big part of that is how do you conduct yourself? You know, one of the things that I, I was, so I left the Senate after two terms. As people knew I was, you know, getting ready to announce that that was the case, they would say to me, “well, Corker, you…” you know, you had a lot of, you had people who wanted you to stay, you know, your staff, the foreign policy world, the leadership, folks back home, obviously there are folks back home that I'm sure were glad I was leaving. But, you know, people started saying, well, we're gonna miss your voice. And it was almost offensive to me. I'd always been a, you know, a producer. I built companies, I built shopping centers, I built buildings, and to be looked to as a voice was almost offensive to me. And so, when I left the Senate, I realized when I was out here in Chattanooga, Tennessee, where I am today, I realized what they were saying. And so, yes, senators’ voices really affect things more so than I would've ever thought. They give voice to other people, don't they? They, they allow people to identify with that. So yes, senators can affect the outcomes and primaries, or what their party’s focused on, and their voice does matter in that. At the end of the day though, it's gonna be the candidates themselves, right? The ones that actually step into the arena, make the step to expose themselves to running for president. And it appears to me that that is already happening, isn't it? And there's gonna be an open– more than open debate, in some cases, divisive debate on the Republican side about this very issue. And I welcome that.

    [Exit Bob Corker Interview]

    Robert Pease (host):

    Something like optimism or expectation there from Bob Corker about the decline in Trump directed loyalty within the GOP, and therefore more open debate going forward in the next Senate and leading into the 2024 Republican presidential primaries.

    Dylan Nicholls (cohost):

    And we also heard from former Alabama Senator Doug Jones, whose surprise election over the populist GOP Judge Roy Moore in 2017 foreshadowed many election results we’ve just seen in 2022, with Democrats like Fetterman in Pennsylvania, Hassan in New Hampshire, and Cortez Masto in Nevada defeating Trump backed opponents whose qualifications were questioned by the establishment wing of their own party.

    Robert Pease (host):

    That’s our indie-minded look at the U.S. Senate. Which did surprise a lot of people with several bipartisan success stories this past term, such as infrastructure and the respect for marriage act. But the U.S. House is distinctly different with three quarters of its Representatives hailing from very safe blue or very safe red seats. And where the primary concern is often not legislation, but the upcoming primary against more extreme candidates in their own party. And that’s true for Democrats and Republicans.

    Dylan Nicholls (cohost):

    Yeah, the next House is also very closely divided with only a slight GOP advantage. With the Senate under Democratic control, that means both the White House and Congressional Democrats will be courting a handful of moderate GOP votes to cross the aisle on important issues such as funding for Ukraine, gun violence, climate change, possibly even immigration reform.

    Robert Pease (host):

    We’ll be talking with a former moderate GOP House member who’s been in that pivotal voting position and previously guested here on the Purple Principle: Will Hurd from Texas. We hope you’ll join us for that episode and find us on Mastodon, where some of the more serious and hopefully civil political discourse seems headed these days. Thanks for listening from the whole team here at Fluent Knowledge, which produces both The Purple Principle and My Body Odyssey podcasts. Original music by Ryan Adair Rooney.

Guest User
Previous

Election Lessons Unheeded? A Cautionary View of the New U.S. House
Next

Repodcast: Deflating Political Football with Tania Israel