Carnegie
Corporation
of New York
Summer 2007
Nonpartisanship and Friendship
A carefully calculated nonpartisan appeal to Democrats and Republicans, liberals and conservatives is the Aspen Institute Congressional Program’s greatest asset. Deliberately designed as a bonding experience to break down partisan barriers, this atmosphere is fostered by unconstrained discussion that does not aim toward a specific outcome other than to advance discussion of the issues. “There’s no agenda there other than to pull experts and policymakers into one room in a sustained interaction,” observes Carnegie Corporation’s Deana Arsenian, who is program director of the Russian Higher Education and Eurasia Program and vice president for International Program Coordination.
Largely as a result of its neutrality, the Aspen Institute Congressional Program provides a “way to look for common ground,” says Rep. Henry Waxman. “The discussion flows in a way that allows give and take, more thoughtful presentation and an opportunity for people to hear different views and think about them as opposed to a talking-point situation…where no one’s listening.” Abandoning partisanship during the discussions is strongly emphasized in Clark’s opening charge to members of Congress. We are not here to proclaim which party is right or wrong—you all are bombarded with that daily,” Clark tells the legislators.
“We strive here for civility—even when we disagree,” he adds. This doesn’t mean the Congressional Program is an ideological utopia totally free of politically tinged discussion. Partisanship can still surface at times. Clark himself acknowledges that his strenuous attempt to keep the discussion collegial “doesn’t always work… Somebody is bound to say, ‘Well, Dick is not going to like me saying this, but I think the President….’” Controversial topics may change, but they don’t disappear. In 2007, “the Iraq war is one issue that may need especially sensitive handling to prevent political disputes, even during meals,” acknowledges Deana Arsenian. “Iraq has raised some partisanship at the dinner table.”
“Occasionally there are rigorous differences of opinion that do not break along partisan lines,” points out Daniel Fallon, program director for Higher Education. “That is especially true of hot-button issues in education, such as some of the provisions of the No Child Left Behind act.”
Another way the Congressional Program bonds lawmakers of all persuasions is by holding programs in overseas locations that may provide an extra opportunity for learning together and forming friendships. For the Russia Program in particular, the sites may be steeped in European history, from ancient wonders to modern horrors. During the summer 2006 U.S.-Russia meeting in Krakow, Poland, for example, participants were taken to the site of the Auschwitz Nazi concentration camp — an emotional experience that was seared in their collective memory.
”You can’t go to Auschwitz without being affected by it,” declares Republican Senator Robert Bennett. The visit is especially relevant today, he says, with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and others disputing “all of this history.” After the visit, “I understand in ways I had never before, just how serious all of this is,” Bennett stresses. Although it was a supplementary activity, the Auschwitz visit had serious policy implications. Describing the rebirth of anti-Semitism in Europe as “very scary” in light of Holocaust history, Bennett notes “we have to deal with it” in making decisions on U.S. aid and policy. As he explains, back in Washington, when related issues arise, you can look over at your colleague in a way that says “we understand; we’ve seen that.”
The informal atmosphere of the Aspen Institute Congressional Program fosters relationships among members of Congress that outweigh political differences, Bennett believes. “I’ve developed friendships with people, quite frankly, many constituents are startled to find I even talk to,” he says. Republican Bennett struck up an unlikely friendship with Democratic Representative George Miller of California, even though he’s “about as far from where I am on environmental issues as anybody can get. He had the reputation of being a very hard-nosed liberal.” But when he sat down with Miller “in the atmosphere of the whole experience,” Bennett found out “much to my surprise, he’s quite reasonable.” Similarly, Miller says by talking informally with a political adversary he could “discover that the national interest is not really solely the province” of either party. Such bipartisan friendships can be very helpful in the legislative wrangling needed for success on Capitol Hill. In a House-Senate conference committee meeting to work out legislation, “I’m sure the experience at Aspen Institute would help in overcoming differences,” Bennett says.