The Dispatch Podcast - Cheri Bustos Reflects on Her Service

Episode Date: April 6, 2022

Rep. Cheri Bustos is leaving Congress at the end of this term. What has she learned from her five terms in the House and—as the former leader of the House Democrats’ campaign arm—from the 2020 election? How can Democrats improve their prospects in the 2022 midterms? Sarah gets these answers and more in a candid conversation with the Illinois congresswoman.   Show Notes: -Hope from the Heartland: How Democrats Can Better Serve the Midwest by Bringing Rural, Working Class Wisdom to Washington -How Dems Win in Trump Districts -The Sweep: “Tsunami or Ripple? What a Midterm Wave Might Look Like.” Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

When you're with Amex Platinum, you get access to exclusive dining experiences and an annual travel credit. So the best tapas in town might be in a new town altogether. That's the powerful backing of Amex. Terms and conditions apply. Learn more at Amex.ca. www.ca.com. Did you lock the front door?

Check. Close the garage door? Yep. Installed window sensors, smoke sensors, and HD cameras with night vision? No. And you set up credit card transaction alerts at secure VPN for a private connection and continuous monitoring for our personal info on the dark web.

Uh, I'm looking into it. Stress less about security. Choose security solutions from TELUS for peace of mind at home and online. Visit TELUS.com. Total Security to learn more. Conditions apply. Welcome to the dispatch podcast. I'm your host, Sarah Isgar.

And today we are talking to Congresswoman Sherry Bustos of the Illinois 17th congressional district. Congresswoman Bustos, known for being the head of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee in 2020, also retiring from Congress after this year. She will have spent 10 years in the House of Representatives, a Democratic congresswoman with lots to talk about living in a Trump-one congressional district, what that means for our politics and how to fix Congress. But let's start with 2020. You were the head of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, the D-Triple-C. And Democrats were running on an anti-Trump message.

It looked like it was going to go very well, especially when you look back at what happened in 2018. Democrats picked up a lot of seats. Not only that, they elected a lot of new women to Congress. Republicans, in fact, only elected one. woman to Congress in 2018. And then 2020, it's a fascinating election. Joe Biden wins handily at the top of the ticket. But then down ballot, Republicans do quite well. Now, in the Republican side of things, the conversation's all about, you know, clearly the top of the ticket was the problem, not the election rules, for instance, as is commonly discussed now in Republican circles.

But on the Democratic side, I'm curious what the diagnosis has been of why 2020. was such an odd election. Well, Sarah, I appreciate your characterization that it was an odd election, and I would agree with that. I actually was talking with a reporter a couple weeks ago, and he starts out the conversation saying,

what went wrong in 2020? And I said, do you mean that we held the house? And it was an odd election. We had a combination of COVID going on, which we were very, very, very responsible to the point where we were taking the lead from the Biden campaign, which was saying, we can't go door to door. We can't do rallies. We can't do the in-person stuff that is so integral to campaigning. And we couldn't, as the campaign arm of House Democrats,

vary from what was going on in the Biden campaign. So, no, that's really, really hard when you've got Republicans on the other side, knocking doors, having rallies, getting people together, getting people fired up, and we weren't doing that. So that was number one. The other thing is, and I know this from a personal perspective, people, how they vote at the top of the ballot, can vary from how they vote down ballot.

And that is frankly what we saw. I mean, I'm a Democrat in a Trump district. And I, in fact, Sarah, just for perspective, there's only three of us left in the whole U.S. House of Representatives who won in 2016, Democrats who won in 2016 and won in 2020 in Trump District. So, you know, that is a rarity. So when I was running for the position and the only people whose vote you need to become the chair of the political arm of House Democrats are your colleagues, the House Democrats. And when I was running for it, my pitch to them was, we have a very fragile majority. You know, the vast majority of people who won in 2018 won by five points or fewer. And, you know, so you knew that it was a very fragile majority and was going to be tough to hang on to. So my pitch to them is my job is to hang on to this majority. And yeah, believe me, believe me, on election night when these returns were coming in,

I wish more than anything else that we would have picked up more seats and not lost some really, really wonderful members of Congress in the process. But the reality is we raised a third of a billion dollars. We diversified our ranks among our staff and our vendors more than we ever had in the history of the political arm of House Democrats, which is very important to, as Democrats, it's very important. and we hung on to this fragile majority. So, you know, in that sense, we did the job that we set out to do,

wish we were able to pick up seats. I hope listeners will indulge me for a second, because as a former campaign operative, I have to get into the weeds with you a little bit because you're going to know this stuff so well, and you mentioned it. You know, first of all, on the money thing, we now know there's diminishing returns

at some point in some races, particularly top of the ticket with high name ID. At some point, the money just doesn't do as much, you've raised a sufficient amount, and then there's other factors that go into that. And also, as you said, like door knocking and things like that that the Biden campaign wasn't doing, and a presidential campaign, it doesn't look like that made nearly the difference that it does for candidates who aren't well known, don't have the name ID, don't have sort of that familiarity of being on TV, for instance, with their constituents every day. I'm wondering if 2020,

in your view, was a way to really distinguish campaign tactics, um, from top of the ticket and congressional races. Yeah, it's a whole different ballgame when you're running, let's say for state legislature, for Congress, for president. It is the, they are all very different races. And a couple lessons that I learned personally. I was way up in the polls in my own race. I was up by 20 points.

I'll just, you know what? I have not talked with anybody externally about. this. I was up by 20 points in my own race. So as my opponent was beating me up saying, you know, the typical, frankly, the typical Republican talking points about I was for defunding police. That was one of her big hits. Keep in mind that I'm married to the sheriff of Rock Island County, Illinois. And we've been married for more than 35 years. I was going to say, did he endorse your campaign? I mean, until we... He did, but funny thing was the Fraternal Order of Police did not,

which is a whole other story that we can get into at some point if you'd like. But, you know, so do I believe in supporting police? You bet. I like to say I love police officers, literally. So I did not take her attacks seriously. Because every time that came up, I'm like, Does she even know I'm married to the sheriff of our county? Because she had just moved into our congressional district within weeks

decided she was going to run for Congress. She had no roots in our district. She knew nothing about agriculture in a district where we have the world headquarters for John Deere, where we have 9,600 family farms, where I'm the granddaughter of a hog farmer, the niece of dairy farmers, the cousin of Angus farmers. We all grow corn and beans. you know so i i literally like yeah i'm up 20 points and it's because i've delivered for this district and i fit this district i am this district yet okay so back to your question couldn't go

door to door couldn't talk to people um you know that i wasn't going to spend a ton on on paid media frankly uh so i could pay more to my you know people running my colleagues and and other people who needed the money more. So the next poll comes in, I'm down to 11, all right? And I'm like going, okay, something's not right here. And then another poll comes in and I'm down by, I'm only up by four. So it goes from 20 to 11 to 4, you know, and okay, so as someone who understands campaigns, you know, there was a little bit of freaking out going on. So I began to punch back. So I am getting to the point here. You know, look, you can't sit there and get beat up and not respond.

You know, you just can't. Even if you think the attacks are absurd, you can't just sit there and not punch back. I'm a former college athlete, and I am very, very competitive to my core. And I also believe in offense and defense. And so the moral of the story, here is, you know, don't just sit there and take a punch, but you got a counterpunch. And actually, frankly, you're better off punching first. And so I, so that's one of the lessons. But I wrote a report after the 2016 election called Hope from the Heartland, which was about Democrats winning in Trump

districts. And then I did an updated newer report out of the 2020 cycle called How to Win. And it's talking to Democrats all over the Midwest who won in Trump districts. That's one of the, of the lessons. But I would encourage your listeners, anybody, whether you're a Democrat, Republican, or independent, if you want to understand how you win tough elections, both of those reports, there's some pretty good lessons in there. Well, we'll put that in the show notes, that way people can go find it easily. But it's a great transition to 2022, which I want to talk about as well. You know, look, you look at the traditional markers for how we think about a midterm election, the president's approval ratings, the economy, gas prices, whatever you want to look at.

It's not great for Democrats. Everyone predicting sort of this Republican wave in the House. But at the same time, there's some ingredients that you need for a wave wave. Mainly, you need Democrats who are in districts they don't belong in, quote unquote, pro-life Democrats, for instance. There's only two of those left in the House. You mentioned Democrats who are still in Trump districts, exceedingly rare at this point. The other ingredient would be sort of traditional swing districts where they are only two or three points either way for any election because of gerrymandering, those are becoming increasingly rare, gerrymandering on both sides, by the way. They've perfected it so much that incumbents have even more protection than usual.

Cook Political Report says now that the largest wave that is really feasible for Republicans is a 15 to 25-point seat swing. That's nothing compared to the 60 seat changes we were seeing just 10, 15 years ago. And certainly, you know, 30, 40 years ago. how give us a preview of what you think Democrats need to do to to is it possible for Democrats to maintain the majority in your view and if not to at least curb the losses to the lower side of that wave which wouldn't be that hard then in 2024 to overcome well look history is not on our side on the side of the Democrats for this election cycle so you've got to know that going into it so what do we need to do

Let's go back to 2018 when Democrats picked up so many seats. What did we do right? I was actually co-chair of the Democratic Policy and Communications Committee, along with Hakeem Jeffries, my colleague out of New York, and David Sisalini, my colleague out of Rhode Island. And we knew that you can't keep talking about Trump. You know, this was the midterm, so Donald Trump had been in office for two years. Everybody in America, for that matter, virtually everybody in the world knew what Donald Trump was.

So there was nothing we needed to do to sound bitter or angry or be hyper-focused on Donald Trump, but we had to focus on what people cared about, what they were worried about, what they were talking with their family about. And we narrowed that down to three things. It was the cost of health care, really specifically prescription drug prices. You know, you'd leave the doctor office, all these stories, you'd leave the doctor's office with a prescription. And you know what? You couldn't even go down to the block to that corner Walgreens because you couldn't

afford to fill that prescription. So we said we're going to bring down the cost of prescription drugs. Number two, everybody was talking about just the bad shape that our roads are in, our bridges are in that horrible traffic if you live in a bigger town. Mass transit, that's in bad town if you live in a bigger town. If you live in a rural area, how you'd have to drive so much farther to take your grain to market because that bridge was out. And even getting your kids to school, how you'd have to take a longer route because of, you know, this road being closed off because it was in such bad shape. You know, just all these stories. So we said, and we still had an

an unemployment issue where we needed to create jobs. So we said, we're going to rebuild America by, and increase, and make jobs, create jobs as a result of that. So one, prescription drug prices, bringing down the cost of health care. Number two, rebuilding our country and in the process creating jobs. And number three, everybody knew that Washington was a mess. Dysfunctional, two, there was still corruption, things that would come out, and that we were going to clean up Washington so it was.

worked again. We focused like a jackhammer on those three things. And the good thing, Sarah, is that we talked about that relentlessly among our colleagues in the House. So we knew don't be talking about Donald Trump. Don't be getting off topic. Those are the three things we're talking about. And then when people said, well, what are Democrats even for? What do you even stand for? that was where we said we stand for the people, period. Because there was a view that that was really a differentiator between what we were standing up for and what Donald Trump was standing up for and the White House.

We were for the people and those three things. So what I think what we do is you fast forward, you take that 2018 model, and you use that instead of focusing on, frankly, things that people don't care about. Right now what they care about? gas prices. They care about inflation. They do care about making sure that they can have health care for their families, that their families are healthy. But it's really right now. It's inflation and it is gas prices. But I'm curious if you think that voters, you know, there's a big debate going on

in the Republican caucus about whether to release a positive agenda or simply complain about what's going on, voters seem to respond really well to complaining. They recognize that. They're like, yes, I also don't like that thing. But having to now run on the accomplishments of a Democratic House, Senate, and presidency, that seems like a harder sell. Well, you know, the irony of all of this, though, is we are creating President Biden under his leadership. We're creating more jobs than we have in history. You know, we are, we are, we are, averaging, we are creating more than 400,000 jobs every month for the last year and a half, every one of those, more than 400,000 jobs every month. Under President Trump, we lost jobs

and we are creating them again. Yeah, look, all true. Yeah, yeah, I mean, it's all true, but the problem is people see COVID happening, and so they don't blame President Trump for that. And they see Biden, I think they see him doing his best. But this is maybe a larger point than even Biden or Trump. It's that voters respond to what they don't like more than they respond to what they are liking. It's sort of the what have you done for me lately problem. And I don't think it's just a problem for Democrats. It's a problem for whoever's in power. But it creates, I think, disincentives in Congress. And you're retiring. So you're not actually up for election this time. You're leaving Congress. I assume there's all sorts of

reasons why one might want to retire from Congress. But I wanted to talk a little bit about those incentives or lack of incentives. It used to be the case that you would go home and need to tout your legislative accomplishments. And it seems like now the more productive thing to do if you're a candidate, and again, either side is instead to say what you don't like, what's going wrong, how Congress is broken. And so the legislative accomplishments aren't a priority. And I'm particularly interested to talk to you about this because you are one of the few people who is willing to go out there and say the getting rid of earmarks is partially what broke Congress, what prevents Congress from legislating still. So I'm curious if you'll talk a little bit about your retirement, what

frustrated you about Congress, and what could be done to fix it, maybe not the sexy stuff that goes on, you know, billboards. But the real stuff as a soon-to-be former member that could actually make Congress legislate again? Yeah, wow, a lot jammed into that question. So first all, I refuse to use the word retirement. I figure I'm too young and too healthy and too energetic and too excited about my next chapter to use that word. So I'm just saying I'm not running for re-election. I announced that actually was a year ago this month. So very early on in the process. So let me start there. Why am I not running for re-election? I have loved my job. I'm in my fifth term. it will be a decade by the time I am done on January 3rd of 2023.

I feel, maybe the word blessed is overused, but I really do feel blessed to have had this job and that the people in a district like the one I've represented have put their faith in me. So January 6th, let's bring that into this. That was a turning point for a lot of members, but it was a last draw for my family. I told you I'm married to the sheriff of our country,

County. We have three grown sons. And they were more worried about me than I was worried about me on that day. I was on the house floor. And we had a family get together at Easter. And all of my, all three of my sons, my husband, two of my three daughters-in-law all said, don't, don't do this again. It's not, my husband said it's not going to get better out there. So, you know, when your family's kind of had it with what you're doing for a living, that was a major part of my decision. So, so you've got that. We are, I literally entered Congress after being elected in 2012,

so going on 10 years ago, saying that I was going to do everything I could to be as bipartisan as I could. In fact, you can look back at my track record in seven out of every 10 bills I've ever introduced are bipartisan on day one. So that's been important to me. I just passed a bill where I was lucky enough to go to the White House to watch President Biden sign it, where I got 100, and we got 113 Republicans to vote for a bill in the U.S. House of Representatives in 2022.

Doesn't happen very often. You know, it takes a lot of work. So, but this, we literally now have Democrats who have the names of the Republicans who didn't vote to certify the election results on January 6th, have their names on their desk saying they will never, ever work with them. Okay, that's a little bit of a problem, right? Because the vast majority of Republicans voted not to certify the results of the election. It's a terrible vote, my opinion. I think it's an unpatriotic vote. It's an anti-democratic vote, meaning against democracy. Terrible, terrible vote.

and I really cannot believe that anybody voted that way, but the reality is they did, and we've got to figure out how we're going to move forward and get legislation passed. So here's what, if we're going to look at a fix, I think there's a couple things that we have to look at. First of all, I'm really, really glad that what we call community project funding,

that's what we call it now, came back. Not earmarks, not pork barrel spending, bridge to nowhere stuff. I mean, look, this is the stuff that people used to call it, you know, when Republicans took control of the House in the 90s and really vilified earmark spending as wasteful. But I think what people didn't realize, including myself at the time, is that all that meant the money's still getting spent, it's just that now bureaucrats, and I don't mean that term in the pejorative sense, but meaning not elected, not accountable officials in the administrative agencies decide where the money goes, instead of people who have

to go back to their constituents and justify it and who know from their constituents what they want to prioritize in their own communities. You know, there's a whole different way to pitch. What are you calling it? Community projects. Community project funding. That's the official name of them now. But here's the difference. Here's the difference between what we're doing now with that and what happened, you know, 10 plus years ago. Everything has to be posted online. Everything that I asked for or any member of Congress asked for in the community project funding, had to be listed online. We had to have a certified form filled out that said no one in our family would benefit

in any way from any of the funding that we were bringing home. So all of that was public and is public. And I think that's really important, this total and complete transparency. I was really, really proud to be the number one Democrat in the U.S. House of representatives in the amount of money that I got for my congressional district. You know, I can tell you this, whoever's in the White House, they're not going to know that the Harrison School in Peoria, Illinois, in the zip code of 61605 needed to be torn down because it's an eyesore. It's getting in the way of progress. It is a, it's a horrible part of a zip

code that has so much potential, but we've got to invest in it. They don't know that that needed to happen. I knew it needed to happen. The mayor of Peoria told me that it was a high priority. So we got a million dollars to tear down this old school so we can help make progress in a zip code that's been distressed. So one very minor example, but I am very proud of the fact that we got $55 million back for our home district. And I do think that's part of the fix as we move forward, you know, that hey Democrats, hey Republicans, we're going to let you make decisions. The other things, I think that we need to have independent commissions in every state in the nation on redistricting. And I'm in a state where the Democrats are in the governor's mansion

and in the lead the Senate and lead the house. We need that in every state, in my opinion. And then number two, we need to know where every cent in campaign finance is coming from. get rid of the secret money that's out there, every cent of it, and really take a look at campaign finance and how that can work in a way that is pro-democracy. I think it's terrible that you've got the secret money. So I think those are the fixes. And frankly, we need leadership in the Senate,

in the House, on the Democratic side, and on the Republican side. that has a commitment to working together and stop the finger pointing and stop the, you know, the gotchas and stop the, you know, well, you did this to us, so we're going to do this to you. Look, I think a new generation is, we're on the cusp of a new generation coming in to leadership positions and into Congress. And I literally, if I were staying in Congress, I would not commit to supporting anybody unless

say we're committed to trying to help us figure out how we're going to work together in a way that is for our country as opposed to for anyone's party. You know, it's interesting. You mentioned the Illinois redistricting issue. And again, it goes to this larger thing that both sides are doing. I mentioned pro-life Democrats being not just endangered. I mean, they're critically endangered species. But, you know, Democrats say they want Republicans who voted to certify the election, voted to impeach Donald Trump, all those things. Adam Kinzinger did all of those things. And what happened in the Illinois redistricting? They got rid of his district. So now Adam Kinzinger won't be in Congress anymore, this Republican who they

hold up as the person who they think all Republicans should be like. How do we get past that when there's political motives to target those people? And again, on both sides, Republicans targeting pro-life Democrats who share their values on these issues, but it makes them vulnerable to beat them and put in a Republican, and on the Republican side, take out folks like Adam Kinsinger? Well, look, I think the toughest place to be is to be a moderate, I guess, is one of the labels that's out there.

But I call it being reasonable. I call it embracing compromise. And I mean this. People who think that you can't compromise that if you don't get everything in this business, bill, you're not going to vote for it, or you're going to bring it down in the rules process. I really just have no use for that kind of mentality. It's hopefully where the community project funding will come in handy because, yeah, you may

want to vote against it, but if you're getting a million bucks to tear down that school, maybe I can tempt you into voting for it. Yeah, exactly, exactly. I think that's a big part of how we're going to move forward. And, you know, look, the name Rosa DeLauro might not be a household name for your listeners, Sarah, but she is the chair of the Appropriations Committee. She's out of the state of Connecticut. And I just follow her, your listeners, follow her because she's the one who came up with all these transparent rules

for these community project funding projects. And that was a little redundant. Because I'm trying not to use the E word. But, you know, if we do things right in the way Rosa DeLoro, Congresswoman DeLoro, came up with the parameters around how we can get funding for these local projects, that's the right way to do things. And it is a way I hope that will lead to bipartisanship. But frankly, back to your question, if you are one of those reasonable people in politics,

you're always getting threatened to be primaried. I have been threatened every single election that I'm going to primary you because you are not on X. You're not on this far left bill. You know, let me give you another example. The people who have protested outside my office have been people who are Democrats, to which my reaction is, why don't you just cross the Mississippi River and go over there where you've got a Republican member in the house, and you can protest outside of her office. It's like, it's beyond me that the dem-on-dem hate crime is something that should go away.

And if we want to call ourselves, and this has become so cliche, that if we want to call ourselves the Big Tent Party, then you've got to welcome people who are from rural America. I am from the rural Midwest, and I'm in a Trump district. my politics are probably going to be a little bit different than if you are from the heart of L.A. or San Francisco or New York City, my politics are probably going to be different. And it's not just because of the district I'm in. It's because of who I am, how I've been raised, what my beliefs are and in the end, my goal every single day is to get results. I think it's all about what in the end

are you going to get done? And to say I've been the number one Democrat bringing home funding through this community project process, I'm very, very proud of that, very proud of that. And, you know, I wish for the last nine years we had had that. And I could say, you know, number one in the history

of, you know, Congress or something along those lines. Because I think that's about getting results. That's about understanding what people at home want you to get done. And to me, that's what it's all about. It's an interesting problem that affects the two parties a little bit unevenly that I want to talk about as well. Because if you are, let's just call them moderates, I hate that term too, because it implies that you don't feel strongly about issues when in fact you feel very strongly about getting some things done. Maybe just not talking about them and complaining about them.

But we're going to use the term moderate, because there it is. Um, moderates also have a higher churn rate, not just because they're likely to lose in a primary or even likely to lose in a general, but because it's also exhausting to run competitive races every two years in a primary and a general. And so they're more likely to retire as well, um, you being an example of this perhaps, but there's plenty more to pick from. Will Hurd, um, in Texas is a good friend of mine. And, uh, he retired obviously from a district that was just pinging back and forth, right? It was a two, three-point district in Texas 23. The problem that I see that's uneven is electing women and people of color. And I'm just going to use women, because we have, I think, a little more data on this. Women tend to be more liberal than their male counterparts, regardless of party. And so when you're looking at like state rep votes, that's what that data is based on, primaries in both parties are more likely to be won by the more extreme candidate, again, just

in general, not in any specific district. So that means that for women on the Democratic side, they are more likely to win a primary. But for women on the Republican side, they're less likely to win a primary. And in fact, when you look at the main problem of electing Republican women, it's getting them out of their primaries. The other problem is, even if we do elect Republican women, they're more likely to retire because they're getting elected in those swingier, more moderate districts. And so you end up with this very lopsided caucus that I'm sure you've experienced as a female Democrat in the House. There's a lot more women who are Democrats than women who are Republicans. The women who are Democrats tend to be on the left side of the caucus a little bit as well.

And it creates this stereotype that then that women are more liberal, than men, regardless of the specific voting record of a woman running. Do you have advice for your Republican colleagues, for the Elise Stephanics out there that are trying to prioritize electing more women? You're in a district that could get won by a Republican or a Democrat next time. What are we supposed to do about this lopsidedness? Well, I'm not going to offer advice to my Republican colleagues on this. But, you know, when you bring up the name Elise Daphonic, you know, I, boy, talk about somebody who is a, you know, just really changed politically. Elise Daphonic was always the woman.

It was Elise Daphonic in Susan Brooks, who, Susan Brooks out of Indiana, who, by the way, did retire, did not run for re-election in a moderate district. But those were the two women. We, as women, on the Democratic side, we'd always go to them because it's like they're nice people, they're good to work with, they're reasonable. And that's always what we're looking for. And believe me, we would love to have more Susan Brooks on the Republican side of the aisle. Lovely, lovely person. She was elected the same year I was in 2012.

Elise DeFonix district changed quite a bit. the time that she's been in Congress. It went from a plus three district Republican to now a plus 23 district Republican. It's a huge difference. Elise Stefanik's district changed and she changed. Chicken and egg there. Yes, yes. So, you know, what's the moral of the story there? She, you know, if you want to survive politically, if you go from a swing district to a heavily, heavily, heavily Republican district, if you think it's more important to be in Congress than to make sure that you vote, for instance, to certify the electoral college results, or that if you have a president who is literally beyond the pale and some of the behavior, and you don't want

to call that out, look, I have always said, and this has been something that has been very, very important to me, winning an election was never, ever more important to me. than making sure that I was doing what I believed was right. I could always live with losing an election, and I've never lost an election, by the way, whether it would be a city council, I was elected to two terms on the East Millian City Council or for my five terms for Congress.

But I can tell you that I would not betray our Constitution or our democracy or the people I represent to win an election. It was just because the way I looked at, I was a journalist for 17 years. I worked in health care for 10 years in a senior position in a health system, and I've been in Congress for 10 years. I figure I'm going to land on my feet. You know, if you're honest and you do things right, you're going to land on your feet. And that has always been how I can feel really, really good about the votes that I cast

and, you know, the job that I've done in Congress. So, and frankly, I think that's really, really important. And I question, I question way too many people now looking at some critical, critical votes where the Constitution has just been ignored. And, you know, while it's not burning the Constitution physically, it's like literally it is burning the Constitution to, to ashes in some of these votes that are just anti-democracy. So anyway, that's a little bit of a rant, but it's sad.

Last question, lightning round, and you can't, you cannot give a, I'll miss my colleagues answer. I want to know the thing that you have nine months and then you're out of there. In nine months, in ten months, what is the thing you're going to to miss most about being a congresswoman and what's the thing you're going to miss least what's the thing you're most looking forward to about not being a congresswoman and again if you say my colleagues no no i reject it it can't be serious i will i will miss most um that every day that i walk into the office we have uh we have the potential to make a difference and um to the point of the 55

A colleague's answer. Is it really? There must be some perk to being a congresswoman that you might miss. The pin that you already know what you're going to wear on your lapel every day. Yeah. Well, as you see, I'm not wearing it right now. It's true. Okay, then here's what I'll say, something that I won't be able to do anymore.

Going on codels has mattered a lot. And let me tell you why it is. These are congressional delegation trips overseas generally with your colleagues to, you know, learn something about what's going on in another country. Correct. And why that has been so meaningful, I'm on defense appropriations. So understanding what is happening and how we spend our tax payer dollars on defense, it's really important. But let me tell you what you get from it psychologically and emotionally. They're bipartisan. And you really get to know your colleagues when you're traveling overseas. You're on the plane together. You're staying in the same hotel. You have dinner together. You have drinks together. You go to every. everything, all of the official activities together, and you get to know them really, really well, that nothing else in Congress allows you to get to know them better. Okay. What are you most looking forward to about not being a congresswoman?

Again, probably the lapel pin being gone. That thing's pretty annoying. Yeah. No, that would not be it. I don't have to raise another cent for my own campaign. I'm now only raising money for other people. And I'm on the, I'm a founding board member of something called elect Democratic women. We're on track to raise $12 million to, to help elect more women and keep women.

So I'm, my time fundraising is for that. And I'm joining a board of, this is a little premature to talk about it. So I'll only say it's another board to help elect moderates since we're using that term. So I'm raising money kind of at the pace I want. want to, but to help others. I don't have to raise it for myself. And that really can be a grind. I have one more like, though, Sarah. I'm on the congressional women softball team, and I've been on it since I was first elected, and that is bipartisan. And I've gotten to know a lot of women that I've gotten close to, and I really adore, I don't always adore their votes, but I really like them a lot

as human beings as people. And I've gotten to know them, you know, from a, you know, woman to woman perspective. That's really been enjoyable. And by the way, we practiced for months, two or three mornings a week, very early in the morning. You know, we go in our sweats and no makeup. And, you know, I brush my teeth, but I don't even comb my hair. And so we're on our rawest form.

And, you know, you talk about everything. But we practice for months for one game. It shows you a little bit about our athletic ability. and we play against the women's Washington Press Corps for charity. So I will miss that a lot. We have the dispatch to know something about softball practicing a lot. Our team tends to lose, though. I'm going to be honest.

You guys do win. The dispatch softball team isn't very good, but our heart is in it as yours is. And look, there is a theme to Congresswoman Boostos for sure and what your joys have been in this. job. It comes through loud and clear. So thank you for your service. And we'll look forward to seeing your last nine months as you run through that finish line. And we appreciate you being with us here today. Thank you, Sarah. You ought to scrimmage with us. So we'll see exactly how good or not

good the dispatch team is. I assure you we are nerds. So you know what? So are we. And we're older nerds. All right. Hey, thank you for the opportunity to spend a little time with you. I really appreciate. appreciate your questions and, you know, wish you all the best and the dispatch listeners. Thank you for taking time to listen to us. Calling all book lovers. The Toronto International Festival of Authors brings you a world of stories all in one place. Discover five days of readings, talks, workshops and more

with over 100 authors from around the world, including Rachel Maddow, Ketourou Isaku and Kieran Desai. The Toronto International Festival of Authors, October 29th to November 2nd. Details and tickets at festivalofauthors.ca.