The NPR Politics Podcast - Kyrsten Sinema's Break-Up With Dems Won't Change Much In The Senate

Episode Date: December 9, 2022

The Arizona senator announced she was leaving the Democratic party — but given her broad support of Democratic priorities and the president's nominees, it is not expected to change the dynamics of Senate control. And the Congress is sprinting toward the finish line, codifying some protections for same-sex and interracial marriages. Incumbent lawmakers will need to extend government funding and pass a big, annual defense bill before the new Congress is sworn in early next month.This episode: White House correspondent Tamara Keith, congressional correspondent Deirdre Walsh, and congressional correspondent Claudia Grisales.This episode was produced by Elena Moore and Casey Morell. It was edited by Eric McDaniel. Our executive producer is Muthoni Muturi. Research and fact-checking by Juma Sei.Unlock access to this and other bonus content by supporting The NPR Politics Podcast+. Sign up via Apple Podcasts or at plus.npr.org. Connect:Email the show at [e-mail] the NPR Politics Podcast Facebook Group.Subscribe to the NPR Politics Newsletter.Learn more about sponsor message choices: podcastchoices.com/adchoicesNPR Privacy Policy

This is Scott from St. Simons Island, Georgia. This weekend, I'll be walking my sweet, smart, funny, and very beautiful daughter Olivia down the aisle as she gets married to her fiancé Jay. This podcast was recorded at 12.56 p.m. Eastern Standard Time on Friday, the 9th of December. Things may have changed by the time you hear this, but I know I will soon not be losing a daughter, but gaining a great son-in-law. Aww.

Okay, here's the show. Hey there, it's the NPR Politics Podcast. I'm Tamara Keith, I cover the White House. I'm Claudia Grisales. I cover Congress. And I'm Deirdre Walsh. I also cover Congress. Arizona Senator Kyrsten Sinema has announced that she is leaving the Democratic Party and registering as an independent. Her decision comes just days after Democrats won the Georgia runoff election and gained a 51-49 majority in the Senate. So Deirdre, why now?

Why is she doing this? What is going on here? Well, Senator Sinema said she doesn't fit neatly in a party box. She had a very choreographed rollout of this announcement, including talking to KJZZ's Mark Brody. I expect that the way I behave in the Senate, which is to show up to work every day, working hard for the people of our state, that won't change at all. So I think you'll see from me exactly what you've seen from me in recent years, which is a willingness to work with anyone of any political party to solve problems and get things done. This is a very Senator Sinema move and a very on-brand explanation for it. And Sinema basically just said she doesn't neatly fit into her party's box. She says she wants to

get away from the partisan Washington structure, and it reflects her independence. And that's pretty accurate. I mean, she has, you know, been notable for her breaks with her parties and her resistance to be loyal to, you know, her party's agenda. sort of push back on President Biden's envisioned broad legislative agenda, push back on the size and scope of his domestic policy bill. They did end up getting a smaller version of that through this summer. But a lot of that is because of Sinema didn't want to go along with some major things that her party wanted to do, like tax companies and make companies pay their fair share. So, okay, that is her official reason. She just doesn't fit in with the party, doesn't want to be able to walk to the beat of her own drum. Is there a calculation here that gets beyond just like, I want to be different? Oh, for sure.

Yeah, there has to be a political calculation here for such a monumental change, especially for the overall Senate. And for Sinema, she has been dogged by a lot of critics within her own state and concerns whether she could win re-election as a Democrat. So definitively, you could probably look at this and see perhaps there's a move here for self-preservation. Perhaps she would consider running as an independent in Arizona, the path there forward politically. I don't know what her chances would be if they would be as strong if she was not with a party. But at the same time, she is trying to face off against these critics and face reality that perhaps she's not the most popular Democratic senator out of Arizona.

And we should just say that she is up in 2024. She is. And she did not say today in any of her interviews whether she was going to run for reelection. But I think that doing this is her only possible path to retaining her seat, right? Because if she can't win a Democratic primary, she could run as an independent. I mean, the thing about Arizona is that the electorate there is pretty roughly divided in threes, a third Democrat, a third Republican, a third independent. So Sinema probably saw the writing on the wall in terms of the primary and was like, I can carve a path as an independent. But for Democrats who face a terribly daunting political map in 2024, in terms of the types of Senate seats that are up,

you know, in states that Trump won, John Tester in Montana. Obviously, Arizona has become a swing state in the last couple of cycles. If Sinema does decide to run it as an independent, and there is a Democrat in the race, if there is a, you know, attractive Republican candidate, maybe somebody like Arizona Governor Doug Ducey, who just finished his term, took a pass last time, might decide to run this time. I mean, she could split the vote and give an opening to Republicans to flip the seat back red. Yeah. And I think one thing we can point out, too, is Deirdre, you had a really interesting point about how Sinema made clear she's not interested in running for president. That was some of the questions that came up after

this announcement. And she made clear that is not of interest. And at the same time, another interesting point about Sinema is that she has voted with the president, with her party, the vast majority of the time. But yet she was facing this kind of unpopularity issue in terms of these concerns of whether she could move forward as a Democrat in the future. Because as a senator, she made things really hard for the president and his party. And that caused, some could argue, almost a disproportionate level of backlash. But it certainly caused a huge amount of backlash for her among Democrats. But let's talk about right now. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer was like literally just spiking a football about how excited he was that they were going to

have the majority and they weren't going to have to have this weird power sharing agreement and they were going to be able to do their subpoenas and they wouldn't be gummed up like they were the last time with a 50-50 Senate. And now Kyrsten Sinema is an independent. So what does that mean for the functioning of the Senate and the functioning of the Democratic majority? I mean, effectively, it won't change much at all. Sinema did talk to Schumer yesterday. She asked him for her committee assignments. He agreed to do that. He put out a statement basically saying she's an independent, you know, she's been effective as an independent. I hope to continue to work with her going forward.

So Schumer will still have that 51-49 Democratic majority in January, and they still will be able to get through Biden's nominees and appointments. Sinema has largely supported those. But, you know, it's just another reminder that in a really closely divided Senate, you know, one senator, two senators, I mean, if they don't go along, that will really change the outcome. I mean, effectively next year, because there will be a Republican House, there isn't really much of a Biden legislative agenda. It's really more about can they get through judicial nominees? And she's been a pretty reliable vote on that. period while Democrats still have control of the House and the Senate before the new Congress starts. And a big thing that has happened during this session is that marriage legislation passed, legislation that aims to enshrine a right to both same-sex marriage and interracial marriage. Yeah, this was a really big moment for Congress. They delayed this before the midterms. They had started the process to vote on this in the Senate. They delayed delayed this before the midterms. They had started the process

to vote on this in the Senate. They delayed it until after the midterms. And we saw significant Republican support, especially on the Senate side, to help push this legislation through to codify same-sex marriage and also address any kind of threats to that privacy, to that level of protection that's been expected. And of course, this came out after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade. And these worries were raised after there were concerns that other protections like this could be threatened. And so it did move through the Senate and the House. And this is a really big win. We saw House Speaker Nancy Pelosi say she was very proud of this being one of the last pieces of legislation that she was able to help pass in her term as

Speaker. So we heard a lot of pride on both sides of the aisle over this. And it's a very big deal in terms of responding to the Supreme Court in terms of what rights must remain protected. So Congress is now racing to the finish, racing to the holidays, and then there will be a new Congress next year, and it will be a divided Congress. So in this final few weeks of Democratic control of both the House and the Senate, what are they getting done? And of their big long to-do list, is a lot of it going to get left behind? I mean, they're still getting some pretty big things done-do list, is a lot of it going to get left behind? I mean, they're still getting some pretty big things done. I mean, the House passed the annual defense authorization bill. This week, we expect the Senate to take it up and pass it as early as

next week. There's some big policy changes on that. It changes the way the military prosecutes sexual harassment and sexual assault cases. It removes the vaccine mandate for the military. COVID vaccine. Exactly. And also has a lot of other programs in there that the Pentagon really cares about and wants to continue going forward, especially as the war with Ukraine continues. The other thing that Congress always leaves to the last minute and always does right around the holidays is fund the government. The federal agencies are funded through December 16th. If Congress does not pass a government funding bill by a week from

today, there could be a possible shutdown. Nobody thinks there's going to be a shutdown, but as usual, Congress procrastinates and waits to the last minute. So it's unclear they can actually get a deal on a full year spending bill for all these federal agencies. So they're probably going to punt maybe for a week, try to negotiate something. Get it right until like Santa is pulling in at the chimney. But as you said, Tam, we're looking at a divided Congress next session. So there's a lot of incentive for both parties to try to do that in some form, whether they tack it onto the defense bill or spending bill, things sort of end up on one train that's moving down the track. But that bill would clarify how Congress certifies the vote for the presidential election. So we

don't have another January 6th. All right, we are going to take a quick break. And when we get back, we're talking about January 6th. The Select Committee's the January 6th attack on the Capitol is expected to make criminal referrals. That is the news of this week as they are winding down their work. But, Claudia, you've been covering this extensively. What does that mean? Right. So this is something the panel has been hinting at for months. Earlier this year, there was court filings that the committee filed in a battle with an attorney, John Eastman, who was tied to this attempt to overturn the 2020 presidential election.

And in those filings, the panel said that former President Trump had broken the law. He had obstructed this official proceeding. And so that in part is what the panel has been looking at as a former president and what crimes that they would recommend that the Justice Department look into him for. There's also other issues that have come up. For example, Vice Chair Liz Cheney, towards the end of these blockbuster hearings, brought up a concern of witness tampering by the former president. So that's another issue that we're waiting to see if there's any updates there. So far, I asked the chairman of the committee, Benny Thompson, about that. He said he had nothing new to share there. This weekend, a subpanel, which is of the lawyers on the committee,

this is Zoe Lofgren, this is Liz Cheney, Jamie Raskin, who's leading it in a sense, and Adam Schiff, the chair of the Intelligence Committee. So that panel over several days has been expected to present behind closed doors their recommendations for referrals, some of them for criminal referrals that we're expecting perhaps could link in to the former president. But there's other referrals they could be making as well. That includes the House Republicans who defied their subpoenas from the panel in recent months. That includes GOP leader Kevin McCarthy. The panel could refer these Republicans for House ethics violations, for example. So it's criminal and there's other areas and this sub-panel is expected to make a presentation this Sunday on where they stand

in terms of what direction the full committee should go in terms of what's expected, who's gonna be targeted with these referrals and in what shape. And it comes in the form of a letter that, for example, Thompson would sign to the Justice Department laying out their case, why there should be a criminal referral in a certain case, and also perhaps sharing new evidence on that. So that's something we expect to hear more about in the coming days. But we should know that a criminal referral from Congress

is effectively kind of a symbolic statement. Congress doesn't have the ability to prosecute crimes. They're referring what they think the crimes are that these people potentially violated to the Department of Justice. As we know, the Department of Justice is already doing a really broad investigation of President Trump and other folks involved in the 2020 election, you know, the fake electors from various states, etc. So this is really just wrapping the present with a bow with the findings that the January 6th committee has accumulated over its year and a half investigation. There's a lot of political pressure on them to include President Trump

on that list of criminal referrals that Claudia was talking about. And I think it's widely expected that he will be referred to the Justice Department, but effectively doesn't really change anything that the Justice Department is already doing. So, right. It's basically just saying, hey, we did this investigation. We had all these hearings. We have all this evidence. We see a crime. Here you go. Here it is on a silver platter. We would like you to see a crime too. But they don't actually have sway over the Justice Department. Is that right? No, but they have information. I mean, the Justice Department has its own information. In fact, Schiff was on morning edition and admitted the Justice Department may have more information than they have in certain areas, but the committee may have some evidence that the Justice Department doesn't have.

And as Claudia has reported over and over, they have not shared their transcripts or evidence with the Justice Department, even though they've asked for it. So some of this could affect ultimately what the Justice Department pursues. But as we said, it's not Congress's job to prosecute any of these criminal referrals. One area, for example, we've heard about is that the panel could look at some of the lawyers, such as Eastman, for example, that were tied to this effort to overturn the 2020 presidential election results. And Chairman Thompson was telling me that it's possible that the committee could make some referrals to try and push for some of these lawyers to be disbarred in their respective states. So this is an area where we don't see the Justice Department making a lot of headlines there. And this is one new territory, perhaps, that the committee will mine

and perhaps show the Justice Department that that's yet another area they should be considering. The other thing that I'm looking at, given the fact that Republicans are taking control of the House in January, is what happens to the five Republicans that the committee subpoenaed, including the top House Republican, Kevin McCarthy, who refused to cooperate with the panel. Could they be referred to the House Ethics Committee, which is kind of a slap on the wrist, which won't really do much? Could they be, you know, voted in contempt of Congress? That would be a big statement and potentially set some precedent going forward. Or could they just decide to sort of let it go and talk about the fact that in their report that these members refuse to

cooperate. So they are going to have a report, as you just said, that will come out on the 21st, is that right, of December? What are we expecting in that report? What I'm thinking here is that this is a committee that every single time they had a hearing, always had a surprise ending. So are you expecting surprises? Or is this essentially going to be a summary of the, you know, the season long show we already watched? I am just because, as you mentioned, Tam, there is that precedent with this panel, they have laid out a lot of surprises before. And it's interesting when I've talked to the chairman about this, about how they're writing this report. I keep bringing up the Mueller report, for example, that wasn't as widely read

as many had expected it might be. That was about 500 pages, which by the way, Thompson said, this could be two Mueller reports. But what they're saying differently about what this report will look like, it's going to engage readers. There's going to be new evidence. There's going to be new information. So they're doing a very good job of trying to sell this and say this is going to be very surprising for folks who even followed this investigation, followed this committee closely. So I'm leaving the door open. That's a possibility that they could have quite a few surprises in this report as well, especially if it's as long as Thompson told me, which could be about a thousand pages. He said, yeah, maybe it's about two Mueller reports, which is about 500 pages. So it could have some surprises in there. Although the committee's work has not

focused much or at all on security at the Capitol. That is a big outstanding question. Are modifications being made to the security posture at the U.S. Capitol building because of January 6th? I mean, we do expect when Republicans take over, they will change some security measures in the House. House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy has already pledged that he will remove the mags that were put in after January 6th. These are the screening metal detainees. Exactly. Where the screening stations where members have to go through every time they enter the House floor. Members of both parties are kind of annoyed by them. Some members were concerned about some Republican members of Congress who wanted to bring weapons to the floor.

You know, obviously they're not allowed in the chamber. There's a big Capitol Police presence around the chamber and they screen people going in and out. I sat down with Capitol Police Chief Tom Manger this week. We're almost two years coming up on the two-year anniversary of January 6th. He said they've learned a lot from the communication failures that were exposed mags, he said that's a decision that's up to leadership and the sergeant arms. He did not want to get into the controversial decisions about what does and doesn't happen around the House chamber. But the interesting thing to me about my conversation with Manger is as much as he said they've learned since January 6th, he said he still sees a lot of chatter from political extremists. And even as the Capitol Police have learned, so have those far right groups and the threats to members have gone up dramatically. And as we saw with the attack on House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's

husband, Paul Pelosi, they're still dealing with this all the time and they're monitoring threats all over the country. All right. Well, we're going to take a quick break. And when we get back, it's time for Can't Let It Go. And we're back. And it's time to end the show like we do every week with Can't Let It Go, the part of the pod where we talk about the things from the week that we just cannot stop thinking about, politics love that. He shows up on opening night of this Broadway show that celebrates his career. And he's in this balcony and he's singing Sweet Caroline. The place goes nuts. Oh, my gosh.

It sounds great. I know. Gives me chills. So, from what I understand, the cast was surprised. Obviously, the audience was surprised. And I just think he's one of those artists that sort of transcends generations. You know, I have a teenager. I'm not sure whether my teen would go to the Broadway show about Neil Diamond, but I really kind of want to go now. It reminded me about some of the songs that are, you know, sort of ever popular.

Yeah. I'm going to go next, and I want to take you back to Can't Let It Go from April of 2017 and our colleague Scott Horsley. My Can't Let It Go is what I call a USSSCU. That is a United States Secret Service scented candle update. Every morning on my way into the White House, I pass through a little security gate, the Northwest Gate, just on Pennsylvania Avenue there. And you go through a metal detector and there's some uniformed Secret Service officers who do check you out,

make sure you're not bringing anything you shouldn't into the White House grounds. And about a year ago, they started putting a scented candle next to the metal detector. Yeah, like on top of the metal detector. On top of the metal detector. Now, it wasn't really for cover-up type purposes. There was no offensive odor in the guard shacks that they needed to disperse. Are you sure? No more than any guard shack.

Not one that I could detect, but they do. I call it an update because it's an ever-changing scent, often matching the seasons. On the first winter day or first crisp fall day, they might go to sort of an apple and spice, apple and cinnamon spice candle. And on this lovely April day, it was pineapple mango was our new scent at the guard shack from, I'm told, Bath and Body Works. And so I just want to say a little thank you to the men and women of the uniform division of the U.S. Secret Service. They're secret, they're sensitive, and they're scented. Okay. So that was Scott Detrow and Ron Elving on the pod along with me and Scott Horsley. And when Scott stopped covering the White House, I picked up the flag of the USS SCCU.

I added some extra letters. It was the U.S. Secret Service Guard Shack scented candle update. And I've been emailing out updates regularly and putting it in the NPR Politics Podcast Facebook group. Every time there's a new candle, often they are not seasonally appropriate, I will tell you. You know, you would think that right now it would be sugar cookie, but it's probably island breeze. No, in fact, here's my update, and it's a really sad update. There is no sugar cookie. There is no Christmas tree. There's not even pumpkin spice. Somebody spilled some wax and they have been banned from having scented candles in the guard shack. There will be no

more USSCCUGS update. That is a very sad update indeed. I feel like they need to revisit this policy, Tam. Yes, I think they do. And if any supervisors are listening to this podcast, the people demand scented candles. They do. And like, yeah, there's probably like even a sale at Bath and Body Works and I could bring them some if only they were allowed to burn them. Claudia, what can you not let go of? Well, my can't let it go is a new app.

I can barely remember the name. It's so alien to me. It is called ChatGPT. This is artificial intelligent chat application where you can go to this site. I think it launched just last month. You can go to this site and you can just put in your names, for example, Tam or Deirdre. You can say, tell me a story about Tam and Deirdre. And it will just generate some story out of who knows what, the AI thing, and tell you a whole tale that just will blow your socks off because you're like,

how did you know that? Whatever, blah, blah, blah. It seems dangerous and creepy. It seems dangerous and creepy. I am scared too. I am fascinated and I am scared too. Yes, because you can automate, for example, there's questions you could automate jobs, customer service jobs, white collar jobs. What is this going to do? And then, by the way, can you use it to cheat on your college paper? Which, by the way, my daughter, my college age daughter is the one who sent it to me. And she just put in her parents' names, her and her sister's name and our dog. And it generated this beautiful story about us running through wildflowers and our dog following behind.

And we had our own crew play with it too. And Elena Moore had a story about Taylor Swift that she wanted to get through there. And this is Elena Moore, our producer, and our editor, Eric McDaniel, got a poem about Taylor Swift from the ChatGPT app. It said there was once a young podcast producer whose heart was filled with sorrow and torture when she heard of the tour of Taylor Swift galore. And it goes on and on and on. And it also generated a story about this being my can't let it go

and how it's a new AI technology. I'm obsessed, but yes, I am scared too. So I don't know where this will all go. I'm a little sad you didn't write a story about us doing this podcast. I'm gonna have to try that. I'm very scared. I just logged on today. I just created the account after I decided to talk about it. But I've been that scared to go to the website. Did you give them your social security number? No, no social. I don't know. They know your social already. Sorry. Yeah, they do. They know everything. And by the way, it has an interesting history. One of the founders of this is Elon Musk. So it's like, so it's totally safe in every way. Just like Twitter. Just like Twitter. All right. That is a wrap for today. Our executive producer is Mathani

Mathuri. Our editor is Eric McDaniel. Our producers are Elena Moore and Casey Morrell. Thanks to Krishna Dev Kalimer, Brandon Carter, Lexi Schapittle, Juma Say, and Catherine Swartz. I'm Tamara Keith. I cover the White House and candles. And I'm Claudia Grisales. I cover Congress. And I'm Deirdre Walsh. I also cover Congress.

And thank you for listening to the NPR Politics Podcast.