I don't think there was ever an actual written dress code in Congress at either the House or Senate (they make their own separate rules). I think it was the sort of thing that Senate leadership just enforced. The place is steeped in custom, much of it unwritten. With the more senior folks passing on the customs to the newer people. And the newer/younger people always go with the flow because they want to actually increase their power and privilege and you don't do that by getting crosswise with leadership.Szdfan wrote: ↑Tue Sep 19, 2023 6:23 pm Not everyone seems to be upset:
https://apnews.com/article/senate-dress ... 91865134d3So am I correct in understanding that there never was a formal, written policy?Not all Republicans were upset about the change. Missouri Sen. Josh Hawley was wearing jeans, boots and no tie on Monday evening, an outfit he says he normally wears when he flies in from his home state for the first votes of the week.
“Now I can vote from the Senate floor on Mondays,” Hawley said, noting that he usually wears a suit and tie every other day.
Nearby, Connecticut Sen. Chris Murphy was also tieless. The Democrat said he’s been reprimanded by Sergeant-at-Arms staff in the past for not wearing a tie on the floor.
“They would tell us when we were doing it wrong,” Murphy said.
It’s unclear if the rules for more formal attire were actually written down anywhere, but Schumer’s directive means that staff will no longer scold senators for their choice of clothing or ask them to vote from the doorway.
For example, I worked there for about a year in the 1990s as a committee staffer. I was employed by NOAA but actually on-loan to the Senate Oceans and Fisheries subcommittee as an agency liaison when they were reauthorizing the Magnuson Act (fisheries) and Marine Mammal Protection Act. So I worked in a Senate office building with the other committee staff. Back then the dress code for staff was pretty explicit. You wore coat and tie when the Senate was in session (either suit or blazer and slacks). And women wore suits, hose, and dress shoes. When the Senate was in recess (staff still worked full time during recesses) the dress code was relaxed and you could wear khakis and open collar shirts, no tie. The women would wear summer casual clothing and sandals without hose (DC is HOT in the summer). There was never any written rule to this effect that I was aware of. You just knew it and it was passed down from senior staff to junior staff and they would let you know if you were out of step. Most guys would keep a blue blazer and tie hanging in their cubical so if you happened to get called into any important meeting, even when the Senate was in recess you would just pop it on.
There was also some differentiation by profession. Senate staff who were attorneys were always WAY more dressed up with expensive suits and posh ties than staff who were economists and scientists. You could just look around the table at a meeting and tell who were the attorneys and who were the scientists and economists.
What seems a little different today compared to the 1990s is that more and more legislators seem to be creating their own private media followings and seem to be building their power base that way rather than the traditional way of working your way up. Especially in the house where we have all these younger firebrand types who spend all their time on Twitter and social media and the endless stream of right-wing media rather than working their way up through the ranks. That seems new. And so I think you have more people pushing the envelope because they don't care about traditions.