Congress Members Erode National Integrity with Antidemocratic Rhetoric

The blame game erupted following the attempted assassination of former President Donald Trump. While the shooter was clearly to blame, fingers were also pointed at Democrats, Republicans, or both, depending on one’s viewpoint. This incident highlighted the already tense and polarized state of American politics, bringing into the spotlight the so-called “crisis of democracy” currently afflicting the nation.

The political environment has been simmering for some time. Growing polarization, reduced public trust in democratic institutions, and a shift toward autocratic ideas have been widely documented. This climate has made agree-to-disagree over things like tax policy seem quaint, as the legitimacy of political opponents is frequently called into question. Compromise now often feels like betrayal, and the subversion of democratic norms becomes easier to rationalize.

As an expert in American politics, I have examined these trends and their repercussions, noting that they render effective governance increasingly challenging. Symptoms of dysfunction have long plagued Congress, but how much of this is due to lawmakers’ rhetoric?

Recent studies indicate that elected officials themselves contribute significantly to the problem. In the U.S., antidemocratic rhetoric has been growing, often attributed to figures like Trump. Researchers, including Kathleen Hall Jamieson, have pointed out the former president’s unique rhetorical style, marked by deflections and violations of democratic norms. Trump’s efforts to cast doubt on national election results and the justice system have further fueled this toxic environment, though he is not solely responsible.

A broader shift is evident when examining the language used by politicians. Many scholars have scrutinized how political figures communicate, identifying a pattern of negativity and incivility. This shift toward antidemocratic rhetoric undercuts substantive policy debates, steering politics into a more confrontational realm.

Collaboratively, we developed a method to track such rhetoric among U.S. lawmakers. We analyzed over a million tweets from the 117th Congress, spanning early 2020 to mid-2022. Our focus was on identifying terms that undermined democratic norms, exhibited autocratic thinking, propagated conspiracy theories, or promoted ethnonationalism.

Our findings revealed an uptick in antidemocratic language, especially post-2020 election. Despite hopes that the January 6th Capitol attack might temper political discourse, rhetoric only intensified thereafter. A notable example is a tweet by Rep. Mo Brooks, which encapsulated several antidemocratic themes.

Not all members of Congress engage in this kind of rhetoric. Out of the 117th Congress, 41 members used such language over 300 times each within our study period. Critically, Republicans utilized antidemocratic rhetoric more frequently than Democrats, by a margin of more than 4 to 1. Male lawmakers were also found to use such rhetoric nearly twice as often as their female counterparts.

While Twitter is not the sum total of political communication, these trends are also apparent in other forms, such as press releases and op-eds. This underlines a troubling shift where certain congressional members undermine democratic norms that uphold their own authority.

Understanding this rhetoric is vital. These communication styles threaten political tolerance and constitutional limits, eroding the very foundations of democracy. By alienating segments of the electorate, they undermine the notion of a unified public good that governance should strive to serve. In a time when American democracy feels precarious, scrutinizing the language of our leaders is more critical than ever.