March 6, 2024

Kyrsten Sinema Does Us All a Favor

The formerly Democratic Arizona senator announced on Super Tuesday that she wouldn’t be seeking reelection.

Chris Lehmann
Sen. Kyrsten Sinema Capitol Hill

Senator Kyrsten Sinema walks to the Senate floor after a meeting in the offices of Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell on Capitol Hill in May 2023.

(Jabin Botsford / The Washington Post via Getty Images)

The most encouraging return on Super Tuesday came early in the day, and didn’t involve any actual voting at all: Kyrsten Sinema, the formerly Democratic senator from Arizona, sent out a typically self-serving video announcing that she would not be seeking another term after initially planning to run as independent in the 2024 cycle. She delivered a fanciful account of her legislative record, claiming to have made heroic strides toward modernizing infrastructure, reducing water pollution, creating jobs, and brokering vital consensus on key issues dividing the country by choosing to “listen without judging and to focus on what unites us.” Yet, in a distressing departure from the well-worn catechism of the difference-trimming moderate, it turns out that the actual American public didn’t appreciate all this problem-solving tutelage: “Americans still choose to retreat farther into their partisan corners.”

“Compromise is a dirty word,” Sinema’s lamentation continued. “We’ve arrived at that crossroad, and we’ve chosen anger and division.” She then took up the standard passive-aggressive refrain of the “it’s not you, it’s me” breakup speech: “Because I chose civility, understanding, listening, working together to get stuff done, I will leave the Senate at the end of this year.”

Sinema’s official Senate farewell was, in other words, a classic Sinema performance: claiming the enlightened, above-the-fray rhetorical high ground while wallowing in the professional-class petulance reserved for an insufficiently grateful client base. Sinema’s announcement was good news for the sort of partisan political calculation she professes to deplore, since it leaves Democrats fielding a strong and accomplished House member, Ruben Gallego, against MAGA grievance merchant Kari Lake, a former TV newscaster who continues plying a paranoid election-denial narrative to dismiss the results of her failed 2022 run for governor.

But Sinema’s departure from the race signifies more than an improved Senate map for the Democrats narrow majority. The very trends she regards as so parlous for her future—and by natural extension, the fate of the American republic—represent a healthy and growing distrust for the inert cult of bipartisan Capitol Hill dealmaking as the only respectable path to resolving the country’s stubborn differences. This household god of conventional Beltway piety is the first-resort defense of cynical, bought-out lawmakers, from eternal no-labels hustler Joe Lieberman to New Jersey graft prince Robert Menendez to President Joe Biden, the erstwhile Senator From MNBA who now fetishizes bipartisan accords anywhere they appear to be on offer, be it the disastrous Senate border deal or the genocidal prosecution of the Gaza War.

Even in this dismal roll call of backward-reeling achievement, Sinema’s bipartisan blather stands out. She had notoriously served, along with Democratic Senator Joe Manchin, as a key “no” vote in the protracted effort to pass the Biden administration’s ambitious “Built Back Better” package of stimulus outlays and green public investments. She also helped block a critical bill to levy steeper taxes on hedge funds and private equity concerns—after bankrolling nearly a cool million in campaign funds from investment operations prior to the vote. And in perhaps her most morally incoherent citation of the holy mandate of bipartisanship, she withheld support for a desperately needed package of voting-rights reform on the grounds that it lacked across-the-aisle appeal.

The formalist myopia of this stance overlooks perhaps the most salient political truth of our age: that the Republican Party relentlessly restricts ballot access and gerrymanders congressional districts so it can continue to exercise maximal power as a governing minority. To insist on an advance bipartisan agreement to dismantle this prime fount of GOP political control is a tautological absurdity—a bit like demanding that extreme weather be completely dissociated from climate change. To top it all off, Sinema repeatedly, and disingenuously, broadcast her reverence for the late John Lewis—the person whom the voting rights legislation was named after—on her self-infatuated social media feeds. Lewis, needless to say, was never an apostle of elite-formalist bipartisan comity, having been jailed and beaten in his efforts to win justice for disfranchised African Americans during the civil rights era. It’s beyond grotesque that soulless establishment hacks like Sinema could invoke his memory while resorting to the racist parliamentary device of the filibuster to prevent the Senate from even debating the expansion of voting rights.

Yet characters like Sinema, Lieberman, and company almost never get called out for such first-order hypocrisies, because in the crabbed moral geography of the Capitol, they’ve staked out the position of omniscient piety. In this scheme of things, the appearance of procedural compromise is always and forever the highest achievement of dispassionate lawmaking, trumping the mere quest for political change through mass organizing and activism. Never mind that the record of bipartisan agreement in Congress has produced many of the worst and most regressive legislative initiatives in modern politics—from the deregulation of the financial sector and the TARP bailouts to No Child Left Behind, the authorization of the 2003 Iraq invasion, and the 1994 crime bill. The bipartisan fever dream remains catnip to the members of our governing class because it makes everything concerning the public weal ultimately about them and the elective affinities they share across party lines—their backroom codicils and after-hours cocktails, their lobbyist-drafted bills and donor-driven bailouts. So, to give the departing senator from Arizona due credit, she’s right about one thing: It’s not us, it’s you.

Thank you for reading The Nation

We hope you enjoyed the story you just read, just one of the many incisive, deeply-reported articles we publish daily. Now more than ever, we need fearless journalism that shifts the needle on important issues, uncovers malfeasance and corruption, and uplifts voices and perspectives that often go unheard in mainstream media.

Throughout this critical election year and a time of media austerity and renewed campus activism and rising labor organizing, independent journalism that gets to the heart of the matter is more critical than ever before. Donate right now and help us hold the powerful accountable, shine a light on issues that would otherwise be swept under the rug, and build a more just and equitable future.

For nearly 160 years, The Nation has stood for truth, justice, and moral clarity. As a reader-supported publication, we are not beholden to the whims of advertisers or a corporate owner. But it does take financial resources to report on stories that may take weeks or months to properly investigate, thoroughly edit and fact-check articles, and get our stories into the hands of readers.

Donate today and stand with us for a better future. Thank you for being a supporter of independent journalism.

Chris Lehmann

Chris Lehmann is the DC Bureau chief for The Nation and a contributing editor at The Baffler. He was formerly editor of The Baffler and The New Republic, and is the author, most recently, of The Money Cult: Capitalism, Christianity, and the Unmaking of the American Dream (Melville House, 2016).

More from The Nation

In a 1881 political cartoon, Charles Julius Guiteau approaches President Garfield at the White House to ask for a diplomatic post. Guiteau assassinated Garfield in 1881.

Why Are Presidential Assassins Such Sad Sacks? Why Are Presidential Assassins Such Sad Sacks?

What would-be killers of the US commander in chief have in common is that they aren’t fervent ideologues; they’re outcasts.

Zack Budryk

The torch has been passed: Vice President Kamala Harris with President Biden at the White House in May.

By Withdrawing in Favor of Kamala Harris, Joe Biden Proves That Only the GOP Is a Personality Cult By Withdrawing in Favor of Kamala Harris, Joe Biden Proves That Only the GOP Is a Personality Cult

Democrats acted as a proper political party, while Republicans remain in thrall to a dangerous authoritarian.

Jeet Heer

President Joe Biden, left, and Vice President Kamala Harris on the Truman Balcony of the White House in Washington, DC, on July 4, 2024.

Joe Biden Cements His Legacy Joe Biden Cements His Legacy

Abandoning his reelection run and endorsing Vice President Kamala Harris took courage and vision. Other top Dems are joining.

Joan Walsh

Kamala Harris for President

Kamala Harris for President Kamala Harris for President

Democrats deserve a candidate who can lift the whole ticket, not drag it down to defeat.

D.D. Guttenplan

Big Brother, 25

Big Brother, 25 Big Brother, 25

Swas Ticker, Degeneration X.

OppArt / Marc Murphy and Gary Taxali

Reflected on a mirror, then–Vice President Joe Biden speaks during an event to unveil a report with analysis related to Recovery Act investments in innovation, science, and technology on August 24, 2010, at the South Court Auditorium of the Eisenhower Executive Office Building in Washington, DC.

The Democrats Have a Two-Biden Problem The Democrats Have a Two-Biden Problem

And so does the president. As he decides his future, Joe Biden has to come to terms with the war within himself.

Jeet Heer