Charlie Sykes: GOP, Toxic Narcissists and a Fundamentally Broken Congress

CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR, CHIEF INTERNATIONAL ANCHOR: Now, Congress is broken, so say staffers and an unprecedented number of elected representatives who are quitting mid-term. A recent survey by the nonprofit Congressional Management Foundation found that a large majority of senior staffers believe the legislative body is just not functioning, and the polarization and rhetoric are causing them to want to leave their jobs. Conservative Political Commentator Charlie Sykes joins Michel Martin to discuss the great resignation.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MICHEL MARTIN, CONTRIBUTOR: Thanks, Christiane. Charlie Sykes, thanks so much for talking with us once again.

CHARLIE SYKES, AUTHOR, “HOW THE RIGHT LOST ITS MIND” AND FOUNDER AND FORMER EDITOR-IN-CHIEF, THE BULWARK: Thank you so much.

MARTIN: You started writing about congressional resignations back in 2021. What did you notice then?

SYKES: Well, what I noticed then was a number of the rising stars of the Republican Party, people who had relatively safe seats, who were looking around saying, I don’t want to be part of this. You had some of the people who had long careers ahead of them in Congress and I think decided that this is not worth it for them, that they didn’t want to spend the next several years sitting in a caucus with the people who wanted chaos, who were more interested in promoting themselves than actually doing something. And of course, this was not the beginning of the great resignation, departure, brain drain, but it’s been accelerating, particularly among Republicans.

MARTIN: As we are speaking now, among midterm resignations, there have been six Republicans, also two Democrats. What do you think that means?

SYKES: Well, first of all, it’s extraordinary. It’s easy to normalize a lot of things that happen in politics, but the number of members of Congress that actually are resigning, and some of them, some of the younger members, like Mike Gallagher from Wisconsin, and resigning in such a way as to make it impossible to have them replaced in this particular term, is really extraordinary. And I think it’s really an indication of just how much disillusionment there is among members of Congress that they don’t even want to serve through their term. What makes it even more interesting is that each of these resignations shrinks the Republican majority. The Republican majority was razor thin to begin with, but now, as you and I are speaking, is down to one vote. And this creates a really difficult, if not impossible dilemma for the leadership. And you have to think that some of the Republican members of Congress who resigned knew exactly what they were doing, and so they were sending a message rather dramatically.

MARTIN: You know, the former president, Donald Trump, who’s kind of at the root of a lot of this, he, in a sort of a series of kind of tirades on Easter Sunday, took special notice of Mike Gallagher, and also another member, Ken Buck, who also decided to retire, saying, never forget our cowards and weaklings, such a disgrace. So, you know, not a new phenomenon for him, sort of personally vilifying people who don’t serve his interests. But tell us what you know about Mike Gallagher and what do you think went into his decision?

SYKES: Well, Mike Gallagher was one of the few genuine rising stars in the House Republican Party. Now, there were moments when he disappointed me. You know, for example, on January 6th, he taped a YouTube appeal to Donald Trump to call off the attack on the Capitol because he knew that these were the president’s supporters. But then he backed off and did not support impeachment and did not become a Never Trumper, went along with the excommunication of Liz Cheney. But having said that, was a substantive guy. Mike Gallagher was somebody who was sort of in the mold of a Paul Ryan type Republican, young policy oriented. And as an indication of the way that his colleagues thought about him, they named him the chairman of this select committee on China, where he had a very, very high-profile position. Mike Gallagher was one of those young Republicans who could have been in Congress for another 40 years. He’s under 40 years old. He could have been there a very long time. He might’ve been a future speaker. And yet, he looked around him and said, you know, I don’t want to be here. This is not a serious place. And he resigned. Now, again, this is somebody who tried to appease the Trumpist wing of the party. He tried to go along. He tried to ride that tiger. He supported Kevin McCarthy. He went along with almost everything the Republicans were doing up until he couldn’t anymore. And then, he decided he’s out of there. And the way he left was really extraordinary. It was a big shock that he decided not to run for re-election. It was an even bigger shock that he was resigning in the middle of the term. But the real twist was that he resigned in such a way that it’s too late to hold a special election to fill his seat in Wisconsin, which means there’s no way that Republicans can replace him. So, it was really quite something for somebody who was a rising star and in many ways a team player. And it underlies, I think, you know, two things, the level of frustration and disgust, but also the ongoing brain drain of the Republican Party.

MARTIN: Democrats are leaving too. As we are speaking now, 30 Democrats, 24 Republicans, either retiring or seeking other office. Do you have some thoughts about what that means?

SYKES: Yes, I think that’s also reflecting the fact that you’re dealing with a Congress that is broken. And it’s not just members of Congress. You’re seeing new studies of senior staffers who are saying that they are contemplating leaving because, you know, Congress is no longer really a functional body. And if you went into politics or you went into government because you wanted to solve problems, because you wanted to pass legislation, you’re looking around and saying, this is not what this is about. I mean, the incentive structures matter. But, you know, people get into politics for lots of reasons. A lot of them have big egos. They’re very, very ambitious. There are some people that are concerned about public policy. But the incentive structure no longer pushes them towards responsible legislation. It rewards the people who are the most extreme, the loudest, who play to social media hits. And I think that for a class of politicians, they look around and go, OK, this is not what I thought. This is not why I got into politics. I want to do something different. So, the numbers — and it’s not just this term. If you look back at what’s happening, for example, to the Republican Party specifically since Donald Trump came on the scene, it’s really been a very dramatic turnover. You look at that class that was — you know, the classroom, say, 2017, I don’t have the numbers right in front of me, but the attrition has been incredible. So, you’re seeing a turnover, not just a generational turnover, but a cultural turnover in the kinds of people who are in Congress now and will be in Congress probably for the next several decades.

MARTIN: But just to play devil’s advocate for a minute, there are some people who argue that that really the generational piece of this is that younger people, the Gen X is wise. It’s either the post-baby boomers aren’t willing to — it’s a generational sort of ethos that if this isn’t satisfying, I’m out, you know, that they just don’t have the same commitment to sort of institutions that their predecessors had. I take it you don’t buy that.

SYKES: Well, I mean, there’s there’s certainly part of that there, but I don’t think that it accounts for this dramatic turnover. When you when you look at, for example, you know, any group of former Republican congressmen, you’ll find that they come from a very different political tradition. It’s not just a matter of age. It is also a matter of culture. It’s a matter of what they think the role of Congress should be. So, I do think that it’s impossible to separate out this sort of vast departure from Congress from the institutional decay that we’re seeing here. Gridlock may be entertaining for the entertainment wing of the media, but being in the minority or even being a majority in a gridlock Congress can be very, very frustrating. You know, particularly when you have a Congress that doesn’t actually do anything. So, if you’re a member, if you’re a backbencher in Congress, you may sit on a committee, but since legislation no longer goes through regular order, you really don’t have any say. You don’t have any clout. You have the prestige. You have the good salary. You’d have to benefits. And in the past, that’s been enough to keep people around for a very, very long time. Now, I think the frustration level, the hyper partisanship, the threats, the insult, that toxicity of the environment just is driving people out. And I don’t think you can overstate the fact that if you go to work every day with toxic narcissists, it’s going to weigh on you. And at a certain point, there are people who went, I would love to be a congressman. I will love be congressman for the next 20 or 30 years, but I’m not going spend the rest of my life dealing with toxic narcissists in an institution that is so fundamentally broken as the House of Representatives is.

MARTIN: And who are we talking about here? Who are these toxic narcissistic? Do you want to name names?

SYKES: I don’t think that any of the names that I might have mentioned are going be terribly surprising. I am trying to imagine being a serious Republican member of Congress, and looking around, thinking, so I have to spend the next two years sitting next to Marjorie Taylor Greene and Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert, and, you know, people like, in the past, you know, Louie Gohmert and Paul Gosar, you know, the folks that generally garner the attention and that have, frankly, been sponsored by the party leadership. I mean, look, the fact is there’s always been a chaos caucus. There’s been always a small rump of unserious people. John Boehner call — I think his term for the Freedom Caucus was they were legislative terrorists. But in the past, there was a critical mass that would have been able to isolate them. Now, that’s no longer the case. And they have the cover of the leader of Republican Party, Donald Trump, who has been in encouraging and promoting some of the most extreme voices. And as long as that’s the case, you know, what we used to call the grownups on their own or the normies, no longer are able to check them.

MARTIN: I mean, I’m in Washington for better or worse. And, you know, I constantly hear my colleagues who are up on the Hill full-time or most of time say that, you know, they know better. That’s like the operative phrase, they know better. Or that they don’t really believe half the stuff that they’re saying. Well, if that’s the case, why don t the people who did go there to legislate get together and do their job?

SYKES: Well occasionally they do, which is why the government hasn’t shut down. But this has been the story over last seven or eight years in our politics that you have people who know better who are simply afraid to take that stand. And fear is a huge factor in modern political politics. They’re afraid of Donald Trump. They are afraid the base. They’re afraid a mean social media post. Also, just keep in mind the recent history of the House of Representatives. You had John Boehner, who was a very, very skilled legislator who ultimately was not able to — who resigned because he was able to keep control of the chaos caucus. Paul Ryan had a huge majority to work with and yet, he ultimately decided that he needed to leave as well. Now, we have people like Kevin McCarthy. I mean, it feels like this — you know, keeps stepping down. You had Kevin McCarthy who lasted less than a year. And the speaker, Mike Johnson, currently has very little leadership experience. And I think that’s on display. So, he not only has as little or no leadership experience, but he has little or no margin for error any longer. He’s already seen what’s happened to Kevin McCarthy. And now, as you and I are speaking, he’s got a one vote margin. So, his ability to get things done is extremely limited. It only takes a small number. It took eight Republicans to throw the House into chaos for pretty much the entire year. I mean, Harry Truman, back in 1948, ran against the do-nothing Republican Congress. That Congress looks like a legislative juggernaut compared to this Congress in part because they spent so much time fighting with themselves. So, now, we come to the moment where if Mike Johnson wants to get anything done, he essentially has to engage in a coalition government. He has to rely on Democratic votes. And the number one cardinal sin for the Republican base right now is compromising with Democrats, working with Democrats, giving Democrats anything like a win. So, it is a radioactive political environment for the speaker who has to find some way to limp through this year until the next Congress.

MARTIN: I mean, he has been willing to negotiate with Democrats in order to keep the government open. Why do you think he’s done that?

SYKES: Well, first of all, it’s the bare minimum to keep lights on. I mean, before we hand out, you know, profiles and courage here, this is the bare minimum for him to do that because there’s really no alternative. I think that the chaos surrounding Kevin McCarthy might have damped down the appetite for chaos, but only temporarily because the chaotic is now built into the system. And so, we have this weird situation. Remember, you know, Marjorie Taylor Greene, one of the most demagogic extremists in the House, actually supported Kevin McCarthy. She was, for a moment, supporting the Republican establishment. Well, now, she is — she may be leading the effort to oust the current speaker who would then need Democratic votes. I mean, you can’t make up this scenario. You know, it is sort of a game of thrones without all the blood. And so, you know, we’re going to — you know, but in terms of getting actual substantive legislation through, that’s the big question. Whether or not they will be able to do anything.

MARTIN: But when it comes to somebody like a Mike Gallagher or Ken Buck, if you’re willing to resign in the middle of the term, it means you are willing lose your job, right? If it was that important to you to hold on no matter what, you’d make certain compromises. So, that is why I remain confused by people who are resigning rather than fight. If you don’t care whether you lose your job, why not stay and fight?

SYKES: Well, they never asked my advice about these things, but that’s what I would have said. You know, decide what it is that is most valuable to you. For example, you know, aid to Ukraine or perhaps getting a rational immigration bill passed. I think it’s always better to stay in the fight. I think what’s happened, though, is they realize it’s hopeless. There’s no way that it going to happen. This Congress is never going to become functional, and I do not want to spend the rest of my life dealing with these toxic demagogues. And I think that the example of people like Liz Chaney and Adam Kinzinger is inspiring, but it’s also a cautionary tale. It also says that if you stay in your fight, you’re going get killed. You’re going to be exiled. And understand that for the modern Republican, to break with the party the way, say, Liz Cheney has done, is not just losing your job, it means you are being excommunicated and exiled from your entire political social world. And I think that this is something that people sometimes underestimate, that in our tribal culture, it’s not just losing your job and your position, it’s all of the social context, you know, your family. People ask me this question, why don’t more people break? Well, if you are willing to give up your entire community, then, you know, fine. Most people aren’t. They’re not willing to alienate themselves from their family, their friends, their professional contacts, you break with them too strongly, you will have no future in lobbying, no future in elective office, but also, no future as an influencer in the party. You will no longer have a seat at the table.

MARTIN: All right. Well, before we let you go, is there anything giving you hope in the current moment?

SYKES: I think about the only thing that gives me hope is that at a certain point, these things exhaust themselves. Now, I’ve been saying that for eight years, and I think there’s been a little bit of wish casting, that of course the fever will break, the fire will burn itself out. I mean, we’ve got ways to go here. I also have — and maybe it’s naive at this point, but a sense of the innate decency and reasonableness of American people, that you get away from politics. You go to a Little League game or a soccer game, you go to a play or a concert, you talk to your fellow Americans, and they’re not at each other’s throat. They are not believing the craziest things. Right now, our politics is bringing out the worst in us. At some point, maybe the best of us will be able to push back against it, but it’s not going to happen anytime soon.

MARTIN: Charlie Sykes, thanks so much for talking with us once again.

SYKES: Thank you so much.