Former U.S. Rep. analyzes factors in Tucson tragedy

Warning against “sweeping generalizations” and lack of communication, Director of Bloomington’s Center on Congress Lee Hamilton gives a warning to the nation at www.centeroncongress.org in his address concerning the shootings in Arizona, “Don’t Let The Dialogue of Democracy Be A Victim, Too.”

The OpEd published Jan. 14 begins with the human side of Tuscon’s tragedy, a call to recognize the hurt and sympathize with everyone affected by the incident. Although presented first, these concerns are not the main point of Hamilton’s statement. The true danger is in the line of communication between representative and voter.

“I indicated that both parties have to be alert to the possibility that there will be a chill between the representative and voter,” Hamilton said. “That contact is at the core of a representative democracy. I don’t want to see anything make that contact become difficult.”

Hamilton has spent 34 years in Congress and cites two or three memorable incidents comparable to being a threat.

Hamilton also acknowledged there may be different circumstances for today’s politicians. He cites some representatives saying they would begin carrying weapons of their own, an intimidating thought in the context of a public appearance.

“Another idea is that there will be no gun permitted within 1,000 feet of an official,” Hamilton said. “Security would have to screen everybody within 1,000 feet. That sort of security makes it difficult to visit the capitol, and a voter’s personal tie to the complex up on the hill is their personal context with the representative.”

Hamilton asserts that being in a threatening position is part of being in politics, but that shouldn’t change the two-way communication a representative has with their represented. The threat won’t be obvious, Hamilton said, but rather a subtle decline in public appearances and events.

“People are intimidated when meeting a politician in the best of circumstances,” Hamilton said. “We want to keep free speech and vigorous debate because it’s important for the system. Rhetoric that incites a person to violence is in a different order, that type of rhetoric is discouraged on both the politics and media sides.”

The line between fueling a terrible incident like the Tucson incident and holding a valuable and energized debate is unclear. Hamilton said he believes that line is not easily drawn in a way that continues the traditions of a country of tough, vigorous debate.

“The point at which you cross the line is the point where you incite violence,” Hamilton said.